I was curious and wanted to get some current opinions regarding the sanctity of secrets on magic sites such as this one, as well as many others.
It's well known in the world of IT (Information Technology, not Invi.. you know what I mean), that the practice of "security through obscurity" is practically no security at all, yet often the method relied on by netadmins and users. A false sense of security, however, is worse than no security.

I see some parallels here.

For one example, a lot of people are still ticked at the Masked Magician. Did he really give away secrets that no mortal could have discovered with a little poking about, with no magical credentials or special government clearances?

Sites such as this do not allow the discussion of secret methods or apparatus (except in the banquet room), yet despite all our almost paranoid (at times) attempts to safeguard our secrets, and the hassles that such efforts induce among ourselves, the irony is that anybody can waltz into their local library and quickly learn a great deal of magical methods in a single afternoon, for free. Paid for by taxpaying you and me, at that!

Are we beating ourselves up using acronyms like " TT ",(okay, bad example, I like it 'cause it saves typing..) and dancing around words we can't say or type, when the truth is that anybody who geniunely gives it a minimum of effort, through say, google, or as in my previous example, the library, will likely discover what they're looking for ? Does anybody other than magicians come to sites like this?

I'm hard pressed to believe that the "muggles", as it were, would find interest in such places. Or are we just separating the "men" from the "boys", so to speak ?
Perhaps one contrast I can draw, between the masked magician, and sites such as these: TV has a way of coming into your house, you sit there passively, drooling, not changing the channel after watching the last mindnumbing sitcom, and on comes this guy in a black mask. Secrets are exposed, one after the other - old ones, for the most part, but I digress.

Here, on the other hand, it seems unlikely that a "muggle" should find his way unless deliberately, which would indicate an interest in magic anyway, would it not?

Thoughts?

You make a good point. However, here's a different view.

You said that anyone who wants to know how magic is done could easily find out by searching on the Internet, or in a library. That's true, but most of the people who know how effects are done weren't interested enough to search through books in the library, or dig through web pages anyway. They were probably just watching TV, when suddenly a magic special comes on, and they start explaining how all these magic tricks are done.

Then, sometime a magician will come and perform for them. Of course, they will know how the effect is done and (sometimes) explain it to everyone else (Usually after the performance, if they're nice). Then, those people will tell other people when they see a magic show, and so it creates a snowball effect.

I’ve experienced this first hand several times, and was shocked when I found out how many people knew about the Balducci levitation through The Masked Magician.

I do agree that a lot of people are paranoid when it comes to protecting the secrets, and using such terms as TT and IT (Besides as abbreviations) are a bit obsessive, considering there aren’t many laymen who study The Magic Café enough to learn anything useful, but you have to remember that most of the people who have learned magic from TV specials didn't do so on purpose.

Shane Wiker

Here's how I see it...

The type of "security" use by magicians doesn't have the same function. It's job is actually to *help* "anybody who geniunely gives it a minimum of effort" learn magic. The only people who are supposed to be hindered are the casually curious (ie those who Google some keyword they hear on a Fox special) or the totally uninterested (ie channel surfers who stop on Fox in the middle of a show they didn't even know about but are stop becuase of some random image, movement, color, etc.). Anyone who is willing to go to the library and look up a book on magic and check it out and take it home and read it is welcome to become a magician.

*Nobody*, regardless of their interest level, should be welcome to the kind of data that the IT pros are trying to protect.

Personally, I think "security through obscurity" has a playfulness about it that is fun and enjoyable within the context of magic but is dangerous and unprofessional in IT.

Barry

Strong encryption is easily broken by weak hearts.

We have your kitty. "meow". If you want to see her again....

No biggie folks.

Of of the actualy problems is connectivity.

Not at all like "secrets" in magic, which are just gossip, trivia and some engineering pertinant ONLY to those who can afford the means, and have some control over their ego issues.

As Fitzkee says, there are virtually no "secrets" in magic that cannot be figured out by a person of average intelligence IF HE WANTS TO. (Caps mine).

We make far too big a thing about secrets, harking back to dealers and manufacturers who want to sell junk at vastly inflated prices.

I've said it before and will say it again: If you look to the secrets to find the magic, you might as well take a piano apart to find the music.

I like that !
BTW, I'm very pleased to "meet" you. I've read a little of your works, (so far, much more to come) and I'm partial to the bizarre genre.. not like it's hard to tell from my picture ;-)

YES!

In cryptography there is the notion of perfect secrecy. Simply put the condition where information can't be distinguished from noise. Instead of following the stream of information you can flip a coin as well.

In real communications security however this is rarely attainable. Even if you follow the best procedures for establishing and preserving security, loopholes are going to exist. At this point you can speak of probabilistic security. The probability that some hidden information is compromised gets lower as you apply these principles.

Similarly our secrets are open to those who spend the effort. Even if the effort might be as little as typing some keywords into a browser. Believe me even this removes millions of people.

In his lecture notes Michael Ammar has a wonderful essay on the Inner Circle and the Men's Hut, where he describes the feelings o a young man entering the Hut for the first time.

Having said these words, I still hate exposure as much as I hate the use of pets names as passwords.

Magic is more like the "intelligence" field.

Data and context.

Sometimes the intelligence field looks and acts more like the stupidity field.

In IT, your encryption is usually mathematically generated. In cryptography, there are methods that are unbreakable if you don't have a stool pigeon. I'm thinking specifically of book codes.

In the IT field, there are LEVELS of security that are determined by the value of the data or service that are protected. This helps with the estimate of the damage done if security is broken.

The same thing, I think, can be applied to magic. The 'TT' is afforded minimal security, since it is a utility tool that has been around for quite a while. It's value is proportional to the ability of the person able to use it correctly.

Now, at the other end, there are effects that are strictly guarded by their creators where no one has any idea of the mechanics. Most of the time, it is a new effect and the value is more of NOT letting anyone know how it works.

The security can be broken by determined people, both in IT and magic. This is mostly done by social engineering (posing as an colleague to gain entrance, etc.)

Therefore the efforts on concealing secrets should be priorized on the damage done if a secret is exposed.

Fortunately for those of us who are devoted lifelong students of magic, the best way to hide something is to put it in print.

Throughout my life so far I have never taken on a student. Would i? perhaps.
more than a few times I have had a friend or aquaintence who was particularly interested in magic. Some of them showed genuine excitement about learning and showed some promise. They asked if maybe I could teach them. They wanted to be magicians. I never took them on. Why? simple. They did nothing on their own. I wouldn't loan them a book that they could easily purchase. Their interest soon dropped from being a student of the art to being an avid spectator. If you really want to become a magician you will. I did. And I never had any help. Just me and my books behind a locked bedroom door.

In closing I feel it is right to be as secretive as we can. If people really really really want to know secrets, they'll find them despite our efforts; however lets protect them from half interested spectators who are willing to spend about 11 minutes searching the net.

Sincerely magicfish

IT is not based upon security. Anybody can go to http://www.microsoft.com and buy what they want. Not so in magic. It's not all for sale, at least not in the stores.

How about we go with the "agency" or "company" model. It's on a NEED TO KNOW basis.

Do you want the knowlege to feel clever or do you want it so you can offer magic to your audiences?