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 <compa...@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 <a...@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 <d...@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 <na...@nadim.cc> >>> wrote: >>> >> >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Christopher Soghoian < >>> ch...@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 <na...@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 < >>> bri...@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 <na...@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
