Why we are upset with the NYTimes Paris terrorist article
On the Twitters, we've been mocking that NYTimes article on the Paris terrorists and how they used "encryption". I thought I'd write up a brief note as to why.It's a typical example of yellow journalism. The public isn't familiar with "encryption", so it's easy to sensationalize it, to make it seem like something sinister is going on.
At one point, the article says:
According to the police report and interviews with officials, none of the attackers’ emails or other electronic communications have been found, prompting the authorities to conclude that the group used encryption. What kind of encryption remains unknown, and is among the details that Mr. Abdeslam’s capture could help reveal.
That's not how encryption works. Instead, if "encryption" were the one thing the terrorists were using to hide, then you'd certainly find encrypted emails and encrypted messages -- ones you couldn't read without knowing the key.
The lack of emails/messages instead hints that the terrorists were meeting in person, passing paper notes to each other, or using telepathy. All of these, even telepathy, are more likely explanation for the lack of evidence than "encryption".
This article cites anonymous "authorities" here as concluding encryption was used. The New Continue reading
It's all about making VNFs easier to build, OSM members say.
CORD was a big topic at the Open Networking Summit this week.
Google reveals details of its in-house NFV load balancer.
