4 ms·

> Why is it so hard to create a cryptographic solution that would allow E2E that works 99.9% of the time, is resistant to malicious actors, but is breakable wit

> Why is it so hard to create a cryptographic solution that would allow E2E that works 99.9% of the time, is resistant to malicious actors, but is breakable with a warrant? Have people really even tried? Yup. Tried very hard. It's not possible. This isn't a restriction of our current tech. It's a fundamental part of the mathematics of cryptography. Asking for it is kind of like trying to legislate pi having a different value.

umvi 7y ago
Citation needed. It would be like saying a paper money system would be impossible/ineffective because paper money manufacturing techniques can theoretically be reverse engineered. In theory that is true, but in practice paper money works quite well.
- jki275 7y ago
  In practice, paper money works fine -- in spite of the fact it is regularly and continually counterfeited. Your plan doesn't work.
- madhadron 7y ago
  They are reverse engineered. Paper money has a limited downside. In the US, we know there aren't bills over $100 in general circulation, so you can, with effort, print up a few million dollars. The money supply of paper-ish money (M1) is around 3.4 trillion dollars. From the point of view of the principal actor US mint this is annoying and needs to be dealt with, but it's not a danger to the system unless it is allowed to run unchecked. The power imbalance involved is what makes it work. For crypto, the principal actor is whoever is encrypting. The downside of an activist in a repressive regime having their crypto broken is basically unlimited for them. Or the population that uses ecommerce as principal actor. The downside for them is enormous and the upside for someone who suborns a system incredible. Since we don't know tye power and incentive imbalance between the actors, crypto has to assume the worst.

4 ms·

> Why is it so hard to create a cryptographic solution that would allow E2E that works 99.9% of the time, is resistant to malicious actors, but is breakable wit

by madhadron 7y ago

umvi 7y ago
Citation needed. It would be like saying a paper money system would be impossible/ineffective because paper money manufacturing techniques can theoretically be reverse engineered. In theory that is true, but in practice paper money works quite well.
- jki275 7y ago
  In practice, paper money works fine -- in spite of the fact it is regularly and continually counterfeited. Your plan doesn't work.
- madhadron 7y ago
  They are reverse engineered. Paper money has a limited downside. In the US, we know there aren't bills over $100 in general circulation, so you can, with effort, print up a few million dollars. The money supply of paper-ish money (M1) is around 3.4 trillion dollars. From the point of view of the principal actor US mint this is annoying and needs to be dealt with, but it's not a danger to the system unless it is allowed to run unchecked. The power imbalance involved is what makes it work. For crypto, the principal actor is whoever is encrypting. The downside of an activist in a repressive regime having their crypto broken is basically unlimited for them. Or the population that uses ecommerce as principal actor. The downside for them is enormous and the upside for someone who suborns a system incredible. Since we don't know tye power and incentive imbalance between the actors, crypto has to assume the worst.