Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

How to Sabotage Encryption Software (And Not Get Caught).

posted by janrinok on Saturday February 28 2015, @09:55PM   Printer-friendly
from the ssshh-'they'-will-hear-you dept.

AnonTechie writes:

In the field of cryptography, a secretly planted “backdoor” that allows eavesdropping on communications is usually a subject of paranoia and dread. But that doesn’t mean cryptographers don’t appreciate the art of skilled cyphersabotage. Now one group of crypto experts has published an appraisal of different methods of weakening crypto systems, and the lesson is that some backdoors are clearly better than others—in stealth, deniability, and even in protecting the victims’ privacy from spies other than the backdoor’s creator.

In a paper titled “Surreptitiously Weakening Cryptographic Systems,” well-known cryptographer and author Bruce Schneier and researchers from the Universities of Wisconsin and Washington take the spy’s view to the problem of crypto design: What kind of built-in backdoor surveillance works best ?

http://www.wired.com/2015/02/sabotage-encryption-software-get-caught/

[Paper]: http://www.scribd.com/doc/257059894/Surreptitiously-Weakening-Cryptographic-Systems

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
How to Sabotage Encryption Software (And Not Get Caught). | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 19 comments | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

  • (Score: 4, Funny) by Justin Case on Saturday February 28 2015, @10:24PM

    by Justin Case (4239) on Saturday February 28 2015, @10:24PM (#151245) Journal

    Your words anger me. You don't know what you're talking about. I'm a security expert, and I'm good enough to crack your lousy "Anonymous" Coward defense. Prepare to be hacked. In fact, you already have been. Never mind that you can't see any evidence of it. I'm that good.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Flamebait=1, Funny=3, Total=4
    Extra 'Funny' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  
    Total Score:   4  

  • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday February 28 2015, @10:32PM

    by aristarchus (2645) on Saturday February 28 2015, @10:32PM (#151251) Journal

    Wow, Justin Case is really good! Even I can find no evidence of his hack!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 28 2015, @10:35PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 28 2015, @10:35PM (#151253)

      My bumhole just spontaneously started to hurt. I think he may have hacked it. :(

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 01 2015, @12:43AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 01 2015, @12:43AM (#151326)

    Come on, mods. "Flamebait"? Really? This is yet more evidence that the "Flamebait" mod needs to go. Every single time I see it used, it has been used incorrectly. Please, SN admins, get rid of the "Flamebait" mod! It's doing more harm than good.

    Or better yet, leave "Flamebait" around as an option. If anyone actually tries to use it, take away all of their mod points and prevent them from ever modding again.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by RobotMonster on Sunday March 01 2015, @04:34AM

      by RobotMonster (130) on Sunday March 01 2015, @04:34AM (#151416) Journal

      Come on ACs. Complaining about modding? Really? This is more evidence that you need to log in!
      Instead of complaining about moderation, you could, you know, moderate.
      You could spend your mod points solely on incorrect Flamebait mods if you liked; I imagine you'll prefer to keep whining about it anonymously...
      I knew there was a good reason I normally read at +1..

      • (Score: 2) by fleg on Sunday March 01 2015, @09:56AM

        by fleg (128) on Sunday March 01 2015, @09:56AM (#151479)

        +5 insightful.