Live data from Hacker News

Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

plus.google.com

71–80 of 420 posts

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#71
post #52

Lets start from the beginning: the NSA "hack" became possible because Google (and its security team) made bad assumptions about the security of the connection between Google's data centers and did not encrypt the traffic. Basically, this is security 101: protect data at rest and protect data in flight. So, sorry but I think the better subject for discussion would be how badly Google screwed up, not how evil is NSA. M…

I can't agree with that, this was on Google's on fiber connections between their own data centers, right? And no other company with multiple data centers encrypts all traffic between them, right? (maybe you'll find a small counterexample but no big one.) So I don't think this is "security 101".

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#72
post #9

Appreciate Mike speaking up like this. We need more people within the industry to speak up. Not just hackers. (People within these companies are also hackers, but they have more effect when they speak because they are part of a company)

I agree, but I do wonder what is going to happen when people start speaking up to say something quite the opposite. "I don't speak for my employer, but I think the NSA is quite awesome and I don't mind that they've been listening to us at all." Or something to that effect. The clash might be interesting to watch.

With the increasingly alarming NSA plans being revealed, if someone thinks NSA is doing a good job, they deserve to be fired. His thoughts and opinion doesn't give him the rights to have public data available to governments. This, ofcourse, assumes that he is into Security Team at some well known company.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#73
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, what kind of spy uses gmail? Sheesh. The kind that is trying to maintain cover as a non-spy so uses the same email services as everybody else.

Sure but only an idiot uses their personal email account for work, right? Especially if your work can get you killed.

The point being made isn't that they would send sensitive data using gmail, it's that if they were compromised the NSA would most likely be reading the emails, and hacking Google would theoretically let the Chinese know if cover was blown if they could see evidence of the NSA listening in.

Of course, that means the joke's on them, because the NSA was listening to everyone...

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#74
post #52

Lets start from the beginning: the NSA "hack" became possible because Google (and its security team) made bad assumptions about the security of the connection between Google's data centers and did not encrypt the traffic. Basically, this is security 101: protect data at rest and protect data in flight. So, sorry but I think the better subject for discussion would be how badly Google screwed up, not how evil is NSA. M…

> Lets start from the beginning: the NSA "hack" became possible because Google (and its security team) made bad assumptions about the security of the connection between Google's data centers and did not encrypt the traffic.

The assumption isn't bad - it's a private network line, not a public internet connection. Nobody else had access to that line, at least they weren't supposed to. Splicing a fiber line is a bit outside the scope of your random attacker. You can't blame Google for not anticipating a hostile break-in by the government. The discussion should absolutely, 100% be directed at the NSA here. To accept that a private network connection is open season for the government to tap is batshit insane.

> Moreover, it is not clear if other governments or criminals also had access to the users' data (e.g. in Google's data centers located outside of the US). So far Google did not produce any public post-mortem thus we have no clue how bad was the problem.

How is Google supposed to tell you if they themselves didn't know?

Although from the leaks it sounds like everyone is fucked thanks to the GCHQ and the NSA getting friendly with each other.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#75
post #68
post #52

Lets start from the beginning: the NSA "hack" became possible because Google (and its security team) made bad assumptions about the security of the connection between Google's data centers and did not encrypt the traffic. Basically, this is security 101: protect data at rest and protect data in flight. So, sorry but I think the better subject for discussion would be how badly Google screwed up, not how evil is NSA. M…

Would you still feel Google had screwed up if the way the US government got the data was to burglarize one of their datacenters and tap directly into the machines' CPUs and memory buses?

Yes (search for SSAE16 or SAS70). However, I would not feel the same way if US government would have used Area 51 technology to hack 4096 public key encryption. The difference from my perspective is that in "burglary" scenario (and un-encrypted traffic scenario as well) Google failed to protect against well known threats. And in the "alien technology" case Google did everything you can at the known security/technology level and the failure came from aliens (aka an "unexpected technology advances").

Basically, I think Google's decision to do not encrypt the traffic is a gross negligence and I would love to see how someone would sue Google for it.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#76
Oh, the hypocrisy....

> "Bypassing that system is illegal for a good reason."

Yes, so is invasion of privacy. Yet Google has no problem breaking the law and violating civil rights for profit.

> "Unfortunately we live in a world where all too often, laws are for the little people."

Yeah, like tax laws and privacy laws...

If you want to get on this high horse, you shouldn't be working for Google.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#77
post #71
post #52

Lets start from the beginning: the NSA "hack" became possible because Google (and its security team) made bad assumptions about the security of the connection between Google's data centers and did not encrypt the traffic. Basically, this is security 101: protect data at rest and protect data in flight. So, sorry but I think the better subject for discussion would be how badly Google screwed up, not how evil is NSA. M…

I can't agree with that, this was on Google's on fiber connections between their own data centers, right? And no other company with multiple data centers encrypts all traffic between them, right? (maybe you'll find a small counterexample but no big one.) So I don't think this is "security 101".

Well, I do :) Moreover, I encrypt all the traffic even inside the same data center.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#78

My feeling is that the NSA/GCHQ hack was arguably an unfortunate thing for them to do, although somewhat predictable, once one knows of the existence of the network topology vulnerability that was exploited. But presumably somewhere in Google someone knew about this possibility sometime back. I wonder whether there was an assumption that nobody would be clever enough to figure things out, or whether security engineer…

[deleted]

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#79
post #13
post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do people assume the Chinese government is not able to use similar techniques?

I would assume they use similar techniques within China and perhaps allied countries like North Korea and Cuba, but the US is performing wiretapping in at least the UK, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Also, how much non-Chinese Internet traffic passes through China?

http://hidemyass.com/proxy-list/

I'm sure lots of botnets use China servers as well.

Re: Google Security Team Member on NSA: "Fuck These Guys"

#80
post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The RPC protocol is stated to be based on protocol buffers so the encoding is known. What you would need to do to reverse engineer it is coming up with matching message descriptions. But, even without that piece of the puzzle, reverse engineering a protocol that doesn't use encryption wouldn't be "extremely difficult". This is not an indication of an inside man. https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/docs/ove…

The only published information is how the values are encoded, not what is encoded (the specifications aren't transported together with the data) so to crack 1622 different protocols only involved in authorization according to the NSA slide is not such a small task, at least if they are interested in more than just recognizing e-mail addresses which can be found using regexps. And just counting the protocols proves th…

The screenshots of the ascii dump of the RPC calls shown in the WaPo article show that there is tons of information to work with, besides just the email account.

You're talking about the NSA here, an outfit which has cracked the cryptosystems of foreign governments in a variety of foreign languages, and even cracked a Russian one-time-pad that they had accidental;y used more than once.

I don't think it's very hard at all for them to reverse engineer RPC serialization that is not even encrypted if they can crack cryptosystems.

Post reply on HN