I wish this article were more particular about what cryptologists are doing wrong? What exactly could they have done instead? Without that info, it just seems like pointing a finger at cryptologists and saying, “This is your job! Do something!”
Modern academic cryptographers have veered off into a land of purely theoretical constructs. Now I love the cool theory we have in crypto, but it's sad that despite all this cool theory, very little of it becomes applicable in building practical privacy-preserving systems.
Rogaway, is a famed academic cryptographer, student of Silvio Micali, who basically founded modern academic cryptography. He is highly respected within the crypto community, so his words hold a lot of weight, and my interactions with crypto professors indicates that they agree with what he says.
Thanks for that pointer. I agree with GP's criticism, though, at least the way the article is written. I was trying to understand it through the lens of the nuclear analogy and failing drastically, because whereas those scientists were developing PRO-nuclear technology, these ones are (a priori, to first order) developing ANTI-surveillance technology.
The nuclear analogy is a little odd, given that one of the reasons we don't have even more nuclear weapons / more states with nuclear weapons / nuclear weapons out in the wild is not technological... but because of international treaties and enforcement.
