News: "U.S. May Help Chinese Evade Net Censorship"

Meyer Wolfsheim wolf at priori.net
Fri Aug 31 13:00:48 PDT 2001


On Fri, 31 Aug 2001, Faustine wrote:

> Tim wrote:
>
> >But, as with Kirchoff's point, the attacker is going to get the design
> >eventually.
>
> If getting the design "eventually" were good enough, why the keen interest
> in putting in a large order for the beta? There's a reason.

As I recall, this was an open beta. The NSA would probably have ordered a
copy under a private individual's name (and had it sent to a residential
address) had ZKS denied them the sale.

(They didn't need a large number of copies to examine it for flaws.)

> Maybe in the long run, it's right to view any objections as being little
> more than irrelevant, moralistic hand-waving. But I don't find the "they're
> going to compromise it anyway so why not make a buck when we can" line of
> reasoning particularly satisfying.

That's not the reasoning that anyone here is stating.

"They're going to obtain a copy of the software anyway, so why not make a
buck while we can," is what's being said, coupled with "they shouldn't be
able to break the software even if they have the source, so if we've done
our jobs there is no reason not so sell it to them."

Please. If you are going to participate in this debate, possess the
ability to paraphrase the opponent's arguements correctly.

-MW-





More information about the cypherpunks-legacy mailing list