but if it’s peer reviewed properly
Is it?
Comment on Mathematician warns US spies may be weakening next-gen encryption
Jaderick@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I know someone in this field and sent him this article. He said the “NIST isn’t being transparent” claim isn’t true
tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=92… nvlpubs.nist.gov/nistpubs/ir/…/NIST.IR.8309.pdf tsapps.nist.gov/publication/get_pdf.cfm?pub_id=93…
He also responded with “of course the NSA would try and mess with it, but if it’s peer reviewed properly I don’t see how they would be successful”
MonkderZweite@feddit.ch 1 year ago
Technus@lemmy.zip 1 year ago
Did you send him Bernstein’s original blog post?
blog.cr.yp.to/20231003-countcorrectly.html
Unless he’s just making all of this up, it does seem pretty damning.
Natanael@slrpnk.net 1 year ago
wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
We know for a fact that they have done it in the last and managed to hide it until it was too late, what makes you think they can’t do it again?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_EC_DRBG
Jaderick@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Is the important bit here. The timeline from that Wikipedia article shows it was published in 2005 and work disproving it’s claim came around in 2006.
If a scientists work is retracted it really kills any more funding they receive. They use examples like the DRBG one as what not to be.
agitatedpotato@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
Looking at the history of the any of the Clandestine US orgs should probably reminds us these people will do loterally anything that they can, like give people LSD in an attempt to control the mind and put microphones in Russian cats.