31–40 of 94 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both OTR (ChatSecure on your phone) and TextSecure are good options. Telegram is not a good option.
because...?
Have the Nigerian 419 scams gotten more sophisticated? "Your email must contain: . . - Your bank account details to receive the $300,000 prize."
and what else I can do with your bank account besides send you money?
> "But Clarkson admitted he was "wrong" after he discovered a reader had used the details to create a £500 direct debit to the charity Diabetes UK."
Obligatory: https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-9812.html $300,000 isn't a whole lot more than it would cost to get n entire novel cryptosystem for a complex application built out of idiosyncratic components assessed professionally. They should just retain Riscure or Rambus to do that for them instead of the PR stunt. Previous thread about Telegram on HN, featuring Moxie Marlinspike: https://news.ycombinator.com/ite…
Not that it proves anything very much if it's not claimed.
I give them, or anyone, credit for trying to create a secure messenger. It is not easy. However, I just wish they would release the source code to their clients and server. They have not. That would go a long way.
The majority of Telegram's source code seems to be released as free software: https://telegram.org/apps (scroll down)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The majority of Telegram's source code seems to be released as free software: https://telegram.org/apps (scroll down)
Just not the bit that matters (the servers).
So, using a bug-prone process (software development) we will alter the software after the fact to introduce a feature which, if it escapes the sandbox and gets into the wrong build, will potentially reveal the secret keys of all users.
Am I reading that right?
Obligatory: https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-9812.html $300,000 isn't a whole lot more than it would cost to get n entire novel cryptosystem for a complex application built out of idiosyncratic components assessed professionally. They should just retain Riscure or Rambus to do that for them instead of the PR stunt. Previous thread about Telegram on HN, featuring Moxie Marlinspike: https://news.ycombinator.com/ite…
What's the mathematical expectation of "Let's pay $300K for the security analysis?" –$300 000, and good publicity among security experts. What's the mathematical expectation of "Let's start a contest with $300K for dealing with our crypto on our terms (assuming 5% of success)"? –$15 000, and much larger PR effect. ($300K-resistant crypto, yay!) Seems to be an easy choice, unfortunately.
For big prize payout contests, I'd get a lot more serious if they provided proof that the funds were waiting in escrow until end-date/winner.
But I'm probably unnecessarily suspicious of the depth of a startup's pockets...
Obligatory: https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-9812.html $300,000 isn't a whole lot more than it would cost to get n entire novel cryptosystem for a complex application built out of idiosyncratic components assessed professionally. They should just retain Riscure or Rambus to do that for them instead of the PR stunt. Previous thread about Telegram on HN, featuring Moxie Marlinspike: https://news.ycombinator.com/ite…
What's the mathematical expectation of "Let's pay $300K for the security analysis?" –$300 000, and good publicity among security experts. What's the mathematical expectation of "Let's start a contest with $300K for dealing with our crypto on our terms (assuming 5% of success)"? –$15 000, and much larger PR effect. ($300K-resistant crypto, yay!) Seems to be an easy choice, unfortunately.
Obligatory: https://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-9812.html $300,000 isn't a whole lot more than it would cost to get n entire novel cryptosystem for a complex application built out of idiosyncratic components assessed professionally. They should just retain Riscure or Rambus to do that for them instead of the PR stunt. Previous thread about Telegram on HN, featuring Moxie Marlinspike: https://news.ycombinator.com/ite…
No? Doesn't this fit the definition of a contest? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_Encryption_Standard_pr...
Yes, the fairness of the contest plays an important part, and a fair context where only the algorithm is analysed goes a long way.
"Just because no one wins a contest doesn't mean the target is secure...it just means that no one won."
Of course. But the fact that it passed revision by experts means it is (probably) safe today (and for what it is known, it might be trivially breakable "behind closed doors")
"Our Twofish cryptanalysis contest offers a $10K prize for the best negative comments on Twofish that aren't written by the authors. "
Ah ok, so contests suck, except for the ones we throw. Nice.
"There are no arbitrary definitions of what a winning analysis is." No? So what is "best negative comment"? It's still subjective. And the 2nd best gets nothing? Who determines that?