Skip to content

Comment on What the Crypto Community Should Learn from GitHub's Acquisitionparent

Comments

Haven't heared of a "cryptography community", so I'll assumed cryptocurrencies.

There was a cryptography community before there was a cryptocurrency community, by definition.

At one point about 1/2 of the "cryptography community" was employed by the NSA. Anyhoo, here's some references over the last few decades:

"But now, in light of the leaked NSA documents, NIST is reevaluating the cohort of random-number generators that includes Dual EC DRBG, and it has opened a public forum on its website where the cryptography community can raise concerns." - https://spectrum.ieee.org/telecom/security/can-you-trust-nis... (2013)

"Anyone possessing that second set of numbers would have what’s known in the cryptography community as “trapdoor information” – that is, they would be able to essentially unlock the encryption algorithm by predicting what the random number generator generated." - https://www.wired.com/2013/09/nsa-backdoor/ (2013)

"It was declassified on 24 June 1998, shortly after its basic design principle had been discovered independently by the public cryptography community." - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skipjack_(cipher)

"The cryptography community has long known that generating random numbers requires great care and is easy to do poorly; Netscape learned this lesson somewhat painfully." - http://www.ddj.com/windows/184409807 (1996)

"Would the cryptography community be better off if only the NSA did patent reviews?" - https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/216c/216af763d36f3f35dc9f33... (1988)

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.