[cryptome] Re: [Cryptography] $750k Fine for exporting crypto

  • From: Redmond <darkredptc@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: cryptome@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2014 12:43:07 -0700

Wow its PGP all over again.
On Nov 8, 2014 12:40 PM, "John Young" <jya@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The global internal rot of digital technology dependence appears doing
> quite well by inducing ever greater investment and reliance upon
> it. Will over-reliance upon secret cryptography be its Achilles heel?
> Let us hope so.
> Conumdrum is that wholesale monitoring is the result of ubiquitous
> digital technology, networks and programs thickly hidden by secret
> cryptography, thinly protected, if at all, by never quite effective public
> cryptography, ineffective by law by design, by implementation and
> by endless excuses to do better next time.
> The correlation between the rise of the Internet to advance global
> surveillance and public cryptography to persuade the populace there
> is hope the surveillance can be countered, is occasionally noted
> but not by cryptography fetishists who promote the notion it is possible
> to have a global platform of diverse levels for multiple open and
> secret uses but still protect at least a few of the levels with encryption.
> This despite the legacy of cryptography as a deceptive technology
> through and through and foremost, in particular by misleading about
> its strengths and weaknesses, its treachery and double-dealing, its
> cheating and betraying, its false promises and "confessed" failures.
> No doubt all forms of security share these characteristics, eventual
> failure is the fundamental outcome of a security system subject to
> ceaseless attack. Every fortress fails, every weapon is surpassed,
> every peace treaty is transgressed, every ideology collapses, every
> nation is overturned; in all cases by excessive conviction that failure
> will not happen, and when it does, it occurs by the least expected
> means. After a few attempts to repair the majestic defense and
> prolong a regime, it finally implodes most often due to internal
> rot of those unable to give up comfortable convictions that munitions
> are invulnerable, that supreme command and control is protected
> against tampering, that oaths and rewards of fealty to the homeland
> are insurpassable. Except for the planted cheats of anonymizers
> and encryption.
>  What we are seeing today is unprecedented in American history:  Wholesale
>> monitoring of entire populations, "just in case" the information might be
>> "needed" later.  Saying "beware, someone evil like Nixon could use this
>> stuff" *misses the point*:  It's bad *even if never abused*.  Its mere
>> *existence* is abuse, no matter who controls it.  If the system were under
>> the control of a saintly administration consisting of nothing but good
>> actors, and there were a magic button that would be pressed just before
>> they handed over the reigns to someone not so saintly that magically erased
>> all the stored information and destroyed the information-gathering systems
>> ... it would *still* be wrong.

Other related posts: