On 28 April 2014 00:45, Arshad Noor <arshad.n...@strongauth.com> wrote: > On 04/27/2014 10:33 AM, Ben Laurie wrote: > >> http://www.links.org/files/SimplySecure.pdf > > > Ben, > > As noble as the goals are of this initiative, the solution is > likely to be accepted only in UK and the USA - only because it > appears that the people behind this effort are from those two > countries. Given Snowden's revelations, why should anyone > outside these two countries trust anything crypto emanating > from the US & UK?
If you read the documentation, we are not intending to create new crypto. > If we really want to see a universal crypto-protocol that works > across the internet, the team that designs it must have > representation from the US/UK's allies and enemies. If there > are weaknesses in the design, then everyone stands to lose (and > hopefully, the protocol never sees the light of day); if it is > strong enough, then everyone is protected. Since we haven't hired the team yet, this seems like a premature criticism. > I believe Bruce Schneier wrote that the US has proven itself > to be a poor steward of the internet; to that extent if we want > (reasonably) universal trust in a new crypto-protocol, its > design must have representation from anyone that has a stake in > it; anything less will only end up in balkanizing the internet > from a crypto perspective. You appear to be describing the IETF. > > Arshad Noor > StrongAuth, Inc. > > P.S. Note that the solution to the problem cannot merely be a > technical one; crypto is a political tool, and in a borderless > internet, the solution to the problem must account for the > politics of trust. > > > _______________________________________________ > cryptography mailing list > cryptography@randombit.net > http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography@randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
