Communication Security Quotes

We worked on solving the problem of voice communications in a noisy military environment. We established military codes that are highly audible and invented selection tests for personnel who had a superior ability to recognize sound in a noisy background.

Every medium by which people communicate can be subject to exploitation by those with illegal intentions. Nevertheless, this is no reason to hand Big Brother the keys to unlock our e-mail diaries, open our ATM records, read our medical records, or translate our international communications.

All I can tell you is that I know the enemy, allies, and troops hear what I say.

As far as Paris goes, we don't know for sure yet how these guys communicate among themselves and how they communicated back to the ISIS leadership in Iraq and Syria, but I'm fairly confident we're going to learn they used these encrypted communication applications that have commercial encryption and are extremely difficult for companies to break - and which the companies have made the decision not to produce a key for.

There is a concern that the Internet could be used to commit crimes and that advanced encryption could disguise such activity. However, we do not provide the government with phone jacks outside our homes for unlimited wiretaps. Why, then, should we grant government the Orwellian capability to listen at will and in real time to our communications across the Web?

We live in a very insecure world with a very insecure communications platform.

When the United States cannibalize dollars from the defensive business of the NSA, securing our communications, protecting our systems, patching zero-day vulnerabilities, and instead we're giving those dollars to be used for creating new vulnerabilities in our systems so that they can surveil us and other people abroad who use the same systems.

Hey, Barack Obama had to give up his Blackberry. He's the first wired president. ... He might have to give his Blackberry because of security reasons. Because they're easy to hack into. In fact, when Obama heard he might have to give it up, he said, 'OMG! WTF?' I mean, he couldn't believe it.

The more urgent the message, the more slowly it moves—but those are the penalties of security.

People are mostly focused on defending the computers on the Internet, and there's been surprisingly little attention to defending the Internet itself as a communications medium.

With original cryptography, you are just trying to secure one narrow thing - say, communications - and you are trying to secure it from a third party. But you can't secure it from the party you are talking to if they forward your email; it doesn't matter how well your email is encrypted.

We think that providing this kind of secure private means of communication for the masses for 99.999 percent of people that have nothing to do with terrorism means more than the threat that we see from the other side.

I realized I don't have a safe means of communications. That's how Telegram started.

As our country increasingly relies on electronic information storage and communication, it is imperative that our Government amend our information security laws accordingly.

With terrorist groups like al Qaeda, you can't learn what you want to learn about their capabilities and their future plans by taking a picture of it, and they've learned not to use the telephone.

The concern is over what will happen as strong encryption becomes commonplace with all digital communications and stored data. Right now the use of encryption isn't all that widespread, but that state of affairs is expected to change rapidly.

The decisions we make about communication security today will determine the kind of society we live in tomorrow.