Is there a post somewhere where an expert offers suggestions to change the contest to be more acceptable?
"I know it looks like we're being pedantic or even cliquey, but what's really happening is they've spotted a fatal flaw in the crypto." I don't feel anyone is being cliquey and I interpreted the first round of critiques in exactly this way.
-
-
I'm finding your post here problematic in much the same way as I was originally bothered by but there's more signal here (no pun intended).
-
"If a 12 year old comes into your IRC channel with their homegrown encryption algorithm, no-one's going to care when you break it, because no one thought it was sound in the first place." This is not a 12 yo. It's one of the most popular chat programs in the world.
-
And given that 1. people were interested in showing flaws in MTProto1, and 2. they cared enough to attempt to fix them in MTProto2, it seems like there's a reason to check MTProto2 and I bet papers would be accepted at conferences.
-
(I also understood the part about there being a large gap between flaw and vuln, also see Spectre)
-
Hey, so like... please don't infer too much about how I think about you precisely from this. You were asleep while I wrote it, I couldn't sound out your views, so it's a more general-audience argument :)
-
Fair enough. I either don't like how you characterized my views or don't think you did such a good job of debunking them :p
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.
