|
|
|
|
|
|
by JacobEdelman
4107 days ago
|
|
|
The sad thing is that really cool, potentially world changing, crypto has been created in the past few years but its not the crypto that gets media coverage. Concepts like Fully Homomorphic Encryption and Secure Obfuscation may revolutionize security in the coming years, but nobody has heard of them precisely because they were published in scholarly journals instead of popular science magazines. Maybe cryptographers should create useless apps that claim to solve all security problems whenever they come up with actually important crypto :) |
|
|
Homomorphic encryption is still very much an emerging tech. For most applications it's still too slow. There's all sorts of cool things we can build when it gets a bit more mature, but for now it's not unreasonable that there's no press coverage of it.
On secure obfuscation - there was actually a wired article about this (unsurprisingly the title was rather overhyped and click-baity), so I don't think it's fair to say it didn't get press coverage. This is closer to being usable in the real world and thus got more press coverage. Again though, it seems unfair to complain about the amount of coverage it got, because regular readership can't go out and use it yet.
The problem IMO is more that there's a conflict between the big splashy software release that gets you lots of users and attention, and the slow careful discussions on crypto lists that gets you more confidence your software is actually secure before it's in the hands of end users.
Without the big release, it can be hard to build a user-base - and if no-one uses your new more-secure messaging app it doesn't really do a lot of good. Without the slow discussions you're potentially endangering your users. Some sort of compromise is probably the answer, but I'm not sure exactly what that should look like (although I have some ideas).