4 ms·
What could we do about it if 1. were true? Not much. For 2. I think it's safe to assume that they know a few tricks that we don't. Probably enough to hasten br
by fnordfnordfnord 13y ago
What could we do about it if 1. were true? Not much.
For 2. I think it's safe to assume that they know a few tricks that we don't. Probably enough to hasten breaking encryption, but probably not enough to make encryption useless.
For 3. Yes, isn't that obvious?
Here's a recent discovery regarding FPGA's, maybe not the NSA, but it didn't get there by accident. http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sps32/sec_news.html http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sps32/sec_news.html
I suspect that some bugs like this one in Intel networking chips may not be bugs http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death.html http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death.html
If it is technically feasible, then it is almost certainly being done.
- DuskStar 13y agoWell, there are some things we could do for 1. - switch to an algorithm not vulnerable to quantum computing, for example. I think NTRU would be an example of this.