After Action Report of the First Crypto War
The ISDN standard was first defined in 1988. Five years later the Clipper Chip was proposed. The result of the First Crypto War was Status Quo Ante Bellum. Everyone has celebrated the lack of encryption as a victory? To who would this serve? The ISDN standard itself is a curious thing, according to a /wikipedia/ article on caller ID spoofing, it is rumored that Paris Hilton hacked into Lindsay Lohan's voicemail. Around the same time that the NSA began warrantless wiretapping? The NSA did have input on the 2G cipher, so why would they be okay with increasing the arbitrary nature of the world? Afterall, privacy for the sake of privacy and freedom for the sake of freedom is sort of pointless. Personally I'm against tyranny, as a result of personal experiences, even thought about how Tor could be improved. But all tyranny is simply the arbitary whims of a tyrant, nothing more. The NSA seems to be achieving control for the sake of control... but seems to be doing so in a way that would blind the other government organs to crime? Why is the world structured the way that it is, and to who does it serve? The problem with writing an after action report of the First Crypto War is that apparently everyone involved are idiots or shills, and the only arguments that ever convinced me were by the academics who supported the clipper chip. And then a few academics found that there is a problem with the Clipper chip protocol, the 16-bit hash was insecure. Apparently the NSA cannot write good protocols. Should've been a bigger scandal, it'd be like a trillion dollar project to build airplanes that cannot fly. Thus no logical conclusion can be formed as of this time, unless one is willing to entertain rumors about the Deep State.
On Wed, Mar 01, 2017 at 09:27:31AM -0800, Ryan Carboni wrote:
And then a few academics found that there is a problem with the Clipper chip protocol, the 16-bit hash was insecure. Apparently the NSA cannot write good protocols. Should've been a bigger scandal, it'd be like a trillion dollar project to build airplanes that cannot fly.
Well at least -that-'s never happened...
On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 12:27 PM, Ryan Carboni <ryacko@gmail.com> wrote:
Why is the world structured the way that it is, and to who does it serve?
On 03/01/2017 11:27 AM, Ryan Carboni wrote:
Everyone has celebrated the lack of encryption as a victory?
I disagree. Plain HTTP is being eschewed and HTTPS is now considered "table stakes" to put up a website. Telnet is effectively dead; SSH is the preferred method to log into a remote server. This was not the case in the Clipper chip era. Plaintext (non-SSL/TLS) SMTP, POP3, and IMAP are effectively dead. Yes, quite a bit of stuff isn't encrypted yet, but it is obvious to me we are headed for a world where the majority of traffic is encrypted and plaintext is the exception not the rule. -- Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@rushpost.com> http://www.rantroulette.com http://www.skqrecordquest.com
On 03/02/2017 01:24 AM, grarpamp wrote:
On Thu, Mar 2, 2017 at 1:50 AM, Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@rushpost.com> wrote:
Plain ... eschewed S ... "table stakes"
Plaintext (non-SSL/TLS) SMTP effectively dead.
Tell that to the operator of this list, whose service still mails out plaintext to servers that accept TLS ;)
All the more baffling, as encrypted connections appear to be accepted just fine. Anyone know why this is the case? -- Shawn K. Quinn <skquinn@rushpost.com> http://www.rantroulette.com http://www.skqrecordquest.com
From: Ryan Carboni <ryacko@gmail.com> "The ISDN standard was first defined in 1988. " Frequently, I see Statists assert that the Internet was built by the United States Federal Government. I shut them down with this argument: Set the "wayback machine" to 1980 or so. Typically, modems available to consumers were 300 bps acoustic models. Could you build "The Internet" as we know it today with that? Absolutely not. Nor with 1200 bps modems, nor 2400 bps. 9600 bps, which I recall were available in the very late 1980's, would start, although full-motion video would require far more than this. 14,400 and 28,800 bps modems were an improvement. So, "The Internet" as we know it could not possibly have come into existence without the bandwidth provided by then-new high-speed modems. ISDN would have been very good (initially, it was claimed to be 64,000 bps in early discussion; more later) but by the time it was rolled out in some locations, it was not sufficiently better than then-available modems. Further, the phone companies expected to be paid relatively large fees for ISDN circuits, as opposed to regular voice channels which were "free" beyond the regular monthly cost. Thus, the vast majority of the credit for developing the Internet as we know it, as least before the high-speed dedicated detworks, was to the various companies that figured out how to shove 28,000 bps down a 3,000 Hz voice channel, digitized and companded with mu-law (or a-law) codecs at 8,000 samples per second. Jim Bell
On 03/02/2017 10:06 PM, jim bell wrote:
*From:* Ryan Carboni <ryacko@gmail.com>
"The ISDN standard was first defined in 1988. "
Frequently, I see Statists assert that the Internet was built by the United States Federal Government. I shut them down with this argument:
Set the "wayback machine" to 1980 or so. Typically, modems available to consumers were 300 bps acoustic models. Could you build "The Internet" as we know it today with that? Absolutely not. Nor with 1200 bps modems, nor 2400 bps. 9600 bps, which I recall were available in the very late 1980's, would start, although full-motion video would require far more than this. 14,400 and 28,800 bps modems were an improvement.
So, "The Internet" as we know it could not possibly have come into existence without the bandwidth provided by then-new high-speed modems. ISDN would have been very good (initially, it was claimed to be 64,000 bps in early discussion; more later) but by the time it was rolled out in some locations, it was not sufficiently better than then-available modems. Further, the phone companies expected to be paid relatively large fees for ISDN circuits, as opposed to regular voice channels which were "free" beyond the regular monthly cost.
Thus, the vast majority of the credit for developing the Internet as we know it, as least before the high-speed dedicated detworks, was to the various companies that figured out how to shove 28,000 bps down a 3,000 Hz voice channel, digitized and companded with mu-law (or a-law) codecs at 8,000 samples per second.
Jim Bell
You're conflating the "INTERNET" with the graphic "World Wide Web", which is an entity within the internet. Stop doing that. Email, and the less gui oriented routines such as Gopher, Archie, etc worked fine at 300/1200/2400bd. And probably still would if all that was happening was text-based, and images were piped into a separate viewing program (etc). Because the number of users would have remained minimal. Rr
participants (6)
-
grarpamp -
jim bell -
Razer -
Ryan Carboni -
Shawn K. Quinn -
Zenaan Harkness