At 12:05 PM 4/16/01 -0700, Tim May wrote:
Thanks for the tip on that. I'll be looking out for it, although at that price, it's cheaper to buy a dedicated PC and run SpeakFreely, as you point out.
There seem to be good market reasons for dedicated set up, especially one that ordinary phones attach to easily. The "bump in the cord" model.
For one, security. Which is more likely to have been compromised: a small sealed box implementing D-H forward secrecy or a PC which may have been tampered with by intruders, maids hired by the Feds, whatever/
Ask that headless arab about the impermeability of handset-style devices. "MossadBell --reach out and touch someone" If you want, epoxy the case closed. Voila, instant embedded system. [You can build the same amount of trust using a COTS pocket pc as you can with a slicker dedicated gizmo. Its easier to prototype starting with COTS if you don't have an industrial design lab at your disposal.]
Second, ease of use. Many of the intended users of the secure phones may not even be heavy users of computers, or may have various machines not supported by SpeakFreely or other programs.
Yep, ease of use is a real problem.
Third, integration of the Starium-type chipset in cellphones remains the Big Win, right?
Getting anything into a cell handset is the Big Win, yep. What Pablo Escobar wants is a secure cellphone he
can use on the run, in his villas, not some SpeakFreely program possibly bugged by the CIA or DEA.
Heh, he wants a *disposable* secure cellphone sold from vending machines on the street. So do the chip makers ;-)