[Cryptography] [RNG] /dev/random initialisation

[ianG]

On 6/11/13 00:44 AM, James A. Donald wrote:
> On Nov 4, 2013, at 10:40 PM, James A. Donald <jamesd at echeque.com> wrote:
>>> Since the hit came a long time after the message, it would not have
>>> been useful in protecting the recipient from clicking on links to
>>> phishing sites.\
>
> On 2013-11-06 01:22, Jerry Leichter wrote:
>> So you think it's all about *you*?  If a mechanism doesn't protect
>  > *you*, *right now*, it's not a security mechanism?


Claiming it is to protect you is an old trick.  Don't give it a moment's 
thought, save the analysis for important problems.


> If the point is to protect the population at large, the first step would
> be to detect spammed urls, not unique urls.
>
> If spying on me to protect me from myself, need to interrupt immediately.
>
> If spying on me to protect the population at large (which I violently
> object to) then should be hitting on non unique urls.
>
> The observed behavior pattern only makes sense if they are spying on me
> for dangerous thoughts, racism, the wrong kind of Islam (those
> misunderstanders of Islam), sexism in the workplace, homophobia, or, as
> with General Petraeus, blackmail material that some of the political
> elite can use against others of the political elite.


https://twitter.com/ashk4n/status/375758189444493312/photo/1

Clues...  and might put to bed some other conspiracy theories of 
hardware level manipulation.



iang, proudly wearing the tin foil hat today