It would be a command to anyone who had “something really important”, and I guess you are right, he may not have been talking about classified stuff, he may have just been talking about random important stuff like grocery lists. But then, why would he care if the computer is safe?
But, you are correct, in that it is not just classified material that he seems to be moved by courier, but all “important” material.
That’s a distinction with a difference. The difference is, it’s even stupider.
So, you are right, I will rephrase my paraphrase of his statement to "if you want to sent important info, it must be done by courier
Well, let’s see exactly what you said: “This is, if you are talking about digital OTP cryptography, if you are talking about pen and paper OTP, then yeah, that’s about as stupid as couriering your secret documents.”
So, I agree that you were NOT in fact talking universally about couriering documents being a bad idea
You WERE calling something “as stupid as couriering your secret documents” So, when I read that, it seems like you are calling the act of “couriering your secret documents” stupid.
Notice no qualifications to your statement, it is simply “as stupid as couriering your secret documents”
Or are we not supposed to take what you said literally?
Is that what he said? Doesn’t seem like it to me. In fact, he didn’t even use the word “classified” at all.
I am well acquainted with the DCD, having actually used them in the past. And please quote where I said anything about how fast it was.
What I object to is someone denigrating a whole organization that provides a valuable service, simply to slam Trump.
I would not use a courier, because sending it electronically is more convenient. But I would understand (as Trump does say) that that would compromise its security.
As for “really important” vs “classified” - the two are different concepts. Some info is really important and is not classified. Some info is classified and not really important. And some is both.
No, it was not a command. It was a statement of a general principle that when you send stuff by computer, you accept that its security may be compromised. Which is perfectly correct.
Restate it “if you want to send important info extremely securely, sending it by computer is not the best method”.
So when faced with state and independent enemy actors trying to hack US computer systems, is it your understanding that Trump’s solution is to return to the pre-digital communication era as opposed to enhancing US cyber-security technology and measures? And if so, is that a viable and realistic policy?
That’s a really silly and biased way of interpreting what he said. As I explained several times.
Again, if I said “If you want to encrypt something with 100% guarantee that it won’t be broken, you should use the one-time pads method” (which is a completely accurate statement), would it be your understanding that my solution to the problem of electronic security of US government communications is to encrypt everything using this method?
So you agree that in order to keep important and classified information safe in the US, we should dismantle our digital communication capabilities. As a matter of policy as stated by president-elect Trump.
For the Nth time, no, it was not a “matter of policy” and no, it shouldn’t be dismantled. But since “no computer is safe” the security of transmission of the information is balanced by the convenience and efficiency of the communications.
The concept has been explained to you numerous times. You refuse to understand it. That’s your problem.
If you were the POTUS elect and you stated this as your emerging cyber-security policy, I would take you at your word. And mock you accordingly. As I do with the proposed courier solution.
LOL, ok. With that reasoning, Trump could just say to you “If you misunderstood what I said, that’s on you!”
Let me know when you call up the DCD and let them know that you can’t think of any reason why someone would use their slow, inefficient service. I’m interested to hear what they say to you.