And even the "proponents" already have. Here, elsewhere, .. Nobody is happy at technically ignorant gee-whiz journalism.
The discussion has been, a few times now, how we tend to speak out about it. And what busses people on the same side seem willing to throw each other under. Gods know why. -Ali On Feb 7, 2013 3:46 PM, "Jillian C. York" <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not going to get into the politics or pettiness of this because > frankly, I don't care. > > But this > headline<http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/147714-cryptography-super-group-creates-unbreakable-encryption-designed-for-mass-market>and > the accompanying claims of unbreakability are so incredibly egregious > that I would expect *every single person on this list* to speak out > against those (claims, that is), regardless of their feelings on the actual > product. > > > > On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:20 PM, Yosem Companys <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Just as a reminder, please let's all try to refrain from engaging in any >> personal attacks. We're all build and use liberationtech to make a >> difference in various ways, and we're bound to have disagreements. But >> let's not forget that we're all working toward the same broad goal of >> making people's lives better. Otherwise, we would likely not be on this >> list. >> >> Best, >> >> YC >> >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Ali-Reza Anghaie >> <[email protected]>wrote: >> >>> Douglas, I'm not sure many people are disagreeing with the end-goals and >>> even Zimmerman acknolwedges the window for verifiable source proof is >>> closing fast (longer than many would have liked as-is). >>> >>> My comments to Nadim are coming from a tact perspective - if the goal is >>> to gain wider adoption and recognition for all the community work, good >>> projects, verified projects, etc. etc. then it helps when you play in the >>> sanboxes occupied by more than the hackers and programmers making it happen. >>> >>> It's not uncommon to have people, who need solutions the most, to be >>> afraid of projects because of the "main name" associated with them after >>> some cursory rant reading. Nadim = Cryptocat, Jacob = TOR, Theo = OpenBSD, >>> etc. etc. >>> >>> It's easy to tell everyone else to pound sand or to roll all activist >>> causes into one for the collective libtech "us" - it's not so each when we >>> take it elsewhere. Just trying to see how we can promote things that look >>> less like personal grips and trolls - and more like building something >>> useful. -Ali >>> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:36 AM, Douglas Lucas <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Can Silent Circle promoters explain why Zimmerman is excused from >>>> Kerckhoffs's principle? >>>> >>>> Is it because something unverifiable is allegedly better than nothing? >>>> Even if we had divine knowledge to tell us Silent Circle is secure, >>>> isn't it an overriding problem to encourage lock-in of closed source >>>> being acceptable for something as common as text-messaging? >>>> >>>> It is good to have a scrappy talented young person such as Nadim being >>>> pesky to older, accepted people. >>>> >>>> >>>> On 02/07/2013 09:45 AM, Julien Rabier wrote: >>>> > Hello all, >>>> > >>>> > I'm no sec expert but to me, it's so obvious that Nadim is right on >>>> this. >>>> > Perhaps the form is not perfect, but if he's the only one fighting >>>> for our >>>> > own sanity here, as he says, that's no surprise. >>>> > >>>> > We should all be asking Silent Circle to commit to their statement >>>> and show >>>> > us the source code of their so-called unbreakable encryption tools. >>>> > >>>> > Again, I'm no sec expert and I won't be the guy who will do the hard >>>> task of >>>> > auditing and reviewing this code. But as a user, as a citizen and >>>> perhaps an >>>> > activist, I want the source code of such tools to be reviewed widely >>>> and >>>> > publicly before using and promoting it. >>>> > >>>> > My 2 euro cents, >>>> > Julien >>>> > >>>> > Le 07 févr. - 10:31, Nadim Kobeissi a écrit : >>>> >> Small follow-up: >>>> >> Maybe it's true I look like my goal here is just to foam at the >>>> mouth at >>>> >> Silent Circle. Maybe it looks like I'm just here to annoy Chris, and >>>> I'm >>>> >> truly sorry. These are not my goals, even if my method seems forced. >>>> >> >>>> >> I've tried writing multiple blog posts about Silent Circle, >>>> contacting >>>> >> Silent Circle, asking journalists to *please* mention the importance >>>> of >>>> >> free, open source in cryptography, and so on. All of this has >>>> failed. It >>>> >> has simply become clear to me that Silent Circle enjoys a double >>>> standard >>>> >> because of the reputation of those behind it. >>>> >> >>>> >> Silent Circle may be developed by Gods, but this is just quite >>>> plainly >>>> >> unfair. If someone repeatedly claims, towards activists, to have >>>> developed >>>> >> "unbreakable encryption", markets it closed-source for money, and >>>> receives >>>> >> nothing but nods of recognition and applause from the press and even >>>> >> from *security >>>> >> experts* (?!) then something is seriously wrong! No one should be >>>> allowed >>>> >> to commit these wrongs, not even Silent Circle. >>>> >> >>>> >> I feel like I'm fighting for our own sanity here. Look at what you're >>>> >> allowing to happen! >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> NK >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> >> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Nadim Kobeissi <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >> >>>> >>> On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 4:11 AM, Christopher Soghoian < >>>> [email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> It is clear that you seem to have developed a foaming-in-the-mouth, >>>> >>>> irrational hate of Silent Circle. As such, anyone who fails to >>>> denounce >>>> >>>> Phil Zimmermann as the great Satan is, in your eyes, some kind of >>>> corrupt >>>> >>>> shill. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> Chris, >>>> >>> You have repeatedly stood up asking VoIP software to be more >>>> transparent >>>> >>> about their encryption. You have repeatedly stood up when the media >>>> >>> overblew coverage into hype. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> However, Silent Circle remains *the only case* where you remain >>>> mentioned >>>> >>> regularly in articles on the company, where you make a point to >>>> completely >>>> >>> ignore that they are posting everywhere on their social media that >>>> they are >>>> >>> developing "unbreakable encryption", and marketing it, >>>> closed-source, >>>> >>> towardsactivists. When I confront you about this, you publicly >>>> accuse me of >>>> >>> "soliciting a hit piece" (!!) against Silent Circle. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> That is what I have a problem with: A huge, clear, obvious double >>>> standard >>>> >>> strictly made available for Silent Circle. >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> I proudly stand by every single statement quoted in that Verge >>>> story. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Chris >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Nadim Kobeissi <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Chris Soghoian gives Silent Circle's unbreakable encryption an >>>> entire >>>> >>>>> article's worth of lip service here, it must be really >>>> unbreakable: >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> http://www.theverge.com/2013/2/6/3950664/phil-zimmermann-wants-to-save-you-from-your-phone >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> NK >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Brian Conley < >>>> [email protected]>wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>>> I heard they have a super secret crypto clubhouse in the belly >>>> of an >>>> >>>>>> extinct volcano. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Other rumors suggest they built their lab in the liberated >>>> tunnels >>>> >>>>>> beneath bin ladens secret lair in Pakistan... >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPad >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> On Feb 6, 2013, at 19:42, Nadim Kobeissi <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> Actual headline. >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> http://www.extremetech.com/mobile/147714-cryptography-super-group-creates-unbreakable-encryption-designed-for-mass-market >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> NK >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> -- >>>> >>>>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: >>>> >>>>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>>> -- >>>> >>>>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: >>>> >>>>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >>>> >>>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>>> -- >>>> >>>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: >>>> >>>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> >>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: >>>> >>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>>> >>> >>>> > >>>> >> -- >>>> >> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: >>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >>>> > >>>> > -- >>>> > Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: >>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >>>> > >>>> -- >>>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: >>>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: >>> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >>> >> >> >> -- >> Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >> > > > > -- > US: +1-857-891-4244 | NL: +31-657086088 > site: jilliancyork.com <http://jilliancyork.com/>* | * > twitter: @jilliancyork* * > > "We must not be afraid of dreaming the seemingly impossible if we want the > seemingly impossible to become a reality" - *Vaclav Havel* > > -- > Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: > https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >
-- Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password at: https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
