Re: I've seen things you people wouldn't believe...

On May 8, 6:19=A0pm, David Friedman <d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> In article <50j624th1j7pbo9uee1seu8cq11tssq...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> =A0"David V. Loewe, Jr" <davelo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Thu, 08 May 2008 09:44:51 -0700, David Friedman
> > <d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > "David V. Loewe, Jr" <davelo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > >> On Thu, 8 May 2008 07:27:37 -0700 (PDT), petert...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
> > >> >On May 8, 12:00=A0am, "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> > >> >> David V. Loewe, Jr <davelo...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> > >> >> > "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > >> >> >> If you're using good quality encryption, they may still be
able=
 to
> > >> >> >> tap it, but that doesn't mean they can tell what's being
said.
>
> > >> >> > If they REALLY want to know, they'll let the NSA play with it.
> > >> >> > And they'll find out.
>
> > >> >> I doubt that very much. =A0Computer power helps code-makers far
mo=
re
> > >> >> than code-breakers.
>
> > >> >> > Trust me on this.
>
> > >> >> Why? =A0Do you have inside knowledge? =A0If so, how come you're
al=
lowed
> > >> >> to post about it?
>
> > >> >Absent good reasons, I'm not going to trust David on this.
>
> > >> >I have to agree with Keith here - while there is a heck of a lot
of
> > >> >lousy security out there, I've never seen any evidence that the
NSA =
(or
> > >> >anyone else) can break properly used modern crypto of adequate key
l=
ength.
> > >> >Breaches that do occur are due to poorly handled keys, poorly
> > >> >implemented
> > >> >software, or compromised systems. Doing it right is like
maintaining=

> > >> >sterility in a medical operating field - a royal PITA, except you
> > >> >won't know when you've failed until too late.
>
> > >> >FWIW, I recently finished a 10-year stint as an engineer at
> > >> >RSA Security Inc, implementing and deploying cryptgraphic
software,
> > >> >so this subject is familiar to me.
>
> > >> 1) How much computing power does the NSA have at it's disposal?
>
> > >> 2) You do understand that Keith is talking about real time
encryption=

> > >> of telephone conversations, correct?
>
> > >> 3) In light of 2), how many people have the capability of
encrypting
> > >> their phone *conversations*? =A0And who can they talk to?
>
> > >Your final point is an important one. But it doesn't provide any
suppor=
t
> > >at all for your original claim. If you are now conceding that the NSA
> > >can't crack good quality enryption, then you ought to concede that
your=

> > >claim was wrong before substituting a new and more defensible
> > >alternative.
>
> > ?
>
> > Are you saying that the second point doesn't matter?
>
> No. I skipped that because I'm not certain whether current encryption
> software can do real time encryption of conversation with adequate key
> length. My guess is that it can=ADthe clipper chip flap was some time
> back, and pretty clearly at that time the NSA was concerned about the
> possibility=ADbut I don't actually know.