> Stratocaster wrote:
>

>> Tom St Denis wrote:
>>

>>>Stratocaster wrote:
>>>

>>>>Sure Tom.Was the topic running your own code on someone elses machine
>>>>in order to spill out the naughty bits? 8^) I fail to see where my post
>>>>is off topic.
>>>>Perhaps I am just dumb.Carry on, I'll just make popcorn and watch.

>>>
>>>You mentioned the CIA and locking up secrets in safes. That has
>>>nothing to do with breaking RSA or even the typical usage of RSA.

>>
>>
>> In context with running your code on other peoples machines.In the
>> clases I attended, this was in a national security context.
>>

>>>RSA is used to sign things and share keys. If you want to keep a ...

> Stratocaster wrote:

>> Sure Tom.Was the topic running your own code on someone elses machine
>> in order to spill out the naughty bits? 8^) I fail to see where my post
>> is off topic.
>> Perhaps I am just dumb.Carry on, I'll just make popcorn and watch.

>
> You mentioned the CIA and locking up secrets in safes. That has
> nothing to do with breaking RSA or even the typical usage of RSA.

>
> RSA is used to sign things and share keys. If you want to keep a
> secret to yourself then a CONVENTIONAL SYMMETRIC CIPHER is the more
> appropriate cryptographic tool.
>
> I'm sorry if un-swordfishing the thread is offending you, but nobody is
> served by paranoid off-topic rantings.
>

> Sure Tom.Was the topic running your own code on someone elses machine
> in order to spill out the naughty bits? 8^) I fail to see where my post
> is off topic.
> Perhaps I am just dumb.Carry on, I'll just make popcorn and watch.

> Stratocaster wrote:

>>> That sounds all l33t and all, except how do I order stuff off amazon
>>> with a credit card in a safe?

>>
>> I am not talking about such transactions.I realize I am not teaching
>> anything, but the point is that ever-more-complex networks are fine for
>> stuff like shopping.Perhaps you expect someone to go through intense
>> effort to take over someones machine in person for their credit card?I
>> would just put a gun to you and make you hand it over.

>
> Ok, well know this, the majority of practical users for crypto are NOT
> government users.
>
> When we talk about breaking RSA, it's usually in the context of how SSL
> is used. Hint: the paper mentions OpenSSL. So to say the solution to
> this RSA attack is to lock up your secrets...

>> That sounds all l33t and all, except how do I order stuff off amazon
>> with a credit card in a safe?

>
> I am not talking about such transactions.I realize I am not teaching
> anything, but the point is that ever-more-complex networks are fine for
> stuff like shopping.Perhaps you expect someone to go through intense
> effort to take over someones machine in person for their credit card?I
> would just put a gun to you and make you hand it over.

>From the turkey's point of view.

>From the dinner's point of view."

> Stratocaster wrote:

>> Absolutely.Another issue that is relevant is spending millions for your
>> security and allowing your information that is sensitive to be accessed
>> from any point other than a direct pipe.Happens all the time.Stupid.I
>> recommend to clients that if you have sensitive information, boil it
>> down to absolutes, and keep it on paper in a safe, and make people
>> initial it when signing it out-like the CIA does.Too much work?Then you
>> arent serious about security, or your spending is out of line with the
>> secrets you want to keep.

>
> That sounds all l33t and all, except how do I order stuff off amazon
> with a credit card in a safe?

>But anyway this has been written up here:
> http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/2/33102/01556500.pdf?arnumber=1556500

> Absolutely.Another issue that is relevant is spending millions for your
> security and allowing your information that is sensitive to be accessed
> from any point other than a direct pipe.Happens all the time.Stupid.I
> recommend to clients that if you have sensitive information, boil it
> down to absolutes, and keep it on paper in a safe, and make people
> initial it when signing it out-like the CIA does.Too much work?Then you
> arent serious about security, or your spending is out of line with the
> secrets you want to keep.

> Scott Contini wrote:

>>Wow, this is good stuff!

>
> I assume all of the quotes are made-up and false. Pretty cute, though.