Reply With Quote
Apply what ever law you want. Unethical people will violate it if they want the information.
OK, Now I know what it is. Wiki has some pretty good stuff on it. As long as the private key feature is utilized, it sounds damn good. Public keys alone are a joke for security.
Apply what ever law you want. Unethical people will violate it if they want the information.
That's probably a better example.
All that some laws do are bind the hand of those working for justice. Criminals don't care about the law, so for someone to cry foul over the ethical use of FISA is just ridiculous to me. There is no cons utional violation unless someone misuses it. Anyone willing to misuse it would care before FISA was passed anyway.
Well, I could be wrong, but almost all encryption schemes that are used today are generally public/private. I'm not aware of any public key only encryptions.
PGP is pretty reliable.
There's no such thing as Public key alone for Public Key cryptography.
The way it works is with Public-Private key pairs (which are mathematically tied together). The math is fascinating too but you need to know about Galois fields and factorization in order to really understand.
But by making it legal, you're only encouraging people to get away with it.
Look at it this way. If I were a highway planner, and I thought the optimum speed for travel was 70 MPH, I'd set the speed limit at 60 or 65... you know people are going to go over the speed limit, so you set articially stricter standards.
The same goes for law. Just because criminals won't be stopped by laws does not mean it's a good reason to loosen up on the laws. Most people won't go straight to the worst offense, but will slowly test the system.
Therefore, best to put stricter restrictions on someone, as that will potentially help slow down unauthorized access/entry.
Not really. The most commonly used encryption schemes use block ciphers (IDEA, 3DES, BLOWFISH, etc). Those use a fixed key. They almost all pre-negotiate a random key using public crypto first.
I don't know the math very well; I just know the application of public/private key infrastructure in regards to information security. I know it's based off multiplications or powers of prime numbers... something like that.
Hm, well I don't have alot of experience in the civvie world, but it seems most military stuff is public/private.
Isn't 3DES a hashing algorithm? I always have trouble remembering the uses/differences between them, as I don't work with encryption/decryption day to day.
The problem here is not with unethical people. The problem here is the attempt to make the entire conundrum ethically permissible and lawful.
There are always corrupt cops and everything else. That doesn't mean that we need to adjust the laws to condone their activities.
It's mostly modular arithmetic (thus the Galois field reference).
And yes, it's based on prime number multiplication. It gains it's strength on the intractability to factor a very large composite number made up of two very large prime numbers. Elliptic Curve cryptography (like El Gamal) is basically somewhat the same but using logarithms instead of exponentiation.
Depends on the usage. For example, real time data streaming using public key crypto is almost always absolutely a no go. For smaller data or when performance is not required then public crypto is king (like emails).
3DES is basically a variant of DES, the very very old military standard block cipher. DES used a 56 bit key (64 bits with parity). 3DES is basically 3 rounds of DES using 3 different keys, bringing the key length to a more amenable 168 bits (it might not seem a lot, but block ciphers work on a completely different realm from public key ciphers, and when combined with CBC modes, it's even harder to break them).
Netscape, explorer, etc. use public keys. Think about it. You never create a key that only you and the person you are corresponding with have. Any good program developer can reverse engineer a public key. That's why you never should never do financial transactions, banking, etc. on the internet. Not unless you have a unique key you input. with the other end. Password alone doesn't cut it.
It's already ethical under the cons ution. As long as we don't violate the cons ution, I'm game.
Ehhh... no. A crypto key is indeed created for every SSL session, the reason your input isn't asked for is because it's much more secure to use a strong entropy random key.
The Cons ution doesn't deal in morals. There's no such thing as a 'ethical under the cons ution' construct.
You don't get what I'm saying. Since there is no unique key at each end to start with, any good programmer can reverse engineer the data stream. It is not secure to a professional.
OK, my choice of wording was poor. My point goes back to reasonable and unreasonable. With probable cause, it is reasonable to search and seize.
i would like the Obama administration, and all of you, to know that I support our president, his SC pick, his economic bills, and especially the government's health care proposals.
thanks
PS: feel free to forward this
There are unique keys at each end.
I am a professional.
You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about.
That I agree with.
"There is a lot of disinformation about the Patriot Act out there, including warrantless wiretapping on US citizens. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about the Patriot Act that seems fishy, send it to [email protected]."
Dubya was a lot more neat. He would send you a NSL asking you to rat out the info he needed. Since you couldn't challenge a NSL, or even talk about it's existence (that includes to potential counsel), then you were SOL.
Patriot Act FTW!
I'm sure the seasoned attorneys that find the time to grace us with their presence on this board will find a defense for the administration but, there are some in the legal profession that believe the Obama administration may be in violation of § 552a. Records maintained on individuals.
Particularly (e)(7) which commands federal agencies -- of which, I think we can all agree, the White House is one --
So, hit the books barristers, the President needs you to help him maintain his prerogative to collect information via [email protected]"(7) maintain no record describing how any individual exercises rights guaranteed by the First Amendment unless expressly authorized by statute or by the individual about whom the record is maintained or unless pertinent to and within the scope of an authorized law enforcement activity;"
Except the datamining program has no strong reasonable/unreasonable delineations, and merely picks out emails based on a few factors and pulls them out for review. Ergo, innocent people's mail is being read along with those that aren't innocent.
Theoretically they could only try to pull email packets from a certain IP, but that wouldn't justify the massive amounts of money and time the government has invested in the system.
I'm fine with this program getting shut down, so really, I don't care. I think it was a half-thought out attempt to see what chain letters discussing health care were the most prevalent so they could run damage control on those issues.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions