3 ms·
You comment here sort of answers my question above. So basically you don't agree with attacking or weakening crypto/security systems. The thing is that without
by rantanplan 12y ago
You comment here sort of answers my question above. So basically you don't agree with
attacking or weakening crypto/security systems.
The thing is that without those "competitive advantages", I fail to see how they can have an advantage over the bad guys. Playing offense, when the need arises, won't cut it. You're gonna have to "lay the foundations" so to speak, for you to be a successful attacker.
So basically we reach the old, but not so tired, question of how much of your freedom you're willing to sacrifice, for your government to be the "meanest of them all"
- bayesianhorse 12y agoHacking is not the only way to spy on an enemy, especially terrorists or criminals. If such a group is sophisticated enough to evade all but the most sophisticated, ultra-secret bleeding edge attacks, maybe it's time to resort to conventional means. Luckily most such groups aren't. They just began using encryption. The alternative to offensive hacking is to include backdoors in the encryption technology used by everyone. I think that this is causing more harm than good.