1995-02-13 - Re: The NSA (Was Re: Factoring - State of the Art and Predictions )

Header Data

From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@access.digex.net>
To: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
Message Hash: 26174d02315a689a74f82dffba2f1e7e4a528c88567c55a2d80cadf79a86882c
Message ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950213010531.26741B-100000@access3.digex.net>
Reply To: <199502130554.AAA23466@bwh.harvard.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-13 06:09:52 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 12 Feb 95 22:09:52 PST

Raw message

From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@access.digex.net>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 95 22:09:52 PST
To: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
Subject: Re: The NSA (Was Re: Factoring - State of the Art and Predictions )
In-Reply-To: <199502130554.AAA23466@bwh.harvard.edu>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950213010531.26741B-100000@access3.digex.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


On Mon, 13 Feb 1995, Adam Shostack wrote:

> Date: Mon, 13 Feb 1995 00:54:21 -0500 (EST)
> From: Adam Shostack <adam@bwh.harvard.edu>
> To: perry@imsi.com
> Cc: Cypherpunks Mailing List <cypherpunks@toad.com>
> Subject: Re: The NSA (Was Re: Factoring - State of the Art and Predictions )
> 
> 
> 	A few weeks back Matt Blaze posted on top ten problems we
> face.  I'll add two to that list.  First is our inability to
> accurately assess the strength of various government agencies.  We
> tend to make very pessimistic assumptions, which tends to be safe, but
> having real data on which to base our assumptions would be better.

What your talking about here is a cypherpunks intelligence capability.
If you think we are thought of as subversive and distasteful now, just 
wait to see what happens if anyone on the list outs the kind of 
information your talking about about e.g., the NSA or the Justice Department.

Were this a private, closely held group instead of a public mailing list, 
you might have a different story.


> 
> 	The other problem we face is that people like Matt write solid
> essays on various things, and no one responds.  People who write
> essays, post solid mathematical results, etc, bemoan this pretty
> regularly.  Fortunately, this problem is easier to address.  Try to
> spend more time on the posts which people took longer on.  Its usually
> obvious which those are.  The reason to spend more time on solid posts
> is that someone took the time to write well on something.  If they get
> solid feedback, they'll do more solid writing, and the quality of
> discourse goes up.

There is a internet lore that says the more valuable and insightful a 
given article is, the less response it gets.

I hope this is right, as most of mine tend to be ignored.


> 
> Adam
> 
> 
> -- 
> "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once."
> 						       -Hume
> 

073BB885A786F666 nemo repente fuit turpissimus - potestas scientiae in usu est
6E6D4506F6EDBC17 quaere verum ad infinitum, loquitur sub rosa    -    wichtig!






Thread