4 ms·
Even all these years later, he doesn't even consider the possibility that he was manipulated. He betrayed all of his users at the drop of a hat, and all it cost
by rozab 7y ago
Even all these years later, he doesn't even consider the possibility that he was manipulated. He betrayed all of his users at the drop of a hat, and all it cost the NSA was a single phone call. Crazy stuff.
- willvarfar 7y agoEncryption as he implemented it does not rely on the secrecy of the algorithm. It relies on the secrecy of the key. This is why he was asking about their ability to break 256 or 40 bit encryption. So there was no trust broken in sharing the source code.
- DennisP 7y agoAssuming he implemented the cryptography correctly, but if he didn't then his users weren't secure anyway, and the source code would have just saved the NSA a little time.
- ebg13 7y agoThat may depend on some specific knowledge of the code, which is of course why they were asking for it.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- folli 7y agoKerckhoff's principle applies. Nowadays, all the good encryption software is open source anyway. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerckhoffs%27s_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerckhoffs%27s_principle
- ebg13 7y ago> Kerckhoff's principle applies That's true and yet unhelpful because all software has errors, some obvious, some not.
- mratsim 7y agoCryptographic software is at the very least audited, at the very best formally verified (i.e. proven bug-free). And now you can use proof assistants that are used to prove mathematical formulas to generate crypto code: https://github.com/mit-plv/fiat-crypto https://github.com/mit-plv/fiat-crypto