"Compare this with SHA-1 & RIPEMD with which no such forethought is necessary (because no B can be found that hashes to the same M with these two alternative algorithms)."
I would have thought that any hash algorith would *theoretically* have collisions. Can somebody smarter than me explain this.
RFID will be in *everything*. Clothes (Walmart), money, cats. Whats next? Food?
Eek imagine marketing RFID food, with biodegradable RFID granules so you can have a head mounted scanner to *really* count the calories of everything you eat.
If I am a corporation wanting to standardize on a Linux desktop then I will want to make a bet on a company that has staying power. You abandoned mp3.com when it was clearly not going to make any money, what reason do I have for believing you will not to the same again?
Naively simple as these proposals may seem (and anybody who thinks the solution to spam is simple is being naive), the fundamental point actually appears similar to the proposal from MSFT, AOL et al. Create a centralized organization to moderate this, and rely on international legislation.
Iff the US can get its house in order legally wrt to spam, then it becomes feasible to proposal international email agreements. Consider snail mail. For a few pennies a letter sent from Boston will make it to Hanoi. Mail is such a powerful tool it was worth creating international agreements to make it worth amazingly well. The same is true with the phone system.
The Internet appeared to have already "solved" the international communication problems through simple open RFCs. At one point we all naively thought that governments would not, should not and could not get involved with it's legislation.
However spamming is like any other antisocial behavior, and if society decides universally that we will not accept a certain behavior then we will legislate against it as we have with any other universally unacceptable behavior.
Remember countries do control the pipes. If Vietnam refused to agree to international spam laws, the rest of the world could embargo them digitally. No email in or out of Vietnam. No access to Google from Vietnam. Seems extreme, and perhaps spam will never be an extreme enough problem to warrant this. However consider the war on terrorism. International hacking attempts to bring down infrastructure in the US will probably happen, and the response to those may well be as severe as the responses to 9/11.
Clearly we need better technology as well. Answer-phones and caller-id mean that I never listen to telemarketers. Digital signatures would be an enormous step in the right direction. Email is far too easy to forge, and the fact that organizations such as banks do not sign their email is ridiculous. Digital signatures are too expensive currently to generate from such services as Hotmail and AOL, but Moore's law and/or entrepreneurs will solve this.
Centralized signing authorities will also be needed, and again this is where the government will have to step in again. Like it or not they are the common root of trust in all stable countries.
It may take 10 years for these international agreements to be worked out and enforced, but like it or not the governments of the world will be involved.
Slashdot Mirror
In this article
it states
"Compare this with SHA-1 & RIPEMD with which no such forethought is necessary (because no B can be found that hashes to the same M with these two alternative algorithms)."
I would have thought that any hash algorith would *theoretically* have collisions. Can somebody smarter than me explain this.
Thanks.
fyi Casino Chips are getting RFID tags also
RFID will be in *everything*. Clothes (Walmart), money, cats. Whats next? Food?
Eek imagine marketing RFID food, with biodegradable RFID granules so you can have a head mounted scanner to *really* count the calories of everything you eat.
I'm not saying its a good thing. Its just what will happen. Its how society works.
We should hold this thought and come back in 5 years to see where we end up.
If I am a corporation wanting to standardize on a Linux desktop then I will want to make a bet on a company that has staying power. You abandoned mp3.com when it was clearly not going to make any money, what reason do I have for believing you will not to the same again?
Iff the US can get its house in order legally wrt to spam, then it becomes feasible to proposal international email agreements. Consider snail mail. For a few pennies a letter sent from Boston will make it to Hanoi. Mail is such a powerful tool it was worth creating international agreements to make it worth amazingly well. The same is true with the phone system.
The Internet appeared to have already "solved" the international communication problems through simple open RFCs. At one point we all naively thought that governments would not, should not and could not get involved with it's legislation.
However spamming is like any other antisocial behavior, and if society decides universally that we will not accept a certain behavior then we will legislate against it as we have with any other universally unacceptable behavior.
Remember countries do control the pipes. If Vietnam refused to agree to international spam laws, the rest of the world could embargo them digitally. No email in or out of Vietnam. No access to Google from Vietnam. Seems extreme, and perhaps spam will never be an extreme enough problem to warrant this. However consider the war on terrorism. International hacking attempts to bring down infrastructure in the US will probably happen, and the response to those may well be as severe as the responses to 9/11.
Clearly we need better technology as well. Answer-phones and caller-id mean that I never listen to telemarketers. Digital signatures would be an enormous step in the right direction. Email is far too easy to forge, and the fact that organizations such as banks do not sign their email is ridiculous. Digital signatures are too expensive currently to generate from such services as Hotmail and AOL, but Moore's law and/or entrepreneurs will solve this.
Centralized signing authorities will also be needed, and again this is where the government will have to step in again. Like it or not they are the common root of trust in all stable countries. It may take 10 years for these international agreements to be worked out and enforced, but like it or not the governments of the world will be involved.