4 ms·

Ah so it's an inevitability argument now. You're all over the place. I don't care if you believe that it's inevitable. I don't, and won't live my life that w

by jki275 7y ago

Ah so it's an inevitability argument now. You're all over the place. I don't care if you believe that it's inevitable. I don't, and won't live my life that way. Slavery was inevitable once. The holocaust was inevitable once. People standing up against it stops what weak minds believe inevitable. And gun parts are machined, not 3d printed for the most part. The laws against it are directly contrary to our Constitution and a lot of people dedicate a lot of time to working against those laws. But even that isn't math -- you simply can't ban math. The files that describe how to machine those parts -- those are readily available all over the world, even where they're banned... Also, I trust Apple a lot more than I trust the other tech companies, because they've been willing to stand up for the consumer -- other companies don't.

umvi 7y ago
I think it boils down to: I believe it is possible to design a secure system that complies with warrants while otherwise retaining user privacy; you don't. That's okay. Before computers existed police could bust down your door with a warrant and search through the files/mail. I don't see why that should change just because we store files/mail digitally now.
- jki275 7y ago
  It's not a matter of belief. There is fact, which is that a broken system is broken, and there is fiction, which is the belief that a broken system can be only broken when requested to be broken, presumably by somebody with the right credentials. No one with any credibility in the field of math or CS believes this fiction. In addition, I encrypt my data specifically so that no one can get to it. That includes the government. I don't care what the government thinks they are entitled to with regard to my data.
  - umvi 7y ago
    All systems are broken, then. Even the one-time pad, though mathematically perfect in theory, is flawed in execution as proven by the NSA. My proposed system in the original post is just as secure as any current scheme. > No one with any credibility in the field of math or CS believes this fiction. In addition, I encrypt my data specifically so that no one can get to it. Huh? It's easy to get an individual's data. Don't fool yourself. You are not low hanging fruit in broad attacks, but if a highly skilled group wanted your data, they could easily get it. I would just look at what keyboard you use and swap it with an identical one that has an invisible keylogger in it. Or I would get to know you and your coworkers and do a precise spear phish. Bam, instantly compromised, no decryption needed. It's only if you commit a terrorist attack and then commit suicide that I have a hard time getting your data because I can no longer spearphish or keylog you.
    - jki275 7y ago
      A one time pad is not broken by design. Your scheme is. You can’t get my keyboard, and I don’t answer phishing attacks. This isn't about that -- in fact you're making the argument your broken key management system isn't needed.
      - umvi 7y ago
        No one is immune from spear phishing. No one. A competent spear phisher will compromise one of your coworkers first (maybe even your manager), then target you posing as them. Click a (legit looking) link and you are pwned. And yeah, I don't know who you are obviously. But if I did and you were my target, I could pwn you easily. Pwning individuals is easy with keyloggers. Also, my scheme isn't broken by design, you just labelled it as such with no evidence. You never said why it's broken by design. Because it's not.
        jki275 7y ago
        You’re making my point for me. Since you believe so strongly in social engineering, there’s no need for backdooring crypto algorithms! You have articulated clearly that you require your proposed system to have a backdoor for the authorities to use to read the traffic. That is the definition of broken by design. Good day.
        umvi 7y ago
        You are picking and choosing which parts of my comments you read and are blind to the rest. Backdoors are not "broken by design", that's just another slogan you are chanting. Also dead people cannot be social engineered. Good day.

by jki275 7y ago

umvi 7y ago

I think it boils down to: I believe it is possible to design a secure system that complies with warrants while otherwise retaining user privacy; you don't. That's okay. Before computers existed police could bust down your door with a warrant and search through the files/mail. I don't see why that should change just because we store files/mail digitally now.

jki275 7y ago
It's not a matter of belief. There is fact, which is that a broken system is broken, and there is fiction, which is the belief that a broken system can be only broken when requested to be broken, presumably by somebody with the right credentials. No one with any credibility in the field of math or CS believes this fiction. In addition, I encrypt my data specifically so that no one can get to it. That includes the government. I don't care what the government thinks they are entitled to with regard to my data.
- umvi 7y ago
  All systems are broken, then. Even the one-time pad, though mathematically perfect in theory, is flawed in execution as proven by the NSA. My proposed system in the original post is just as secure as any current scheme. > No one with any credibility in the field of math or CS believes this fiction. In addition, I encrypt my data specifically so that no one can get to it. Huh? It's easy to get an individual's data. Don't fool yourself. You are not low hanging fruit in broad attacks, but if a highly skilled group wanted your data, they could easily get it. I would just look at what keyboard you use and swap it with an identical one that has an invisible keylogger in it. Or I would get to know you and your coworkers and do a precise spear phish. Bam, instantly compromised, no decryption needed. It's only if you commit a terrorist attack and then commit suicide that I have a hard time getting your data because I can no longer spearphish or keylog you.
  - jki275 7y ago
    A one time pad is not broken by design. Your scheme is. You can’t get my keyboard, and I don’t answer phishing attacks. This isn't about that -- in fact you're making the argument your broken key management system isn't needed.
    - umvi 7y ago
      No one is immune from spear phishing. No one. A competent spear phisher will compromise one of your coworkers first (maybe even your manager), then target you posing as them. Click a (legit looking) link and you are pwned. And yeah, I don't know who you are obviously. But if I did and you were my target, I could pwn you easily. Pwning individuals is easy with keyloggers. Also, my scheme isn't broken by design, you just labelled it as such with no evidence. You never said why it's broken by design. Because it's not.
      - jki275 7y ago
        You’re making my point for me. Since you believe so strongly in social engineering, there’s no need for backdooring crypto algorithms! You have articulated clearly that you require your proposed system to have a backdoor for the authorities to use to read the traffic. That is the definition of broken by design. Good day.
        umvi 7y ago
        You are picking and choosing which parts of my comments you read and are blind to the rest. Backdoors are not "broken by design", that's just another slogan you are chanting. Also dead people cannot be social engineered. Good day.