<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=us-ascii" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffff99" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Trixter aka Bret McDanel wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:1210711959.31763.163.camel@trixtop.0xdecafbad.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Tue, 2008-05-13 at 16:32 -0400, Bill Michaelson wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Referring back to my earlier suggestion about public key
authentication, a more widespread appreciation and understanding of
it's applicability in various realms would go a long way toward
helping solve many problems ranging from spam and phishing to stuff
like this. It's a mind-share/social problem. There is nothing
inherently wrong with spoofing; the problems arise when the receiver
is unduly deceived.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
that only works if you can trust the key holders. Someone has to have
your public key and be trusted so that you know its real, and not a fake
one. Yes you can cache it once you have had contact but not first
contact.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Yes, of course, just as this is an issue with web browsers.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:1210711959.31763.163.camel@trixtop.0xdecafbad.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
Further when you get phone calls that are authenticated on each end as
to whom you are talking there will be abuses. It will be used as a
method of surveilance and tracking by governments, presumably it will be
a smart card type device and not the phone itself, and when you go from
phone to phone you will ultimately be required to insert it to prove
identity. </pre>
</blockquote>
Maybe.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:1210711959.31763.163.camel@trixtop.0xdecafbad.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap=""> After all this will help stop drug dealers, child
pornographers and terrorists right? (those are the 3 claims that most
of the tracking laws have used for the last 15-20 years).
</pre>
</blockquote>
Those are favorite excuses for increased surveillance, I agree.<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:1210711959.31763.163.camel@trixtop.0xdecafbad.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
But it wont stop there, this can help stop credit card theft on the
intarweb, so it will be mandated that you use it there too, meaning you
wont be able to do anything online anonymous, because you will have to
authenticate with your card. Why stop there, make it some type of RFID
system so that they can monitor who you are as you drive down the road
(michelin has a plan to put RFIDs in tires and claim they can be read
upto 90mph so its not just a random theory).
While you arent proposing all of this, think for a second about how many
governments have been clamoring for something like this. End to end
authentication is not always a good thing, it may be helpful in a couple
of situations but at what cost?
</pre>
</blockquote>
You make a good point - essentially that the widespread acceptance and
facility of this technology also facilitates abuse of another sort. I
agree that anonymity should be available. Would it necessarily
eliminate all channels of anonymous communication? I don't think that
is a foregone conclusion (nor do I think you are really suggesting it
is).<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>