Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Cryptography 'Becoming Less Important,' Adi Shamir Says

Posted by Soulskill on from the encryption-is-useless-when-users-are-also-useless dept.

Trailrunner7 writes "In the current climate of continuous attacks and intrusions by APT crews, government-sponsored groups and others organizations, cryptography is becoming less and less important, one of the fathers of public-key cryptography said Tuesday. Adi Shamir, who helped design the original RSA algorithm, said that security experts should be preparing for a 'post-cryptography' world. 'I definitely believe that cryptography is becoming less important. In effect, even the most secure computer systems in the most isolated locations have been penetrated over the last couple of years by a series of APTs and other advanced attacks,' Shamir said during the Cryptographers' Panel session at the RSA Conference today. 'We should rethink how we protect ourselves. Traditionally we have thought about two lines of defense. The first was to prevent the insertion of the APT with antivirus and other defenses. The second was to detect the activity of the APT once it's there. But recent history has shown us that the APT can survive both of these defenses and operate for several years.""

6 of 250 comments (clear)

  1. no by masternerdguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Encryption is the best anti-tampering mechanism you have in computing. Well placed encryption protects OS data from tampering, user data from theft, and sensitive communications secured. It's only getting more important.

    --
    To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.
    1. Re:no by jonwil · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Slashdotters (including myself) dont hate code signing, they just hate code signing where the owner of the computer does not control what gets signed and what can run.

    2. Re:no by happylight · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think the point is no encryption is going to protect you from users installing malware, buggy software, or just plain hand over data unknowingly. Next to no attackers would attack the cryptography itself. The weakest link is always somewhere else.

    3. Re:no by crutchy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      would you remove all the locks on the doors and windows of your house merely because they couldn't stop aliens from abducting you?

      also, window locks are uselss because burglers can simply smash the window

      any level of personal security (even the fake security cameras, lasers, etc) is better than none at all

      but on the other hand, imposing your ideas of "security" on others is not a good idea (such as the TSA)

      people should be free to decide what level of security they think is appropriate for themselves, as long as it doesn't adversely affect others (don't install a nuclear reactor powered ion cannon in your back yard because your neighbors likely won't be very happy having risks from your ideas of security imposed on them)

  2. APT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Would have been nice to define APT...

  3. Re:The way I do security by masternerdguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have fun when Joe the Burgler takes your computer.

    --
    To offset political mods, replace Flamebait with Insightful.