Recent Posts2001
Living Room / Re: National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace (NSTIC)
« Last post by Renegade on May 12, 2014, 05:31 PM »This is doable. Has less to do with middle men and doing things anonymously. This is more along the lines of you wanting to prove who you are on the net. Say your a respected scientist posting or a writer. With this system you can prove who you are so that when you post people know for a fact that it is you and not some poser.
This has been long talked about in security forums and security podcast. On a personal level this is where the idea of SQRL (https://www.grc.com/sqrl/sqrl.htm) comes from at GRC.-nickodemos (May 11, 2014, 06:09 PM)
That looks very interesting.
Users are identified only by a random “opaque token” and each unique combination of user and website creates a unique identity token. Thus, every user presents a unique identity to every website they visit. It is up to the user and the website to then (optionally) bind the user's unique SQRL identity to a real-world account on the website.
I imagine that it wouldn't be that hard to include a set of identifying data and then use a "web of trust" where that data was verified against data given to other sites. You could then build a "reputation", which is what "identification" boils down to anyways, i.e. You are relying on X, Y or Z to verify that A is who A says, e.g. You rely on a piece of plastic (drivers license) to verify that John is who he says he is, with that drivers license being issued/authenticated by a third party X - i.e. You rely on X's authentication of A's identity, which boils down to relying on X's reputation to build A's reputation.
For another example, you could authenticate yourself with an identity authenticator (e.g. government thugs), then that authenticator could authenticate you with another service provider (web site) with you providing the necessary key to decrypt an identity verification (i.e. locking your identity information).
RFID has been proven as a bad idea. Problem is Govt hate change on something they implemented. Some security people have given worst case scenarios about how a terrorist could place a bomb in a trash can at a historical site. The device sends out RFID signal and when it gets five RFID's based out of a given country (USA) it blows. The govt knows this and now people are placing passports with RFID in them in blackout bags.
RFID's will die off but only once something else comes to replace it or the govt will do nothing.-nickodemos (May 11, 2014, 06:09 PM)
The sooner RFID dies the better.
For the benefit of those that don't know why RFID is colossally retarded:
I suppose the question is, "Would governments actually accept something that is secure?" My guess is "no" because that limits their control.
(Lightbulb Conspiracy [FACT])
Make sure to bring a clean set of underwear. (That actually is on topic.)