I guess the issue is that the layman cannot really tell how secure a solution is, and so are unlikely to be able to make well reasoned decisions about the information they release. As such there really needs to be a far greater level of responsibility placed on people who hold the keys so to speak. Once again this is especially true since people re-use (and use overly simple) passwords at a scary rate. By not protecting their information on a crappy real estate website you are potentially leaving open their bank to abuse.
I feel instances like these just show dangerous levels of incompetence and a blatant disregard for user's information. Good solutions generally require less work anyway so there's no excuse.
All private user information is equally private. To arbitrarily suggest that certain data is less important is a dangerous road to walk down. We should be holding everyone to the same standards when it comes to security.
This is especially true with the high amount of password reuse that goes on.
I guess the issue is that the layman cannot really tell how secure a solution is, and so are unlikely to be able to make well reasoned decisions about the information they release. As such there really needs to be a far greater level of responsibility placed on people who hold the keys so to speak. Once again this is especially true since people re-use (and use overly simple) passwords at a scary rate. By not protecting their information on a crappy real estate website you are potentially leaving open their bank to abuse.
I feel instances like these just show dangerous levels of incompetence and a blatant disregard for user's information. Good solutions generally require less work anyway so there's no excuse.