On 29/03/13 06:42 AM, Jon Callas wrote:
...

I don't believe that it is in the interests of a company to shaft its 
customers. ...


Right, this is why I like Apple. This is the same secret as in the gambling industry. The house always wins -- so why bother cheating? Better to actually go the other way and be ultra honest and work to your customers needs. Indeed, in casinos, they hand free money out at the slightest complaint, it's called "comping". Why? Coz 99 out of 100 customers will simply play the money back into the house.

...
Let me ask again -- what could an LE or GOV offer that would be better than 
being cool?

Be More Cool?

The LEAs might be stupid (a better term might be "behind") but the spooks definitely aren't. The latter have been working on how to breach organisations for about a century (in the USA, several centuries elsewhere), they wrote the manual on it many times over. It's their job, why do we subconsciously think we can defeat them at it because we're smarter or cooler?

There are ways to seduce such an organisation. Share work on a cool secret project [0]. Once inside, loyalties can be shifted, rich contracts can be loaded with conditions, products can be shifted.

A second way is to offer cool people, who have primary loyalties that one doesn't notice. If we recall 20 year pensions, this is surprisingly easy to arrange. Ask your HR department how they'd feel about employing someone with 20 years of experience in secret spook technology. Recently retired, looking for a new challenge!

HR are going to be highly positive about this person. They will see talk of potential conflicts of interest as blather from over imaginative geeks living in conspiracy la-la land. Once a high-tech business model gets rolling, the demand for good techs is insatiable.



iang



[0]  Apropos other thread on DES and 56 bit keys:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Encryption_Standard#NSA.27s_involvement_in_the_design

"NSA worked closely with IBM to strengthen the algorithm against all except brute force attacks and to strengthen substitution tables, called S-boxes. Conversely, NSA tried to convince IBM to reduce the length of the key from 64 to 48 bits. Ultimately they compromised on a 56-bit key.[9]"

Apparently in their own words, the NSA manipulated a cool project by being cooler. As another pointer, Ross Anderson once posted about an article in "Foreign Policy" journal (memory may trick me here) which outlined how they manipulated the South African crypto industry.
_______________________________________________
cryptography mailing list
cryptography@randombit.net
http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography

Reply via email to