Search Mailing List Archives


Limit search to: Subject & Body Subject Author
Sort by: Reverse Sort
Limit to: All This Week Last Week This Month Last Month
Select Date Range     through    

[liberationtech] issilentcircleopensourceyet.com

Nadim Kobeissi nadim at nadim.cc
Tue Nov 6 10:53:17 PST 2012


Ali,
The issue is trust. Security software verifiability should not have to
depend on Silent Circle (or who they hire to audit, for example Veracode.)


NK


On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 1:51 PM, Ali-Reza Anghaie <ali at packetknife.com>wrote:

> Nobody would dispute that - that's not quite the same thing as FOSS
> default positions or some of the other criticisms.
>
>  For example, I'd contend a paid Veracode audit would in all likelihood
> be better than any typical FOSS audit. Had they done that (heck, they might
> have but I doubt it) and still announced the intent of opening the codebase
> - I wager that would not have stopped the criticism.
>
> It appears to be a deep-seeded cultural divide more than any of the other
> factors combined.
>
> -Al
>
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Yosem Companys <companys at stanford.edu>wrote:
>
>> Security audits are always important, especially when people's lives are
>> at risk.
>>
>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 10:37 AM, Nadim Kobeissi <nadim at nadim.cc> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Ali,
>>> There is no "agenda," and there needn't be one if you are to critique
>>> security software. No need to be so aggressive.
>>> My qualms against Silent Circle are detailed here:
>>> http://log.nadim.cc/?p=89
>>>
>>>
>>> NK
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Ali-Reza Anghaie <ali at packetknife.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Seriously - what's your agenda?
>>>>
>>>> Where are the domains for the other tens of providers who charge arms
>>>> and legs based on closed protocols even?
>>>>
>>>> What's the nit with Silent Circle specifically? Because they're
>>>> accessible? Because it's easier to use? Because the founders have good
>>>> track records of standing up to Government too?
>>>>
>>>> Being absolutist about everything isn't helping anyone who ~needs~ it -
>>>> it's a privilege of the "haves" that we can have these conversations over
>>>> and over again.
>>>>
>>>> Shouldn't we have taken the "fight" to carriers, Apple iOS T&Cs, etc.
>>>> harder and longer ago? And why do we keep expecting private entities to
>>>> fight our Government battles for us? It's a losing proposition and
>>>> increases the costs-per-individual to untenable levels when we mix
>>>> absolutely all their enterprise with civil liberty issues.
>>>>
>>>> There has got to be a better way than this ridiculous trolling and
>>>> bickering. Someone? Anyone?
>>>>
>>>> Again, seriously, what's the agenda against Silent Circle specifically?
>>>>
>>>> -Ali
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Nadim Kobeissi <nadim at nadim.cc> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> http://issilentcircleopensourceyet.com/
>>>>>
>>>>> NK
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at:
>>>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at:
>>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at:
>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at:
>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>>
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at:
> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.stanford.edu/pipermail/liberationtech/attachments/20121106/75f2a07f/attachment.html>


More information about the liberationtech mailing list