Simson Garfinkel analyses Skype - Open Society Institute

Adam Shostack adam at homeport.org
Sun Jan 30 13:09:58 EST 2005


On Sun, Jan 30, 2005 at 11:12:05AM -0500, John Kelsey wrote:
| >From: Adam Shostack <adam at homeport.org>
| >Sent: Jan 29, 2005 12:45 PM
| >To: Mark Allen Earnest <mxe20 at psu.edu>
| >Cc: cryptography at metzdowd.com
| >Subject: Re: Simson Garfinkel analyses Skype - Open Society Institute
| 
| >But, given what people talk about on their cell phones and cordless
| >phones, and what they send via unencrypted email, they are acting like
| >they think their communications are secure in the absence of any
| >encryption.  So I don't think adding some 'cryptographic mumbo jumbo'
| >is going to change their sense of security in the wrong direction.
| 
| One thing most people seem to miss about this, though, is that cellphones and cordless phones are *great* for privacy from other humans who live in your house or work in your office.  When you don't want your children to hear a conversation, you can go take the call in the bathroom or in the car while you're driving alone.  Everybody seems to miss this--cellphones and cordless phones don't diminish privacy, they just move it around.  Sophisticated eavesdroppers can violate more of your privacy, but nosy family members, roommates, and office mates can violate a lot less.  I thnk most people correctly evaluate which of these groups is more likely to do something unpleasant with what they learn by eavesdropping.  
| 
| It seems to me that VOIP pushes this in a somewhat different direction, because it's probably easy for your high-speed internet access (maybe a wireless hop to a router that talks to a cable modem) to be eavesdropped by moderately technically savvy nosy neighbors, and because there are a lot of criminals who are using more technology, and will surely target VOIP if they think they can make any money off it.  

Hi John,

   That's a very interesting point.  There are clearly times when it's
the case.  I suspect, with no data to back me up, that a form of
hyperbolic discounting occurs here:  The family member who is clearly
present ends up dominating consideration, and the less
likely/understood eavesdropping threat disappears.  (As does the 'yell
for attention, pick up another extension attack,' but that's another
story.)

Adam

---------------------------------------------------------------------
The Cryptography Mailing List
Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo at metzdowd.com



More information about the cryptography mailing list