NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
washingtonpost.com
NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
1–10 of 138 posts
Re: NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
#2Why doesn't anyone use it?
The FIRST question is: Is it really a solution?
The answer to that: NO, see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5879308
Re: NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
#3From the article: "And while most types of software get more user-friendly over time, user-friendly cryptography seems to be intrinsically difficult. Experts are not much closer to solving the problem today than they were two decades ago."
I'm not sure I agree that user-friendly cryptography is "intrinsically difficult." It doesn't seem like it would be hard for email clients and even the Gmail frontend to pop up a message saying, "Your email is insecure. To let people send you private messages securely, set up your 'public key' now. It's easy." Then a short wizard would walk users through the process and automatically append the public key to all outgoing messages.
On the other side, if you were going to send a message to a friend, the email client would check if that person has published a public key and then ask, "The recipient allows secure messages. Would you like us to send this message securely?"
Google and Microsoft and other large companies are no strangers to implementing a feature and using their size and clout to quickly make it a de facto standard. The real reason we don't have easy end-user cryptography is that these companies would lose access to mine your data and provide new services on top of that (and the article mentions this too.)
Re: NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
#4From the article: "And while most types of software get more user-friendly over time, user-friendly cryptography seems to be intrinsically difficult. Experts are not much closer to solving the problem today than they were two decades ago." I'm not sure I agree that user-friendly cryptography is "intrinsically difficult." It doesn't seem like it would be hard for email clients and even the Gmail frontend to pop up a m…
And where is the private key stored? On Google or Microsoft's server? What then would be the point? (I assume you'll answer that it'll be done client-side, but JavaScript cryptography is a whole mess of fail. But that's a separate issue.)
Re: NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
#5From the article: "And while most types of software get more user-friendly over time, user-friendly cryptography seems to be intrinsically difficult. Experts are not much closer to solving the problem today than they were two decades ago." I'm not sure I agree that user-friendly cryptography is "intrinsically difficult." It doesn't seem like it would be hard for email clients and even the Gmail frontend to pop up a m…
And where is the private key stored? On Google or Microsoft's server? What then would be the point? (I assume you'll answer that it'll be done client-side, but JavaScript cryptography is a whole mess of fail. But that's a separate issue.)
And if it is stored client-side, what happens when the user inevitably loses their key? You and I might have backups in multiple places, and on an encrypted USB stick in a bank vault, but my dad doesn't, and the next time he spills wine on his laptop, there goes literally all of his e-mail.
Re: NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
#6Bitmessage is absolutely user-friendly. You are not even asked to enter a password.
Re: NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
#7That's the question about all this thing that I don't know how to anwer. Just extend it a bit...
There are OSs that won't give root access to the NSA, encryption that the NSA won't be able to read and cloud services that the NSA won't be able to access even with cooperation of the CEO. Why none of them are widely used?
And I don't accept the answer on the article as suficient. Yes, a few things are harder when you want any level of security, but not all. There are plenty of applications where security just won't disturb you (like VoIP), and plent of places that put security above all other concerns and should care about this (like non-US military). Yet, nearly nobody chooses the secure path.
Re: NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
And where is the private key stored? On Google or Microsoft's server? What then would be the point? (I assume you'll answer that it'll be done client-side, but JavaScript cryptography is a whole mess of fail. But that's a separate issue.)
And if it is stored client-side, what happens when the user inevitably loses their key? You and I might have backups in multiple places, and on an encrypted USB stick in a bank vault, but my dad doesn't, and the next time he spills wine on his laptop, there goes literally all of his e-mail.
It's stored client-side, and as a back up on the central server, with a passphrase that is the users responsibility.
Re: NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
#9"In contrast, when a system has end-to-end encryption, losing a password is catastrophic; it means losing all data in the user’s account."
Um... what? Can't the user just reset his/her password, instead of a website emailing him/her the old password?...
Re: NSA-proof encryption exists. Why doesn’t anyone use it?
#10"In contrast, when a system has end-to-end encryption, losing a password is catastrophic; it means losing all data in the user’s account." Um... what? Can't the user just reset his/her password, instead of a website emailing him/her the old password?...
Er, not if it's the password to the private key.