On Thu, Oct 2, 2014 at 4:28 PM, Eleanor Saitta <e...@dymaxion.org> wrote:
> Field outcomes aren't about math. That's the point I'm trying to make > here. > > The precautionary principle and a Do No Harm approach to software > development are incredibly important when looking at the requirements > specification of security tools intended to be used in a hostile > environment. I cannot stress this strongly enough. > > Real-world field experience is the only reasonable and reliable guide > for determining the appropriate design of security systems; anything > else is at best a amateur[1]. For novel capabilities, *careful* field > testing in moderate risk environments is necessary to establish a > baseline. Building a real loop with existing training programs to > ensure that you get field feedback when systems are used is similarly > critical. > > Building software because it's cool is fine, as are projects we do > because we believe in them, but at a certain point, there's a bar. > Recommending your tools for use in the field in hostile environments > is that bar. Beyond that bar, we have an ethical obligation to > attempt to act in a professional manner. > > I am on the CipherShed project, which is working to sustain TrueCrypt while rewriting most of it. I'm working on it because it's cool. I have zero "field" experience. You described me quite well, I'm afraid. I really need to understand concerns about TrueCrypt. I got the game-theory thing. Bad guys keep breaking your fingers because they can't be sure you don't have more to tell. I get it. I will have an impact on the code going forward. Also, I am entirely a pragmatist. I am an engineer, not a cryptographer, and I build stuff that works in the real world. Can you explain a deniable crypto-system that fits the real world? I have enjoyed this thread so far, and I have to say, I lean towards the guy claiming real-world experience. I think we who are trying to keep TrueCrypt alive could use your advice. Bill
-- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable on Google. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech. Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu.
