Ben Bucksch wrote:

For the last, this is standard risk analysis - convert all assets to dollar values and convert.


Fine. Then "standard risk analysis" is inherently flawed, because obviously (at least to me) not all values can be expressed in dollars. I mean, even *MasterCard* got *that* ;-P.


It might sound as though it makes no intiutive sense
to express all values in dollars.  Yet, in practically
all large dollar decision questions that might raise
this question, it is standard practice to express the
dollar value of a life.

The reason for this is quite simple:  if not done
this way, there is no other way to justifiably decide
between opposing choices.  E.g., which life to save.

For example, the roads management people happen to
have a value.  I recall it being $186,000, about 20
years back.  This allows them to decide whether to
expend money to correct or improve a road.  First
they calculate, statistically, how many lives the
planned improvement will save, and also, the cost.
Divide those two numbers, and if the answer is better
than $186,000 per life saved, then they make the
change.

The Military have these numbers.  Hospitals have
these numbers.  Life insurance sells these numbers.
Anywhere where there are serious calculations made
(serious constraints meet serious demands) these
numbers exist.  Certainly, this is standard in
security engineering.

My suggestion here is that Mozilla simply bypasses
this whole question by doing what practically all
retail and open source software organisations do:
explicitly declare that they are not in the life
saving game (it's part of the disclaimers).


Husband/wife? That can be covered with 40 bit ADH, in general.


Huch? I certainly don't want my love letters to be read my *anyone*, *ever*, apart from the recipient and me. That means not even the NSA or my little brother, if they really try. In fact, I expect that as a basic right.

I approve!


You might then be a great supporter of our proposals
to, for example, permit enhanced self-signed cert
browsing.  This would mean, for example, there would
be many more free webmail interfaces that used certs
to protect those very sensitive love letters.  You'd
also be a great fan of having all those chat rooms
where you trade personal information such as pre-
divorce advice over the open net converted to using
some form of easy crypto.

Encouraging those servers to use self-signed certs
would be a great boon to privacy.  Alternatively, if
we subscribe to conspiracy theories and believe that
the NSA has already acquired all the root copies it
needs, then we really want some alternatives...


> (I have neither wife nor little brother atm, as it happens ;-) .)


That might be the safest course :)


iang _______________________________________________ mozilla-crypto mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/mozilla-crypto

Reply via email to