Miryafa wrote:These are my thoughts, not news. This seemed like the right forum to put them in, so sorry if it's not.
It seems to me that our ability to gather information on computers is outpacing our ability to conceal it, and could lead to a "cameras everywhere" environment where everyone knows what everyone else is doing. I think this because of the growing number of people who are computer-literate, and sites like this one that help people figure out the basics of hacking, combined with the low security standards of most of the internet.
Now, if there's no privacy to start with, then there can't be encryption, because anyone looking at an encrypted file could just find a copy of the pre-encrypted message, so cryptography would be useless.
Does this seem plausible to anyone else?
WallShadow wrote:No no no no no NO non!
Encryption won't be obsolete for any part of the next century. It was used for ages as a means of defending information, and that's how it's going to stay. If the government gets the ability to monitor us 24/7, either we'll be too dumb-struck to notice, or there will be a massive revolt against it. But seriously, consider this; several cities around the world already have mass free WiFi available to everyone. Lets say our Joe Shmo wants to make a secure bank transaction but doesn't have his own private network. No problem! Encrypt everything.
Especially with new algorithms such as zero knowledge and private outsourcing computation constantly being developed, encryption is far from a dead language. We will continue to use encryption until the day that we feel we have nothing to hide from our neighbors.
Miryafa wrote:I know next to nothing about hacking. Is it really possible to securely encrypt information, resistant to all attacks, on wifi?
Miryafa wrote:on wifi?
Springynull wrote:BTW what do you mean by "on wifi?"
Miryafa wrote:Is it really possible to securely encrypt information, resistant to all attacks, on wifi?
Miryafa wrote:Are there attacks that are used so rarely that current security conventions are still insecure?
Miryafa wrote:And more importantly to the main topic: is cryptography really advancing faster than cryptanalysis?
I know next to nothing about hacking. Is it really possible to securely encrypt information, resistant to all attacks, on wifi? I would guess that the widespread use of wifi already answers this question, yet I'm not sure. Are there attacks that are used so rarely that current security conventions are still insecure?
cilpolir wrote:When you're loggin in to websites (like gmail or something like that) in public wifi always use https://. It's just that part that decreases the risk, because when someone is doing a MitM attack they will not just see your passwords in plain text instead they will see it encrypted.
Miryafa wrote:As for MitM attacks, am I right in thinking that if a MitM attack is successful, everything goes to pot (secret keys are lost, then authentication and passwords, etc)?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests