I must admit I'm baffled, and rather appalled, to be seeing supposed
advocates of cryptography suggesting, in effect, that cryptologic
education somehow perpetuates a guild system or that deployed 
security protocols need not be measured against the current state of
the art.

It might be debatable whether only licensed electricians should
design and install electrical systems.  But hardly anyone would argue
that electrical system designers and installers needn't be competent
at what they do.  (Perhaps most of those who would advance such arguments
were electrocuted or killed in fires before they had a chance to make
their case).

The sad fact is that if one wants to be taken seriously as cryptographer,
one needs to learn cryptology.  The good news is that there are few,
if any, artificial barriers to doing so.  Those of us who seek to
increase the pool of talent and see more widely deployed cryptography
can best do so by making the subject accessible to newcomers and those
in related fields.  We do everyone a disservice by patronizingly
encouraging or tolerating poor designs in deployed systems, however well
intentioned they may be.


The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to