No, but I thought we already agreed it buys more time, and also moves incentives towards fixing bugs rather than exploiting them. But... I am curious if you're in favour of key escrow for governments?
-
-
i'm strong in favour of 0day, strong against key escrow.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @qwertyoruiopz @rmhrisk and
What's your rationale, it seems like key escrow aligns with your philosophy of allowing governments access is a good thing?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
it's a good thing if they do so with 0day, since it 1. has costs which limit scope of usage to only critical stuff, 2. it has a side effect of growing the security research community, meaning more eyeballs overall might end up killing bugs, 3. 0day is there no matter what.
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @qwertyoruiopz @rmhrisk and
They both have costs, just different costs. For example, presumably key escrow would require judicial approval. I think maybe you're counting costs per-exploit, not per-compromise, because they're pretty cost effective, no?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
by cost I don't necessarily mean $, there's also risk of getting caught, which is an implicit cost you must assume *on each compromise*.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @qwertyoruiopz @rmhrisk and
Sure, so let's say you buy one exploit for $100k, and compromise 100 targets with it, that's probably a lot cheaper than getting a lawyer in front of a judge for 100 warrants. Still seems like a pretty good deal if you get caught a couple of times, don't you think?
3 replies 3 retweets 4 likes -
my worry is that ultimately, there's an infinite supply of warrants, while at any given point in time the amount of weaponised capabilities is limited, so $ isn't really the point here. if you wanted to use 0day 100x as often, your cost would be much more than 100x.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @qwertyoruiopz @rmhrisk and
Hmm... but aren't you assuming you can only use an exploit once? If I want buy an exploit and use it 100x as often, sure it's useful life will be shorter but it's clearly not going to cost me 100x more? How do you get to that number?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
i'm not really assuming that. i'm just saying that costs become non-linear once you scale things up and want to be able to keep doing what you're doing over time rather than just briefly. a "big brother" scenario seems a lot more likely to come from key escrow than 0day.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
Dunno, you could just use a 0day once to compromise the build server... that scales really well, and has really happened 
-
-
Replying to @taviso @qwertyoruiopz and
That presumes the code signing system is online and automated; bad design x2.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Most code signing system compromises have been due to online keys. That’s why sensitive keys are kept offline.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 50 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
that's a fair point ;)
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.