>>30
I don't see why you would think so, but it need not be American anyway. The Chinese and Russian governments could easily want the same, as could more sinister organizations that plan to rule us.
Yay, more enemies. Sounds exciting
!
That doesn't save you from bad binaries caused by a compromised system.
It's trivial to devise a method to cross-check whether another system's compiler has been compromised (whether binaries match with the source). Or do you think that every single system with every single C compiler, going back to the 90's, is compromised?
Ad hominem. This is not proper argument. I've shown you respect, now I must demand that you remain courdial too.
Alright, fine, I give you that.
I was using RSA as an example. DSA could have unknown (to us) weaknesses just like any other algorithm.
That's true. It would be nice if GPG incorporated some more algorithms and if *nix distributions used multiple algorithms for signatures.
Perhaps the computers of the advesaries are simply better?
2+2=4 regardless of how much money you pump in changing it (at least with anything short of ,,1984'').
We don't know what's going on in those multi-billion dollar\euro research labs.
It's probably a paranoid arms race. I doubt they managed to crack anything useful, but they're feareful that the others did so they constantly invent new algorithms to "thwart" them.
I suspect that they have quantum computers that can make short work of any public-private key cipher systems.
Only for factorization. There are public key cipher systems that aren't even related to factorization or the DH assumption for that matter. Too bad people don't use them.
Fine, install the keylogger. It doesn't refute the fact that your system is vunerable.
I would argue that, given the measures I've taken, my system is almost impossible to compromise without my knowledge.
This shouldn't even be posted.
Take a joke.
Once again, you are not refuting my point, you are just hand-waiving. It could be anybody.
It can't. There are few points at which someone actually has an occasion to insert spyware onto a computer. It's very difficult to accomplish (i.e. requires lots of money) and it's useless if the person makes their own computer out of scratch.
Only neurotypicals use those OSes, and are the type to get virii from porn because they are completely oblivious about security. They would never even bother with encryption.
So the only ones who do run secure operating systems are shy pale-skinned nerds. How exactly are shy pale-skinned nerds dangerous, threatening or even relevant to the real-world criminal activities of secret services? Sure, they can maintain public certain unconfortable information (e.g. Wikileaks), but that's a mere annoyance; I'm certain that a lot of entries on Wikileaks are really supplied by the secret service of one country that wants to tarnish the image of another. People relevant to secret services are statistially very likely to fall in the ,,type to get virii from porn''.
That is why they would alter tar. No one would suspect that tar would have a back door that would return the wrong data. It is your blind trust that will destroy you.
Bah, rootkit-hiding 101. I can still sleep at night because I know that some other shy pale-skinned nerd already has a testing system that periodically checks whether the binaries still match the source. In case you're about to ask how he'd know his testing system hasn't been compromised, well, I'm going to have to ask you to use your brain a little.