Slashdot Mirror


US Government Using PS3s To Break Encryption

Entropy98 writes "It seems that the US Immigration and Customs Enforcement Cyber Crimes Center, known as C3, has replaced its '$8,000 Tableau/Dell server combination' with more efficient and much cheaper $300 PS3s. Each PS3 is capable of 4 million passwords per second, and C3 currently has 20 PS3s with plans to buy 40 more. Naturally this is only being used to break encryption on computers seized with a warrant and suspected of harboring child pornography."

61 of 570 comments (clear)

  1. What by sopssa · · Score: 4, Insightful

    being used to break encryption

    Each PS3 is capable of 4 million passwords per second

    Something doesn't match up. For first the different encryption schemes take different times to try even one password, and even more if you combine several of them together. Secondly you cannot try 4 million passwords in a second if its encrypted content, it takes a lot more than that.

    1. Re:What by edittard · · Score: 4, Funny

      Perhaps they're just hitting people with them?

      --
      At the bottom of the /. main page it says 'Yesterday's News'. Well they got that right.
    2. Re:What by plover · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's a news article featuring small sound bites and quotes. It's not an in-depth technological review. Nobody quoted the environment in which they benchmarking their tests: AES-128, 3DES, DES, or whatever.

      And yes you certainly could test 4 million passwords a second on these machines, but again it really depends entirely on what algorithm you're attacking.

      --
      John
    3. Re:What by Swift+Kick · · Score: 5, Informative

      You're right. The submitter didn't read the article (or lacked the reading comprehension to understand it).

      The article says that "the networked Playstation 3s can process 4 million passwords per second, cutting down on the time necessary to find the correct combination.". Nowhere does it say that a single PS3 can do that.

      --
      "We'll need 2000 crickets, 4 cans of Easy Cheese, and the fluid from 18 glowsticks for this plan to work...." - ph0n1c
    4. Re:What by blueg3 · · Score: 4, Informative

      You usually don't care what the variable encryption scheme is when you're cracking -- typically, there is a method of simply verifying that the password is accurate, which is what they're doing. (Brute-forcing keys is fairly foolish with modern encryption systems, but brute-forcing passwords isn't.)

    5. Re:What by commodore64_love · · Score: 2, Informative

      +1 funny? Or +1 informative.

      In the UK they lock you in jail for year-after-year until you give them the encryption key. So much for the right to be presumed innocent until PROVED guilty.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    6. Re:What by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      this commodore64_love is just trolling...

    7. Re:What by isama · · Score: 4, Interesting

      [sarcasm]You are guilty! You won't give us the key so you must be![/sarcasm]

    8. Re:What by Hatta · · Score: 3, Interesting

      All very accurate and informative. I still wonder about the numbers here. If I did my math correctly, (282 trillion posibilities, 4 million tries a second) you exhaust the search space in 816 days. That's over a year on average. And that's if they're using a simple 6 character alphanumeric password. Given that we all have a right to a speedy trial, this just doesn't seem like it would be ready in time for court. I think they'd do a lot better to use their sneak and peak warrant power to install key loggers.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    9. Re:What by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your passphrase should be quite a bit longer than eight characters if you care about your key at all.

    10. Re:What by MRe_nl · · Score: 3, Funny

      And that is why my password is"Pleasestophittingmeononotthewaterboardblipdoolpoolp"

      --
      "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
    11. Re:What by Apatharch · · Score: 2, Informative

      If by "year-after-year" you mean two years* then yes, you are correct. However, I get the feeling that's not what you intended to imply.

      * Or 5 years in terrorism-related cases

    12. Re:What by base3 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And the government backdoor would make this exercise unnecessary.

      --
      One CPU cycle wasted on digital restrictions management is ONE TOO MANY.
    13. Re:What by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 4, Funny

      "Look, we'll give you a PS3 if you tell us your password.

      "We'll even throw in the HDMI cable. We'll get it eventually; this way you and I can both go home before lunchtime."

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
    14. Re:What by ehrichweiss · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I must be missing something here. WHY would someone use the original app instead of one modified to remove said rate limit? I mean the limit itself is going to be artificially imposed with something like "sleep(5)", so "cracking" the binary would be trivial at best, and the first vector I would think. Again, am I missing something here?

      --
      0x09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0
    15. Re:What by theaveng · · Score: 3, Interesting

      +1 funny? Or +1 informative. In the UK they lock you in jail for year-after-year until you give them the encryption key. So much for the right to be presumed innocent until PROVED guilty.

      Sad but true. Refusal to share your encryption key or password is now illegal in Britannia.

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    16. Re:What by Ash+Vince · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why do you quote US sentences with other countries? "Innocent until proved guilty" comes from US, and while usually true elsewhere too, you seem to just flame with this shit again.

      Sorry to disapoint you but your legal system is only based on ours (I am a UK citizen). The presumation on innocence and the adversarial system you inherited just stems from english common law. Here is a link regarding presumption of innocence:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence

      Here is a link on english common law:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_law

      For the most part it is a reasonable system so your founding fathers chose not to change too much of it when they threw off the yoke of english rule.

      --
      I dont read /. to RTFA, I read /. to offend people in ignorance.
    17. Re:What by calmofthestorm · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No, you're right. They're doing offline attacks. If they had access to the computer while on they'd do a coldboot attack or something similar where they freeze ram in LN2, take it out, stick it in a chip analyzer (or liveboot the computer), and grab the delicious, delicious key material. Also, I believe windows lacks the ability to mark a page as do-not-swap* which means that sometimes you can grab the pagefile and find key material in it. Which is why you should use Ubuntu: Linux for Pedophiles:-)

      * My info is 8 years out of date. Could be wrong.

      --
      93rd rule of Slashdot: No matter how obvious my sarcasm is, my comment will be taken seriously by someone.
    18. Re:What by theaveng · · Score: 4, Funny

      +1 funny.

      What's your password?
      "Please stop hitting me."

      What's your password?
      "Please stop hitting me!"

      What's your password?
      "I TOLD you my password!"

      (smack). No you didn't! You're acting like a child. Stop playing these games. Tell us your password!
      "pleasetophittingme"!!!!!

      (smack). Oh great. He's unconscious.

      --
      FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
    19. Re:What by onionman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I must be missing something here. WHY would someone use the original app instead of one modified to remove said rate limit? I mean the limit itself is going to be artificially imposed with something like "sleep(5)", so "cracking" the binary would be trivial at best, and the first vector I would think. Again, am I missing something here?

      Yes, you are missing something, but it is a very common misconception. The "rate limit" is in the algorithm itself, not simply in the application which implements the algorithm.

      Here is an example to demonstrate how such a rate limit can be constructed. Begin with a rather fast and strong hashing algorithm such as SHA-256. Now SHA-256 operates in the Merkle-Damgaard chaining mode which is inherently serial, so what you can do to slow it down is to define your password authentication algorithm to be a SHA-256 hash of a "message" which is formed by appending your password with one-billion 32-bit unsigned integers which are just consecutive counter values. Since you don't actually have to store the counter values, this takes no additional memory to implement. Since the algorithm is strongly serial in nature, you can't short-cut the process without breaking SHA-256 (which would be very impressive). Even on the fastest processors, hashing a > 1Gig message with SHA-256 is quite time consuming... at least several seconds per attempt. This provides a very effective rate limit.

    20. Re:What by sydneyfong · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'll nitpick.

      The presumption of innocence does not really go that far back in the history of common law. If you bothered to read a bit further into the link you provided, you'll see that in the quoted case of Woolmington v DPP (decided in 1935) that the case was about overturning a principle of the "presumption of guilt" specifically:

      On appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal, Woolmington argued that the Trial judge misdirected the jury. The appeal judge discounted the argument using the common law precedent as stated in Foster's Crown Law (1762). ... In every charge of murder, the fact of killing being first proved, all the circumstances of accident, necessity, or infirmity are to be satisfactorily proved by the prisoner, unless they arise out of the evidence produced against him; for the law presumeth the fact to have been founded in malice, unless the contrary appeareth...

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woolmington_v_DPP

      *This* is the traditional common law, the one that the USA inherited.

      I'll argue that this Woolmington v DPP case changed the law significantly. At the very least, before this case was decided, the principle of presumption of innocence was not as entrenched as it were after the case. Arguably, this case established the doctrine of the presumption of innocence as we know it today.

      It's fundamentally some academic quirk on common law jurisprudence - under traditional common law principles, the law is "discovered", not "made" by judges. And thus, judges do have a tendency sometimes to "pretend" that all they're doing is applying existing legal principles, instead of changing the laws by setting a precedent. And then after the decision we'll have to accept that "common law was like that all along!", which is not really that accurate.

      Take note, I'm not intending to glamorize the US system (which I don't harbor complements), but just to set things straight. I do study the laws of your jurisdiction extensively, as a law student in Hong Kong.

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    21. Re:What by Spad · · Score: 3, Informative

      The best part of RIPA is that if you genuinely do no know the encryption key then the onus is on you to prove it, otherwise the assumption is that you do know and are simply witholding the information; off to jail for 5 years...

    22. Re:What by Chrisq · · Score: 4, Funny

      Could be worse, imagine if it was "fuck you, stupid customs official"

    23. Re:What by Spazztastic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Could be worse, imagine if it was "fuck you, stupid customs official"

      My secret answer for a gaming account was "Your moms box." When I called them up and had to change my information, the guy asked me and I immediately realized what it was. Good thing he had a sense of humor, otherwise he might have thought my childhood superhero was his mom's box.

      --
      Posts not to be taken literally. Almost everything is sarcasm.
    24. Re:What by Hognoxious · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually it's English. Magna Carta and all that.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    25. Re:What by PerfectionLost · · Score: 2, Funny

      Interrogator: "Look, we'll give you a PS3 if you tell us your password.

      "We'll even throw in the HDMI cable. We'll get it eventually; this way you and I can both go home before lunchtime."

      Prisoner: "There are no games for the PS3, couldn't you give me a Wii with 4 controllers?"

      Interrogator: "That's why this is torture."

  2. Call me paranoid, but by Eudial · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Naturally this is only being used to break encryption on computers seized with a warrant and suspected of harboring child pornography.

    ... suuuuuure.

    --
    GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
    1. Re:Call me paranoid, but by Totenglocke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Question: How does this get modded troll? Slashdot is known for it's blatant distrust of government surveillance, so how does pointing out that there's no reason to believe the government's claims that they won't use this for cracking anything but legally seized computers amount to trolling?

      --
      "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson
  3. Lovely encryption by Applekid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good to know when the Government is cracking the encryption implemented by the public it's "cracking down on child pornography." When it's the public cracking encryption implemented by corporations it's a violation of the DMCA.

    --
    More Twoson than Cupertino
  4. Re:Is this April 1st? by Rattenhirn · · Score: 4, Informative

    On the old (pre slim) PS3, you can install Linux legally and without any hard or soft mods. This was also possible with the old (pre slim, see the pattern?) PS2, if you bought a hard disk.

  5. Wow, 4 million passwords per second... by Animal+Farm+Pig · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, with a brute force attack, I've only got 36,030,233,524,592,808,479,552,335 years before they will reach mine!

    1. Re:Wow, 4 million passwords per second... by noidentity · · Score: 4, Funny

      So, with a brute force attack, I've only got 36,030,233,524,592,808,479,552,335 years before they will reach mine!

      Thanks, we'll just skip ahead to the password we would have be trying 36,030,233,524,592,808,479,552,335 years from now, and crack your encryption today!

  6. Nit-picking the article by davidwr · · Score: 3, Informative

    "He explained that the number of possible combinations in a six-digit password is 256 to the sixth power."

    Um, only if the person uses characters that can't be typed on a normal keyboard.

    In practice, the password "alphabet" is either 26, 52, 62, 84, or some other number not much above 84 characters. 84^6 is much less than 256^6.

    However, in practice, people who fear the cops will use a lot more than 6 digits.

    If the passwords are decent passphrases of, say, 6 words, taken out of a dictionary of even 2,000 common words, that's 2,000^6, or "still not that big of a number" as it's known in the security field. And that's if the person makes it easy by not using any spaces, using all lowercase, etc.

    The real smart crooks encrypt their stuff in a way that nothing short of banging them over the head with a $5 pipe wrench will ever reveal.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
    1. Re:Nit-picking the article by Wonko+the+Sane · · Score: 4, Informative

      Um, only if the person uses characters that can't be typed on a normal keyboard.

      If the smart crooks are using any version of Windows then they can access all extended characters from their normal keyboard by holding down the ALT key and typing the character code on the numeric keypad.

      I used character 255 back in the Windows 3.1 days to make directories that no one else could figure out how to get in to. (DOS had no problem but windows couldn't handle a file with that character in the name)

    2. Re:Nit-picking the article by PitaBred · · Score: 2, Funny

      Bang them over the head? I'd go for the kneecaps and extremities. Hitting someone over the head to get knowledge out of said head seems a little foolish...

  7. And the problem with this is??? by LWATCDR · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Really what is the problem with this. These computers are being searched AFTER a judge issues a search warrant. In other words constitutional law is being followed to the letter in this case.
    So what is the problem? Because it may involve child porn and you think that it is harmless? Well some of those computers have pictures of the victims "children" and the criminal act happening.
    There is nothing wrong with this legally.
    And having a fit about it is a clear case of calling wolf.
    I am sure this will be used in any investigation that involves a computer and not just for child porn.
    Complaining about the legal search of a computer after a warrant is issued is just stupid.

    BTW I am sure that the NSA has much better systems based on FPGAs and Cell chips for breaking encryption than PS-3s but we will never hear about those and that type of wiretap without a warrant is what I am worried about.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    1. Re:And the problem with this is??? by Hatta · · Score: 2, Informative

      Who said there was a problem?

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    2. Re:And the problem with this is??? by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >>>There is nothing wrong with this legally.

      Nope. Searches performed with the permission of a judge (warrant) are perfectly legal. ----- That's fine. It's the law that needs to be changed. IMHO there should actually be three stages - childhood, teenager, and adulthood. Then we'd no longer have the nonsense of teenaged boy/girlfriends being charged for "child porn" simply because they took photos of their own bodies. (For that matter nudity shouldn't even be illegal, regardless of age.)

      >>>wiretap without a warrant is what I am worried about.

      Agreed, As Judge Napolitano keeps repeating, the Patriot Act gives federal cops the ability to write their own warrants, without need to stand before a judge and swear an oath. That's just plain ridiculous.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  8. Re:Trust me. by turing_m · · Score: 2, Funny

    That is the only thing they use them for... Wink, wink, nudge, nudge, Know what I mean?

    Look... are you insinuating something?

    --
    If I have seen further it is by stealing the Intellectual Property of giants.
  9. It's fun to laugh but on a serious note by davidwr · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I knew a guy once who worked closely with anti-kiddie-porn cops. They rotated those guys off fairly quickly so they wouldn't go insane. What you see on Law & Order with the same cops doing the kiddie-smut patrol year in and year out may work for Munch and Stabler but it doesn't work in the real world.

    Also, in the real world I'll be a cop's donut you don't get to do that kind of work in a decent-sized department unless you are emotionally stable, in a stable romantic relationship with another adult or had one in your past for a long time, and have a history of not getting irrational and emotional at the sight of disturbing visuals, while at the same time not being stone-cold about it either.

    --
    Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
  10. Re:Right idea, poor execution by klingens · · Score: 2, Informative

    Sorry to inform you that your memory isn't serving you. The SPEs work in Linux just fine, it's the videocard that doesn't. In short, Sony doesn't want you to play games under Linux so no one can develop games that run on Linux (cirvumventing Sony's stranglehold on the hardware) for the PS3. Linux games wouldn't need to pay Sony for each game sold as the normal titles do.

  11. They aren't cracking Encryption! by rahvin112 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There is a difference between cracking encryption and the password used to secure the encryption. The article says they are using the systems to crack passwords, not encryption. The submitter has a reading problem.

  12. How does this work? by AP31R0N · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seems to me that a reasonably well designed OS would lock after 4 password attempts. How are they entering all these passwords w/o the system balking?

    i'm asking because i don't know, please don't mod me a troll for not knowing something.

    --
    Utilizing the synergization of benchmark e-solutions to pre-workaround action items!
    1. Re:How does this work? by cfalcon · · Score: 3, Informative

      If the government wants into your data, they have a copy of the data (presumably because they lawfully confiscated it with a warrant). The last thing they are doing is asking *your OS to unlock itself*. If they are fortunate enough to grab your machine while it is ON and, say, the screen is locked, then they can just read the RAM directly after using the hotplug thing that lets them transport your still-running computer to the lab, from your wall. No need to decrypt anything if the key is in memory.

      If instead your machine is deactivated and everything is off, they would run a program versus the actual data on the drive (or rather, on a COPY of the drive that they make). At no point would they run your OS, and obviously if you just have a bunch of data to try to crack, there's nothing to "lock"- the only code running is the cracking code, guessing solutions. However, I wouldn't think that brute force would actually crack any secure passwords ever.

  13. Hmmmm by Idiomatick · · Score: 4, Interesting

    With the planned 60 PS3s assuming they brute force it and worst-case. It will take them:

    At 8character passwords w/ letters and numbers only, 3.3hours.
    Upper and lower case increase that figure to 10.5days. (With 9 characters 7.15years)
    84character set brings us up to 119.5days.
    Note: I just used x^8 which isn't totally accurate, the numbers in reality are a bit larger but it doesn't matter much.

    This makes me wonder in case this is true. We are running up to a physical limitation in the human brain. People already have trouble memorizing the dozens of 8character passwords. 9 characters will hold moores law off for a few more years (not the precise meaning of moores law but you know what i mean). The problem is also that people are getting more accounts for things. Most people even today use the same passwords for a variety of things. I'd say almost all people.

    So I ask the /. crowd are there any good alternatives to passwords that are feasible? Something secure. Something that can be implemented on websites. What do you think we should be working towards? Is there already something in place that you can give an example of?

  14. This only works on poor passwords by Khopesh · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've done a lot of password-cracking math, even toyed with the idea of writing an academic paper on it. Generally, I work on the (generous) assumption that a well-groomed single node can chunk through 100k passwords per second and that things scale perfectly, so 20 nodes would work through 2M passwords per second. They're claiming their 20-node cluster can handle twice that, and I fully believe it. Powerful GPUs are known to perform extremely well on password cracking, and PS3s certainly have them. That's twice the performance for half to a fifth the cost. Nice, but not "OMG."

    They plan to scale up to 60 nodes, which is 12M pass/s. To break a 8-character monospace password (37 bits of complexity, which is pretty weak), it would take just under five hours ( 26^8/(12*10^6) /60/60 ). However, to break an 8-character alphanumeric password (case and numbers), that becomes seven months ( (26+26+10)^8/(12*10^6) /60/60/24/365*12 ).

    This is only scary when you have a super-intelligent dictionary attack. Scrape the hard drive and any subpoenaed documents for words and add that to a dictionary of common password parts, then perform your dictionary attack -- dreadfully powerful. To avoid falling victim to this, a good rule of thumb is that words are awesome to use, and they're more secure, but they're only about as secure as two random characters (three with a rich vocabulary including 3 or more of: arcane words, uncommon foreign words, uncommon misspelled words, uncommon proper nouns, l33t-speak ...). So that 13-char "secure password" you use that looks like metropolitan8 effectively only has three or four characters to a dictionary attacker, and that clever 14-char password of spageti4dinner has only five or six, depending on how good the attacker's dictionary is at misspelled words. A tip: put punctuation inside your words to break them up (without forming words), e.g. metr[opo;%litan8, and you've pretty much defeated the dictionary attack.

    --
    Use my userscript to add story images to Slashdot. There's no going back.
    1. Re:This only works on poor passwords by bertok · · Score: 5, Informative

      However, to break an 8-character alphanumeric password (case and numbers), that becomes seven months

      Ah... theory!

      In practice, even very long passwords are trivially cracked in little time, using simple methods.

      Unfortunately, I lost the source, but while studying cryptography myself, I stumbled upon a quote from some guy involved in government decryption in the US, and (paraphrasing), he said that their technique was basically to pick up the hard disk from the machine with the protected content, and then simply try every consecutive range of bytes as a password.

      Unless the disk was encrypted with 'whole disk encryption', it works something like 90% of the time, simply because of stupid software saving plain-text passwords, users reusing passwords for various purposes, things like hibernation and page files, etc... I suspect that on disks from corporate networks, it would work even better, because if any one disk reveals the network admin password, you can unlock everything else from there.

      So if you have a 100 GB disk, and you try all byte ranges from 4 to 20 bytes long (to account for various password lengths), and you try every byte range as both an ASCII and UTF-16 string, that's merely 17x2x100*10^9 = 3400 billion passwords to try, or 3.2 days at your quoted "12 million passwords per second".

      In practice, most disks would crack much faster than that, if you aim the algorithm at the most likely sources first, such as the page and hibernation files, the user registry, and the web browser cache and configuration folders.

      The lesson I took away from that is that against an attacker with physical access, it really doesn't make the slightest difference how strong your password is, unless the entire disk is encrypted.

  15. This is silly by Lord_Jeremy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Seriously, this whole article sounds like a load of horsebull. As far as I know, things like RSA and AES use integer math for the encryption and decryption schemes. It therefore doesn't make much sense to use a product designed for large numbers of floating point operations, as I would imagine the PS3 is. I'm actually pretty curious how many GMIPS the PS3 can perform. In any case, why would they pay for a device that contains all sorts of hardware ancillary to the core processing task. For instance, any gaming system is going to have a fairly powerful GPU, as well as extraneous RAM and sound hardware, etc. Also, in terms of the 4 million passwords or keys or whatever per second, I just wrote a very minimalist C program to try cracking passwords on an encrypted disk image I just created and it was definitely not reaching 4 million tries a second on my Core 2 Quad...

  16. Riiiight.... by Stanislav_J · · Score: 3, Funny

    Naturally this is only being used to break encryption on computers seized with a warrant and suspected of harboring child pornography.

    Naturally. (*wink-wink* *nudge-nudge* say no more...)

    --
    "Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
  17. Re:Big bad lawyers fron Sony by CronoCloud · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Installing Linux is a Sony supported function on the PS2 (fat model) and the PS3 (fat model), no hacks/mods needed.

  18. Re:Obama fails again... by ppanon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's pretty simple. The military courts are appropriate for combatants captured on a foreign field of battle. By trying KSM and the others in civilian courts (because the 9/11 victims were civilians on US soil), the case establishes a couple of things that neo-cons don't want to happen:

    a) since evidence obtained through torture is ineligible in civilian courts, the information used by the prosecution will be what was obtained before he was tortured. So when KSM gets convicted on the basis of all the incriminating information that was available prior to torture, it will be a strong indictment that the torture used on him was not necessary. The whole neo-con "we had to torture" argument is shown for the pack of lies it is. Since Cheney was the biggest proponent of torture, it's not surprising he's also the most opposed to this happening since a conviction changes his place in history from question mark to a sadistic torturer.

    b) it re-establishes the primacy of the standard US criminal justice system for acts committed on U.S. soil.

    Basically, if KSM and his buddies can be convicted and put in jail through the civilian courts, it means that the wholesale raping of the Geneva Convention, habeus corpus, and other civil rights by the (neo-con) Republicans was unnecessary. It also sets a strong counter-precedent in case the neo-cons (inevitably) try the whole "Permanent Emergency" gambit again.

    So yeah, the neo-cons and their water bearers like Lieberman are seriously against this and using FUD to slam the effort. Big surprise.

    --
    Laissez lire, et laissez danser; ces deux amusements ne feront jamais de mal au monde. - Voltaire
  19. A tip: by falconwolf · · Score: 2, Informative

    put punctuation inside your words to break them up (without forming words), e.g. metr[opo;%litan8, and you've pretty much defeated the dictionary attack.

    I tried that once and was told I could not use a punctuation mark. I mix alphanumeric characters though.

  20. Re:Obama fails again... by G-Man · · Score: 4, Insightful

    - All those officers and enlisted in the Pentagon would be surprised to know they are civilians.

    - Are they going to release KSM if he is acquitted? If not, this is just a show trial and a sham.

    - Whatever your stance on waterboarding, they didn't do it to KSM to get him to confess. They did it to acquire intel to prevent further attacks and/or take the battle to Al Qaeda.

    - During an interview with NBC tonight, the interviewer asked Obama if people would find it offensive that KSM would receive all the rights of an American citizen in a trial. Obama replied "I don't think it will be offensive at all when he's convicted and when the death penalty is applied to him." Pre-judging much? Tainting the jury?

    Come on. This is no trial in any real sense of the word. Other observers have pointed out that no one wants to see this guy walk, so the judges and prosecution will go through any contortion, no matter how ridiculous, to see him convicted. Whatever rulings they issue will then become precedent the Govt can use against everyday criminals (i.e., you and me).

    Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is the *enemy*. He cannot be rehabilitated. He cannot be reconstructed. He and his comrades would seek the overthrow of our system of government and its replacement with Sharia law. He is not a common criminal, and it is disrespectful to treat him like one - and you should always respect your enemy. Send him to his god and be done with it.

  21. Re:Obama fails again... by iamhigh · · Score: 3, Interesting

    - All those officers and enlisted in the Pentagon would be surprised to know they are civilians.

    The majority of casualties were civilian. This was not an act of traditional war. This is far, far different than the cut and dry battlefield that the Geneva Conventions were based on.

    - Are they going to release KSM if he is acquitted? If not, this is just a show trial and a sham.

    If 12 New Yorkers can't find this guy guilty, then I am pretty damn sure he didn't do it. And he will not be realeased in the US, no matter what.

    Come on. This is no trial in any real sense of the word. Other observers have pointed out that no one wants to see this guy walk, so the judges and prosecution will go through any contortion, no matter how ridiculous, to see him convicted. Whatever rulings they issue will then become precedent the Govt can use against everyday criminals (i.e., you and me).

    And neither was the case for the the unabomber, OKC bombing or any other big trial. This is no different. As for precedent... where do you live that planning (and following thru) to kill thousands isn't already firmly against the law?

    Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is the *enemy*. He cannot be rehabilitated. He cannot be reconstructed. He and his comrades would seek the overthrow of our system of government and its replacement with Sharia law. He is not a common criminal, and it is disrespectful to treat him like one - and you should always respect your enemy. Send him to his god and be done with it.

    Oh yeah, the prez was the one prejudging, eh?

    --
    No comprende? Let me type that a little slower for you...
  22. Truecrypt is not open source by falconwolf · · Score: 2, Informative

    TrueCrypt is open source and is available for download from Source Forge, which hosts open source projects. And here's the downloadable source code.

    Falcon

  23. Dissenting by ChePibe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Aside from the fact that adequate grounds exist for military jurisdiction based on the Pentagon portion of the attack - and the fact that the act KSM is most likely to be charged with conspiracy, which certainly occurred outside of the U.S. - the analysis is far more complex if one has a basic understanding of criminal procedure. The very high standard of proof required to convict in a criminal court, and the complexity of the rules of evidence - particularly when considering the difficulty of trying a conspiracy charge. Hell, as a law student, I spent untold hours just looking at hearsay and its numerous exceptions. Not to mention the issue of evidence extracted during and after water boarding sessions and other interrogation

    I obviously haven't seen the prosecution's evidence in full, but if this were a more traditional criminal charge, I'd wager that they would have one hell of a tough row to hoe. Keep in mind that, if the law is applied as it should be, a jury may only consider evidence that has been admitted before the Court. If vital bits of evidence are excluded--a scenario that is certainly feasible--can the prosecutors successfully prove the elements of the crime KSM is charged with? If not, in a real trial, he would have to be let free.

    Of course, this isn't going to be a real trial.

    Assume that KSM is acquitted. There is obviously no chance he'll ever be released, nor could he be released onto U.S. territory at all, of course, under the Immigration and Naturalization Act. A real criminal trial would carry with it the vagaries and risks associated with any criminal trial, no matter how "air tight" a case is (e.g., O.J. Simpson), and the possibility of an acquittal and release.

    I fear what we have here with the upcoming KSM trial is more of a show trial. The conviction, execution, and virtually pre-determined, or at least that is how Obama is treating it in statements to the press (as a lawyer and former law professor, he should know better, as he acknowledged with his subsequent ass covering).

    Aside from some of the more obvious questions (Why a criminal trial for only this handful? Why are military tribunals "good enough" for the rest? Why has Obama shifted support from the military tribunals he once supported specifically for KSM to the civilian courts? How will classified evidence be handled? Will KSM truly be given full access to all the evidence against him, including names of informants?) are the more larger concerns. Why a show trial for this person? Why now? Will show trials become the norm for the particularly loathsome among us? For those it is more politically convenient for the president to try via show trial? Is this the direction we would like to go in?

    If this were to be a real trial, it would be a demonstration of the Obama administration's willingness to take unacceptable risks on national security, particularly since a much friendlier venue is allowed under law and some of the trickier, thornier aspects of the law can be avoided. Instead, it may prove to be a perversion of the criminal justice system, which has rules that are much better established and protect every single American citizen. Why open the door to show trials?

  24. Re:I call sheeninagan on that by bertok · · Score: 4, Informative

    That would only works if the password is kept on a temporary file. Otherwise there is no reason whatsoever the password would be anywhere on disk. And that does not work at all if you use a bootable CD.

    But that's not how it happens in the real world. Most people don't run their computers from read-only media with the swap turned off!

    First of all, there's lots of bad developers out there. Passwords get saved all over the place, in the registry, configuration files, etc... I've seen web sites that were "https", but then put the plain text password into the URL, which is saved in the unencrypted browser history!

    Second, even if you store passwords in memory only, the pagefile might still contain it, if a page containing the password was swapped out. It's even more likely with hibernation files, which swap out everything, including kernel space marked as non-pageable.

    In theory, there's features like "protected memory" that developers can use to store passwords securely in memory, but this takes a lot of work. In Win32 there's a set of APIs for it, but many developers don't use it, or haven't even heard of it. It's such a low level "buffer manipulation" style API that lots of high-level languages can't or don't use it. It's only recently that C# got support for it, for example, and I don't think Java has anything comparable. Most garbage-collecting languages are vulnerable, because memory can be relocated (copied) at any time, which may prevent buffers from being properly cleared.

    One of the worst culprits are those "I forgot my password" web pages that email you your plain text password to your mailbox, so that your email client can then cheerfully write it all over the place. Even if you encrypt your PC's disk, but use corporate email, your password is now in plain text, on the server's disk.

    In practice, real security is hard. Very, very hard. As a consultant, I've been to over 100 clients, including major banks and very security sensitive government institutions, and I've only ever seen 2 secure networks: One financial services company, and the internal LAN on the new generation Boeing planes.

  25. Close... by DarthVain · · Score: 2, Funny

    My current one is something like "StupidITPassWordPolicy#23"

    I can't wait til I somehow get locked out or something and have to call IT help desk to look it up...

    Notice length, upper and lower, special chara, numbers..... and know that that number is required to change frequently...

    The one concession they made was it used to also compare the only and the new and if ANY part of it was identical it wouldn't accept it (like Password3 and Password4, etc...)

    I am sure that not brings down the percentage of people that write their password each week on a sticky note and stick it to their monitor from 95% to 80%... Well done IT genius, well done. Truly we are all more secure for your wonderfully well through out ideas.

        -Bitter.

  26. Re:Obama fails again... by DM9290 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is the *enemy*. He cannot be rehabilitated. He cannot be reconstructed. He and his comrades would seek the overthrow of our system of government and its replacement with Sharia law. He is not a common criminal, and it is disrespectful to treat him like one - and you should always respect your enemy. Send him to his god and be done with it.

    He would love that. treating him like a common criminal is the most humiliating thing you can do to him.
    And seriously... unless the state has evidence to prove such allegations I would not want to live in a place that any government officials have the power to just go around and kill people with no due process.

    This is a land where the rule of law, the constitution, and the fundamental principles of justice are supreme. if you hate your justice system so much that you would try to thwart it and impose your own vigilantee justice, then you are just as bad as any common criminal attempting to replace justice with Sharia law.

    Justice demands a fair trial. And if the US can't give it, they should turn these people over to the Hague.

    --
    No one has a right to their *own* opinion. They have a right to the TRUTH.
  27. Re:As Idiomatick puts it... by skarphace · · Score: 3, Informative

    So I ask the /. crowd are there any good alternatives to passwords that are feasible? Something secure. Something that can be implemented on websites. What do you think we should be working towards? Is there already something in place that you can give an example of?

    The best possible password is a phrase. Something simple like 'whereartthouromeo' is long, difficult to crack, and yet, still easy to remember. Now add some numbers, case change, and sepcial characters... 'WHEr3@r7thourom#)' is virtually impossible to crack. The password is not inherently flawed. It's still valid, useful, and machines are still too underpowered to crack that stuff.

    --
    Bullish Machine Tzar
  28. Re:Obama fails again... by b0bby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is the *enemy*. He cannot be rehabilitated. He cannot be reconstructed. He and his comrades would seek the overthrow of our system of government and its replacement with Sharia law.

    My view is, he's just like Timothy McVeigh, or an abortion clinic shooter. There's no way they can actually overthrow our system of government. They are non state terrorists, little more than common criminals, and really have very little power. Our system of the rule of law is much stronger and more important than any of them - and if we can't convict him in a court of law, then he should be freed. If he is freed and viewed as a serious threat, he should be kept under surveillance, but the rule of law is more important than any one individual.