5 ms·

another great argument in favor of banning cryptography. no encryption - no ransomware

randomhodler84 4y ago
Indeed! We should also ban crime too, that will surely stop it. Why not get rid of general purpose computation and global communication networks while we are torching our technological footprint.
- throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
  the Internet is here to stay. too useful for commerce and disseminating propaganda globally. it will remain, in some perverse walled-garden form general purpose computation though... I feel it's already on the chopping block. I think we'll see the first signs during the upcoming "cyber pandemic".
  - randomhodler84 4y ago
    They will take my intels amd and rpis from my cold dead hands!
    - hnthrow1010 4y ago
      If you're caught committing crimes (like for instance, using the computers to arrange transactions of human trafficking) and you invoke a standoff and shootout with the police, then yes, they probably will. That's true with or without blockchains. And because I can see where this is going: The takes along the lines of "it's not illegal, I was just flipping some electrons into ones and zeros" is a really bad take, you can do better than that.
      - randomhodler84 4y ago
        Agreed. Crime is not a good thing, and please do not thing I am trying to endorse it. I just know that it exists and will use whatever resources it has access to. I philosophically disagree with denying ourselves something because someone somewhere can do crime. Now, encryption and by extension cryptocurrency, this is truly revolutionary. They can shoot me in the head, but they cannot read my data, access my devices, or take the money. All that remains is silicon and metal. I like the idea that when I die, everything I have written privately, and every sat I have earned will rest forever, unreachably.
        hnthrow1010 4y ago
        >I philosophically disagree with denying ourselves something because someone somewhere can do crime. That's not why we should deny cryptocurrency. We should deny it because it is fundamentally bad, it serves no purpose besides scamming and fraud. The technology is broken and can't ever achieve its stated goals except by pure luck, at which point it is no better than any other solutions. >they cannot read my data, access my devices, or take the money Yes, they can. A dedicated aggressor (i.e. a nation state actor) will just torture and blackmail you until you give that up. Of course it gets harder for them if they kill you, then they would have to brute force your data. But then why would they need access to your devices, if you were the target they were trying to get rid of? If your private correspondence was with another party, they can also just blackmail the other party into giving up dirt on you. Cryptography can't actually do anything about these classic "meatspace" techniques.
        randomhodler84 4y ago
        Multisig constructions were created for the torture case. There are unfortunately cases where this has proven true. I know your opinion re usefulness, noted. It contrasts greatly with my experiences. Some of us dream up ways to keep the State out, you keep dreaming up ways the State will defeat it. It is a cat and mouse game for all eternity. I am confident we will survive.
        hnthrow1010 4y ago
        No, you are looking at this totally the wrong way. I don't "dream" of the state defeating things. This is basic threat analysis, it does you no good to avoid doing it. Being "confident" that something will happen in the future is not the same as being confident that your current solution will hold, which chances are it will not. Also, multisig is not appropriate for a two way communication (like for instance, a financial transaction), you need three or more parties to make it useful.
        randomhodler84 4y ago
hnthrow1010 4y ago
I love this take because it's almost there but it's narrowly missing the point just to draw a huge straw man. Ransomware is not specifically enabled by cryptography. It's enabled by people providing "money laundering as a service" which is an apt description for cryptocurrencies.
- randomhodler84 4y ago
  It’s far closer to the truth than you are willing to admit. Ransomware is primarily enabled by encrypting your files. How they take payment is irrelevant. No encryption (eg: a universe where AES, RSA, ECEIS is broken), no ransomware. My position is the fallout of ransomware is enabled by people failing to take backups.
  - hnthrow1010 4y ago
    No, this is totally wrong, you didn't think this through. They don't need to do that. They could just copy the files to their own machine, delete them, then send them back when you pay the ransom. Encryption certainly makes it easier for them, but the main thing that enables it is money laundering. Which is the primary reason anyone uses cryptocurrency to transfer huge sums of money.
    - randomhodler84 4y ago
      Could sure, but that’s not how ransomware typically works. Typically, it is a non interactive process that is enabled by automated application of strong encryption delivered via a binary payload. It is encryption that puts the user in danger of malicious intent not the payment rails. Before Bitcoin, LR ukash and shady payment card processors handled this. Cryptocurrency is just a better rail, so good guys and bad guys use it. Is your problem with the network enabling crime? (Internet?)
      - hnthrow1010 4y ago
        Cryptocurrency is not a better rail. In fact it is a worse rail for almost everything. But it is the only rail that currently allows people to do this at the scale it does, due to its operators openly welcoming unlimited amounts of money laundering on the network. This has nothing to do with cryptography or the internet. It is entirely about money laundering. Yes, money laundering happened before, that is not an excuse for these networks to allow it to happen in such large volumes and at such great speed that it is enabling this entire new class of ransomware.

Indeed! We should also ban crime too, that will surely stop it. Why not get rid of general purpose computation and global communication networks while we are torching our technological footprint.

throwaway0x7E6 4y ago
the Internet is here to stay. too useful for commerce and disseminating propaganda globally. it will remain, in some perverse walled-garden form general purpose computation though... I feel it's already on the chopping block. I think we'll see the first signs during the upcoming "cyber pandemic".
- randomhodler84 4y ago
  They will take my intels amd and rpis from my cold dead hands!
  - hnthrow1010 4y ago
    If you're caught committing crimes (like for instance, using the computers to arrange transactions of human trafficking) and you invoke a standoff and shootout with the police, then yes, they probably will. That's true with or without blockchains. And because I can see where this is going: The takes along the lines of "it's not illegal, I was just flipping some electrons into ones and zeros" is a really bad take, you can do better than that.
    - randomhodler84 4y ago
      Agreed. Crime is not a good thing, and please do not thing I am trying to endorse it. I just know that it exists and will use whatever resources it has access to. I philosophically disagree with denying ourselves something because someone somewhere can do crime. Now, encryption and by extension cryptocurrency, this is truly revolutionary. They can shoot me in the head, but they cannot read my data, access my devices, or take the money. All that remains is silicon and metal. I like the idea that when I die, everything I have written privately, and every sat I have earned will rest forever, unreachably.
      - hnthrow1010 4y ago
        >I philosophically disagree with denying ourselves something because someone somewhere can do crime. That's not why we should deny cryptocurrency. We should deny it because it is fundamentally bad, it serves no purpose besides scamming and fraud. The technology is broken and can't ever achieve its stated goals except by pure luck, at which point it is no better than any other solutions. >they cannot read my data, access my devices, or take the money Yes, they can. A dedicated aggressor (i.e. a nation state actor) will just torture and blackmail you until you give that up. Of course it gets harder for them if they kill you, then they would have to brute force your data. But then why would they need access to your devices, if you were the target they were trying to get rid of? If your private correspondence was with another party, they can also just blackmail the other party into giving up dirt on you. Cryptography can't actually do anything about these classic "meatspace" techniques.
        randomhodler84 4y ago
        Multisig constructions were created for the torture case. There are unfortunately cases where this has proven true. I know your opinion re usefulness, noted. It contrasts greatly with my experiences. Some of us dream up ways to keep the State out, you keep dreaming up ways the State will defeat it. It is a cat and mouse game for all eternity. I am confident we will survive.
        hnthrow1010 4y ago
        No, you are looking at this totally the wrong way. I don't "dream" of the state defeating things. This is basic threat analysis, it does you no good to avoid doing it. Being "confident" that something will happen in the future is not the same as being confident that your current solution will hold, which chances are it will not. Also, multisig is not appropriate for a two way communication (like for instance, a financial transaction), you need three or more parties to make it useful.
        randomhodler84 4y ago

hnthrow1010 4y ago

I love this take because it's almost there but it's narrowly missing the point just to draw a huge straw man. Ransomware is not specifically enabled by cryptography. It's enabled by people providing "money laundering as a service" which is an apt description for cryptocurrencies.

randomhodler84 4y ago
It’s far closer to the truth than you are willing to admit. Ransomware is primarily enabled by encrypting your files. How they take payment is irrelevant. No encryption (eg: a universe where AES, RSA, ECEIS is broken), no ransomware. My position is the fallout of ransomware is enabled by people failing to take backups.
- hnthrow1010 4y ago
  No, this is totally wrong, you didn't think this through. They don't need to do that. They could just copy the files to their own machine, delete them, then send them back when you pay the ransom. Encryption certainly makes it easier for them, but the main thing that enables it is money laundering. Which is the primary reason anyone uses cryptocurrency to transfer huge sums of money.
  - randomhodler84 4y ago
    Could sure, but that’s not how ransomware typically works. Typically, it is a non interactive process that is enabled by automated application of strong encryption delivered via a binary payload. It is encryption that puts the user in danger of malicious intent not the payment rails. Before Bitcoin, LR ukash and shady payment card processors handled this. Cryptocurrency is just a better rail, so good guys and bad guys use it. Is your problem with the network enabling crime? (Internet?)
    - hnthrow1010 4y ago
      Cryptocurrency is not a better rail. In fact it is a worse rail for almost everything. But it is the only rail that currently allows people to do this at the scale it does, due to its operators openly welcoming unlimited amounts of money laundering on the network. This has nothing to do with cryptography or the internet. It is entirely about money laundering. Yes, money laundering happened before, that is not an excuse for these networks to allow it to happen in such large volumes and at such great speed that it is enabling this entire new class of ransomware.