Re The Big Hack: How China Used a Tiny Chip to Infiltrate Amazon and Apple

["Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com>]

Begin forwarded message:

> From: "Ed Gerck, Ph.D." <egerck () gmail com>
> Date: October 4, 2018 at 10:20:04 PM GMT+9
> To: David Farber <dave () farber net>
> Subject: Re: [IP] The Big Hack: How China Used a Tiny Chip to Infiltrate Amazon and Apple
>
> Hello Dave and list,
>
> This is good news, and not only because it was going on silently since before 2015 until now, but because it helps 
> make it clear that trust -- not just data or information -- is part of communication system design.
>
> But not that "trust" that would rely on an "hard" component that could not be attacked, a supposedly secure chip, but 
> as we introduced in 1997. More specifically, in the context of the engineering problem of Internet communications, we 
> already [1] began by defining the same notion of trust as "that which is essential to a communication channel, but 
> cannot be transferred from a source to a destination using that channel."
> We cannot use the same channel for both the information and the trust for that information, neither sending nor 
> receiving. A decision to trust a set of bytes (such as someone's name, a source of a communication, a name on a 
> certificate, a digital signature, a chip, or an electronic record) must be based on factors outside the assertion of 
> trustworthiness that is contained in that same set of bytes. Likewise, a decision to trust someone (e.g., in priming) 
> must be based on factors outside the assertion of trustworthiness that the person (or animal) makes for himself.
> At the same time, we demonstrated why trust is needed in this context, as qualified reliance on information [1]. 
> Trust in communication theory is already considered as independent, and as something essentially communicable. We 
> discussed specific rules that can be used for trust communication, from human to machine, machine to machine, and 
> machine to human.
>  Now, the basic dimensions in physics do not (yet) include trust, but the difficulty in defining trust suggests that 
> it might be as fundamental as space and time.
> This is not a matter of activism, primate behavior, measuring (we can measure), or introducing psychobabble, but of 
> describing trust as a natural quantity that occurs in nature but cannot be described just by space and time, nor 
> their fusion, in spacetime. Can we do that? We already can do that in communication engineering, in some cases.
>    
> Technical Report Trust as Qualified Reliance on Information, Part I
>
> Cheers,
> Ed Gerck
>
> On Oct 4, 2018 04:54, "Dave Farber" <farber () gmail com> wrote:
>  The Big Hack: How China Used a Tiny Chip to Infiltrate Amazon and Apple
> https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-10-04/the-big-hack-how-china-used-a-tiny-chip-to-infiltrate-america-s-top-companies



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-a538de84&post_id=20181004092507:E61C630A-C7D8-11E8-B889-9C00971566BB
Powered by Listbox: https://www.listbox.com