Agencies like the NSA are currently able to eavesdrop on anyone with few restrictions only - though other messages are spread by the NSA.
Theoretically cryptography can make that difficult. Hence those agencies speak up for actions like introducing trapdoors to make it possible to get access to everybody's data.
See the U.S. discussion about the Clipper Chip some years ago:
While encryption offers us privacy for the transmission of data, we do not only wish to have it but also need it if we want to transport data which shall not be seen by anyone else but the recipient of our message. Given this, the governments and governmental institutions/organizations fear to lose control. Strict laws are the consequence. The often repeated rumor that the Internet was a sphere of illegality has been proven wrong. Some parts are controlled by law very clearly. One of them is cryptography. Prohibition of cryptography or at least its restriction are considered an appropriate tool against criminality. Or one should say: had been considered that. In the meantime also governmental institutions have to admit that those restrictions most of all work against the population instead against illegal actors. Therefore laws have been changed in many states during the last five years. Even the USA, the Master of cryptography-restriction, liberated its laws in December 1999 to be more open-minded now.
for an insight into the discussion having gone on for years see:
the final text of the new U.S. Encryption Regulations you will find under:
an explanation of the regulations can be found under:
TEXTBLOCK 1/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611776/100438659102
Following the communist revolutions of the 20th century all "means of production" became the property of the state as representative of "the masses". Private property ceased to exist. While moral rights of the creator were recognized and economic rights acknowledged with a one-time cash award, all subsequent rights reverted to the state.
With the transformation of many communist countries to a market system most of them have now introduced laws establishing markets in intellectual property rights. Still the high rate of piracy reflects a certain lack of legal tradition.
TEXTBLOCK 2/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611725/100438659483
Most computer systems are far from being secure.
A lack of security - it is said - might hinder the developments of new information technologies. Everybody knows electronic transactions involve a more or less calculated risk. Rumors about insecurity let consumers doubt whether the commodity of e-commerce is bigger or its risks. First of all the market depends on the consumer's confidence. To provide that another application for public key cryptography gets essential: the digital signature, which is used to verify the authenticity of the sender of certain data.
It is done with a special private key, and the public key is verifying the signature. This is especially important if the involved parties do not know one another. The DSA (= Digital Signature Algorithm) is a public-key system which is only able to sign digitally, not to encrypt messages. In fact digital signature is the main-tool of cryptography in the private sector.
Digital signatures need to be given for safe electronic payment. It is a way to protect the confidentiality of the sent data, which of course could be provided by other ways of cryptography as well. Other security methods in this respect are still in development, like digital money (similar to credit cards or checks) or digital cash, a system that wants to be anonymous like cash, an idea not favored by governments as it provides many opportunities for money laundry and illegal transactions.
If intellectual property needs to be protected, a digital signature, together with a digital timestamp is regarded as an efficient tool.
In this context, the difference between identification and authentication is essential. In this context smartcards and firewalls are relevant, too.
A lot of digital transactions demand for passwords. More reliable for authentication are biometric identifiers, full of individual and unrepeatable codes, signatures that can hardly be forged.
For more terms of cryptography and more information see:
TEXTBLOCK 3/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611776/100438659015
Since the invention of appropriate means and technologies, communication no longer requires face-to-face meetings.
From writing and reading to using computers, expanding and exhausting one's possibilities to communicate relies more and more on the application of skills we have to learn. With the increasing importance of communication technologies, learning to apply them properly becomes a kind of rite of passage.
A Small World
From the very beginning - the first Sumerian pictographs on clay tablets - to today's state of the art technologies - broadband communication via
Since the invention of the electrical telegraph, but especially with today's growing digital communication networks, every location on earth seems to be close, however distant it may be, and also time no longer remains a significant dimension.
Threatened Cultural Memory
More and more information is transmitted and produced faster and faster, but the shelf life of information becomes more and more fragile. For more than 4500 years Sumerian pictographs written on clay tablets remained intact, but newspapers and books, printed some decades ago, crumble into pieces; film reels, video tapes and cassettes corrode. Digitalization of information is not a cure; on the contrary it even intensifies the danger of destroying cultural heritage. Data increasingly requires specific software and hardware, but to regularly convert all available digitized information is an unexecutable task.
Compared to the longevity of pictographs on clay tablets, digitized information is produced for instant one-time use. The increasing production and processing of information causes a problem hitherto unknown: the loss of our cultural memory.
For further information see
For another history of communication systems see
TEXTBLOCK 4/4 // URL: http://world-information.org/wio/infostructure/100437611796/100438659807
RTMark is a group of culture jammers applying a brokerage-system that benefits from "limited liability" like any other corporation. Using this principle, RTMark supports the sabotage (informative alternation) of corporate products, from dolls and children's learning tools to electronic action games, by channelling funds from investors to workers. RTMark searches for solutions that go beyond public relations and defines its "sbottom line" in improving culture. It seeks cultural and not financial profit.
Friedman is considered the father of U.S.-American cryptoanalysis - he also was the one to start using this term.
The term refers to the separation of a work process into a number of tasks, with each task performed by a separate person or group of persons. It is most often applied to
An assembly line is an industrial arrangement of machines, equipment, and workers for continuous flow of workpieces in
b. June 12, 1924
41st President of the United States. In 1954, George Bush co-founded and became the president of Zapata Offshore Company. By 1964, he became chairman of the Republican Party of Harris County. That same year, he ran for the U.S. Senate, but was defeated in the Democratic landslide. Bush had better luck in the election of 1966, when he became the first Republican ever to represent Houston in Texas. Presidents Nixon and Ford selected Bush for a series of high-profile appointments: Ambassador to the United Nations in 1971, Chairman of the Republican National Committee in 1973, envoy to China in 1974 and Director of Central Intelligence in 1976. When Jimmy Carter was elected President in 1976, he appointed a new Director and George Bush returned to private life. In 1980, Bush made his own run for the Presidency. George Bush sought the Presidency again in 1988, and won the Republican nomination over a large field of candidates. His election that November was a decisive one, though not the landslide he and Reagan had enjoyed in 1984.