[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: GPG and Signing



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Brad Rogers wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Apr 2007 14:03:24 +0000
> Joe Hart <j.hart@orange.nl> wrote:
> 
> Hello Joe,
> 
>> Hmm, that's an interesting observation.  I didn't think of that.  Of
>> course, most of the people I communicate with via e-mail don't use PGP
>> so I can't send them encrypted mail.
> 
> You can *send* it them.  They're unlikely to be able to *read* it,
> though.   :-)

LOL.  You've got that right.

> 
>> I do like the idea though.  I just wonder, how difficult is it really
>> for the authorities who may confiscate my computer to break the GPG
>> encryption?  I know it has something to do with the length of
> 
> Since various governments stopped trying to prosecute Phil Zimmerman,
> conspiracy theorists say that they (the governments) have found a
> sure-fire algorithm or crack for PGP.

I kind of thought so.  I also have serious doubts over the real security
benefits of SELinux specifically because it was developed by the NSA.
It is not rational that they would design a security system that they
could not access, and then release it to the public.

I guess that's the pessimist in me thinking that.

> 
>> password, but is seems that a cluster of computers could use a brute
>> force attack and succeed in discovering the password eventually.  It
>> might take a few months of constant number crunching though.
> 
> You've never come across Distributed.net, and the brute force attacks
> they did with RC5-64 and are now doing with RC5-72?  All as an
> intellectual exercise.  Visit http://www.distributed.net/ for more info.

I will.  I wondered why the export of encryption was relaxed so as to
allow Debian to no longer maintain a non-us repo.  That site probably
has info on the details.
> 
>> Meanwhile I rot in jail for "engaging in suspicious activity".
> 
> Just add flagged words if you want to be monitored.  Things like, atom
> bomb, murder, assassinate, etc.
> 
>> In some ways it is better not to encrypt mail.  It is like saying "I
>> have nothing to hide here, go ahead read my mail."
> 
> Just like the Illuminati;  Hidden in plain view.
> 
> Hmmm, I talk to too many conspiracy theorists.......
> 

Well, with the fact that most internet traffic is being monitored by
government institutions, I would think that this message is now being
read by the programs that flag "suspected" mail specifically because you
mentioned the flagged words.

I just wonder how many people it takes to do all the monitoring, I mean
I know computers do most of the grunt work of searching, but there has
to be humans that read the stuff to make sure its really a threat, or
are  we already in the times where the computers can take those
decisions and issue security threats and flag the identity of the
participants in "suspicious" conversations to be detained upon entry to
the United States or The European Union.

Are the thought police real?  I think that some of the new laws enacted
in the US since I left there are getting close.

I sure will be glad when Etch is released so we can stop talking about
non-debian stuff like this.  Meanwhile, how's the weather wherever you are?

Joe
- --
Registerd Linux user #443289 at http://counter.li.org/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGD8ZWiXBCVWpc5J4RAuIYAJ0ZsLloSXRYB7Wk0AiBz1AEy9MtTwCfQayx
KBoXb0c62u41rLY7IwFeU+I=
=zdwI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Reply to: