On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 5:27 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
> On 2011-06-17 4:02 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
>
> Crypto is no more than an equivalent of doors, locks, keys, safes, and
>> hiding.
>>
>
> The state can break locks, but it cannot break crypto.
>
> Hiding *is* effectual against the state -
On 2011-06-17 4:02 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
> Osama, for
example, was found in part by traffic analysis. Maybe he should have
been using Tor instead of USB sticks and couriers, but I bet usage of
Tor from a sleepy Islamabad suburb would have led to his being found
sooner.
That was not a sleepy
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:08 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
> On 2011-06-15 7:05 PM, Nico Williams wrote:
>>
>> It's only when push comes to shove that crypto
>> doesn't help.
>
> In the conflict with Al Quaeda, as in any war, push has come to shove, and
> yet encryption does help.
Encryption, assumi
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 5:51 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
> On 2011-06-15 6:22 PM, Adam Back wrote:
>>
>> Then there are countries where crypto is officially or effectively already
>> banned - there being caught with privacy tech on your laptop, cell phone
>> etc
>> would be dangerous.
>
> Which, ho
On 2011-06-16 4:47 AM, Nico Williams wrote:
That's nice, but not scalable. Scale that up enough and you have
anarchy, which is just a temporary situation until a strongman takes
over.
Firstly:
Anarchy always exist. The state is an island in a sea of anarchy, and
that island increases or dimi
On 2011-06-15 7:05 PM, Nico Williams wrote:
It's only when push comes to shove that crypto
doesn't help.
In the conflict with Al Quaeda, as in any war, push has come to shove,
and yet encryption does help.
Long before push comes to shove you have to deal with the fact that
your crypto is on
On 2011-06-15 6:22 PM, Adam Back wrote:
Then there are countries where crypto is officially or effectively already
banned - there being caught with privacy tech on your laptop, cell phone
etc
would be dangerous.
Which, however, tend to be the countries where there is lots of privacy
tech on pe
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:36 PM, StealthMonger
wrote:
> Some folks do not choose to have a state. For them, all states are
> foreign powers.
That's nice, but not scalable. Scale that up enough and you have
anarchy, which is just a temporary situation until a strongman takes
over. And even for
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:36 PM, StealthMonger
wrote:
> Some folks do not choose to have a state. For them, all states are
> foreign powers.
That's nice, but not scalable. Scale that up enough and you have
anarchy, which is just a temporary situation until a strongman takes
over. And even for
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 2:36 PM, StealthMonger
wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Nico Williams writes:
>
>> crypto has a place ... to protect us ... from foreign powers, and
>> from casual inspection by one's state
>
> Some folks do not choose to have a state. For
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Nico Williams writes:
> crypto has a place ... to protect us ... from foreign powers, and
> from casual inspection by one's state
Some folks do not choose to have a state. For them, all states are
foreign powers.
> You must participate in ...
On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 3:22 AM, Adam Back wrote:
> Well said StealthMonger, I suspect Nico is in the minority on this list with
> that type of view.
>
> I read Nico's later reply also. Short of banning crypto privacy and
> security rights stand a better chance of being balanced by more deploymen
Well said StealthMonger, I suspect Nico is in the minority on this list with
that type of view.
I read Nico's later reply also. Short of banning crypto privacy and
security rights stand a better chance of being balanced by more deployment
of crypto. (In terms of warrantless wiretaps etc which s
13 matches
Mail list logo
