5 ms·

"designed to beat" means better, not perfect. Imperfect means eventually it gets beat. The NSA might say what the IRA told Margaret Thatcher, "Today we were u

"designed to beat" means better, not perfect. Imperfect means eventually it gets beat. The NSA might say what the IRA told Margaret Thatcher, "Today we were unlucky, but remember we only have to be lucky once. You will have to be lucky always."

justcommenting 11y ago
as a friend reminded me, anonymity only buys you time; it does not buy anyone justice. and david simon's recapitulation is more succinct and compelling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2Fv-nJCfrk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2Fv-nJCfrk
- jacquesm 11y ago
  It might buy you enough time. Note that almost every exercise in security is an exercise in buying time. Today's encryption will likely be broken tomorrow and by the time you've achieved your goal it no longer matters whether or not your communications are broken. Of course if you plan to stay in business for a very long time you're gambling against really good odds of discovery and potentially not achieving your goal. If you want to be a terrorist or miscreant you could extrapolate from that that fewer numbers is better and the first 'hit' should be your hardest and should not take too long to set up or require a lot of communication. Fortunately for the rest of the world any plot that does real damage usually does not have those properties. But beware of the lone wolf with access to technology.
jacobwcarlson 11y ago
Do you have a specific weakness in the implementation you've found and would like to share? Vaguely pointing out that something is imperfect isn't very useful, indeed, it would be amazing if you told us something was perfect!
- late2part 11y ago
  I disagree: Highlighting the fact that it's not perfect is terribly useful. Be careful what you use things like this for.
junto 11y ago
I haven't heard that quote before. It is very good, if not quite scary.
anonbanker 11y ago
For a bit of historical perspective, Margaret Thatcher ended up being always lucky. the IRA weren't lucky enough, and were easily co-opted.

justcommenting 11y ago

as a friend reminded me, anonymity only buys you time; it does not buy anyone justice. and david simon's recapitulation is more succinct and compelling: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2Fv-nJCfrk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E2Fv-nJCfrk

jacquesm 11y ago
It might buy you enough time. Note that almost every exercise in security is an exercise in buying time. Today's encryption will likely be broken tomorrow and by the time you've achieved your goal it no longer matters whether or not your communications are broken. Of course if you plan to stay in business for a very long time you're gambling against really good odds of discovery and potentially not achieving your goal. If you want to be a terrorist or miscreant you could extrapolate from that that fewer numbers is better and the first 'hit' should be your hardest and should not take too long to set up or require a lot of communication. Fortunately for the rest of the world any plot that does real damage usually does not have those properties. But beware of the lone wolf with access to technology.

jacobwcarlson 11y ago

Do you have a specific weakness in the implementation you've found and would like to share? Vaguely pointing out that something is imperfect isn't very useful, indeed, it would be amazing if you told us something was perfect!

late2part 11y ago
I disagree: Highlighting the fact that it's not perfect is terribly useful. Be careful what you use things like this for.

junto 11y ago

I haven't heard that quote before. It is very good, if not quite scary.

anonbanker 11y ago

For a bit of historical perspective, Margaret Thatcher ended up being always lucky. the IRA weren't lucky enough, and were easily co-opted.