[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-talk] NSA supercomputer

Why not using some exotic scramble of keys/method to encrypt the whole
message ?

The only way to hide/protect us from something we don't know, is putting a
mess in protocols. A big mess.
The point is : How can we unscramble it at the end without revealing the
secret necessary to scramble it ?

Guys, if you are in trouble with NSA, or other US governmentals agency,
you're screwed. Physically. Don't mind your electronical com'.


2013/4/5 george torwell <bpmcontrol@xxxxxxxxx>

>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
>
> i wasnt going to, but now i have to...
> i dont know what tech or knowledge they have.
> but i imagine that if you angered them, and they wanted your keys, they
> would come and get them.
> physically or electronically.
> <again, only cause nsa whistle-blowers has said so.>
> so lets not speculate :)
>
> i have a lot of faith in the developers, but if you feel that they are
> missing something, please find a way to contribute that knowledge to the
> project. that way we all benefit.
>
> On 04/04/2013 08:23 AM, Tim wrote:
> > Those at the root of the NSA have technology that is far faster and more
> vast than you imagine it
> currently to be. To decrypt keys, It does not take what you might
> otherwise expect.
> >
> > I'm sure one or more of the developers are either in denial or part of
> the "security" apparatus or both. I would not hold your breath.
> >
> > Be well.
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:55 AM, George Torwell <bpmcontrol@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:bpmcontrol@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> >
> >     i may be wrong but:
> >     - we are talking about keys of every node along the path. how can you
> >     increase that just locally?
> >     - keep in mind that we dont know if factoring such a key is
> likely, if i
> >     remember correctly that talk mentioned huge amounts of computation
> power
> >     and electricity.
> >         something like a year for a 40 mega watt consuming data center
> per 1024
> >     bit key. <maybe way off, but the point being - its really expensive.>
> >         on the other hand its rumored that the utah data center will
> have 65
> >     mega watts from its own power station.
> >     im pretty sure that the developers will move us safely from these
> keys as
> >     soon as its needed :)
> >
> >
> >     On 4 April 2013 13:54, Bernard Tyers <ei8fdb@xxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:ei8fdb@xxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> >
> >     > That's what I was thinking, I just didn't know if there was another
> >     > reasons.
> >     >
> >     > I guess the key size is configured on the Tor node? I haven't
> found it
> >     > anywhere in the configuration (I'm using TBB on OS X).
> >     >
> >     > Is it possible to increase the size of the key, if say I've got
> a big
> >     > server running as a node?
> >     >
> >     > If there are nodes using different length keys, is the security
> relying on
> >     > the node with the smallest key length?
> >     >
> >     > Thanks.
> >     >
> >     > Bernard
> >     >
> >     > ----
> >     > Written on my small electric gadget. Please excuse brevity and
> (possible)
> >     > misspelling.
> >     >
> >     > Alexandre Guillioud <guillioud.alexandre@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:guillioud.alexandre@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> >     >
> >     > >The bigger the key is, the longer (cpu cycle) it take to
> encrypt/decrypt ?
> >     > >
> >     > >Le jeudi 4 avril 2013, Bernard Tyers a écrit :
> >     > >
> >     > >> Hi,
> >     > >>
> >     > >> Is there a reason 1024 bit keys, instead of something higher
> is not
> >     > used?
> >     > >> Do higher bit keys affect host performance, or network latency?
> >     > >>
> >     > >>
> >     > >> Thanks,
> >     > >> Bernard
> >     > >>
> >     > >>
> >     > >> ----
> >     > >> Written on my small electric gadget. Please excuse brevity and
> >     > (probable)
> >     > >> misspelling.
> >     > >>
> >     > >> George Torwell <bpmcontrol@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:bpmcontrol@xxxxxxxxx> <javascript:;>> wrote:
> >     > >>
> >     > >> a second guess would be going after 1024 bit keys.
> >     > >> there is also a video on youtube from a recent con about the
> >     > feasibility of
> >     > >> factoring them, <"fast hacks" or something like that> at the
> end, jacob
> >     > >> applebaum asks about it and they advise him to use longer keys
> or
> >     > elliptic
> >     > >> curves crypto.
> >     > >>
> >     > >> _______________________________________________
> >     > >> tor-talk mailing list
> >     > >> tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <javascript:;>
> >     > >> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
> >     > >>
> >     > >_______________________________________________
> >     > >tor-talk mailing list
> >     > >tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     > >https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
> >     > _______________________________________________
> >     > tor-talk mailing list
> >     > tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:
> tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
> >     >
> >     _______________________________________________
> >     tor-talk mailing list
> >     tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >     https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
> >
> >
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJRXnX4AAoJELpj163ICqulUkQP/23p+bUuJrtJB2mBf61ONab4
> WQYntei2nUX+1iegQAmfO8rAQe7A897HCaiOH4paEZCsmTMzsCPdYIQrJli6MCDD
> l7eHYXJRByw16otUY8GI4d2mZ6AtwefrYVTLDO+PZrjyFcWRHoJ7YRXD2qOsfdQQ
> 1B9eKDX3Q0laZC99bInLM8zuRX/2GG5gvFBoDTo3AtMMZZWCgxYwRy6MDPyUDjPb
> 1lJNHthkGriNwpgiewx3SX0USDY4DiwYL1NVFAqisQKsWpoaGyJAUhk3HQ6wvRsx
> o/pC0TFXJspYvSDMqZvRQke6h8I85JO3uU2hPEonq/cu3RC88M7e6/b3hyG1fbVP
> /gwF1sCQH+fmcrthxZkVWnA1QDrQ1CTtx6ooJT03POPxSqWQ/7RRKGifqn6cmYSo
> pVgNTYb+6OzkMQTGNIFukjd+NIideSjTrNziNIdCHK8HqXX9mqh2rXopwTpxSp+1
> mQtqaxf9U7USyMLd4gPOkBD83d6nuywwBxrUhou3BH73b4uOu6z9xz2OPvRWf5j1
> 3ykjbjgBnDfjslFilOvAG8dzVCIp5SayXaDAfhe+R9iZBHDgHLxINuqodvQIgNT5
> trNtOq3szx1KR5+8LIOGS0DhNjuuCqy0JQG+KCLsOc2IeuKYyCbGg28EmNFozde/
> OS1jfrL6I/LX+i/mdf3a
> =tydj
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
> _______________________________________________
> tor-talk mailing list
> tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
>
_______________________________________________
tor-talk mailing list
tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk