Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Clean Network

state.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 20 posts

Re: The Clean Network

#11

Post by canada2020 »

It’s almost like the intention is to divide the world and create more segregation rather than to benefit any one group.

And the brand sounds very pretentious. Maybe “the trust network” would’ve been better. It’s simply a group where we all trust each other. It’s not any “cleaner” tbh.

Re: The Clean Network

#12

Post by rasengan »

incrudible wrote: post #9
rasengan wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't cryptographically verify that the system you are using doesn't have backdoors Yes you can, there are many methods including but not limited to SGX among other things.

SGX has critical flaws that may or may not have been put there intentionally. How do you "cryptographically verify" that such vulnerabilities do not exist?

To be able to exploit these "critical flaws" in SGX is quite difficult in the real world. That said, I agree that it could happen in extraordinary circumstances. If you fall under these extraordinary circumstances, you really shouldn't being using a computer identifiable to you in any serious kind of way nor connecting to anything you had ever historically connected to.

Re: The Clean Network

#14

Post by lemonspat »

notacoward wrote: post #10

The terminology is unfortunate at best, deliberately racist at worst. Authoritarian nationalists' obsession with them being "clean" and others being "unclean" has a very sordid history. Even if they're misnomers, "secure" or "safe" would have been better, or any number of completely value-neutral names.

Why do you need to pretend things are racist when they aren't? IT and security use medical terms like 'viruses', and bad computers are 'wiped clean', so 'clean' is a common term and there's no reason to pretend that its intended to be racist. A clean network is a joke though and will fail

Re: The Clean Network

#15

Post by notacoward »

lemonspat wrote: post #14
notacoward wrote: post #10

The terminology is unfortunate at best, deliberately racist at worst. Authoritarian nationalists' obsession with them being "clean" and others being "unclean" has a very sordid history. Even if they're misnomers, "secure" or "safe" would have been better, or any number of completely value-neutral names.

Why do you need to pretend things are racist when they aren't? IT and security use medical terms like 'viruses', and bad computers are 'wiped clean', so 'clean' is a common term and there's no reason to pretend that its intended to be racist. A clean network is a joke though and will fail

So you're pretending to read my mind and claiming without evidence that it's some sort of habit? Very convincing. I did say "at worst" didn't I? That's clearly meant to express that it's an extreme on a range of possible motives or interpretations. When there's a broad choice of equally accurate terms and one makes a choice of the one with certain associations, that choice itself can be a signal. Especially when "keeping out the Chinese" is clearly a major focus of the document. It's a possibility, and I stated no more than that.

Re: The Clean Network

#16

Post by incrudible »

rasengan wrote: post #12
incrudible wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SGX has critical flaws that may or may not have been put there intentionally. How do you "cryptographically verify" that such vulnerabilities do not exist?

To be able to exploit these "critical flaws" in SGX is quite difficult in the real world. That said, I agree that it could happen in extraordinary circumstances. If you fall under these extraordinary circumstances, you really shouldn't being using a computer identifiable to you in any serious kind of way nor connecting to anything you had ever historically connected to.

It's not about me, it's about government infrastructure. How do you procure a system that you don't have to trust, where you can rely on cryptography alone? It's simply not possible. It's not just about CPUs, but all the hardware that goes into running a network.

Re: The Clean Network

#20

Post by kmccauley »

This is insane-all the carriers listed in this program are globally connected and by definition China is connected to them as well. Therefore, access to cloud based services is easily achieved by their hackers. I spun up a small DNS service yesterday to test and the first IP address to hit it (within minutes) was from China. They are constantly scanning our networks.
Post reply on HN