On Thu, 5 Sep 2013 15:58:04 -0400 "Perry E. Metzger" <pe...@piermont.com> wrote: > I would like to open the floor to *informed speculation* about > BULLRUN.
Here are a few guesses from me: 1) I would not be surprised if it turned out that some people working for some vendors have made code and hardware changes at the NSA's behest without the knowledge of their managers or their firm. If I were running such a program, paying off a couple of key people here and there would seem only rational, doubly so if the disclosure of their involvement could be made into a crime by giving them a clearance or some such. 2) I would not be surprised if some of the slow speed at which improved/fixed hashes, algorithms, protocols, etc. have been adopted might be because of pressure or people who had been paid off. At the very least, anyone whining at a standards meeting from now on that they don't want to implement a security fix because "it isn't important to the user experience" or adds minuscule delays to an initial connection or whatever should be viewed with enormous suspicion. Whether I am correct or not, such behavior clearly serves the interest of those who would do bad things. 3) I would not be surprised if random number generator problems in a variety of equipment and software were not a very obvious target, whether those problems were intentionally added or not. 4) Choices not to use things like Diffie-Hellman in TLS connections on the basis that it damages user experience and the like should be viewed with enormous suspicion. 5) Choices not to make add-ons available in things like chat clients or mail programs that could be used for cryptography should be viewed with suspicion. Perry -- Perry E. Metzger pe...@piermont.com _______________________________________________ The cryptography mailing list email@example.com http://www.metzdowd.com/mailman/listinfo/cryptography