Social Media and the state

Veritable Quandry

Specializing in derails and train wrecks.
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
4,632
Location
Columbus, OH
SL Rez
2010
Joined SLU
20something
SLU Posts
42
I'm somehow making a point with this. I just don't know what that point is right now.
That Mel Gibson would probably call him sugar tits?
 
Last edited:
  • 1ROFL
Reactions: Isabeau

Khamon

Folk Harpist
Joined
Sep 23, 2018
Messages
2,748
Location
Alabama
SL Rez
2003
Joined SLU
2007
That Mel Gibson could take him down in one round?

(although I doubt that is true today)
 

detrius

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
1,874
Location
Land of bread, beer and BMW.
Joined SLU
09-30-2007
SLU Posts
10065
...

...

...

...No, that's not it.
That "sugar mountain" looked huge, but all it took was Trump pissing all over him and now he's melting away?
 
  • 1Doge
Reactions: Free

Innula Zenovka

Nasty Brit
VVO Supporter 🍦🎈👾❤
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
21,218
SLU Posts
18459

Bartholomew Gallacher

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2018
Messages
5,769
SL Rez
2002
Perhaps encrypted email, but I think it is a pretty safe bet that the NSA has backdoors to a lot of cryptography systems. One history I read said they exerted considerable pressure on Whitfield-Diffie et. al. to build a backdoor into the first PKC system for them, and I assume that has continued. I know Apple has the rep of being "uncrackable", but the NSA wouldn't tip that they have that backdoor, too, to help some local police force bust a drug dealer. It was the same deal when we cracked Enigma -- we pretty much had to hold off using the intel we got until having the Nazis know that we were reading their mail was less valuable than the strategic value of that intel.
Encryption, if done correctly, works fine. This is why the NSA always tried to corrupt it with backdoors or work around it.

And especially regarding email there is PGP, which is the grandfather of end to end encryption done by the client side. If done correctly, this is unbreakable for the NSA.

The drawback is that doing it is not exactly user friendly, which is why so many people are not using it, because it would mean exchanging key finger prints and giving them trust to validate them.

And even if done perfect, the workaround would be e.g. installing a keylogger on one side and try to grab the password...
 

Noodles

☑️
Joined
Sep 20, 2018
Messages
4,406
Location
Illinois
SL Rez
2006
Joined SLU
04-28-2010
SLU Posts
6947
Encryption, if done correctly, works fine. This is why the NSA always tried to corrupt it with backdoors or work around it.

And especially regarding email there is PGP, which is the grandfather of end to end encryption done by the client side. If done correctly, this is unbreakable for the NSA.

The drawback is that doing it is not exactly user friendly, which is why so many people are not using it, because it would mean exchanging key finger prints and giving them trust to validate them.

And even if done perfect, the workaround would be e.g. installing a keylogger on one side and try to grab the password...
The key is "when done properly".

Which also changes over time.

Which also doesn't exist over time unfortunately, because at this point they are just storing massive piles of data and waiting for computing to get faster to turn that "Billion years to brute force" into "5 minutes to brute force."

Honestly, if they really wanted to reduce time to brute force, it would probably be faster to study "random" key generation mechanisms, and probably reduce the number of actually used keys down to a tiny fraction of the total possible. Because randomness in computing generally isn't nearly as random as we ever want it to be.