4 ms·

Careful, last time I made this as a top level comment, he pretty much lost it on me.

tptacek 13y ago
Let's see if everyone can understand the difference between a longstanding technical debate and a deliberate attack on my character.
- lawnchair_larry 13y ago
  Dual_EC was the former, and I have no idea how you would have interpreted it as a personal attack. But this probably isn't worth a subthread. Edit: I've said it before, I greatly appreciate the crypto knowledge you share on HN. When crypto related submissions come up, I often click comments before reading the articles just to see your take on it. I did it just this afternoon with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7642434 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7642434 and was disappointed to see you had not weighed in yet.
  - tptacek 13y ago
    Like I said, this is just drama. I like a lot of your comments too.
smtddr 13y ago
You should link to that comment so we can all see the context and judge for ourselves. :) (sidenote: I'm very happy about all the attention SSL related stuff is getting. Just like Snowden said, encryption is our best defense against whoever and all the SSL stuff is the most commonly used encryption out there. Don't know what to do about dis-honest CAs though...). EDIT: tptacek is probably right that this is drama and my sidenote should probably be the main comment
- jontas 13y ago
  I'm guessing it's this, but I didn't go too far back in the comment history so I may be wrong: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7430250 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7430250
  - tptacek 13y ago
    This is really just drama (I'm equally culpable here on this thread). Let's talk about TLS and UKS instead.
  - lawnchair_larry 13y ago
    No, it wasn't that. That one was a bit silly (admittedly, so is this thread, and the one it references). I'll find it and edit this post. Edit: linked upthread in my other comment.
- lawnchair_larry 13y ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6944360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6944360 [deleted] is tptacek's comment I'm referring to, but it's quoted in the thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6420306 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6420306 was a previous episode of the same debate. tl;dr The issue was whether or not Dual EC was an NSA backdoor, and then whether or not there were any implementations. There was a time when tptacek denied both of these, saying it was too dumb to be a backdoor, and later conceding but saying it wasn't used in any software. Interestingly, before the NSA paying RSA scandal came out, my post in the second linked thread says: > Edit: Actually, I take that back. I have no problem believing that RSA Security are perfectly sane. Would we be completely shocked if the reason they chose a questionable default was due to coercion from the spooks? Only NSA has the keys, so it's a pretty safe backdoor. Only 215 days ago, that sounded like tinfoil hat tier speculation.

Let's see if everyone can understand the difference between a longstanding technical debate and a deliberate attack on my character.

lawnchair_larry 13y ago
Dual_EC was the former, and I have no idea how you would have interpreted it as a personal attack. But this probably isn't worth a subthread. Edit: I've said it before, I greatly appreciate the crypto knowledge you share on HN. When crypto related submissions come up, I often click comments before reading the articles just to see your take on it. I did it just this afternoon with https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7642434 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7642434 and was disappointed to see you had not weighed in yet.
- tptacek 13y ago
  Like I said, this is just drama. I like a lot of your comments too.

smtddr 13y ago

You should link to that comment so we can all see the context and judge for ourselves. :) (sidenote: I'm very happy about all the attention SSL related stuff is getting. Just like Snowden said, encryption is our best defense against whoever and all the SSL stuff is the most commonly used encryption out there. Don't know what to do about dis-honest CAs though...). EDIT: tptacek is probably right that this is drama and my sidenote should probably be the main comment

jontas 13y ago
I'm guessing it's this, but I didn't go too far back in the comment history so I may be wrong: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7430250 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7430250
- tptacek 13y ago
  This is really just drama (I'm equally culpable here on this thread). Let's talk about TLS and UKS instead.
- lawnchair_larry 13y ago
  No, it wasn't that. That one was a bit silly (admittedly, so is this thread, and the one it references). I'll find it and edit this post. Edit: linked upthread in my other comment.
lawnchair_larry 13y ago
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6944360 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6944360 [deleted] is tptacek's comment I'm referring to, but it's quoted in the thread. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6420306 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6420306 was a previous episode of the same debate. tl;dr The issue was whether or not Dual EC was an NSA backdoor, and then whether or not there were any implementations. There was a time when tptacek denied both of these, saying it was too dumb to be a backdoor, and later conceding but saying it wasn't used in any software. Interestingly, before the NSA paying RSA scandal came out, my post in the second linked thread says: > Edit: Actually, I take that back. I have no problem believing that RSA Security are perfectly sane. Would we be completely shocked if the reason they chose a questionable default was due to coercion from the spooks? Only NSA has the keys, so it's a pretty safe backdoor. Only 215 days ago, that sounded like tinfoil hat tier speculation.