I can’t downvote you but your response doesn’t add any value to the conversation.
Founding fathers had no way of knowing of the current state of affairs, technologically speaking. Imagine billions of unbreakable safes containing secret messages to and from anyone globally, instantly transported to…
The techies who agree tend to frequent circles other than hacker news.
It’s not just the chip. It has a PCI bus. But you knew that already.
No, not true. Crypto isn’t perfect as is, and involves levels of security. Two party crypto has two parties who could leak the data. Two party with exceptional access has three. Current crypto is susceptible to brute…
It’s just a brainstorming idea. There would be a key as well - the idea would require both the key and substantial computational power for exceptional access Brainstorming ideas are meant to be thrown out. Attacking the…
It’s a trade off. There’s no cognitive dissonance, just refusal to work towards better compromises. Lovely argument, though. Euphemistically it’s clear you’re very passionate about this issue. Maybe my hacker news…
Pre quantum algos have this shortcoming built in
The government has a different idea of what constitutes “broken” in this case. Of course adding a third party introduces additional risks. Two parties versus three parties: All can access the clear info; neither…
Let’s leave politics and assumptions about me out of it, please. Same point: figure out a technological and procedural solution to the human attack vector. If “security professionals” all agree on ideology or theory…
There’s no discussion of how to build exceptional access encryption that solves the weakening issue, just that it “can’t be done”. The spirit of this initiative in 2019 is likely more about stopping strong encryption at…
Bad guys already do use such schemes and more. If the government can’t crack strong encryption as-is, the problem is that strong encryption is deployed at scale.
Build a better exceptional access encryption system that solves human and technological shortcomings. Removing strong encryption at scale would have far more effect than what you’ve described.
Strong encryption absolutely impedes investigations. And, what indication is there that the primary purpose of mass surveillance is blackmail?
I can’t downvote you but your response doesn’t add any value to the conversation.
Founding fathers had no way of knowing of the current state of affairs, technologically speaking. Imagine billions of unbreakable safes containing secret messages to and from anyone globally, instantly transported to…
The techies who agree tend to frequent circles other than hacker news.
It’s not just the chip. It has a PCI bus. But you knew that already.
No, not true. Crypto isn’t perfect as is, and involves levels of security. Two party crypto has two parties who could leak the data. Two party with exceptional access has three. Current crypto is susceptible to brute…
It’s just a brainstorming idea. There would be a key as well - the idea would require both the key and substantial computational power for exceptional access Brainstorming ideas are meant to be thrown out. Attacking the…
It’s a trade off. There’s no cognitive dissonance, just refusal to work towards better compromises. Lovely argument, though. Euphemistically it’s clear you’re very passionate about this issue. Maybe my hacker news…
Pre quantum algos have this shortcoming built in
The government has a different idea of what constitutes “broken” in this case. Of course adding a third party introduces additional risks. Two parties versus three parties: All can access the clear info; neither…
Let’s leave politics and assumptions about me out of it, please. Same point: figure out a technological and procedural solution to the human attack vector. If “security professionals” all agree on ideology or theory…
There’s no discussion of how to build exceptional access encryption that solves the weakening issue, just that it “can’t be done”. The spirit of this initiative in 2019 is likely more about stopping strong encryption at…
Bad guys already do use such schemes and more. If the government can’t crack strong encryption as-is, the problem is that strong encryption is deployed at scale.
Build a better exceptional access encryption system that solves human and technological shortcomings. Removing strong encryption at scale would have far more effect than what you’ve described.
Strong encryption absolutely impedes investigations. And, what indication is there that the primary purpose of mass surveillance is blackmail?