Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-1.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1Vxzg6-00015a-7c for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 31 Dec 2013 13:48:14 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.217.182 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.217.182; envelope-from=gmaxwell@gmail.com; helo=mail-lb0-f182.google.com; Received: from mail-lb0-f182.google.com ([209.85.217.182]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1Vxzg5-0001xK-Ap for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 31 Dec 2013 13:48:14 +0000 Received: by mail-lb0-f182.google.com with SMTP id l4so6105533lbv.41 for ; Tue, 31 Dec 2013 05:48:06 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.152.29.202 with SMTP id m10mr29703655lah.23.1388497686551; Tue, 31 Dec 2013 05:48:06 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.112.198.65 with HTTP; Tue, 31 Dec 2013 05:48:06 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <52A3C8A5.7010606@gmail.com> <1795f3067ba3fcdd0caf978cc59ff024.squirrel@fruiteater.riseup.net> <52A435EA.7090405@gmail.com> <201312081237.24473.luke@dashjr.org> <20131212205106.GA4572@netbook.cypherspace.org> Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 05:48:06 -0800 Message-ID: From: Gregory Maxwell To: Drak Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (gmaxwell[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 URIBL_BLOCKED ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [URIs: zikula.org] -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1Vxzg5-0001xK-Ap Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Dedicated server for bitcoin.org, your thoughts? X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2013 13:48:14 -0000 On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 5:39 AM, Drak wrote: > The NSA has the ability, right now to change every download of bitcoin-qt= , > on the fly and the only cure is encryption. Please cut it out with the snake oil pedaling. This is really over the top. You're invoking the NSA as the threat here? Okay. The NSA can trivially compromise an HTTPS download site: even ignoring the CA insecurity, and government run CAs certificate authorities issue CA certs to random governments and corporations for dataloss prevention purposes. Not to mention unparalleled access to exploits. The downloads are protected by something far stronger than SSL already, which might even have a chance against the NSA. Actual signatures of the downloads with offline keys. I'm all pro-SSL and all that, but you are=E2=80=94 piece by piece=E2=80=94 = really convincing me that it produces an entirely false sense of security which is entirely unjustified.