full-disclosure - Trustworthy Computing Mini-Poll

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <004601c2a72d$38c47040$6a01a8c0@gfserver>
From: andrewt at nmh.co.za (Andrew Thomas)
Subject: Trustworthy Computing Mini-Poll

Hi Simon,

-----Original Message-----
From: full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com
[mailto:full-disclosure-admin@...ts.netsys.com] On Behalf Of Simon Richter
Sent: 18 December 2002 06:43
To: smcalearney@...osecuritymag.com
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.netsys.com
Subject: Re: [Full-Disclosure] Trustworthy Computing Mini-Poll
...snip...
This stuff has some interesting potential if you do it right. The question I
have to ask you is whether you think the risks involved are too great for the
gain achieved (so all of this should be dropped), or whether you think it would
make sense to e.g. form a lobby group and ask for the "owner + web of trust"
solution. It is technically doable and in the line of liberalism, so I think it
has a good chance of becoming law.
:-)
...snip...

I might be missing something, but how does software/hardware limitation of
personal control fall under the description of 'in the line of liberalism'? 

To answer your question, I would personally be quite happy for the technology to
be developed, as long as it wasn't forced on me by law.

Regards,
  Andrew
--