[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Taler] Post-quantum Taler
|
From: |
Christian Grothoff |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Taler] Post-quantum Taler |
|
Date: |
Wed, 11 Nov 2015 11:30:41 +0100 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/31.7.0 |
I have one more.
Paranoid answer:
Why would anyone trust a spy agency's PR statements, when the its job is
to lie and deceive? The statement is more likely used to either cover up
a different advance (distract), or to spread doubt about working current
cryptography and thus make it harder for defenders to choose systems, or
even cause people to move away from more secure options (dazzle). After
all, the chance that the NSA has a quantum computer (say > 8 bit) today
is very close to 0%, and the chance that they try to deceive the public
is 100%.
On 11/11/2015 02:57 AM, Jeff Burdges wrote:
> We were asked about the NSA's recent comments on quantum cryptography
> during Florian's trial run of his talk where he mentioned RSA blind
> signing. We'll probably be asked about it again, so..
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature