Talk:Bruce Schneier

how to say it?

Is it pronounced "shn-EYE-er" or "shn-EE-er"? —User:17.206.16.106 23:44, Sep 27, 2004 (UTC)

The first one. —User:Mulad (talk) 00:13, Sep 28, 2004 (UTC)

Are you completely sure? (How do you know?) Also, could this information maybe go in the article? It's what I came here looking for, and it's something useful that a lot of people want to know about him. Glenn Willen (Talk) [[]] 00:45, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

There's a movie of a talk given by Schneier here, and he's introduced as "shn-EYE-er". — Matt Crypto 01:31, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

You pronounce it "Shneyer On Fire"! :-)--169.232.119.242 (talk) 07:07, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Transportation Security Administration

Was there some airline-related work we should mention in this article? Ojw 2 July 2005 19:56 (UTC)

Lack of criticism?

Is there any serious criticism of Schneier's work? Ludvik 13:15, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Of course there is - cryptanalysis of his ciphers and criticisms of some positions he takes. But those belong on the entries about those things, not here. For example, here are some responses to 10 risks of PKI: [1] [2] — ciphergoth 15:33, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Lost PGP key

Is it true that he lost a PGP private key and, since then there were no revocation measures, he still receives mail he can't decypher?

Yup. See the comment (footnote, I think I remember) in Practical Cryptography. ww 06:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Mention in da Vinci Code

From the 15 May 2006 edition of Crypto-Gram:

As an aside, I am mentioned in Da Vinci Code. No, really. Page 199 of the American hardcover edition. "Da Vinci had been a cryptography pioneer, Sophie knew, although he was seldom given credit. Sophie's university instructors, while presenting computer encryption methods for securing data, praised modern cryptologists like Zimmermann and Schneier but failed to mention that it was Leonardo who had invented one of the first rudimentary forms of public key encryption centuries ago." That's right. I am a realistic background detail.

There is nothing Schneier can do about getting gratuitously name-dropped, but that piece of trivia does not belong in WP. Appearing in a sentence like that makes him look like a bit of an idiot by association. Leibniz 13:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Besides, the bit about Leonardo inventing public key encryption makes mention of Schneier really unimportant. In the presence of a major whopper, the little ones don't get much noticed. ww 03:32, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Mention in 24

In the episode of the Fox Television show 24 aired on Monday; March 16, 2009 the character Carlo Rota suggested the that designer of the Blowfish encryption designed a back door into it. I figured it was worth recording here.

Did it already happen to one of you?

While reading Secrets & Lies, I have a feeling that Schneier is always saying behind the written lines: HIRE ME, HIRE MY COMPANY, HIRE MY BUSINESS, etc, etc. Is it a cryptography expert subliminal trick??? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.19.136.57 (talk • contribs)

These aren't the subliminal mind tricks you're looking for. Schneier can go about his business. Move along. — ciphergoth 08:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Haha. Help me, Bruce Schneier. You're my only hope. --JHP (talk) 05:58, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Citation templates

I've tried to format the citation templates according to their documentation. The relevant parts are as follows:

Template:Cite book:

• date: Full date of publication edition being referenced, in ISO 8601 YYYY-MM-DD format, eg. 2006-02-17. Must not be wikilinked.
  • OR: year: Year of publication edition being referenced, and month: Name of the month of publication. If you also have the day, use date instead. Must not be wikilinked.

• pages: pp. 5–7: first page and optional last page. This is for listing the pages relevant to the citation, not the total number of pages in the book.

pp. is an abbreviation used when citing multiple pages (p or p. is the abbreviation for "page").

Template:Cite web:

• date: Full date of publication, preferably in ISO 8601 YYYY-MM-DD format, e.g. 2006-02-17. May be wikilinked.
  • OR: year: Year of publication, and month: Name of the month of publication. If you also have the day, use date instead. Must not be wikilinked.

By default these dates appear as ISO 8601 YYYY-MM-DD dates, but this can be changed easily in your preferences for any full date. Unfortunately, the Rebecca Blood reference only lists year and month, and so can't be automagically reformatted.

I published the Bruce Schneier interview on January 31, 2007. Rebeccablood 18:35, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

»  [3]

Hopefully that clears it up? —GrimRevenant 04:49, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Note that currently, MediaWiki only reformats dates that are linked, e.g., [[2006-02-17]]. The "accessdate" field is automatically linked, but not the "date" field. -- intgr 07:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

The only reason I didn't link that one was that the template specified "Must not be wikilinked", so I assumed that it would be taken care of automatically. Anyone have any idea why linking the date would be a bad idea? —GrimRevenant 08:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

It breaks the template, to put it simply. Templates are currently inconsistent (even internally: cite web accepts wikilinked date attributes, but insists on unlinked ISO format for accessdate) and always will be to some extent. Where the template does not auto-link dates presented unlinked in ISO format I always use a wikilinked "human" layout, i.e. 20 April 2007, which makes it easier for editors. Chris Cunningham 08:29, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

attack tree reversion

BS is one of the pioneers of the technique, and has written several published articles on it (eg, in Dr Dobbs). It is quite relevant to this article. ww (talk) 02:41, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal

I propose merging the contents of Individual-i into this article. That stub, long unattended, lacks any assertion of notability sufficient for stand alone status, but it may be relevant within the context of the biography of the symbol's creator. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:19, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Sole comment on this topic took place here. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:09, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

New reference

I think that the "citation needed" should be removed from the line that states that Schneier has authored and coauthored hundreds of cientific papers. I suggest replacing it with a reference such as: List of articles authored or coauthored by Bruce Schneier, on Google Scholar —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.187.6.252 (talk) 23:47, 26 February 2008 (UTC)