indeed, i vote to continue. Because you don't mind being overlooked by NSA doesn't mean everybody don't care.
On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 7:33 AM, Rüdiger G. Biernat < rgbier...@rgbiernat.homelinux.org> wrote: > This discussion about security/NSA/encryption IS important. Please go on. > > > Von Samsung Mobile gesendet > > > -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- > Von: Giles Coochey ** > Datum:10.10.2013 11:39 (GMT+01:00) > An: list@lists.pfsense.org > Betreff: Re: [pfSense] NSA: Is pfSense infiltrated by "big brother" NSA or > others? > > On 10/10/2013 09:38, Thinker Rix wrote: > > On 2013-10-10 01:13, Przemysław Pawełczyk wrote: > >> On Thu, 10 Oct 2013 00:05:22 +0300 > >> Thinker Rix <thinke...@rocketmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>> Well, actually I started this thread with a pretty frank, > >>> straight-forward and very simple question. > >> That's right and they were justified. > > > > Thank you! > > > >> BTW, you pushed to the corner the (un)famous American hubris (Obama: US > >> is exceptional.), that's the nasty answers from some. > > > > Yes, I guess I have hit a whole bunch of different nerves with my > > question, and I find it to be highly interesting to observe some of > > the awkward reactions, socioscientificly and psychologically. > > > > I have been insulted, I have been bullied, I have been called to > > self-censor myself and at the end some users "virtually joined" to > > give the illusion of a majority an muzzle me, stating, that my > > question has no place at this pfSense mailing list. Really amazing, > > partly hilarious reactions, I think. > > These reactions say so much about how far the whole surveillance and > > mind-suppression has proceeded already and how much it has influenced > > the thoughts and behavior of formerly free people by now. Frightening. > > > >> Thinker Rix, you are not alone at your unease pressing you to ask > >> those questions about pfSense and NSA. > > > > Thank you for showing your support openly! > > I too was surprised to see some activity on the pfsense list, after > seeing only a few posts per week I checked today to find several dozen > messages talking about a topic I have been concerned with myself - as a > network security specialist, how much can I trust the firewalls I use, > be they embedded devices, software packages, or 'hardware' from > manufacturers. > There are many on-topic things to discuss here: > 1. Which Ciphers & Transforms should we now consider secure (pfsense > provides quite a few cipher choices over some other off the shelf hardware. > 2. What hardware / software & configuration changes can we consider to > improve RNG and ensure that should we increase the bit size of our > encryption, reduce lifetimes of our SAs that we can still ensure we have > enough entropy in the RNG on a device that is typically starved of > traditional entropy sources. > > This is so much on-topic, I am surprised that there has been a movement > to call this thread to stop, granted - it may seem that the conversation > may drift into a political one, with regard to privacy law etc... > however, that is a valid sub-topic for a discussion list that addresses > devices that are designed and implemented to safe-guard privacy. > > -- > Regards, > > Giles Coochey, CCNP, CCNA, CCNAS > NetSecSpec Ltd > +44 (0) 8444 780677 > +44 (0) 7983 877438 > http://www.coochey.net > http://www.netsecspec.co.uk > gi...@coochey.net > > > > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > _______________________________________________ > List mailing list > List@lists.pfsense.org > http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list > > -- Alexandre
_______________________________________________ List mailing list List@lists.pfsense.org http://lists.pfsense.org/mailman/listinfo/list
