jm + wired + future   2

Madhumita Venkataramanan: My identity for sale (Wired UK)
If the data aggregators know everything about you -- including biometric data, healthcare history, where you live, where you work, what you do at the weekend, what medicines you take, etc. -- and can track you as an individual, does it really matter that they don't know your _name_? They legally track, and sell, everything else.
As the data we generate about ourselves continues to grow exponentially, brokers and aggregators are moving on from real-time profiling -- they're cross-linking data sets to predict our future behaviour. Decisions about what we see and buy and sign up for aren't made by us any more; they were made long before. The aggregate of what's been collected about us previously -- which is near impossible for us to see in its entirety -- defines us to companies we've never met. What I am giving up without consent, then, is not just my anonymity, but also my right to self-determination and free choice. All I get to keep is my name.
wired  privacy  data-aggregation  identity-theft  future  grim  biometrics  opt-out  healthcare  data  data-protection  tracking 
november 2014 by jm
How Advanced Is the NSA's Cryptanalysis — And Can We Resist It?
Bruce Schneier's suggestions:
Assuming the hypothetical NSA breakthroughs don’t totally break public-cryptography — and that’s a very reasonable assumption — it’s pretty easy to stay a few steps ahead of the NSA by using ever-longer keys. We’re already trying to phase out 1024-bit RSA keys in favor of 2048-bit keys. Perhaps we need to jump even further ahead and consider 3072-bit keys. And maybe we should be even more paranoid about elliptic curves and use key lengths above 500 bits.

One last blue-sky possibility: a quantum computer. Quantum computers are still toys in the academic world, but have the theoretical ability to quickly break common public-key algorithms — regardless of key length — and to effectively halve the key length of any symmetric algorithm. I think it extraordinarily unlikely that the NSA has built a quantum computer capable of performing the magnitude of calculation necessary to do this, but it’s possible. The defense is easy, if annoying: stick with symmetric cryptography based on shared secrets, and use 256-bit keys.
bruce-schneier  cryptography  wired  nsa  surveillance  snooping  gchq  cryptanalysis  crypto  future  key-lengths 
september 2013 by jm

Copy this bookmark:



description:


tags: