3 ms·

Go ahead, unlock your hard drives then. Disable HTTPS, it makes no difference right? The government can just do evil maid attacks while you're asleep or rubber-

Go ahead, unlock your hard drives then. Disable HTTPS, it makes no difference right? The government can just do evil maid attacks while you're asleep or rubber-hose whatever CA you're using anyways. While you're at it, why don't you leave the door to your house unlocked? The government can just kick it in whenever they want, no biggie, right? Strong cryptography still remains a formidable barrier for law enforcement, regardless of what pessimists like munroe would have you think.

ethbr0 4y ago
Munroe isn't a pessimist: he's a humorist.
- cowtools 4y ago
  well you know what they say about humor on the internet, poe's law and all. I guess the joke is that security is presented as an all-or-nothing situation, when in reality security is just about disproportionally increasing the cost for attackers and decreasing the severity of their attacks.
nemothekid 4y ago
>Go ahead, unlock your hard drives then. Disable HTTPS, it makes no difference right? In what world is the Government your only threat?
- cowtools 4y ago
  It's a good question. I wonder this too. But until we can make cryptography that is criminal-proof but not government-proof, and until the government can feasibly enforce its use, then I don't think it really matters. It's hard to imagine any tool that only works against criminals but not against the government. Especially considering that there's a spectrum between criminal organizations and government organizations.
  - nemothekid 4y ago
    >It's hard to imagine any tool that only works against criminals but not against the government. Especially considering that there's a spectrum between criminal organizations and government organizations. You are missing the point; the point of Randall's comic is that most, if not all, cryptographic methods fails under the threat of physical violence. For most of us in the western world, and certainly for most of us on this forum the most likely threat of someone using violence to extract cryptographic secrets from you would be the entity that claims a monopoly on it - the government (your local mugger is not going to request you install his CA root store). Most criminals, and the majority of white collar criminals who would benefit the most from the world disabling HTTPS do not have the mechanism, infrastructure or capability to exact violence on me the same way the government can. So your implication that "because cryptography is violence resistant, we should unlock our hard drives" is very naive.
jquery 4y ago
I’m curious how you know it’s a formidable barrier. You sure they just don’t care about you? I’ve never tested this hypothesis, I assume everything I do online is basically “in the clear” for advanced nation states.

ethbr0 4y ago

Munroe isn't a pessimist: he's a humorist.

cowtools 4y ago
well you know what they say about humor on the internet, poe's law and all. I guess the joke is that security is presented as an all-or-nothing situation, when in reality security is just about disproportionally increasing the cost for attackers and decreasing the severity of their attacks.

nemothekid 4y ago

>Go ahead, unlock your hard drives then. Disable HTTPS, it makes no difference right? In what world is the Government your only threat?

cowtools 4y ago
It's a good question. I wonder this too. But until we can make cryptography that is criminal-proof but not government-proof, and until the government can feasibly enforce its use, then I don't think it really matters. It's hard to imagine any tool that only works against criminals but not against the government. Especially considering that there's a spectrum between criminal organizations and government organizations.
- nemothekid 4y ago
  >It's hard to imagine any tool that only works against criminals but not against the government. Especially considering that there's a spectrum between criminal organizations and government organizations. You are missing the point; the point of Randall's comic is that most, if not all, cryptographic methods fails under the threat of physical violence. For most of us in the western world, and certainly for most of us on this forum the most likely threat of someone using violence to extract cryptographic secrets from you would be the entity that claims a monopoly on it - the government (your local mugger is not going to request you install his CA root store). Most criminals, and the majority of white collar criminals who would benefit the most from the world disabling HTTPS do not have the mechanism, infrastructure or capability to exact violence on me the same way the government can. So your implication that "because cryptography is violence resistant, we should unlock our hard drives" is very naive.

jquery 4y ago

I’m curious how you know it’s a formidable barrier. You sure they just don’t care about you? I’ve never tested this hypothesis, I assume everything I do online is basically “in the clear” for advanced nation states.