3 ms·
> If they can crack encryption they're not going to tell us and they will probably act like they can't. The thing that was pretty apparent from Snowden's leaks
by hn_throwaway_99 3y ago
> If they can crack encryption they're not going to tell us and they will probably act like they can't.
The thing that was pretty apparent from Snowden's leaks is primarily that they don't need to. This fear that "NSA can crack cryptography" is the wrong fear. First, as others have noted, there are legions of other researchers evaluating and attempting to break widely used crypto-systems. There is no reason to believe the NSA has some unique brilliant minds that aren't available elsewhere.
More importantly, though, why bother with a "frontal assault" on breaking crypto schemes when endpoint security is a million times more hackable. That is, usually at some point someone wants to view the encrypted data that is being sent, and at that point it needs to be decrypted, so why not just try to hack at that point (which is exactly what they do). As an example, just look at all the stolen cryptocurrency heists. All of these heists resulted from stolen keys or from implementation bugs, not from cracking the crypto schemes that protect cryptocurrency in the first place.
- FormerBandmate 3y agohttps://xkcd.com/538/ https://xkcd.com/538/ writ large
- XorNot 3y agoWhat I dislike about this comic is the subtle implication that torture is an effective means of information extraction - it suffers from the car keys phenomenon of how people think about torture. Basically: if I threatened to hit you with a crowbar unless you gave me your car keys, you'd give them to me, because a car isn't worth anything. Same story with an ordinary person's computer: they just don't have enough worth hiding that can't be repaired later, compared to serious injury. "Oh no, someone got my credit card! I'll have to argue for some chargebacks from my bank after I report it was stolen" rather then recover from a shattered knee-cap.