These comments in all places seem 90% rhetoric, 10% moment-in-time papers/analyses from years ago. I want the analysis without the rhetoric. Anything that spends words on "non standard crypto" and berating people for even considering it is not analysis.
-
-
Replying to @wycats @aleattorium
This is not analysis.pic.twitter.com/LoQ5zTzLLG
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats @aleattorium
If cryptographers spent time doing in depth analysis of every crank encryption app out there, they'd never have time to get anything done. It's valid to dissmiss them for the same reason physics professors don't give in-depth refutals for perpetual motion machines.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zofrex @aleattorium
Ok, so this is the stuff I'm talking about. There are a small handful of popular chat apps in the world, and Telegram's encryption is not analogous to a perpetual motion machine. It's more like a nuclear reactor that works but some experts worry doesn't follow best practices.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Yes, it would be really bad if people messed it up, but calling it a "crank encryption algorithm" is simply wrong and devalues the argument people are making. Do experts think that https://core.telegram.org/techfaq#q-i-39m-a-security-expert-and-i-think-your-protocol-is-not-secur … this contest is a fraud? $300k is pretty good...
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wycats @aleattorium
I haven't seen the 2nd round before, but yes, experts *absolutely* believed the contest was a fraud. It's a setup that sounds good to non cryptographers but is meaningless in actuality.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zofrex @aleattorium
Is there a post somewhere where an expert offers suggestions to change the contest to be more acceptable?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @wycats @aleattorium
This is a pretty good explanation of why the original contest was meaningless https://moxie.org/blog/telegram-crypto-challenge/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @zofrex @aleattorium
It sounds like they updated the challenge in response to criticism. Have people described their concerns with the new contest?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @wycats @aleattorium
Why? If someone tries to straight up *CON* people, why is that not enough to run screaming in the opposite direction? Life's too short to do free work, and being subjected to a torrent of abuse and attacks on your reputation by the CEO is the only reward for analysing telegram
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
This article claims they're conning people but maybe the first contest was just naively flawed. The assumption that they're crooks is certainly driving a lot of people to make these claims with minimal details but I don't think that's correct.
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.