SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
In the field of cryptography, a secretly planted “backdoor” that allows eavesdropping on communications is usually a subject of paranoia and dread. But that doesn’t mean cryptographers don’t appreciate the art of skilled cyphersabotage. Now one group of crypto experts has published an appraisal of different methods of weakening crypto systems, and the lesson is that some backdoors are clearly better than others—in stealth, deniability, and even in protecting the victims’ privacy from spies other than the backdoor’s creator.
In a paper titled “Surreptitiously Weakening Cryptographic Systems,” well-known cryptographer and author Bruce Schneier and researchers from the Universities of Wisconsin and Washington take the spy’s view to the problem of crypto design: What kind of built-in backdoor surveillance works best ?
http://www.wired.com/2015/02/sabotage-encryption-software-get-caught/
[Paper]: http://www.scribd.com/doc/257059894/Surreptitiously-Weakening-Cryptographic-Systems
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 01 2015, @06:46PM
It is not just cryptography that this method works. I have seen it used to good effect in many other fields.
I usually *let* the other person think they 'won' by backing down. Then just dumping defect after defect after defect on them. Until they relent that they FUCKED THE HELL UP.
"oh ok your right that code is good and working correctly I was mistaken" two days later "here are 50 defects where your code is not working correctly when will you correct it?"
I always give you a chance to fix it up front. Always. But if you are going to play passive aggressive "I am right and you are wrong" in meetings; I will just bury you in process and make you irrelevant because you will be spending all your time fixing something.