--- Anonymous [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And then, of course, in the off chance they can't actually break the
message under that flag, they can merely send a guy out with
binoculars or whatever.
Don't forget about rubber-hose cryptanlysis. Rumour has it that
method is preferred in
--- Anonymous [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And then, of course, in the off chance they can't actually break the
message under that flag, they can merely send a guy out with
binoculars or whatever.
Don't forget about rubber-hose cryptanlysis. Rumour has it that
method is preferred in
--- Tyler Durden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, they could just tune in on Echelon, which really seems to be
reality. There is no need for infinite resources to do such a thing.
Echelon ain't a radio, and not all members of TLAs have access. Indeed,
you
can be damn sure that they are very
And then, of course, in the off chance they can't actually break the
message under that flag, they can merely send a guy out with
binoculars or whatever.
Don't forget about rubber-hose cryptanlysis. Rumour has it that
method is preferred in many cases since it makes the code-breakers
At 17:43 2005-04-29, you wrote:
Eh...for email you may have a point, but I'm not 100% convinced. In other
words, say they want to monitor your email account. Do you really believe
they are going to tap all major nodes and then filter all the traffic just
to get your email? ...
Well, they could
Well, they could just tune in on Echelon, which really seems to be
reality. There is no need for infinite resources to do such a thing.
Echelon ain't a radio, and not all members of TLAs have access. Indeed, you
can be damn sure that they are very careful to NOT share a lot of the
At 16:10 2005-05-02, you wrote:
Here is the fundamental misunderstanding. Your email is no account.
There are no place where your account is stored. The only thing that
exists is an endpoint, where you receive your mail. Before the mail
reaches that point, its's just TCP-packets on the wire.
At 17:43 2005-04-29, you wrote:
Eh...for email you may have a point, but I'm not 100% convinced. In other
words, say they want to monitor your email account. Do you really believe
they are going to tap all major nodes and then filter all the traffic just
to get your email? ...
Well, they could
From: Morlock Elloi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: zombied ypherpunks (Re: Email Certification?)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
I'm still having trouble understanding your threat model.
Just assume braindeath and it becomes obvious.
No tla with any dignity left would
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 11:43 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
Look...a little tiny yap yap dog can often scare off a bigger dog or
animal
by making it clear that any interaction's going to suck.
For some reason I'm reminded of the old tagline:
YIP! YIP! YAP! YIP! YAP! *BANG* [EMAIL PROTECTED] NO
From: Morlock Elloi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: zombied ypherpunks (Re: Email Certification?)
Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2005 12:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
I'm still having trouble understanding your threat model.
Just assume braindeath and it becomes obvious.
No tla with any dignity left would
On Fri, 2005-04-29 at 11:43 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
Look...a little tiny yap yap dog can often scare off a bigger dog or
animal
by making it clear that any interaction's going to suck.
For some reason I'm reminded of the old tagline:
YIP! YIP! YAP! YIP! YAP! *BANG* [EMAIL PROTECTED] NO
I'm still having trouble understanding your threat model.
Just assume braindeath and it becomes obvious.
No tla with any dignity left would bother e-mail providers or try to get your
password. All it need to do is fill gforms and get access to tapped traffic at
major nodes (say, 20 in US is
13 matches
Mail list logo
