Re: This is supporting evidence that root CA is pwned
I have been making this point for 2 months now. If they can demand user info and content from Google, they can just as easily do that from Verisign and Godaddy etc. Only their customers are Google and Microsoft and their user info is a private key....
As a Canadian, I will be pressuring my Member of Parliament to drop relations with the US as far as is practical and improve our relations with BRIC. Honestly, some American's are up in arms over the destruction and surveillance your government has exported over the last 60 years, but we put the blame firmly at your feet too.
The American people have consistently refused to pull back their government, and as such are complicit in these activities. The next decade had better show significant change in your society or your children will find themselves excluded and ostracized from the growing global community that, as of now, you are not welcome in.
Whatever, let trolls think what they want, as long as we dont have standard's banditry (like Motorola was attempting) we're cool.
Can you imagine if you could hold hostage royalties on these kind of standards? Chaos would ensue, with MS, Google and Apple each buying a carrier and integrating vertically with no glimmer of compatibility between them.
Because there is no possible contingency. The plan is to do whatever they want for as long as they want and trust in their powerful friends to keep them out of jail when it eventually unravels.
We see this time and time again when small people run giant organizations, they take and take and leave the organization they were meant to serve in rubble. Enron, AIG, Lehman Brothers, a ton of government departments etc.
Actually, Motorola only ever offered a flat zero out deal, tied to their non FRAND patents. They never once offered an FRAND offer on just the SEP patents, and this is the problem.
The long and short of it is that they wanted to leverage their GSM patents against Microsoft to get the operating system patents Microsoft owns (non standard essential) but it backfired on them, rightfully so.
Although the entire principle of it has been shattered because there is no real way to secure the common time source required by the endpoints (unless we all start putting gravity-calibrated atomic clocks in all our PCs).
If they can unravel long keychains, the protocol specifics won't matter. Thats the real threat, if they can break 256 bit encryption on a 2048 bit key in any useful amount of time then the specifics of HOW something is encrypted become less important.
All despotic organizations have this mentality, and it stems from protection of their own position, not even of the organization. No one would refuse a hire (realistically) because someone too smart will bring your organization down. That's a ridiculous assertion (even if true in this case). No, they will prevent brilliance from coming in because it puts their own cushy job at risk (what if this brilliant guy actually wants to be doing what i do. He'll get it. So ill say no now).
If you think that black on black crime is a function of race, and not a function of geography then you are a racist. When you ghettoize a community, you ensure that they will be the victims of all crime that they commit.
Poor black people live nearby other poor black people, and when they get desperate enough to commit a crime, they commit it close by. This is the same reason most crime in mainland China is Chinese-on-Chinese crime.
If you want an interesting real-world example of the NSA sticking their nose into private cryptography, read the story of Heimdall Kerberos (forked from MIT Kerberos way back when). Its a great example of even when they REALLY put their feet down on security technology it has a way of getting away from them (sometimes printed and carried over borders).
Hey, I've read a few of your post now, and I have a general comment to you. There's nothing wrong with liking apple, they are a cool company, but you are making arguments that are based on a misunderstanding of history and some bent timelines. For example: the kindle fire didn't exist in 2010, and the iPad was only a year old with precious few competitors. Apple's payment system was considerably better than Googles at the time, a fact fixed in 2011.
Your history below is also fairly inaccurate and seems a bit based on bio movies, and all this ties together to give you a bit of a fanboyish zeal and makes your arguments easily dismissed. Which is too bad because even if I disagree they are well articulated.
The quote is identical, and its a logical fallacy to deliberately setup a system that has the capability to outpace its requirements, and then claim that any outpacing the requirements was an accident. Just because the ANALYST was not 'willfully breaking the law', his managers were when they gave him access to do so. Thats how delegated privilege works.
Was this a leak? The guardian article suggested it came from the declassified judgement. And honestly, i think maybe the companies should have to pay for this crap themselves, we've basically turned handing us over to the feds a billable project...