Posted on 06/13/2013 1:24:29 AM PDT by PieterCasparzen
seven en francais is sept (pronounced set)
maybe Zetta is close enough
Is the IRS part of the 'team' - a team as interested in going after American citizens as protecting us from Islamists? Maybe the American people should vote on this - how much 'security' do we want vs how much freedom do we give up? Or better yet, let's consider peacefully dividing the country. One have liberal control freaks who can open their borders, hand out cash to real terrorist (a la John Kerry) and give up their privacy. The other half will take a few risks, close their borders and live free...
Dems need to consider this - their country can be run as paranoid as it comes... and we won't be there to object.
Is the IRS part of the 'team' - a team as interested in going after American citizens as protecting us from Islamists? Maybe the American people should vote on this - how much 'security' do we want vs how much freedom do we give up? Or better yet, let's consider peacefully dividing the country. One half liberal control freaks who can open their borders, hand out cash to real terrorist (a la John Kerry) and give up their privacy. The other half will take a few risks, close their borders and live free...
Dems need to consider this - their country can be run as paranoid as it comes... and we won't be there to object.
Bad advise. Unless someone makes some kind of fundamental breakthrough in mathematics that would make factoring large numbers inconsequential, there is plenty of crypto available today that is strong enough that the feds would have no concievable ability to crack it in your lifetime, even given Moore's Law.
They are much more likely to hack your computer and steal your keys if they really want them than to worry about 'breaking' the message.
If we all habitually used encryption as a part of our daily communications, we could make it much more difficult for them to tell the difference between an email that is routine, and one that is 'interesting'.
There is no technical reason why good, strong crypto isn't built into all email clients. I suspect government pressure, more than anything else keeps it out.
When was the last time you saw federal LEOs on TV bemoaning the availability of civilian encryption?
10-12 years by my count.
It’s the dog that didn’t bark.
There are plenty of mathematical back doors.
Trust me on this.
I swear I had not seen this thread when I posted this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3030810/posts
Posted on Thursday, June 13, 2013 10:14:10 AM by Abundy
Over the last two weeks we have seen revelations regarding the NSA datamining and allegations that DHS has compiled a list of people it deems dangerous to the government.
Anyone want to bet against the NSA capturing and segregating in a separate database all NCIC instant check phone calls as part of the creation of the enemies list or simply for collation with the list if the government decides these dangerous people need a visit?
Think about the information in that phone call...
name, SSN, type of firearm
...all information handed to the government for safekeeping. The FBI and ATF don’t even need to violate the law since it’s the NSA that is doing so.
Mathematical back doors? Do you mean to imply that there's some intrinsic flaw in ALL encryption algorithms?
Are you saying that brute force decryption is not even needed? For now, I'll rely on systems which require brute force. An encryption system with a "mathematical back door" is no encryption system at all...
The brute force encryption is the equivalent of trying to get in the front door. That’s locked, bolted and made out of steel. Meanwhile the clever cryptanalysts climb in that side window over there. The one that’s open a wee bit if we can just prise a little with this here crow bar.
Just remember. The last time you heard a federal LEO call encryption the ‘tool of terrorists’ and cry for its regulation or outlawing. 10-12 years by my memory.
The dog that didn’t bark.
What good is a front door if the side door will suffice? It's as if you're saying that there's no such thing as strong encryption, because there's ALWAYS a side door. As I said, I'd like to learn more about this claim.
Just ask yourself when was the last time you saw federal LEOs kvetching about the civilian encryption programs.
They were all over TV in the 90’s complaining about civilian access to ‘terror tools, including encryption’.
And then, all of a sudden, in the early 00’s all fell silent on that front.
Do you think, in light of all this data farming being done on 300M of us, they just gave up?
It’s the dog that didn’t bark.
It doesn’t matter if YOU can’t think of a mathematical means to break the encryption. Plenty of really smart mathematicians have been tasked with it for decades.
Remember in the old cowboy western movies when the Indians were getting ready to go on the warpath? They’d throw a big powwow and dance in a big circle to the sound of lots of drums. And while those drums were pounding the cowboys knew they were safe. Because they knew where the Indians were.
But when those drums grew quiet....
I haven’t heard those particular drums in 10 or 12 years. Have you?
I understand your comment about the all the hoo-ha calming down. But my recollection of the period is that it became settled that if somebody wanted to use strong encryption like PGP, then there’s not a lot that the government can do to stop them. I’m sure that corporate R&D departments, the military, and other such entities use it all the time. The fact that it hasn’t become widely used by private citizens doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s obviated.
I guess if the government goes after you for using strong encryption, it means that you've already run afoul of them on some other point...
Well, between civilian entities PGP is probably a good thing to use.
Just don’t assume the feds can’t break it. I wouldn’t swear it on the Bible but I’d bet a mint on it in Vegas.
True but you can literally flood them with enough chaff to choke on for years everything from knock knock jokes to Aunt Kate’s toxic tuna casserole recipe. The amount of computer power & time/money will make it prohibitive in time & expense to decrypt every damn thing.
Nope. Not even.
You’re thinking in terms of computational equipment you’ve seen.
The gentleman is asking for factual information yet you can provide none only rambling about old westerns/cowboy movies.
A great deal of the folks on the internet don’t even realize that there are encryption software that is available for use by non government folks.
As for the government flunkies not talking about digital encryption on the idiot box why let folks like the inner city gang banger get improved skills like figuring out secure communications like using cut outs & dead drops & encryption by pointing out that they can learn how to do these things.
Are you claiming that there is no encryption that the NSA can’t break at near real time? If so how do you come to this conclusion what inside info if any do you have on this point?
As I’ve told other posters. Use encryption if you like. It will undoubtedly keep 3rd parties from reading your messages.
The feds aren’t worried about the gang bangers regardless of what they do.
If everyone had started using encryption for nearly everything 15 years ago it might have been different.
But then, the agency in question has infinite dollars. And if they’re not picking your pocket for them they can just print their own.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.