On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Andreas Bader <[email protected]> wrote: > Notionally there is no unbreakable encryption. > Practically there is a unbreakable encryption (AES, SHA-3); our > standarts are more than adequate. > The risk with encryptions is more the possibility of a hardware hack. > Or a bad guy beating the shit out of you with a 5 Dollar Wrench until > you tell him the password. > In real life no one will use a super computer to break our hardcore > encrypted harddrives.
I think Nadim was being sarcastic. I'm also eager to see what comes from this. I too think it's rather odd that these supposedly respectable cryptographers are so blatantly ignoring Kirchoff's principle. Quickly skimmed the article; it seems that you have to trust them to *actually* encrypt your stuff on your phone before storing it on their servers. As with so many others, it'd behoove them to put their code where their mouths are; I don't mind them making money off of this, but at least they should stop leveraging their big names in the industry to get a lot of media attention around them selling snake-oil. JC -- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
