3 ms·

If you are talking about, say an EpiPen, then that is injecting medical grade chemicals that someone manufactured and packaged. "Rolling your own" EpiPen, inclu

If you are talking about, say an EpiPen, then that is injecting medical grade chemicals that someone manufactured and packaged. "Rolling your own" EpiPen, including manufacturing and purifying the chemicals needed, manufacturing the delivery device, and then shooting yourself with that, would probably result in death. You appear to be totally clueless in the various ways that any of these processes could fail, resulting in your death. And that is most likely true of your understanding of crypto too. Don't roll your own crypto, and please, please, do not roll your own injectable medicine.

madez 9y ago
> Don't roll your own crypto, and please, please, do not roll your own injectable medicine. But some people must and did, right? Else we would neither have injectable medicine nor crypto. Instead of simply ruling it out, I argue for pointing to risks and guidelines for when it is appropiate and when not. We need people working in all areas, including cryptography and manufacturing of injectable medicine. That's why I oppose the strict, overly-simplified rule in this case. I never argued and don't argue for a random web-store one-man-show to develop their own crypto, nor for them to craft their own injectable medicine.
- lowbloodsugar 9y ago
  No. They don't. A whole group of people get together and the end result is good crypto or safe medicine. Sure, one person might have the idea. By the time it's included in, e.g. a Java Crypto library or OpenSSL, or your arm, it's been thoroughly reviewed by tens or hundreds of people. For example, "RSA" is the initials of the three people who invented it, by trying for some time to implement an idea published by two others two years earlier. Only a fool would say, "Bah, I know what I'm doing! Ship it!"
  - madez 9y ago
    I completely agree. Scientifically proven methods like independent verification are very important. Yet, it could very well be custom "own" crypto that is verified and then used.

madez 9y ago

> Don't roll your own crypto, and please, please, do not roll your own injectable medicine. But some people must and did, right? Else we would neither have injectable medicine nor crypto. Instead of simply ruling it out, I argue for pointing to risks and guidelines for when it is appropiate and when not. We need people working in all areas, including cryptography and manufacturing of injectable medicine. That's why I oppose the strict, overly-simplified rule in this case. I never argued and don't argue for a random web-store one-man-show to develop their own crypto, nor for them to craft their own injectable medicine.

lowbloodsugar 9y ago
No. They don't. A whole group of people get together and the end result is good crypto or safe medicine. Sure, one person might have the idea. By the time it's included in, e.g. a Java Crypto library or OpenSSL, or your arm, it's been thoroughly reviewed by tens or hundreds of people. For example, "RSA" is the initials of the three people who invented it, by trying for some time to implement an idea published by two others two years earlier. Only a fool would say, "Bah, I know what I'm doing! Ship it!"
- madez 9y ago
  I completely agree. Scientifically proven methods like independent verification are very important. Yet, it could very well be custom "own" crypto that is verified and then used.