Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
On 08/15/2013 06:35 PM, Edward Ned Harvey (blu) wrote: > [...] That's why I only *use* cryptography and don't *create* it. I > read a book and took a class on how to *use* cryptography. I am > utterly unqualified to create ciphers and hashes. You make such a valuable point. No one should think they can design good cryptographic primitives. (Anyone can create a cypher that s/he can't break and be fooled into thinking it is good, but being able to break your own cypher isn't the point.) Some are much closer to being qualified, but the biggest part of their qualifications is a reputation that will prompt others with similar talent to put time and effort into critiquing their work. Maybe cryptography shouldn't be designed by committee, but it really does need to be shot full of holes by a committee, of really smart and motivated people, examining it very carefully. Less ambitions: few should think they can even implement trusted designs by others. Not unless you are that really persnickety and anal and paranoid and skeptical and the extraordinarily rare programmer who can write bug-free code. (I have met only two or three who come close.) In most programs one little mistake will frequently not matter. That is how we survive with programs that have lots of bugs. But cryptography is different. One little mistake is likely to break it all. Cryptography needs to approach perfect. Over the years I have spent a lot of time paying attention to cryptography and feel like I have reached the most basic level of competence: I have some hope of competently deploying cryptography that others have carefully designed and implemented; I have some appreciation of the limits of my understanding and hope I would shrink before trying to wield things I didn't understand. And before deploying my work, I would still want to write up a careful summary of what I did, how it is useful, how it is not, what assumptions have been made, and the resulting limitations. (Do commercial crypto products ever include such information?) And then I would want someone smart to carefully look over my work. I know enough to know it is easy to mess up. Which means I know more than Microsoft. -kb
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |