Mike wrote: "Faustine" <a3495@cotse.com> wrote :
Adam wrote: On Thu, Aug 30, 2001 at 10:02:54AM -0700, Tim May wrote: | Alas, the marketing of such "dissident-grade untraceability" is | difficult. Partly because anything that is dissident-grade is also | pedophile-grade, money launderer-grade, freedom fighter-grade, | terrorist-grade, etc.
I think a larger problem is that we don't know how to build it.
And as long as you have companies like ZeroKnowledge who are willing/gullible/greedy/just plain fucking stupid enough to sell their betas to the NSA, you never will.
Holy faulty logic Batman! This has to be one of the more doofy things I've heard. It's right up there with the EMI Grounding Strap thread. What're you going to do, sell a product in CompUSA with instructions to the cashiers that the NSA is not allowed to buy it? If the NSA is willing to pay for some software that's great. They've got as much right to buy it as anyone else.
True, of course they do. "Technology is morally neutral," sure, whatever. Yay capitalism. I still think handing over your security product beta on a silver platter in exchange for a nice fat government contract is a stupid, stupid idea.
As long as they obey the law! and don't reverse engineer it, let them share in financing further development.
Do you really think that anyone would have the slightest qualm about reverse engineering a product like this when "national security interests" are at stake?
I would find it more relevant to know which commercial product designs have been influenced by which non-commercial agencies.
Either way, the prospects for "dissident-grade untraceability" are fairly bleak.
oy g'vay ( sp? )
close enough. ;) ~Faustine.