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] Cryptography super-group creates unbreakable encryption

Nadim Kobeissi nadim at nadim.cc
Thu Feb 7 13:32:38 PST 2013


The latest "unbreakable even by a supercomputer" article includes artistic,
black and white photographs of Phil Zimmermann and John Callas:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2274597/How-foil-eavesdroppers-The-smartphone-encryption-app-promises-make-communications-private-again.html#axzz2KDR1XKE6


NK


On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Ali-Reza Anghaie <ali at packetknife.com>wrote:

> And even the "proponents" already have. Here, elsewhere, .. Nobody is
> happy at technically ignorant gee-whiz journalism.
>
> The discussion has been, a few times now, how we tend to speak out about
> it. And what busses people on the same side seem willing to throw each
> other under. Gods know why. -Ali
>  On Feb 7, 2013 3:46 PM, "Jillian C. York" <jilliancyork at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm not going to get into the politics or pettiness of this because
>> frankly, I don't care.
>>
>> But this headline<http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/147714-cryptography-super-group-creates-unbreakable-encryption-designed-for-mass-market>and the accompanying claims of unbreakability are so incredibly egregious
>> that I would expect *every single person on this list* to speak out
>> against those (claims, that is), regardless of their feelings on the actual
>> product.
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Yosem Companys <companys at stanford.edu>wrote:
>>
>>> Just as a reminder, please let's all try to refrain from engaging in any
>>> personal attacks.  We're all build and use liberationtech to make a
>>> difference in various ways, and we're bound to have disagreements.  But
>>> let's not forget that we're all working toward the same broad goal of
>>> making people's lives better.  Otherwise, we would likely not be on this
>>> list.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> YC
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Ali-Reza Anghaie <ali at packetknife.com>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Douglas, I'm not sure many people are disagreeing with the end-goals
>>>> and even Zimmerman acknolwedges the window for verifiable source proof is
>>>> closing fast (longer than many would have liked as-is).
>>>>
>>>> My comments to Nadim are coming from a tact perspective - if the goal
>>>> is to gain wider adoption and recognition for all the community work, good
>>>> projects, verified projects, etc. etc. then it helps when you play in the
>>>> sanboxes occupied by more than the hackers and programmers making it happen.
>>>>
>>>> It's not uncommon to have people, who need solutions the most, to be
>>>> afraid of projects because of the "main name" associated with them after
>>>> some cursory rant reading. Nadim = Cryptocat, Jacob = TOR, Theo = OpenBSD,
>>>> etc. etc.
>>>>
>>>> It's easy to tell everyone else to pound sand or to roll all activist
>>>> causes into one for the collective libtech "us" - it's not so each when we
>>>> take it elsewhere. Just trying to see how we can promote things that look
>>>> less like personal grips and trolls - and more like building something
>>>> useful. -Ali
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Douglas Lucas <dal at riseup.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Can Silent Circle promoters explain why Zimmerman is excused from
>>>>> Kerckhoffs's principle?
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it because something unverifiable is allegedly better than nothing?
>>>>> Even if we had divine knowledge to tell us Silent Circle is secure,
>>>>> isn't it an overriding problem to encourage lock-in of closed source
>>>>> being acceptable for something as common as text-messaging?
>>>>>
>>>>> It is good to have a scrappy talented young person such as Nadim being
>>>>> pesky to older, accepted people.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 02/07/2013 09:45 AM, Julien Rabier wrote:
>>>>> > Hello all,
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I'm no sec expert but to me, it's so obvious that Nadim is right on
>>>>> this.
>>>>> > Perhaps the form is not perfect, but if he's the only one fighting
>>>>> for our
>>>>> > own sanity here, as he says, that's no surprise.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > We should all be asking Silent Circle to commit to their statement
>>>>> and show
>>>>> > us the source code of their so-called unbreakable encryption tools.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Again, I'm no sec expert and I won't be the guy who will do the hard
>>>>> task of
>>>>> > auditing and reviewing this code. But as a user, as a citizen and
>>>>> perhaps an
>>>>> > activist, I want the source code of such tools to be reviewed widely
>>>>> and
>>>>> > publicly before using and promoting it.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > My 2 euro cents,
>>>>> > Julien
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Le 07 févr. - 10:31, Nadim Kobeissi a écrit :
>>>>> >> Small follow-up:
>>>>> >> Maybe it's true I look like my goal here is just to foam at the
>>>>> mouth at
>>>>> >> Silent Circle. Maybe it looks like I'm just here to annoy Chris,
>>>>> and I'm
>>>>> >> truly sorry. These are not my goals, even if my method seems forced.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I've tried writing multiple blog posts about Silent Circle,
>>>>> contacting
>>>>> >> Silent Circle, asking journalists to *please* mention the
>>>>> importance of
>>>>> >> free, open source in cryptography, and so on. All of this has
>>>>> failed. It
>>>>> >> has simply become clear to me that Silent Circle enjoys a double
>>>>> standard
>>>>> >> because of the reputation of those behind it.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Silent Circle may be developed by Gods, but this is just quite
>>>>> plainly
>>>>> >> unfair. If someone repeatedly claims, towards activists, to have
>>>>> developed
>>>>> >> "unbreakable encryption", markets it closed-source for money, and
>>>>> receives
>>>>> >> nothing but nods of recognition and applause from the press and even
>>>>> >> from *security
>>>>> >> experts* (?!) then something is seriously wrong! No one should be
>>>>> allowed
>>>>> >> to commit these wrongs, not even Silent Circle.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I feel like I'm fighting for our own sanity here. Look at what
>>>>> you're
>>>>> >> allowing to happen!
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> NK
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Nadim Kobeissi <nadim at nadim.cc>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Christopher Soghoian <
>>>>> chris at soghoian.net>wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> It is clear that you seem to have developed a
>>>>> foaming-in-the-mouth,
>>>>> >>>> irrational hate of Silent Circle. As such, anyone who fails to
>>>>> denounce
>>>>> >>>> Phil Zimmermann as the great Satan is, in your eyes, some kind of
>>>>> corrupt
>>>>> >>>> shill.
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Chris,
>>>>> >>> You have repeatedly stood up asking VoIP software to be more
>>>>> transparent
>>>>> >>> about their encryption. You have repeatedly stood up when the media
>>>>> >>> overblew coverage into hype.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> However, Silent Circle remains *the only case* where you remain
>>>>> mentioned
>>>>> >>> regularly in articles on the company, where you make a point to
>>>>> completely
>>>>> >>> ignore that they are posting everywhere on their social media that
>>>>> they are
>>>>> >>> developing "unbreakable encryption", and marketing it,
>>>>> closed-source,
>>>>> >>> towardsactivists. When I confront you about this, you publicly
>>>>> accuse me of
>>>>> >>> "soliciting a hit piece" (!!) against Silent Circle.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> That is what I have a problem with: A huge, clear, obvious double
>>>>> standard
>>>>> >>> strictly made available for Silent Circle.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> I proudly stand by every single statement quoted in that Verge
>>>>> story.
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Chris
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Nadim Kobeissi <nadim at nadim.cc>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Chris Soghoian gives Silent Circle's unbreakable encryption an
>>>>> entire
>>>>> >>>>> article's worth of lip service here, it must be really
>>>>> unbreakable:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/6/3950664/phil-zimmermann-wants-to-save-you-from-your-phone
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> NK
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Brian Conley <
>>>>> brianc at smallworldnews.tv>wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> I heard they have a super secret crypto clubhouse in the belly
>>>>> of an
>>>>> >>>>>> extinct volcano.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Other rumors suggest they built their lab in the liberated
>>>>> tunnels
>>>>> >>>>>> beneath bin ladens secret lair in Pakistan...
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 6, 2013, at 19:42, Nadim Kobeissi <nadim at nadim.cc>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> Actual headline.
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/147714-cryptography-super-group-creates-unbreakable-encryption-designed-for-mass-market
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>> 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
>>>>> >
>>>>> > --
>>>>> > 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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088
>> site:  jilliancyork.com <http://jilliancyork.com/>* | *
>> twitter: @jilliancyork* *
>>
>> "We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want
>> the seemingly impossible to become a reality" - *Vaclav Havel*
>>
>> --
>> 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/20130207/0e9edba9/attachment.html>


More information about the liberationtech mailing list