Hacktivismo to Release Steganography Tool 204
Anonymonkey writes: "According to this story at , a group called Hacktivismo will release a steganographic tool called Camera/Shy at H2K2 this year. Apparently, it will make it easy for persecuted political groups to hide messages in images. The group has links to the Cult of the Dead Cow, which is, of course, working on Peek-a-Booty."
Hm... (Score:1, Troll)
What do they mean by persecuted anyway? One could argue that the Taliban/Al Qaeda are persecuted political groups...
Re:Hm... (Score:2, Interesting)
You're absolutely right! (Score:5, Insightful)
Cheers
-b
Re:You're absolutely right! (Score:1)
Re:You're absolutely right! (Score:1, Interesting)
What rights have you lost under the patriot act?
Re:You're absolutely right! (Score:4, Informative)
In summary:
So basically, if you don't particularly want the rights given to you by the First and Fourth Amendments to the Constitution, then the Patriot Act is a Good Thing(TM)(R)(C)
Read another way (Score:1)
Due process appears to be intact.
Re:You're absolutely right! (Score:2)
No, but running them down with my car shouldn't be a crime.
Seriously, blocking ambulances or emergency vehicles are "acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws". Do so, and I hope you get a nice long jail term.
Section 213 of the Act authorizes federal agents to conduct "sneak and peek searches," or covert searches of a person's home or office that are conducted without notifying the person of the execution [within a "reasonable period", ie 90 days] of the search warrant until after the search has been completed.
Right. Because if you TOLD criminals you were going to search their places ahead of time, they'd do NOTHING to remove evidence.
I'm not going to bother with the rest of your paranoia, because it mostly comes down to "Republicans are evil incarnate, and can't be trusted like those oppressive regimes that I love."
-jon
Re:You're absolutely right! (Score:1)
Re:You're absolutely right! (Score:2, Insightful)
Just an exageration meant to show that your argument does not necessarily hold. You can get rid of some things for the greater good, without infringing on regular people's rights. You don't always have to go by precedent, you can judge actions on their own merit.
Re:You're absolutely right! (Score:2)
Sure, some things are more dangerous or prone to dangerous use than others, but fact is, if someone's really looking to do evil shit, they will find a way to use a spoon if they have to. If "outlawing any implement that could possibly be used for evil" is the philosophy, you have to outlaw everything from nuclear bombs to napkins. Pure and simple.
That was my point, and I'll stick by it.
Cheers
-b
Re:Hm... (Score:2)
Technology, ANY technology, helps your enemies as effectively as it helps your friends. Get over it.
Re:Hm... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Falon Gong... (Score:2, Redundant)
That's correct, but it could also work for groups like the Falun Gong. The Falun Gong is a religous movement that has suffered much oppression [cnn.com] in China [gateway2china.com].
Every coin has two sides... (Score:2, Interesting)
The Falun Gong is a religous movement that has suffered much oppression in China.
Of course, one could also argue that Falun Gong is a doomsday cult which preachs racism [gospelcom.net]. I assume that PRC's government believes that, aside from the implications of competing with a powerful organization full of people with martyr complexes, their actions are little different from Germany's treatment of the Church of $cientology [hypermart.net] and the United States' treatment of Branch Davidians, for example.
Re:Hm... (Score:2)
Re:Hm... (Score:1)
Both are effective means of communicating covertly, but they are two separate things.
Re:Hm... (Score:1, Insightful)
It's not the first wheel. (Score:3, Interesting)
Will it do anything differently than the rock-solid and famous OutGuess" [madchat.org] ?
Re:It's not the first wheel. (Score:2)
The articles says... (Score:1)
personally i think this is a good project BUT once again im afraid we may have to defend it from the same old DMCA/PATRIOT nonesense...
Hey jackass... (Score:1)
Re:Hey jackass... (Score:2)
From the article:
Hacktivismo says Camera/Shy will also use encryption, suggesting keys will be needed to reveal secret information in full.
Traffic analysis (Score:5, Insightful)
That can be enough to tip off the wrong someone.
Likewise, if you start sending graphic files back and forth where you USED to be sending other types of traffic, whatever entity might be watching those transmissions is likely to catch on. Let's not even go INTO how you're sending MORE data rather than less. Me, I'd be shooting for a method that breaks the communication up, sends it in with a bunch of other garbage to multi-pointed destinations at random times, strongly encrypted en-route so sender and receiver are masked...
Oh wait, that sounds a lot like a mixmaster remailer.
And yes, I know, mixmaster and PGP are not an option for environments where the very use of same is enough to get you drawn and quartered.
Re:Traffic analysis (Score:2)
I would think you wouldn't send any data directly to B at all... you'd merely set up an account on eBay and start selling some junk... but in the pictures of the junk, you hide your steganographied secret messages. Your buddies pose as eBay buyers, and occasionally read your page (along with many others, for cameoflage)... but when they read your page, they "Save Image As..." and extract the secret messages.
For them to reply back to you, the same process is done in reverse. It would take a pretty sharp government to catch on to this, I think....
Re:Traffic analysis (Score:2)
Re:Traffic analysis (Score:2)
Absolutely true !
And sometimes human rights activists get arrested because they spoke to the wrong person.
You are talking about mistakes here. If you embed messages in images you don't want to bring attention to those images by sending them off in a email. Instead you make them a part of some normaly looking webpage and let everyone download it. That is what is so cool about steganography, nobody will know about the secret message, and even if they know they can't find it unless they know the secret.
Re:Traffic analysis (Score:2, Insightful)
The Burma Solution (Score:2)
Basically, from what I've heard, 10% of the adult population of Burma are secret police informants, either willingly or through coercion. You can never be sure who your real friends are, and no activity involving more than one person can be secure. More importantly (to this discussion), unlicensed possession of a modem is severely punished [ahrchk.net]. So, in Burma, stego, crypto, and traffic analysis are all effectively obsolete. Only "trusted" people and organizations get internet access, with the understanding that they will be watched closely. Everyone else lives in medieval isolation (except for working for PepsiCo), cut off from the rest of the world, with far fewer human rights than even the citizens of China.
Re:Traffic analysis (Score:2)
In which case Alice, Bob, Chris, Denise and Edward don't communicate directly at all. Instead they use some method to broadcast their steganography disguised messages in a way that will be seen by lots of people.
Well, I don't see anything too different here! (Score:1)
So, basically the author had to paste together some code for a front end gui that manages the stenographic encoding with the key based encryption.
I don't even see how this is going to change anthing or be relevant to those indivuals who use combinations of both at present time.
Although, I can see myself downloading this when it's released so I can send a test out. But c'mon...
Dumb, DUMB idea (Score:5, Insightful)
I am afraid unless Hacktivismo is really careful and knows what they're doing, their program may get some human rights workers tortured and killed. By careful, I mean don't even mess with embedding messages in jpg images. It might be reasonably safe to embed them in audio or video streams at very low bit rates, like one bit per several seconds of 44 khz 16 bit PCM audio or mini-DV video. And even that would take sophisticated encoding to keep detection difficult.
Reference: Security Engineering by Ross Anderson, reviewed on Slashdot a few months ago.
Re:Dumb, DUMB idea (Score:2, Insightful)
It isn't hard for to come up with conventional cryptography that is robust against normal attacks. The technology is well understood and can be engineered to be robust against virtually any conventional cryptographic attack. Similarly, steganography is fairly well understood. Even if the government could detect that images or audio files were being used as a covert channel, they would be unable to break the underlying encryption. It would be vastly easier for them to just imprison and torture people into revealing their activities than to assume a technological attack.
Individuals in these countries are exercising a form of civil disobedience, and it is important that they continue to do so. If oppressive governments are forced to spend all their efforts to detect and eliminate perceived threats, it divides their power and makes it more difficult to hide their clandestine misdeeds.
Re:Dumb, DUMB idea (Score:3, Insightful)
Cryptography is broken if the attacker can read a message, but steganography is broken if the attacker can detect the message. The consequences of either type of break are just as bad. So using detectable steganography is as bad as using weak cryptography.
There are lots of strong cryptography programs like PGP out there, and well-informed users also know that there's a lot of cryptographic snake oil and understand what snake oil is. But many of the same people think they can blatantly mess around with GIF color tables (etc.) and not get noticed. They are wrong and they are asking for trouble. I haven't seen a steganography program yet whose use in messages isn't pretty easy to detect if you know how the program works. Steganography programs are almost all snake oil. I'd want to see very convincing evidence that the Hacktivision program isn't snake oil before letting anyone trust their life to it.
Re:Dumb, DUMB idea (Score:2)
Re:Dumb, DUMB idea (Score:2)
I suspect that it'll actually be repressive regimes that do that, not Hacktivismo. Incidentally, where can we find the steganography tools that you've made publically available?
This is misleading. (Score:2, Insightful)
Why just 'persecuted political groups'? (which I hope isn't another name for a terrorist organization). The article says that it is easy to use. Which means that you and I can communicate with each other securely, with no one eavesdropping. It's neither a good or bad thing, it's a tool. This tool can be used for good and bad.
I really think that this post was implying that terrorists will take advantage of this tool. Drop this terrorism crap. Terrorists use many other mundane things to cause damage, why not make a big deal about those items too.
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
Re:This is misleading. (Score:1)
Personally, I dont think he was talking about Terrorism. You people gotta get your mind off that shit. Life does not revolve around terrorists
No, it just ends with 'em.
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
Indeed. It tends to end around them.
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
Why just 'persecuted political groups'? (which I hope isn't another name for a terrorist organization).
Sigh, you are American, right ?
*Everybody* is either a a terorrist or supporting terrorism !!!!!! Get this into your head !!! It only depends on from which side you are looking.
Do you think that Afghans who lost their relatives to American cluster bombing think you are not supporting terrorism if you supported the Afghan war ???
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
Let me repeat this for the billionth time:
TERRORISTS INTENTIONALLY ATTACK CIVILIAN TARGETS TO ADVANCE A POLITICAL AGENDA.
Americans weren't targeting civilians on purpose in Afghanistan. If they were, a few nukes would have solved any problem with bin Laden real quick, and the collateral damage wouldn't have mattered. But since it DOES matter, the US has been doing things the hard way.
Notice that the US apologized for attacking a wedding by accident (the funny thing is that no one can find the graves for the 40 people supposedly killed in the attack. A two day search turned up only 5 graves), even though the people were firing weapons (and possibly an anti-aircraft gun) in the air in the middle of a war zone. See, that's because the US is the good guys and regrets killing innocents. I don't remember the al Qaeda apology for killing 3,000 Americans with those airliners. Do you?
-jon
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
The US doesn't target hospitals in war. Saddam and Slobo, however, liked to put military instalations in civilian locations. That's a violation of the Geneva conventions, but brainwashed idjits like you don't want to call them on it. To you, the US is the root of all evil.
The US could easily kill virtually the entire population of the Arab world in about a half-hour. Why doesn't it, if it's as evil as you think?
Terrorism only equals war to a coward. And civilians are killed at a lower rate in modern war.
-jon
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
If you are incapable of telling the difference between thugs and defending yourself from thugs, then I pity you. You've probably been ruined by some teacher or professor and you're too weak-minded to think for yourself and realize their foolishness.
-jon
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
Tsk, tsk .. ;-) .. It looks like *you* were the one who was making the claims, and I was calling you on them ..
Let's scroll back 1 post
On the topic that everybody is a terrorist, depending from which side you are looking You wrote:
TERRORISTS INTENTIONALLY ATTACK CIVILIAN TARGETS TO ADVANCE A POLITICAL AGENDA
And I replied (and asked for some examples):
Yes, ? And are you claiming that there is *ANY* army on this planet that doesn't attack civilian targets in times of war ?? Please, name one !!
Take the american army operations in Yugoslavi for example. And watch the Americans do it again in Iraq, any time now. But since it looks like you didn't understand my argument, I'l rephrase it: "If all of group (G) does X, you can't claim that doing X makes you a T without applying the definition to all of G)."
You also made the (unsupported) claim:
Americans weren't targeting civilians on purpose in Afghanistan
And I replied:
This is a almost meaningless statement. They surely "targeted" and their "targets" were purely "civilians" and they surely had a good "purpose" for dropping them bombs.. What are you trying to claim ?
If you are incapable of telling the difference between thugs and defending yourself from thugs, then I pity you.
And where does this fit into the discussion ?? For Al-Qaida the Americans are the 'thugs', right ? I realy, realy don't understand what you are trying to explain.
You've probably been ruined by some teacher or professor and you're too weak-minded to think for yourself and realize their foolishness
I regularly look over my belives and 'truths', so I welcome any logical arguments that you mights have, but so far you have just whined and tried (without success) to attack everything else except my statements.
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
And it is a war crime to place military facilities in civilian locations. That's what Iraq does, and that's what the Taliban did. Heck, the Taliban was abusing Red Cross facilities, stealing supplies and storing weapons there. They also stored weapons in Mosques. What great men you defend.
Al-Qaeda is, quite simply, insane. They want to establish a world-wide Islamic caliphate, presumably with bin Laden as the Caliph. They are mad that Saudi Arabia asked US troops to defend it against Iraq. They are mad that the British and French carved up the Ottoman Empire. They are mad that Ferdinand and Isabella defeated the Moors in Spain in freaking 1492. All of these complaints have NOTHING to do with the US. But the US is the target, because it's the lynchpin of the modern world.
So, if you're ready to worship bin Laden, you keep rooting for al Qaeda. I'm hoping those fucks are exterminated soon. Let's call it a difference of opinion.
-jon
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
Of course, by definition, everything that is blown up, is a part of the "war effort". It wouldn't be blown up otherwise. You have a talent of making silly definitions.
The US, went after almost anything that could be defined as even remotely political, and boombed it. That included all and every property that was owned by Slobodan's supporters. That's how war works.
And it is a war crime to place military facilities in civilian locations.
I often think about why the American governament offices are found in the same buildings as nurseries etc ... (remember the Oklahoma bombing ?)
Al-Qaeda is, quite simply, insane. They want to establish a world-wide Islamic caliphate, presumably with bin Laden as the Caliph.
You shouldn't belive everything that the US propaganda-machine spits out. Bin Laden and supporters want to make Islamic states more fundamental, and they don't want the western world to be in their way. They have no interest in making your country Islamic.
They are mad that Saudi Arabia asked US troops to defend it against Iraq.
True. Well, they are mad because the US did it.
They are mad that the British and French carved up the Ottoman Empire.
True.
All of these complaints have NOTHING to do with the US. But the US is the target, because it's the lynchpin of the modern world
Well, you forgot:
They are mad because of the thousands of islamic people killed by the American army in Iraq.
They are mad because of the sufferings of the Iraqian people by US imposed sanctions.
They are mad because of endless unilateral US support for Israel.
They are mad because of how Israel was created by the US (and UK).
They are mad because of how the US protects the governments in Saudi and Kuwait against it's own people, and prevents those countries from changing.
They are mad because of how the US has financed wars (Iran/Iraq for example).
So, if you're ready to worship bin Laden, you keep rooting for al Qaeda. I'm hoping those fucks are exterminated soon. Let's call it a difference of opinion.
And then what ?? Do you cincerely belive that if you could press a button and kill all of AlQaida today, that America's problems would go away ??
The 9/11 attack was a *revenge* attack, not *first blod* as certain people would like you to belive. (and indeed many Americans belive so)
And no, I am not worshipping Bin Laden, just because I see his point doe not mean that I agree with him on how to correct the problems.
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
Anyone who equates putting anti-aircraft guns on the roofs of apartment buildings and chemical weapon factories in hospitals with putting nurseries in a building that manages Social Security paperwork is a loony.
Anyone who can ignore the hundreds of thousands killed in the inter-Muslim wars (Iran/Iraq, Iraq/Kuwait, Lebanon, Syria against its own population) and be mad that the US drove Iraqis out of Kuwait under a UN mandate with Arab countries as allies is a loony.
Anyone who think that the US is responsible for "suffering" from sanctions is a loony. Why aren't the Kurds suffering in their autonomous regions, given that they're under the same sanctions? Where is Saddam getting the money to give to the families of Palestinian Islamikazies? Maybe, just maybe, Saddam is starving his own people on purpose, and idiots like you are too stupid to figure this out.
The US' "unilateral support" argument is a canard. There was a great article on the history of US-Israeli relations in the Economist (a magazine noted for its anti-Israel bias). A hate-monger like you won't bother to read it, but anyone else can find it at: http://www.dean.usma.edu/socs/ir/ss307/readings/ne gotiations%20exercise/the%20unblessed%20peacemaker .htm
The US and UK didn't create Israel. This is more loony speak. The UN did. Sorry to burst your crazy bubble,but I'm sure facts just bounce off of it.
Protecting the Saudis and the Kuwaitis is now grounds for killing office workers in New York. The view into your loony world is amazing.
And why is a loony like you mad at the US for the war between Iran and Iraq? Didn't the USSR, France, England, and a host of other countries supply weapons to both sides? More crazy excuses from a hate monger.
America's problems with terrorists aren't limited to Al Qeada. They're caused by a backwards, hate-filled culture that doesn't want to own up to its own faults and would rather blame everything on the magic bogeymen of Jews and America. There was a fascinating report put together by Arab intellectuals this week that pointed out that Spain translates more books in a year than the entire Arab world has translated in the last 1,000 years. 65 million Arabs out of 280 million are illiterate. There isn't a single Arab democracy. This is a damaged society that wants to pull the rest of the world down to its level rather than improve itself. When Arabs start trying to fix their own problems, America's problem with terrorism will subside.
Now go off to your cave, beat a woman, and blame Jews for your miserable lot in life.
-jon
Re:This is misleading. (Score:2)
? makes what easier ?? I sincerely hope that you haven't been losing sleep or felt depressed because of our little discussion here ?
Anyone who .. bla bla bla .. is a loony
Anyone who .. bla bla bla .. is a loony
Anyone who think that the US is responsible for "suffering" from sanctions is a loony.
Please. I see you are becoming desperate .. but I will still try to discute with you..
Iraq's neighbours, and Iraq's history of war with them, do not allow Iraq to just turn it's army into boyscouts. Iraq, just like Iran and the USA *needs* an army to protect it's interests. You can't realisticly expect them to stop running their army and stop buying and developing weapons.
It's not Disneyland out there.
So when the US imposed sanctions just allow Iraq to sell enough oil to feed it's population, the population will starve. That's reality. Expecting anything else is just beliving in spiritual pipedreams.
I'd realy like to read the article you gave the link to but I can't seem to get it to work. Could you please either repost it or send it to "agust @ BioDef. org" ? Thanks. We could also take the discussion to email if you feel like continuing it.
The US and UK didn't create Israel. This is more loony speak. The UN did. Sorry to burst your crazy bubble,but I'm sure facts just bounce off of it.
You should take some anger-management classes, it might help you.
UN, had just been founded and was a great too for those who won WWII to implement their ideas about the world in the name of "everybody". Saying that "UN did it" is like saying "the computer did it". It's just a tool. And at the time it were the UK and USA who called the shots.
And don't forget that the land where Israel is now, was a political part of UK at the time.
Protecting the Saudis and the Kuwaitis is now grounds for killing office workers in New York.
Welcome to reality. Well, it wasn't exactly that the US was protecting "the Saudis" and "the Kuwaitis", but more *which* Saudis and Kuwaitis they were protecting (the families who control) If only the US would realise what effects their war efforts are having in far-away countries.
The view into your loony world is amazing.
Unless you are some kind of a spirit or ghost, it's your world also. No wait a minute.. You actually think that I agree with those terrorist attacks ??????? What on earth gave you that idea ?? I'm explaning *why* things did happen. And although I can see the other side of the coin, I don't agree with all of it. And I absolutely don't agree with killing civilians, although I can understand *why* they are the targets.
And why is a loony like you mad at the US for the war between Iran and Iraq? Didn't the USSR, France, England, and a host of other countries supply weapons to both sides? More crazy excuses from a hate monger.
Ahh, yes clearly you think that by showing you a different view I was agreeing with that view. Ahh no. I am simply showing that the US is not doing the right things to let this particular problem go away. The deep hate against the USA.
And although I hold no such deep hate I can see why the US are doing things like they do. (Economical interests) But I don't agree with what they are doing.
Back to your "arguments", your arguments aren't even arguments. You can't justify a bad deed by saying "everybody does it". That is exactly what is putting many American companies into hot accounting-water right now. (and propably some people in jail).
There isn't a single Arab democracy. This is a damaged society that wants to pull the rest of the world down to its level rather than improve itself. When Arabs start trying to fix their own problems, America's problem with terrorism will subside.
You are starting to see the light here. As well as some US officials are starting to see the light. The US could have changed the above problems you mention, a long time ago instead of supporting sheiks and oil barons. All in the name of cheap oil. And it's paying off real cool, now that the arab population is all up in arms against America, but the oil countries are to afraid to use the oil as a political negotiation tool against America. Because, after all, it is America who has hept them in power. (and likely will keep them in power)
It is in America's best interest to keep the arab countries up in arms against each other and to keep the dictators in power (at least until they start turning agains America).
And that is the thing that has to change, I think that if anything positive can come out of the 11th sept attacks, it will be changing what is in USA's best interests !
Please post the URL again, I'm always interested in reading well reasoned articles.
-RE
Hiding Essays and Exams in Prono (Score:2, Funny)
Sites such as the Internet Paper Mill [coastal.edu] and Term Papers [termpapers.com] will start to have to list EssayWritingChicks.com
Now we should be able to hide from these guys.
Plagiarism.com [plagiarism.com]
Plagiarism.org [plagiarism.org]
Wordcheck [wordchecksystems.com]
Integriguard [integriguard.com]
Eve [canexus.com]
Practical utility of steganography? (Score:2)
But, what's the practical application? Surely traffic analysis makes stuff like this pretty lame for routine use? Yes, you can hide one message, or a few, but how do you have a conversation using this kind of technology and not stick out for emailing huge JPEGs back and forth?
What do you do? Have a competition to photoshop images? Run a porn site?
I'm just not convinced this is the way to go for real applications.
Re:Practical utility of steganography? (Score:1)
But, what's the practical application? Surely traffic analysis makes stuff like this pretty lame for routine use? Yes, you can hide one message, or a few, but how do you have a conversation using this kind of technology and not stick out for emailing huge JPEGs back and forth? What do you do? Have a competition to photoshop images? Run a porn site?
Simple, post a pr0n picture (with hidden message) to usenet and put a subject like "Any1 have more pictures of her!", your correspondant gets the message, make another pr0n picture (with hidden response) and post it to usenet with subject "Requested: a picture of that chix, request more" and so on.
I see it everyday on pr0n newsgroups, err, no that I go there everyday, but errr, well gotta go!
Re:Practical utility of steganography? (Score:1)
IE Only (Score:1)
Interesting (Score:1)
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
That's not stego at all. Here's an article to explain it [techtarget.com].
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
"Persecuted Politcal groups"? (Score:1)
"Persecuted" has emotional context (Score:1)
Meanwhile back at MI5 research park . . . . . . . (Score:2, Funny)
Q Ok pay attention Bond there have been some developments in secret codes since you last came through. I'd like to tell you about our latest wheeze for getting messages back to HQ by e-mailing pictures of Anna Kournikova.
Bond You mean the tennis player named after an Internet virus?
Q The very same. What you need to do is put your message into a very small dot, a micro dot in fact . .
Bond And stick the dot onto a Kournikova photo?
Q Exactly.
Bond Why Kournikova? apart from the obvious?
Q Well that's the devilish part. You see noone will suspect that the picture is anything other than a virus so it will be blocked and deleted.
Bond While all your team will have the perfect excuse to examine Kourno pictures in extreme detail. Now that is devilish cunning. Who invented this stuff?
Q Ah well they used to call themselves the Cult of the Dead Cow but its really a SMERSH front
Bond I see . . . . . .
Don't use this with E-mail (Score:3, Interesting)
Some people are talking about traffic analysis, but it seems to me that the best way to use this would be to post images on the web (ideally, with no HTML files linking to them).
In each message, you'd give a URL to the location of your next transmission. Maybe also a date and time period when it will be available.
And, if you used public web access points like internet cafes to transmit and receive your images, your activity would probably be pretty darned hidden.
Just a thought off the top of my head.
Re:Don't use this with E-mail (Score:2)
To truly be anonymous... find a good open proxy, post it to the web and update your message in your logo pic etc.
Slashdot could be transmitting information to someone with their masthead daily... I say use fortune to give users a cool msg and viola.
What about Usenet? (Score:1)
I mean, seriously, how carefully is Uncle Sam going to keep tabs on alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.bin_laden_and_a_goat ?
LSB Steganographic Techniques = Easy Detection (Score:3, Informative)
In the stego world this is roughly equivalent to using ROT13. If you try and hide any sizeable amount it's a joke to detect. There are many better methods- F5, SSIS, etc...
Re:LSB Steganographic Techniques = Easy Detection (Score:2)
Damn. Oh well, I guess I'll just use the tool you released. Where can I get it?
speaking in secret is not freedom of speech (Score:2)
Freedom of speech is being able to go in the center of a public square and say whatever you want. It's being able to put your ideas on the front page of a newspaper or pamphlet and distribute it without fear of persecution.
That being said, this may be a useful tool for some people, but I doubt it will be undetectable. Steganography is a tough problem. And encryption won't help you if the stego is detected, because the police will just put you in jail until you give them the key, since you must have something to hide when you use encryption...
Cracker groups shouldn't be taken too seriously. (Score:1)
steganography stuff. And really attack-safe steganography is beyond the abilities of these guys. Personally I think such groups just create
some PR-hype to found a little later a "security
company" and suck money out of clueless customers.
Just take a look at @Stake formerly l0pht.
And peek-a-booty ?
Rather peek-a-vaporware.
The "Cult of the Dead Cow" should rename itself to "Cult of Microsoft" for their 31337 v4p0rw4r1ng 5|<155.
Weapon of Choice (Score:3, Interesting)
But that doesn't mean I hate Camera/Shy. It's all about giving people more options to talk to each other. If someone's country has decided to filter what you know, restrict what you say and jail you for just thinking different, I'll give praise to any software, hardware, wetware, lotek or notek method for getting people talking to each other, even if it's just a ROT13 plugin for Eudora.
Peek-a-Booty (Score:2)
Now that I think about it. (Score:2)
Of course e-mail is out. But using a web site and splitting up your message throughout the images would be great.
Maybe as the images are layed out on the screen, the top one being part one, middle part two and so on.
A whole site can be used to hide anything from Decss to "anarchy" text files or plans to blow up shit.
Still, my favorite was the earlier suggested posting pr0n to newsgroups. See, before you "diss" this type of product get creative. The users will, the NSA will....
LSBs are okay, but text rules (Score:2)
I currently like the list of disco songs tool [wayner.org] because it doens't have the same statistical problems.
Also on The Register (Score:2, Funny)
Fav quote -
"If there were no state-sponsored censorship of the Internet, if Cisco et al weren't crack hoes for hire, if there were no democracy activists screaming for help -- hell, we could be off having fun instead of working long hours after our day jobs," Hacktivismo member and occasional Reg contributor Oxblood Ruffin told us
GIMP PLugin (Score:1)
there's also a rather nice Steganography Plugin for The GIMP [gimp.org].
1000 words (Score:2, Funny)
Thought we already knew that a picture tells a 1000 words...
here's a thought... (Score:1)
What Janet Reno had to say... (Score:1)
now... "Think about the terrorists" (i.e. taking away our rights)
peek-a-booty != CdC (Score:2)
The cDc and Peek-A-Booty
A commonly-perpetuated misconception about this project is that it is run by CULT OF THE DEAD COW (cDc). This is a myth that has been propagating since the projects inception. The Peekabooty project has its own open- source group, entirely separate from the cDc.
I'm at a loss here...
Why Bother? (Score:2, Insightful)
There are just too many ways of sending unencrypted / unhidden messages; adding more work just seems like a big hassle for the sender and recipient - as was said after 11/9/01, the reason that messages were not intercepted was because they were low-tech / plain text / whatever. It is quicker and easier to make it innocent-sounding except to those who know already. Any agency screening emails / web pages / whatever would have a lot LESS work to do if it just had an image scanner that decided if there was any potential code, then concentrating on those. As another poster said, checking if a pic does or doesn't have steganography involved is easy (though you then have to decode it) - would it not then be easier to have an image of unencoded text which would be easily readable only if you look at it, on an obscurely titled web page? No automated searcher would be able to read it, no human would ever know where to look unless they alredy knew where it was.
With email, text messaging, instant messaging, unlimited internet forums, the internet pages themselves, snail mail, telephone, telegraph, morse, hundreds of languages, and god-knows what other methods, there are just too may ways to transmit info to plough through these and find hidden messages.
I just don't see the point.
On another note - could terrorist emails be easily intercepted if the volume of traffic was reduced significantly? i.e. if spam was banned?
Re:Why Bother? (Score:2)
Given that various individuals with bugger-all resources have managed to build reasonably effective spam filters, I'd imagine that the NSA, with decades of experience in filtering wheat from chaff and with huge resources to throw at the problem, are probably very good at filtering out spam from their searches.
Unless terrorists disguise their messages as spam :)
Re:Why Bother? (Score:2)
Which is why mass interception isn't really very effective. Unless you know where to look in the first place you simply have a large quantity of utterly useless information. Yet after September the 11th there were calls for more automated interception, even when it was revealed that security services in the US lacked people who knew Arabic.
Great Research (Score:2)
The group has links to the Cult of the Dead Cow, which is, of course, working on Peek-a-Booty.
However if you visit the PeekABooty people:
A commonly-perpetuated misconception about this project is that it is run by CULT OF THE DEAD COW (cDc). This is a myth that has been propagating since the projects inception. The Peekabooty project has its own open-source group, entirely separate from the cDc.
Oh well
Re:Great Research (Score:2)
You're new around here, aren't you!
Beating "brute force computing power" (Score:2)
Any weakness of steganographic systems can be overcome.
For example; to beat brute force computing power only requires to have the message as an image of obfuscated text. There are several ways to do this; for one - think red-green colourblind eye test charts. It can also be multi-layered - each with seperate key. This would require manual viewing at every single attempt to crack it. The man hours required are too large to estimate.
P.S. The United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization and the United States Department are hiding the simple solution to uniquely identify all registered trademarks on the Internet. The answer to this problem has been ratified by honest Lawyers. I believe UN WIPO and US DoC to be corrupt.
If you have heard of the respected Dr. Milton Mueller, you may be interested in the conclusion of his recent report, Domain Name Trademark Disputes under ICANN's UDRP. My comments and link to it on ICANN forum [icann.org]. His conclusion matches what I told UN WIPO and Nominet UK [icann.org] over a year ago.
Please visit World Intellectual Piracy Organization [wipo.org.uk] - Not associated with visit United Nations World Intellectual Property Organization [wipo.org]
not by the cDc (Score:1)
anyone who had actually read the peek-a-booty website could have seen that.
more crack reporting by slashdot. sigh.
Counterintuitive (POSSIBLY DEADLY) features (Score:2, Interesting)
"Automatic scanning of Web pages for stegged and encrypted gif files."
It seems to me that this would allow those opposed to the use of this tool to use it to scan for sites that employ it for transmission of state censored information, hurting those this tool is supposedly meant to help, and helping those this tool is meant to circumvent. This of course would not let those entities decrypt and view the censored information, but just the knowledge of what sites, people, etc. are connected to an underground movement is enough to get somebody thrown into prison let alone killed.
steganography vs saganography? (Score:1)
Shit! This is serious, actually... (Score:1, Offtopic)
More islamic terror. You'd think they'd have some imagination, wouldn't you?
No, wait. Imagination, Creativity, Free Will. These are all PROHIBITED in the name of *spit* allah.
Re:Shit! This is serious, actually... (Score:2)
If you were capable of using any of those things, you'd probably be talking about other things, rather than using the easiest, most spineless rhetoric americans have been priviledged to in years.
Wait and find out what has happened, like people capable of using their brains do.
Re:He will! (Score:2)
I hate people who kill other people. I do not hate racial groups because a few of them killed people. By this logic, I can kill you, because Timothy McVeigh is an American Amry psycho. Does he represent americans?
Civilians Targeted (Score:1, Offtopic)
Two of the injured were in serious condition after the crash at Bonelli Park, said Capt. Brian Jordan, of the Los Angeles County Fire Department.
check your sources (Score:1)
Re:One civilian dead in plane attack (Score:1)
Re:Is this important news (Score:1)
Re:Is this important news (Score:1)
Re:Palestinian, Taliban, Pakistan, Libyan (Score:2)
I promise to say lots of nice things about islam so you get to spew your rhetoric all the time like I know you wanna. (Otherwise, when this all dies down, youll be bored from not getting to be so hateful and racist, a concern I know you have.)
Re:Your logic... (No, _your_ logic) (Score:2)
You are the true racist (Score:1, Troll)
Are you growing your beard nice and long now, in the hope of joining them?
Re:Yay.. (Score:1)
Re:new new special and new (Score:1)