Live data from Hacker News

AT&T has a fiberoptic splitter copying our data to NSA

eff.org

231–233 of 233 posts

Re: AT&T has a fiberoptic splitter copying our data to NSA

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Example of a system doing A+B+C -> Skype. You can claim that they have some way to clone the traffic for NSA use - maybe they do, but from the technical point of view - they satisfy the requirements. It also relies on Skype doing proper authentication / identity presentation. Hardware-only plug & play box will never work here. You actually have to know something about the connection - information provided out of band…

> Skype If it doesn't have backdoors now, it will soon. The remote-intercept capability mandate for land line phones is in the process of being extended to all commercial VOIP. > Hardware-only plug & play box will never work here. This looks like an example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Terminal_Equipment Or, for that matter, this: http://www.gdc4s.com/content/detail.cfm?item=32640fd9-0213-4... > I don't think…

> But the absence of any easy-to-use/uncrackable/provably non-backdoored secure voice phone on the market is proof enough for me.

If you have to worry about being monitored by government, a super secret phone will not help you anyways. If it's worth doing, your room / furniture / clothes / windows are already bugged and all you say will be recorded before it hits the phone. I really think a provably secure phone is a non-issue.

Re: AT&T has a fiberoptic splitter copying our data to NSA

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Skype If it doesn't have backdoors now, it will soon. The remote-intercept capability mandate for land line phones is in the process of being extended to all commercial VOIP. > Hardware-only plug & play box will never work here. This looks like an example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Terminal_Equipment Or, for that matter, this: http://www.gdc4s.com/content/detail.cfm?item=32640fd9-0213-4... > I don't think…

> But the absence of any easy-to-use/uncrackable/provably non-backdoored secure voice phone on the market is proof enough for me. If you have to worry about being monitored by government, a super secret phone will not help you anyways. If it's worth doing, your room / furniture / clothes / windows are already bugged and all you say will be recorded before it hits the phone. I really think a provably secure phone is a…

If it's worth doing, you will be caught and tortured. "Extraordinary Rendition."

The worth of the phone is to prevent you from turning into someone who ought to worry in the first place.

Bugging room / furniture / clothes / windows is expensive.

The NSA is known to use voice recognition and keyword search. It is no longer necessary to already be a target in order to be extensively and intelligently eavesdropped on.

Re: AT&T has a fiberoptic splitter copying our data to NSA

#233
post #163
post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Freenet, Phantom or Tor. Pick one and make it easier for people to use. Designing a whole new system isn't what we need, a "just works" system is.

I know of Freenet and Tor, but haven't heard of Phantom. Because the word 'phantom' returns a huge number of irrelevant Google results, I haven't been able to find the project. Care to throw us a pointer?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phantom_Anonymity_Protocol
Post reply on HN