[Cryptography] Forget the Enigma Code; embrace the Hammurabi Code

[ianG]

On 29/05/2015 00:58 am, Henry Baker wrote:

> Nassim Nicholas Taleb (see below) recognized the wisdom of Hammurabi and suggests its use for bank fraud.  But why stop with bankers?  Lets use Hammurabi's Code for all computer security.


The Swiss used to have a rule that any officer of a bank that went 
bankrupt could be criminally indicted just on that.  I'm not sure if 
that is still the case, or even relevant as banks aren't going bankrupt 
like they used to...


> I further suggest that Bitcoins in the amount of the bonds' face value be placed in "honeypots" within the company networks, so that these bonds will be the first items to be stolen if the company's networks were breached.  If you don't feel comfortable leaving millions of dollars worth of Bitcoins lying around in your internal network, why should hundreds/thousands/millions of ordinary consumers trust you with their valuable identity data?


The problem with this is that it creates a pot of honey that both 
insiders and outsiders can steal.  So you now add governance load to the 
system, and the one thing we know from the last decades of governance 
improvements is that we don't have a good track record of doing that ...



> 'This was simply the best risk-management rule ever.  The Babylonians understood that the builder will always know more about the risks than the client, and can hide fragilities and improve his profitability by cutting corners ­ in, say, the foundation.  The builder can also fool the inspector; the person hiding risk has a large informational advantage over the one who has to find it.'

So how does this work - the programmers fly on the first flight?  The 
programmers stand under the rocket?  On the launch pad?

What about the 1000th flight of an airbus 380 that goes down due to a 
number being out of range because of a committee that changed a spec in 
a protocol from a company in China that copied an IETF protocol that was 
designed for remote control lawnmowers?


> Hammurabi:
>
> http://www.commonlaw.com/Hammurabi.html
>
> 229. If a builder has built a house for a man, and has not made his work sound, and the house he built has fallen, and caused the death of its owner, that builder shall be put to death.
>
> 230. If it is the owner's son that is killed, the builder's son shall be put to death.
>
> 231. If it is the slave of the owner that is killed, the builder shall give slave for slave to the owner of the house.

Finally, a reason to be a slave of a builder than a son of a builder :)

Now, the obvious problem here is this:  it will add terrific costs to 
the process.  Programming will now look like American health care - the 
best in the world but also many times more expensive and out of reach of 
most.  So innovation will come to a great screaming halt, the economy 
will stall and all the fun guys will migrate to the countries that 
aren't beaten up in secret treaty negotiations.

As the ancient chinese curse has it, be careful what you wish for.



iang