Can I Be Trusted?
schneier.com
Can I Be Trusted?
1–10 of 62 posts
Re: Can I Be Trusted?
#2No, I do not. I have no reason to distrust him but equally no reason to unthinkingly trust. I listen to his opinions and take them into account.
Re: Can I Be Trusted?
#3[deleted]
Re: Can I Be Trusted?
#4I trust the real Bruce Schneier, not his NSA clone!
Re: Can I Be Trusted?
#5So far, I haven't seen the good reasons why I might be untrustworthy. I'd help, but that seems unfair.
The better question to ask would be "Why might I be trustworthy" which he could then try to answer. Not that I don't think Schneier is untrustworthy..
Re: Can I Be Trusted?
#6So far, I haven't seen the good reasons why I might be untrustworthy. I'd help, but that seems unfair. The better question to ask would be "Why might I be trustworthy" which he could then try to answer. Not that I don't think Schneier is untrustworthy..
Yes, he just have disclosed the reason not to be trusted. He conflates absence of evidence with evidence of absence.
Re: Can I Be Trusted?
#7So far, I haven't seen the good reasons why I might be untrustworthy. I'd help, but that seems unfair. The better question to ask would be "Why might I be trustworthy" which he could then try to answer. Not that I don't think Schneier is untrustworthy..
Yes, he just have disclosed the reason not to be trusted. He conflates absence of evidence with evidence of absence.
No, he is suggesting "innocent until proven guilty", you are suggesting the opposite.
This is a "have you stopped beating your wife" question, what could any person say except "there is no evidence that I am untrustworthy". How do you mathematically verify a person?
Re: Can I Be Trusted?
#8I think a fair bit of his non-cryptography security advice of the past 10+ years has been...different than a lot of people I know better and have direct evidence of their competence would give. Increasingly so recently (the past year or two). As a cryptographer, particularly on the symmetric side, he does a good job (at least, the other people who I know who are good at that also think he does a good job; I understand number theoretic cryptology better than I understand the more complex details in designing symmetric stuff). He also went way far over to the "high level policy/politics" side post-BT acquisition vs. actual implementation work, other than crypto competition entries, as far as I can tell.
So, it's not so much "not trust" as "critically evaluate what he says each time".
Re: Can I Be Trusted?
#9So far, I haven't seen the good reasons why I might be untrustworthy. I'd help, but that seems unfair. The better question to ask would be "Why might I be trustworthy" which he could then try to answer. Not that I don't think Schneier is untrustworthy..
Yes, he just have disclosed the reason not to be trusted. He conflates absence of evidence with evidence of absence.
> He conflates absence of evidence with evidence of absence.
Absence of evidence is evidence of absence. The false statement of that form is "absence of proof is proof of absence".
If absence of evidence wasn't evidence of absence, then, at best, the presence of the event and the presence of evidence are have no bearing on each other & are independent (in the statistical sense, i.e. the "evidence" is not evidence at all), and at worst, presence of evidence corresponds to the event not happening (i.e. the "evidence" is backwards).
Re: Can I Be Trusted?
#10Bears repeating: trust but verify. Trust the math but not personalities because allegiances can change. And as cperciva writes (http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2013-09-10-I-might-be-a-spoo...), verify through actual code reviews.