Second to last slide mentions that too - paraphrased "could be worse - people might find alternatives to tor or improve it if they knew what we could do".
And instead of move "away" - why not move to *both* AES and another cypher.
If they cascade the one the US recommends wiht the one China recommends with the one Russia recommends, it seems you're safe unless all thre of those governments are conspiring against you. And if that's the case you problably have bigger problems.
For filing my taxes, there are some CAs I trust far more than others.
For downloading movies (if I were to do that), there are also some CAs I trust far more than others -- but that set is entirely non-overlapping with that first set.
And for buying stuff with credit cards, sometimes I'd trust that first set, and I could imagine times I'd rather trust that other set.
I wonder why HTTPS stuff can't require *two* certificates that validate. That way unless both CAs are compromised, the traffic's safe.
It's just like any other single-point-of-failure in your network. You probably work with two telcom companies to make sure your website and/or company has network access. Why shouldn't you do the same for certificates. Buy one from a US CA, one from a Russian one, and one from a Chinese one, and if browsers could check to make sure *all* (or two out of the three, whatever) validate, unless they collude you should be pretty safe.
Even better if one of those can be a self-signed one. You can even exchange those keys over normal boring https, and then unless your commercial CA was already hacked at the time you distribute your self-signed one, your self-signed one will protect against your commercial CA being hacked in the future.
Or perhaps better - tips attached to specific bugs and feature requests in projects - and held in escrow - so they go to people who commit specific fixes to the project?
I'm not too interested in an escrow service, but personally I liked tvtwm enough I might join a bounty program to bring it back into the mainstream.
I'd gladly toss a few bucks to fund a bounty to get it back into a major distro.
"Require" is the key word -- and pretty much since the invention of the plow and the tractor, we've been able to create whatever's really absolutely "required".
That starving people still exist is that societies really don't care that people starve (how many days of the Iraq war == the cost to feed all the poor in the world?); and would rather invest in increasing the wealth of their own powerful people - at the expense of unneeded people starving.
That will get worse, rather than better, as more people join the unneeded group.
You can't vote out bureaucrats. They stay in place from administration to administration and really run things.
You can't vote them out because they and their partners have acccess to all this sigint on their competitors.
I imagine any politician who did vote to defund such agencies would be quickly be labeled as a threat to national security and re-educated.
The ability to share disks by copying or moving them from one machine to another is an AWS feature.
It's common that you'd launch a high-CPU compute node (which might be windows) to prepare a set of data on a disk; and then kill that expensive high-CPU node when the data's ready; and move the disk to another machine (which might be running Linux).
Perhaps he's thinking to configure it so you only have to trust the Russian *or* US government.
Dunno how it'd work for compute nodes --- but if you have 1 Russian Firewall in front of one US firewall in front of one Chinese firewall -- it seems you could set up a network where unless all 3 of them collude your combo-firewall is safe.
All of those are incredibly valuable.
The CIA alone spends $11.5 billion on Data Collection Expenses each year. And of all organizations, Skype is one of the most able to provide information to them - whatever your PC's microphone's hearing now - whatever non-skype-related files Skype keeps accessing even though it has no need to - etc.
He had a lot of tension with his Paypal investors: http://gawker.com/227491/sequoia-erases-elon-musk : "Musk was a charismatic chancer, backed by the venture capital firm, with an online bank which wasn't going anywhere. He was involved in Paypal only in so far as he managed to talk his way into a 50-50 merger with the successful online payments service, and served as CEO until his wayward management style provoked a staff revolt."
Slashdot Mirror
drug smuggling
deliveries of court orders
weapons etc
The author of this bill loves it too.
>>> countering the portions of the Patriot Act that were interpreted to let the NSA collect telephone metadata in bulk
Way to distract people by focusing on some archaic legacy communication tool.
Now if his new bill would ban them from mining Google and Tor, you'd be getting somewhere.
Second to last slide mentions that too - paraphrased "could be worse - people might find alternatives to tor or improve it if they knew what we could do".
If they cascade the one the US recommends wiht the one China recommends with the one Russia recommends, it seems you're safe unless all thre of those governments are conspiring against you. And if that's the case you problably have bigger problems.
Suddenly your costs go from "damn, we need to figure out something new, build it, and test it" to "cool, let's do it again".
And the latter is far cheaper.
What can be done is to add a trust factor to CAs.
Trust can't be a single value.
For filing my taxes, there are some CAs I trust far more than others.
For downloading movies (if I were to do that), there are also some CAs I trust far more than others -- but that set is entirely non-overlapping with that first set.
And for buying stuff with credit cards, sometimes I'd trust that first set, and I could imagine times I'd rather trust that other set.
It's just like any other single-point-of-failure in your network. You probably work with two telcom companies to make sure your website and/or company has network access. Why shouldn't you do the same for certificates. Buy one from a US CA, one from a Russian one, and one from a Chinese one, and if browsers could check to make sure *all* (or two out of the three, whatever) validate, unless they collude you should be pretty safe.
Even better if one of those can be a self-signed one. You can even exchange those keys over normal boring https, and then unless your commercial CA was already hacked at the time you distribute your self-signed one, your self-signed one will protect against your commercial CA being hacked in the future.
It's quite possible they do understand the physics
Or, their lawyers advised them that it's legal in some really devious way because they didn't actually look at what was stolen until the "legal" time.
Anyone else here miss twm and tvwm? IMVHO Linux Desktop's gotten worse every step since then.
Sounds almost exactly like how Belluzzo was rewarded for killing HPUX, PA-RISC, IRIX, and 64-bitMIPS in favor of WinNT-on-Itanium. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Belluzzo
I'm not too interested in an escrow service, but personally I liked tvtwm enough I might join a bounty program to bring it back into the mainstream.
I'd gladly toss a few bucks to fund a bounty to get it back into a major distro.
to create any material goods we may require.
"Require" is the key word -- and pretty much since the invention of the plow and the tractor, we've been able to create whatever's really absolutely "required".
That starving people still exist is that societies really don't care that people starve (how many days of the Iraq war == the cost to feed all the poor in the world?); and would rather invest in increasing the wealth of their own powerful people - at the expense of unneeded people starving.
That will get worse, rather than better, as more people join the unneeded group.
Wine-on-Mint is probably more compatible with XP apps than Win8 is anyway.
You can't vote out bureaucrats. They stay in place from administration to administration and really run things.
You can't vote them out because they and their partners have acccess to all this sigint on their competitors. I imagine any politician who did vote to defund such agencies would be quickly be labeled as a threat to national security and re-educated.
And this isn't even a vulnerability.
The ability to share disks by copying or moving them from one machine to another is an AWS feature.
It's common that you'd launch a high-CPU compute node (which might be windows) to prepare a set of data on a disk; and then kill that expensive high-CPU node when the data's ready; and move the disk to another machine (which might be running Linux).
Isn't that exactly what the author described?
So you're suggesting they're being pushed by Disney?
Perhaps he's thinking to configure it so you only have to trust the Russian *or* US government. Dunno how it'd work for compute nodes --- but if you have 1 Russian Firewall in front of one US firewall in front of one Chinese firewall -- it seems you could set up a network where unless all 3 of them collude your combo-firewall is safe.
Or maybe the guide is from Deer Trail, Colorado
"When four sit down to conspire, three are fools and the fourth is a government agent."
Far more than that.
One in 4 are FBI informants - and that's just a single agency inside the DOJ. And DHS and DOD spend far more on this kind of work.
When 4 Anons get together, I suspect it's most likely this combo:
And once they figure out that they can't bust each other, they recruit some script kiddies instead.
Norton 360 that is completely worthless against their root kit?
For all we know, Norton 360 might *be* their root kit.
If you're going for automation - why not just fixed cameras and other sensors covering the whole area?
All of those are incredibly valuable. The CIA alone spends $11.5 billion on Data Collection Expenses each year. And of all organizations, Skype is one of the most able to provide information to them - whatever your PC's microphone's hearing now - whatever non-skype-related files Skype keeps accessing even though it has no need to - etc.
No more ... running red lights
No more red lights at all! http://www.cs.utexas.edu/~aim/
Autonomous Intersection Management
(Awesome traffic intersection simulation on that page)
Instead, he's PT Barnum
Are you suggesting PT Barnum wasn't brilliant?
Still brilliant - but (like many brilliant people) he can be quite the blowhard too.