Topic: SHA-256 is designed by the NSA - do they have a backdoor? (Read 27837 times)
REALITY WINNER
OP: this question has been brought up many times, and answered as well: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/nsa-and-ecc-289795
If the NSA did make Bitcoin, the would be able to find A LOT of people money laundering, operating out of China and so forth perhaps?!
Speculation is fun
Speculation is fun
Wo wo wow! NSA have a backdoor in SHA? Srsly? All cryptanalytics worldwide are NSA undercover agents. This thoughts made me wet
I guess two sock-puppets is always better than one in dumb govt. drone way of thinking ... bigger budgets, less accountability.
Quote
Within a year, major questions were raised about Dual Elliptic Curve.
Cryptography authority Bruce Schneier wrote that the weaknesses in the formula "can only be described as a back door".
After reports of the back door in September, RSA urged its customers to stop using the Dual Elliptic Curve number generator.
But unlike the Clipper Chip fight two decades ago, the company is saying little in public, and it declined to discuss how the NSA
entanglements have affected its relationships with customers.
Cryptography authority Bruce Schneier wrote that the weaknesses in the formula "can only be described as a back door".
After reports of the back door in September, RSA urged its customers to stop using the Dual Elliptic Curve number generator.
But unlike the Clipper Chip fight two decades ago, the company is saying little in public, and it declined to discuss how the NSA
entanglements have affected its relationships with customers.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/dec/20/nsa-internet-security-rsa-secret-10m-encryption
ECC is use for Bitcoin right ?
I thought this was very interesting
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm
http://groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/classes/6.805/articles/money/nsamint/nsamint.htm
Wo wo wow! NSA have a backdoor in SHA? Srsly? All cryptanalytics worldwide are NSA undercover agents. This thoughts made me wet
Yeah, because some tyrannies are better than others ... 
With logic like that, winning is not an option chump.
With logic like that, winning is not an option chump.
And that's why you lose
Yeah, because some tyrannies are better than others ...
With logic like that, winning is not an option chump.
With logic like that, winning is not an option chump.
"In God we trust. Everyone else, we monitor".
Sounds like a good policy. As if anyone else would be 'better' if they were in that position.
Check yourselves before criticizing the 'government' please...
Sounds like a good policy. As if anyone else would be 'better' if they were in that position.
Check yourselves before criticizing the 'government' please...
Except they use the full force of secrecy laws and corrupt judges (and who knows what other nefarious means) and the Iron Fist of the State to specifically avoid all monitoring ... check yourself before defending corruption please ...
Fool check yourself before bitching about 'corruption' in a developed first world nation/
'nefarious', 'iron fist' LOL
Do you think you can even post like this if you were under REAL tyranny? Mouthing off like no tomorrow. Jesus Christ you naive fuck.
Typical Statist apologist ... all class defending the indefensible.
The NSA are a soft tyranny, you have no clue.
Have a nice day sweetie.
LOL typical soft fuck from 1st world that thinks they know something about 'tyranny'.
The only difference, but a big one, between tyranny and politics is the end result. Let me know when they bust in your door in the middle of the night and drag off your family mafia style into the deepest darkest alley to be raped and killed as you watch.
No one gives a shit about some pampered fools bitching about 'tyranny' and can't even tell the difference between a real talk and 'state apologist'
Really, it's sad how naive some of you are. You even deluded yourself you know better than others
"In God we trust. Everyone else, we monitor".
Sounds like a good policy. As if anyone else would be 'better' if they were in that position.
Check yourselves before criticizing the 'government' please...
Sounds like a good policy. As if anyone else would be 'better' if they were in that position.
Check yourselves before criticizing the 'government' please...
Except they use the full force of secrecy laws and corrupt judges (and who knows what other nefarious means) and the Iron Fist of the State to specifically avoid all monitoring ... check yourself before defending corruption please ...
Fool check yourself before bitching about 'corruption' in a developed first world nation/
'nefarious', 'iron fist' LOL
Do you think you can even post like this if you were under REAL tyranny? Mouthing off like no tomorrow. Jesus Christ you naive fuck.
Typical Statist apologist ... all class defending the indefensible.
The NSA are a soft tyranny, you have no clue.
Have a nice day sweetie.
"In God we trust. Everyone else, we monitor".
Sounds like a good policy. As if anyone else would be 'better' if they were in that position.
Check yourselves before criticizing the 'government' please...
Sounds like a good policy. As if anyone else would be 'better' if they were in that position.
Check yourselves before criticizing the 'government' please...
Except they use the full force of secrecy laws and corrupt judges (and who knows what other nefarious means) and the Iron Fist of the State to specifically avoid all monitoring ... check yourself before defending corruption please ...
Fool check yourself before bitching about 'corruption' in a developed first world nation/
'nefarious', 'iron fist' LOL
Do you think you can even post like this if you were under REAL tyranny? Mouthing off like no tomorrow. Jesus Christ you naive fuck.
"In God we trust. Everyone else, we monitor".
Sounds like a good policy. As if anyone else would be 'better' if they were in that position.
Check yourselves before criticizing the 'government' please...
Sounds like a good policy. As if anyone else would be 'better' if they were in that position.
Check yourselves before criticizing the 'government' please...
Except they use the full force of secrecy laws and corrupt judges (and who knows what other nefarious means) and the Iron Fist of the State to specifically avoid all monitoring ... check yourself before defending corruption please ...
"In God we trust. Everyone else, we monitor".
Sounds like a good policy. As if anyone else would be 'better' if they were in that position.
Check yourselves before criticizing the 'government' please...
Sounds like a good policy. As if anyone else would be 'better' if they were in that position.
Check yourselves before criticizing the 'government' please...
Boy you know your stuff. I got a Master Degree in Information Security and Advance Cryptography. I can confirm you are spot on. 
I can't tell if you are sarcastic or trolling or what, but just in case you are serious: Where did you get your Masters Degree? I am genuinely curious. I don't see those kinds of courses offered in any school in my country.
The closest I can see is a Masters in National Security Administration, which I've been eyeing for a few years now. I just need to find the time (one year of going to school.) They don't seem to talk about Cryptography though, it's more like a Strategic Warfare school. (It's a military college.)
You seem to have your systems quite in order sir Do you mind while we stray somewhat off topic if I ask, how you authenticate your recipients public key?
I'm supposed to get their GPG fingerprint from a more secure channel, such as voice or telephone (including SMS or text messages). But these days you can do VOIP, and some chats, some video conferencing, skype, yahoo with webcam, etc. The best method, of course, is in person. Do you mind while we stray somewhat off topic if I ask, how you authenticate your recipients public key?Also depends on how much you should trust the other party, if it's just casual conversation or he's trying to buy something from me, I don't even bother, I just accept his public key and check later (from somewhere else, another physical internet connection from another physical location) if I got the same public key. I try to check if it's from a keyserver or his own private web page or something.
Would be very hard for some bad guy to compromise all of those unless the poor guy has already been a national security level target for some time and he's been replaced by a clone or something.
I can probably accept the public keys of most of the bitcoin devs, for example, and use those to communicate with them and/or verify the latest bitcoin-qt releases.
Boy you know your stuff. I got a Master Degree in Information Security and Advance Cryptography. I can confirm you are spot on.
Sh*t I thought SHA-256 was designed by aliens!
It is, after all, the "world wide web"
You seem to have your systems quite in order sir Do you mind while we stray somewhat off topic if I ask, how you authenticate your recipients public key?
I'm supposed to get their GPG fingerprint from a more secure channel, such as voice or telephone (including SMS or text messages). But these days you can do VOIP, and some chats, some video conferencing, skype, yahoo with webcam, etc. The best method, of course, is in person. Do you mind while we stray somewhat off topic if I ask, how you authenticate your recipients public key?Also depends on how much you should trust the other party, if it's just casual conversation or he's trying to buy something from me, I don't even bother, I just accept his public key and check later (from somewhere else, another physical internet connection from another physical location) if I got the same public key. I try to check if it's from a keyserver or his own private web page or something.
Would be very hard for some bad guy to compromise all of those unless the poor guy has already been a national security level target for some time and he's been replaced by a clone or something.
I can probably accept the public keys of most of the bitcoin devs, for example, and use those to communicate with them and/or verify the latest bitcoin-qt releases.
Also, the NSA themselves rely on this encryption, do they want their secrets revealed?
How can you know that NSA use SHA-256 in their own communication channels? Jump to: