On 28/01/12 12:22 PM, Noon Silk wrote:
On Sat, Jan 28, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Steven Bellovin<[email protected]> wrote:
Or at least that's what everyone thought. More recently, various groups have
begun to focus on
a fly in the ointment: the practical implementation of this process. While
quantum key distribution
offers perfect security in practice, the devices used to send quantum messages
are inevitably
imperfect.
This is only surprising if you assume large values of "everyone". Anyone in
the real world has
long since worried about implementations. Remember Bob Morris' Rule 1 of
cryptanalysis: check
for plaintext.
(http://www.ieee-security.org/Cipher/ConfReports/conf-rep-Crypto95.html)
So why didn't one of these "real world" people point this out, to
researchers? It's a bit too easy to claim something as obvious when
someone just told you.
Real world issues were frequently pointed out, but this isn't a real
world project, and real world ears weren't listening.
Quantum encryption is an unholy alliance between vulture funders who
want some scary wonderful box to sell, physicists who need funding to
play with really sexy ideas, and government who get tickled pink at the
idea that their scientists are on the cutting edge of society.
They just all come together with the same goal, but different interests.
It is a mistake to think this is about encryption. As is pointed out
frequently, we can do more or less the same thing with SSL.
It is ... sadly the case that the market for security is not a real
market in the sense of good information symmetrically held by all.
Instead it is a market in silver bullets (google). This is just another
silver bullet.
iang
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography
