PDA

View Full Version : Externals externals...



peteshimmon
2013-Jun-08, 05:00 PM
Lots of sound and fury about phone records
now. Well absolutely forgetting politics
(as required) how many cop shows have we
seen where obtaining records is a part of
the plot? Suddenly it is fuss fuss fuss:)

Being technical people we know what has been
going on for years. Or we guessed.

And another thing, young people used to put
thoughts down in secret notebooks kept in
very secret locations. Now they broadcast
them to the World! Fuss fuss fuss...

Trebuchet
2013-Jun-08, 11:18 PM
Pretty much every episode of NCIS has them violating the entire Bill of Rights, not to mention quite a few laws of physics. DNA analysis in five minutes? No problem. I still love Abby however.

peteshimmon
2013-Jun-09, 02:08 AM
Oh yes! The one on the computer...
tap tap tap...his insect killer zapped
twelve bugs yesterday.

tap tap tap...the ice cream van passed
at one fifty seven, five seconds.

tap tap tap...his cat meowed on the bed.

They were careless twice with Abbey leaving
nasty villains in her lab. The second time
they rushed in to find him fully trussed up
in plastic! Did not get the full joke potential
when she just bopped the first on the nose.

But Columbo was getting phone records decades
ago.

publius
2013-Jun-09, 02:37 AM
Pete,

There's a wee bit of a difference between subpoenaing phone records ("metadeta") of those whom real evidence suggests have committed a crime -- you know, specific people, places, records, etc, relating to specific things -- and blanket Hoovering of millions of such phone records, estimated at 3 billion per day, just to see if anything interesting is there. Not to mention other such Hoovering. There is a big, big difference.

After yesterday, I'm not gonna criticize the tin-foil hat crowd ever again. The default is they are watching and collecting every form of digital, if not all electronic communication on the planet.

publius
2013-Jun-09, 05:49 AM
And a little bit of that tin foil that I'm now going to assume is true is that NoSuchAgency has a large qubit quantum computer in it's newest Utah "Death Star" (that uses more power than Salt Lake City, half of which powers cooling systems to keep the other half from melting the systems) facility that doesn't exist which is capable of effortlessly breaking RSA public key encryption, thus enabling them to snoop on all secure internet channels.

Yessir, I'm going to assume that it is true now and that the only way to securely communicate involves going retro, way retro, using no electronic or signal propagation at all.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-09, 06:07 AM
I've been operating under that assumption for years, ever since I heard of Echelon. I never really worried about it, I just figured best practices are still best practices. You could use code words in normal usage a lot until the system becomes acclimated to a particular user's use and lists them as a non-threat. And we the Internet just keep feeding the black hole with more and more inane statements until it has a conniption.

publius
2013-Jun-09, 06:21 AM
Yeah, but even if you suspect something, it can still be a big shock when it is pretty much confirmed. You know, "Wow, they really are doing this!" I've been "Hoovering" all the revelations I can find and from what I gather, what we've learned now is likely only the tip of the iceberg.

peteshimmon
2013-Jun-09, 07:48 AM
I cannot get upset about anyone looking at
my phone usage, maybe it is my age. Thirty
years ago we fretted about 1984 coming true,
now we have millions of cameras up on poles
in urban areas accross the country. And I am
fascinated that face recognition technology
is starting to be used on the camera signals.

How many times have we heard of these things
being used when there is a child missing?
The film Clear and Present Danger showed
capabilities which look to be the exact
situation these days. And it looks to be
nessessary!

When modern computerised exchanges came in
over twenty years ago we could look up
numbers that called us and stop our number
being sent out. Except for the police I
guessed, they would know. And how many
criminals have been caught thinking that
they really could stop anyone knowing
they called:)

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-09, 04:52 PM
And people laugh when I say that a nuclear HEMP attack may be in our future. I don't think I ever promised it would be terrorists/freedom fighters from the Middle East who were trying to take down our vast information infrastructure networks.

Swift
2013-Jun-09, 08:02 PM
Lots of sound and fury about phone records
now. Well absolutely forgetting politics
(as required) how many cop shows have we
seen where obtaining records is a part of
the plot? Suddenly it is fuss fuss fuss:)

As we don't seem to be "absolutely forgetting politics", this thread is extremely close to being closed.

If people want to talk about the technology of cop shows, or similar, that's fine. Even the technology of real world surveillance. But any discussion of real world operations is sure to get into forbidden topics.

HenrikOlsen
2013-Jun-09, 10:22 PM
And it looks to be nessessary!
I haven't seen anything remotely indicative if this being true.
Frightening, terrifying, comforting and lazy, I can see all those. But necessary? No.

peteshimmon
2013-Jun-10, 11:39 AM
It is technology that drives events. When things
become easily available, they get used. The CCD
has made billions of imaging devices possible.
Much better than those glass things we used to
use. And many manufacturing plants in the World
are turning out flat screens. Someone was trying
to say we needed them on our fridges a few years
ago.

Well now there are things that can digest billions
of data records. And they want to use them. Now where
can such records be found? Heh heh.

Here is my list. Sales records, credit cards,
bank details, electoral lists, exam results,
customer details...etc etc. There will be
pipelines into these nice data sources I am
sure. And I don't care!

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-10, 04:01 PM
It is technology that drives events. When things
become easily available, they get used. The CCD
has made billions of imaging devices possible.
Much better than those glass things we used to
use. And many manufacturing plants in the World
are turning out flat screens. Someone was trying
to say we needed them on our fridges a few years
ago.

Well now there are things that can digest billions
of data records. And they want to use them. Now where
can such records be found? Heh heh.

Here is my list. Sales records, credit cards,
bank details, electoral lists, exam results,
customer details...etc etc. There will be
pipelines into these nice data sources I am
sure. And I don't care!

Is that because you have nothing to hide? Not even what happened at your friend's bachelor party in Vegas... and how they thought it was funny that you thought it was a petting zoo... and I guess it kinda was. Nothing to be ashamed of, it's legal, and your wife would probably understand... probably would have... if you had told her... but if she hears about it for the first time from us, I know she might misunderstand. So, please tell us more about your co-worker from Pakistan, I'm sure he's a great guy and this is just a routine background investigation, but we know you talked behind closed doors on January 5th between 7pm and 9pm and we'd like to know what you talked about. No, you're not in trouble, we have no reason to suspect you of anything, do we?

peteshimmon
2013-Jun-10, 04:24 PM
Heh heh. Just avoid Las Vegas in your life
and I am sure that has now been impressed
on certain high up personages in the UK.

publiusr
2013-Jun-10, 07:28 PM
I do talk to myself at times, trying out jokes. If I try to do that on a tape recorder, I flub my words and stutter.
The idea that someone may have been listening ( I visit aerospace sites so maybe there is more scrutiny) makes me hope for a situation like you had in the movie THE LIVES OF OTHERS.

Maybe they've learned something from me.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-11, 01:38 PM
I bet this bulletin board gives the NSA computer conniptions. Think about it, lots of both scientists and cranks from different countries coming here and casually discussing nuclear weapons, lasers, rockets, optics, chemistry etc... and some of the participants have security clearances... and some of them are or have been intelligence officers.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-11, 05:33 PM
Speaking of the technology of surveillance, I wonder how much international traffic flows through us domains and servers. While the system so far is alleged to be snooping on US citizens, it might be snooping on foreigners using foreign sites where traffic is hosted or flows through servers in the US... and I suppose that information could be given to foreign governments who also have rules against snooping on their own citizens.

If that's the case, then perhaps it explains why the leaker hid in HK, since China is already known to monitor the web, whereas another country that no one expect to be might not be so pleased about the exposure of their complicity with such a system.

jokergirl
2013-Jun-11, 06:05 PM
...Not to mention other such Hoovering...

I'm sure everything useful has already been said, but I needed to congratulate you on that lovely lovely pun.

;)

publius
2013-Jun-11, 11:56 PM
Thanks, but it's far from original with me. Indeed, I've seen that pun (and others, many not suitable for a family forum) in articles about this.

SkepticJ
2013-Jun-12, 05:48 AM
Yessir, I'm going to assume that it is true now and that the only way to securely communicate involves going retro, way retro, using no electronic or signal propagation at all.

There are ways you still could. Ever heard of one-time pads? Not even a quantum computer utilizing all the mass-energy of the universe could break them in an infinite span of time.

Of course the pads (huge digital files, these days) have to be physically transported on some storage medium to the end users.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-12, 02:58 PM
There are ways you still could. Ever heard of one-time pads? Not even a quantum computer utilizing all the mass-energy of the universe could break them in an infinite span of time.

Of course the pads (huge digital files, these days) have to be physically transported on some storage medium to the end users.

Or codewords or a new language. If there are a lot of cameras up, it might be hard to use chalk marks and dead-drops.

publius
2013-Jun-12, 09:24 PM
There are ways you still could. Ever heard of one-time pads? Not even a quantum computer utilizing all the mass-energy of the universe could break them in an infinite span of time.

Of course the pads (huge digital files, these days) have to be physically transported on some storage medium to the end users.

Yeah, and if wishes were horses, beggars could ride. :) Your key stream had better perfectly random, the rand() function in your HHL library won't cut it.

The overhead of doing that, and doing it right, are enormous and utterly impractical.

publius
2013-Jun-12, 09:47 PM
Oh, and I've seen a lost of people writing about this, the "Cloud" is dead. In light of recent revelations (which are likely the tip of the iceberg), one would have to be insane to trust their data to the Cloud and those who control the physical hardware. I've always been leery of it, and now there is no question. My data will remain on hardware under my physical control, thank you.

SkepticJ
2013-Jun-12, 10:22 PM
The overhead of doing that, and doing it right, are enormous and utterly impractical.

Define impractical. If you truly value your communications remaining private, some extra work on par with what people put up with for communicating via paper letters doesn't seem impractical to me.

There are hardwware-based (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_random_number_generator) random number generators. They exploit chaotic phenomena, and some of the generators are quite small. You can even make your own, if you're a super tinfoil hat person.

Send the pads via snail-mail, and the pads themselves could be encrypted and/or tamper-proofed.

How quickly do you think you could possibly blow through many gigabytes worth of pad via text-based communication?

Trebuchet
2013-Jun-12, 11:53 PM
Oh, and I've seen a lost of people writing about this, the "Cloud" is dead. In light of recent revelations (which are likely the tip of the iceberg), one would have to be insane to trust their data to the Cloud and those who control the physical hardware. I've always been leery of it, and now there is no question. My data will remain on hardware under my physical control, thank you.

If your physical hardware is connected to the internet, you're very little better off.

Luckmeister
2013-Jun-13, 02:36 AM
Yessir, I'm going to assume that it is true now and that the only way to securely communicate involves going retro, way retro, using no electronic or signal propagation at all.

Here's my answer. Not electronic and signal propagation is relatively secure.

18483

publius
2013-Jun-13, 06:25 AM
Define impractical. If you truly value your communications remaining private, some extra work on par with what people put up with for communicating via paper letters doesn't seem impractical to me.

There are hardwware-based (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardware_random_number_generator) random number generators. They exploit chaotic phenomena, and some of the generators are quite small. You can even make your own, if you're a super tinfoil hat person.

Send the pads via snail-mail, and the pads themselves could be encrypted and/or tamper-proofed.

How quickly do you think you could possibly blow through many gigabytes worth of pad via text-based communication?

It's highly impractical for just about everything RSA encryption is used for on the web/net today.

Suppose you and I want to communicate by your one-time pad system. We've got to create the pads. Suppose we do, via a good hardware random generator (and one we know isn't compromised....)

Send the pads by snail-mail? Insecure. We need to transport them ourselves, having the key pad CD or DVD or flash drive in known custody all the time. And then we've got make sure it stays secure. No one breaks in or hacks in and gets access to it. We need a machine disconnected from the internet, and do all the encyrpting and decrypting on that, transferring ciphertext only by physical means, say a floppy but that's getting dated, so say a flash drive and keep the key media locked up physically, etc. We never want plain text anywhere save that isolated machine.

It's a darn difficult thing to do, and must be done with military drill precision. All the security steps drilled in one's head and followed to the letter. And that's just two people who are going to send text messages. Let's suppose we have a group. Everyone is going to have to have the key and follow all the protocols to the letter.

Nicolas
2013-Jun-13, 12:11 PM
The default is they are watching and collecting every form of digital, if not all electronic communication on the planet.

And clearly not selling it to the commercial world, as "targeted advertising" these days still makes the Tsar Bomba appear as a sniper's utensil by comparison.

And that last sentence just gave this thread full NSA lock-on.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-13, 01:55 PM
I'm waiting for The Onion to write an article about Google acquiring the NSA so it can offer a new Memory Recovery Service.

"Google, What was I coming to the store to get?"

"Forget what your wife asked you to pick up at the store? Let us scan your phone conversation.... She said she wants pickles and ice cream. May we also suggest you pick up a home pregnancy test?"

"Wait! Where's my wallet? I just had it."

"Your pocket was picked a few minutes ago. We're tracking the suspect on the store cameras. Shall we call for security, or would you like to use Google Wallet instead. Please remember that arresting and incarcerating someone costs the taxpayers money, but simply reporting your credit card as stolen allows the banks to make money on fees, which helps the economy."

"Google, I can't find my keys! Were they stolen too?"

"No, you left them in the car. Did you know that if you had a Google computer-driven car that you'd never get locked out again? Would you like to learn more or shall I call a locksmith?"

Trebuchet
2013-Jun-13, 03:59 PM
I keep thinking the NSA should have just outsourced PRISM to China. They literally have an army spying on us anyhow and there'd have been less chance of a whistleblower.

SkepticJ
2013-Jun-13, 06:08 PM
It's highly impractical for just about everything RSA encryption is used for on the web/net today.

But refraining from using electronic communication at all isn't impractical?


Send the pads by snail-mail? Insecure.

It's possible to create tamper-proof packaging, e.g.: encase the pad inside a block of wax that has been heavily marbled (like paper marbling). Take photographs of the packaging, e-mail them to the recipient, and if anything is off, they will assume it has been compromised.


It's a darn difficult thing to do, and must be done with military drill precision. All the security steps drilled in one's head and followed to the letter. And that's just two people who are going to send text messages. Let's suppose we have a group. Everyone is going to have to have the key and follow all the protocols to the letter.

Is it more difficult than refraining from using all long-range communications technology?

SeanF
2013-Jun-13, 06:29 PM
It's possible to create tamper-proof packaging, e.g.: encase the pad inside a block of wax that has been heavily marbled (like paper marbling). Take photographs of the packaging, e-mail them to the recipient, and if anything is off, they will assume it has been compromised.
As long as you can ensure that the e-mailed photograph hasn't been tampered with. But if you can do that... :)

publius
2013-Jun-14, 01:15 AM
Yep, just read that what I knew would happen has already happened. Some lawyer has filed something demanding access to the NoSuchAgency database (since we now know it exists) claiming it will prove his client is innocent of the charges against him. I knew it was only a matter of time. Once the precedent for letting this into court is set, it's Katie bar the door. All it will take is one judge to let it in.

SkepticJ
2013-Jun-14, 01:35 AM
Why is that a problem, exactly? They're already spying on us (and how could we possibly make them stop?) so some good might as well come out of it by exonerating innocent people.

publius
2013-Jun-14, 01:39 AM
Pandora's Box. All of it will be soon be fair game, and for *the prosecution*, of course. And civil litigation. The only sane thing to do would be to destroy all the data. But that will never happen.

Oh, we could stop it all right but it would be a Herculean undertaking, but that's well beyond the allowed scope of this forum.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-14, 04:26 AM
I saw something on FB that I was thinking the other day, it may be more secure to send snail mail.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-14, 04:31 AM
Pandora's Box. All of it will be soon be fair game, and for *the prosecution*, of course. And civil litigation. The only sane thing to do would be to destroy all the data. But that will never happen.

They could mess with them by giving it to them in encrypted form. Then when the lawyers asks for it to be unencrypted, they NSA would say that it's always encrypted in storage and isn't unencrypted until it is "collected" and that it can't be "collected" until they perceive a national security risk and ask and receive a warrant from the FISA court, neither of which would happen.


Oh, we could stop it all right but it would be a Herculean undertaking, but that's well beyond the allowed scope of this forum.Technically speaking, it would only take a few newks at the right lat-long and altitude... but you didn't hear it from me.

publius
2013-Jun-14, 04:40 AM
Oh, they'll try to stop it and avoid letting courts have at it (but not for the same reasons the rest of us want it stopped), and it will work for a while, but there will be legions of lawyers working at it, and it's only a matter of time.

What I was thinking would happen was it would be some "for the children" thing to pull on heartstrings. That is something like the data could be used to find out what happened to some missing child suspected to be a victim of foul play and who the perpetrators were. I didn't think about the defense wanting it to prove innocence.

publius
2013-Jun-14, 04:43 AM
I bet they're hardened against EMP attack using the best materials and design money can buy. Now, if you could get EMP devices *inside* the facilities and set 'em off simultaneously. Hey, that would make a good movie. We have a group determined to destroy Big Brother, and they hatch a plan. Maybe some Ocean's 11 - 13 or whatever elements in there along with the obvious themes.

publius
2013-Jun-14, 04:55 AM
:whistle:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-14/u-s-agencies-said-to-swap-data-with-thousands-of-firms.html

Thousands of firms swapping data for perks. Oh, it just paranoia to assume Big Brother has moles working in various firms. Complete nonsense, nothing to see there, take off the tin foil hat....

publius
2013-Jun-14, 05:02 AM
So from that, I will now assume that my router has a backdoor in it, as well as Windows, which will let in the spooks any time they want should they get interested in me.

I wonder just what little "easter eggs" the hardware people have put into various chips that might provide some interesting opportunities for those who know it's there? The mind boggles.

publius
2013-Jun-14, 05:22 AM
Like I said before, tip of the iceberg it is. With all the coming revelations, I believe we're all going to be forced to swallow the proverbial red pill, whether we want to or not.

publius
2013-Jun-16, 07:57 AM
Here another little gem which I learned from reading some stuff today. *And this is way back in 1999*:

http://www.heise.de/tp/artikel/5/5263/1.html

That pretty much confirms a backdoor (or perhaps it should be called a special frontdoor) has been in Windows since the first versions of Win95.

In the stories about the tech companies being in bed with YouKnowWho, only a few of the top company people usually know what's going on, most everyone else is kept in the dark. According to that, Windows progammers knew of a second secret key in Windows, but it turns out there was a third key there that they didn't even know about.

From what I've been reading over the past few days, the following should be assumed to be true: Every version of Windows (and probably MacOS and the rest, Linux is the only one I'm not certain) has a door that will allow the spooks to enter and do just about anything they want, all unbeknownst to the owners and operators of the systems. It probably erases it tracks automatically, built in to the system from the get-go.

And I would be money that all sorts of embedded systems and similiar for industrial control and all that probably have similiar "features" built in to them as well.

peteshimmon
2013-Jun-16, 12:58 PM
Reminds me of something I saw in an electronics
mag a few decades ago. Your FCC wanted a special
chip in all CB radio sets that transmitted a
unique identification number for that set every
time it operated. A throwaway comment was that
the chip companies only had to decide if they
wanted the money was in 50 or 100 dollar bills.

Did they go ahead with that?

publius
2013-Jun-17, 05:22 AM
Speaking of one-time ciphers, I was just reading something that claimed our spooks cracked one of the Soviet's "one-time" cipher systems. They were reusing keys because the requirements were so difficult. So that should tell you how hard it is to properly implement a working one-time cipher systems. It was too impractical even for the Soviet govt to do correctly at the time.

publius
2013-Jun-17, 06:31 AM
Did they go ahead with that?

Don't have a clue, Pete, as that's not my bailiwick. If there's any lurker who knows, maybe he'll speak up.

Another thing I was reading about encryption on another forum. Some guy said he worked for some outfit in Europe, and said our govt was always giving them trouble about the level of encryption they were using for data they piped into/through the US. But, a few years ago, they dropped it and stopped complaining.

He said they soon gulped when they wondered if that meant the US spooks could now break anything they were using. That ties in with the quantum computer talk.

Trebuchet
2013-Jun-17, 02:48 PM
They were reusing keys because the requirements were so difficult.

That's related to the problems caused by IT departments requiring unrememberable passwords, forcing people to write them down. Long passwords of plain text have been shown far harder to crack by brute force.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-17, 04:01 PM
Don't have a clue, Pete, as that's not my bailiwick. If there's any lurker who knows, maybe he'll speak up.

Another thing I was reading about encryption on another forum. Some guy said he worked for some outfit in Europe, and said our govt was always giving them trouble about the level of encryption they were using for data they piped into/through the US. But, a few years ago, they dropped it and stopped complaining.

He said they soon gulped when they wondered if that meant the US spooks could now break anything they were using. That ties in with the quantum computer talk.

I've seen people debate whether or not the US or anyone could actually or even conceivably crack AES 256. Some say no, some say yes, and some say there's gotta be a backdoor, and others say then people will just go to the next higher level of encryption. And others say it's not a brute force method but something related to either quantum computing or a breakthrough in P=NP, which appears to be beyond my ken.

peteshimmon
2013-Jun-17, 06:54 PM
Well something else I read, a guy at NSA
was annoyed at mention of the DES encryption
standard. Wondered if the people who implemented
56 bits rather than 64 made sure there was no
easy way in.

SkepticJ
2013-Jun-17, 07:24 PM
Speaking of one-time ciphers, I was just reading something that claimed our spooks cracked one of the Soviet's "one-time" cipher systems. They were reusing keys because the requirements were so difficult. So that should tell you how hard it is to properly implement a working one-time cipher systems. It was too impractical even for the Soviet govt to do correctly at the time.

There haven't been Soviets in more than two decades. Random number generators' capacity have advanced considerably since their time*. Plus, the Soviet government was dealing in volumes of communication that are simply not comparable to what a private individual's correspondence would entail.

*In other news, the Victorian Era British Empire was incapable of achieving powered flight. Throw away your ultra-light, it's not practical.

mkline55
2013-Jun-17, 07:27 PM
I would not be surprised to find that every encryption standard has a built-in master key capability.

publius
2013-Jun-17, 10:45 PM
*In other news, the Victorian Era British Empire was incapable of achieving powered flight. Throw away your ultra-light, it's not practical.

:lol: So two decades is ancient history, eh? I remember when I used to think that way, when I was very young.

Ara Pacis
2013-Jun-18, 01:17 AM
*In other news, the Victorian Era British Empire was incapable of achieving powered flight. Throw away your ultra-light, it's not practical.

:lol: So two decades is ancient history, eh? I remember when I used to think that way, when I was very young.

112 years is ancient history? :)

publius
2013-Jun-18, 02:01 AM
112 years is ancient history? :)

Yeah, he was pulling me over his way even then.

I still think of my '92 F-150 as still relatively new, and gosh, it's two decades old now (and runs as good as ever). My *brand spanking new* F-150, an '04, is nearly one decade old. As I said before in some thread, when I was a little kid back in the mid '70s, a neighbor was still driving around a '55 Chevy pickup, and I thought that thing was old as the hills and couldn't understand why anybody would want to drive something that *old*. It hit me a while back my '92 F-150 was the same age now as that '55 Chevy was then and some kid probably thinks it's old as the hills. That neighbor is still alive, but not doing much and his son still has that old '55, threatening he's going to get it running again.

SkepticJ
2013-Jun-18, 04:34 AM
:lol: So two decades is ancient history, eh? I remember when I used to think that way, when I was very young.

It is when you're talking about computer technology.

The first transistor, which looked like this (http://www.beatriceco.com/bti/porticus/bell/images/transistor1.jpg), was invented in 1947. The Apple II went on sale in 1977. Thirty years.

publius
2013-Jun-18, 06:24 AM
And none of those advances have made one-time pads any more practical for real world use. If it so relatively easy, then why is it so little used, even by govts whose resources are vast compared to private entities? No one uses it because it is still so darned hard to do correctly.

Yes, it theoretically unbreakable -- any coherent message of the same length as the ciphertext is equally probable to be the true message, but the practical problems of implementing it in the real world make it very difficult and expensive to do.

Two people don't even need a computer to do it, or even some fancy quantum event based random number generator. Just make the pads by getting some Scrabble blocks, shake them up and drop them, then do a pick up of each letter tile, letting that sequence be your pad. Then you encrypt via modulo-26 arthimetic.

That's essentially the way it was done 100 years ago, although I think random banging on typewriters was used, with the ribbons being burned afterwards. Dice have also been used as the random number generator.

Simple in concept, and truly unbreakable. But so darned difficult to do in practice.

publius
2013-Sep-06, 04:39 AM
The lastest (leaked) info in all this mess confirms just what all the paranoid and tinfoil hat types have suspected. Just about all common encryption schemes used on the internet are compromised. Backdoors and engineered weaknesses galore. They got really worried back in the '90s when encryption starting catching on and becomming accessible to the average Joe. They took steps. Lots of steps to stay ahead of that curve. When you can throw billions around like candy, you can do all sorts of amazing things.

I'm thinking about the plot them in the Battlestar Galactica remake. The Colonials couldn't beat the Cylons at their own game of tech, so they had to drop it and go old school. That's the way it is here.

Just keep this in mind. Big Brother can read, see, and listen to just about any communication you send out via the electronic ether if they want to. Assume everything is compromised. Everything. Assume all the tech companies are in bed with said Big Brother,likely willing, or maybe with some persuasion. There was some outfit the name of which I forget which was offering some serious secure communications. THey announced they were having to shut down because of reasons which they were legally forbidden from discussing. ANd you know what that means. One of those secret court orders. Rather than comply, the just shut down.

Hlafordlaes
2013-Sep-06, 11:59 AM
Well, there's one backdoor that's been around and in the open for a long time. Here's (http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/architecture-and-technology/vpro/vpro-technology-general.html)Intel's marketing, which discusses enhanced security. Here's (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_vPro) the wiki; scroll down to vPro Security section. This is built into many motherboards... and ATM embedded systems. I am pretty sure that vPro was used to keep messing with Iran's computers every time they cleaned them during the Stuxnet attack. With vPro, it is apparently possible to reinfect a computer that has had all its data wiped, since the method does not rely on storing anything in the usual ways.

But, hey, ever since I learned how to listen to an incoming analog call without picking up the receiver back in the 70's, I've figured nothing is safe.

However, I was never too concerned until this tech met up with the Patriot act; now you could conceivably be tucked away for a false positive. 'Nuf said on that, tho.

publius
2013-Sep-16, 05:37 AM
What amazes me is how these guys (NoSUchAgency) were thinking so many moves ahead. They're into everything, even before someone knew where they were going, they were there waiting.

And I suspect the next shoe to drop will indeed be "they're in the hardware" to an extent that will boggle the mind.

Swift
2013-Sep-16, 01:13 PM
What amazes me is how these guys (NoSUchAgency) were thinking so many moves ahead. They're into everything, even before someone knew where they were going, they were there waiting.

And I suspect the next shoe to drop will indeed be "they're in the hardware" to an extent that will boggle the mind.
I strongly considered infraction(s) for some of the content of this thread, particularly after my warning about how political this topic is.

I'm going to be nice and just close the thread. If you have a convincing argument as to why it should be reopened, Report this post.