Slashdot Mirror


After Lavabit Shut-Down, Dotcom's Mega Promises Secure Mail

Lavabit may no longer be an option, but recent events have driven interest in email and other ways to communicate without exposing quite so much, quite so fast, to organizations like the NSA (and DEA, and other agencies). Kim Dotcom as usual enjoys filling the spotlight, when it comes to shuttling bits around in ways that don't please the U.S. government, and Dotcom's privacy-oriented Mega has disclosed plans to serve as an email provider with an emphasis on encryption. ZDNet features an interview with Mega's CEO Vikram Kumar about the complications of keeping email relatively secure; it's not so much the encryption itself, as keeping bits encrypted while still providing the kind of features that users have come to expect from modern webmail providers like Gmail: "'The biggest tech hurdle is providing email functionality that people expect, such as searching emails, that are trivial to provide if emails are stored in plain text (or available in plain text) on the server side,' Kumar said. 'If all the server can see is encrypted text, as is the case with true end-to-end encryption, then all the functionality has to be built client side. [That’s] not quite impossible but very, very hard. That’s why even Silent Circle didn’t go there.'"

100 of 158 comments (clear)

  1. Re:New Plan by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Funny

    The latency is really bad, but at least your information will be secure!

    Heh heh, secure. Heh.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  2. Re:New Plan by kwark · · Score: 1

    How does searching work for this kind of tranport/storage?

  3. Re: New Plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I think you need a new new plan

    http://news.yahoo.com/ap-interview-usps-takes-photos-mail-072949079.html

  4. Links? by chill · · Score: 4, Informative

    Are those actual links, or just the <a> tags?

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Links? by Desler · · Score: 2

      Just empty anchors.

    2. Re:Links? by zm · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just empty anchors.

      The links in the story have been secured for your protection.

      --
      Sig ?
    3. Re:Links? by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Drop them on the NSA's cables, and voila!

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    4. Re:Links? by the11thplague · · Score: 1

      Thought it was a Firefox bug :)

    5. Re:Links? by wmac1 · · Score: 1

      You cannot access the links because Dotcom's privacy policy has been applied to them and that does not allow you.

    6. Re:Links? by Noughmad · · Score: 2

      Timothy's razor: Never attribute to browser bugs that which is adequately explained by Slashdot "editors".

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
  5. Article by chill · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    1. Re:Article by buchner.johannes · · Score: 2

      If you go to https://silentcircle.com/ they shut it down "preemptively".

      Yesterday, another secure email provider, Lavabit, shut down their system less they "be complicit in crimes against the American people." We see the writing on the wall, and we have decided that it is best for us to shut down Silent Mail. We have not received subpoenas, warrants, security letters, or anything else by any government, and this is why we are acting now.

      Why oh why? Are there no hosters outside the US?

      Also, if they (e.g. Lavabit) give up, why don't they publish their hosting source code on e.g. github? Then others (Pirate Bay, Mega) can start from there, and set up servers in Iceland, Skandinavia, Hong Kong, ....

      --
      NB: The message above might reflect my opinion right now, but not necessarily tomorrow or next year.
    2. Re:Article by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      Having a service hosted in one country but with admins from another seems like the worst of both worlds since either the government of the country the admins reside in or the government of the country the servers reside in could attack things.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    3. Re:Article by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      Well in all the controversy and even our learning in the Trust No One mentality, we are looking four someone to trust.
      That tells you something about humanity. And the fact that encryption its not just a game means we must trust someone our our work from scratch will be cracked by the experts we were up against. I for one believe some source would be good but four all we know NSA could honeypot anything as fair game, and post backdoored code on the domains we currently still trust, especially Silent Circle ( after NSL does force their hand)

      Then the alternative is silly: pgp your own email, never use windows to avoid nsa backdoors that will compromise your priv key, expect to teach each contact how to use it.
      Even without back doors the problem is network effect. If you cannot convince someone to do something dead easy like joining $BETTER_UNDERDOG_SOCIAL_NETWORK where there is no technical training for key gen process, then good luck with even the geek friends following you into trusted encryption land

  6. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by Max_W · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The should be developed an international mechanism of verifications of the Article #12 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Many countries have signed it. The should be international inspections of data centers, telephone companies, etc.

    http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a12

    Article 12. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

    1. Re:The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by JanneM · · Score: 1

      "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference "

      Nothing arbitrary about the mass surveilance. It's all quite deliberate and systematic. Your rights are well protected.

      --
      Trust the Computer. The Computer is your friend.
    2. Re:The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by rossdee · · Score: 1

      So what makes this declaration "Universal ?
      Doesit apply on other planets or even all parts of this one?

    3. Re:The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by Darkness404 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, except none of those are followed by the majority of the countries that signed it.

      Articles 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, and 29 certainly do not apply to the USA.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    4. Re:The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by Max_W · · Score: 1

      Exactly. It means that it applies to all humans in the universe. Even if a human is in space, on an orbit, or at, say, a moon.

      When I hear as the president says that the US citizens are not being snooped upon, I always think: "And what about us, who did not happen to be US citizens." Are we a too easy target?

      We are also protected by The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The USA has signed it by the way, the same as China, Russia, and many other countries.

    5. Re:The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by Arker · · Score: 1

      You are also "protected" by the US Constitution to the same degree. The Constitution talks about the rights of people, not of citizens. Unfortunately both documents are simply being treated as toilet paper by the people entrusted with their enforcement.

      --
      =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
      Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
    6. Re: The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      All those numbers! You must be sending a coded message.

    7. Re:The Universal Declaration of Human Rights by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1

      Snooping is not interference. You still get your messages. It's just that the government knows what you're doing. The US 4th Amendment is stronger, but it's ignored.

  7. No worky by SpaceMonkies · · Score: 2

    Ok I actually tried to read the article and those links don't work. A low day for Slashdot editors.

    Check out the new Slashdot iPad app

  8. Go Kim! You Magnificent Slimy Bastard... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I find this farcical, so the NSA is going to start playing whack-a-mole with a what will be in the near future, a plethora of alternative secure email providers. Ask the RIAA how well that works out.
    AC.. because I can.

  9. Re: New Plan by dotancohen · · Score: 1

    I think you need a new new plan

    http://news.yahoo.com/ap-interview-usps-takes-photos-mail-072949079.html

    (selectively) Quoting the article:

    ...the photos of the exterior of mail pieces are used primarily for the sorting process..

    See, that's just _metadata_. No worries.

    --
    It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.
  10. Will need better security than current by Ricardo · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to Security Now/Steve Gibson, the encryption/security on the MEGA file site is not very sound

    https://www.grc.com/sn/sn-390.htm (search for "Java Crypto" to get about 3/4 way through the show) or listen to the podcast..

    MEGA is well intentioned Im sure, but the Javascript code in MEGA does not cut it for serious security, and they need to dp waaay better for an email service.
    Remember that ALL THE DATA is being retained now, so one crack in the system and there is a way in.

    Air tight security is do-able, but needs to be serious - I wish Mega lots of luck.

    --
    Move along... there is no sig here.
    1. Re:Will need better security than current by Teckla · · Score: 1

      search for "Java Crypto" to get about 3/4 way through the show

      It's hard to tell if he's talking about Java or JavaScript -- he bounces between the two as if they're interchangeable, when they're not.

    2. Re:Will need better security than current by fnj · · Score: 1

      Does that tell you anything about him?

  11. Re:New Plan by SuricouRaven · · Score: 2

    Actually, there's a product in there.

    Envelopes for the paranoid. Made of extra-thick paper, with an aluminium foil lining. Each pack comes with very, very thin stickers bearing a pack-unique printing that can be placed over the seal, making it impossible to open the envelope without tearing.

  12. We require a new encryption scheme by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The problem is that private key, in server solution, are available on the server. Even in Mega, the private key is located server side and the password/passphrase is supplied by the end user over SSL. So, the weakpoints are SSL and the domestic machine, as well as an intercept placed on a server at Mega.

    What we require is a private key that a person hold, on a smartcard type arrangement. From this we derive a personal certificate authority and a public key. We issue certificates through our personal CA for particular roles and upload them to our provider. This then acts as our transport encryption, digital signatures, email encryption and so forth. The private key never enters the network and everyone has a unique encrypted layer, rather than a common SSL certificate.

    Decryption is performed by streaming the contents through the smartcard. We can add additional factors to this authentication such as biometrics, pin, etc. In fact, the user should be able to determine the amount of factors, their order, etc. The decrypted output can either be sent back into the machine (if you feel it is secure), or forwarded to a secure offline machine.

    We only need to make sure that this forwarding eliminates the possibility of an exploit and that means a limited stack that only provides certain features. Such as text and/or video.

    There is no reason that a standard mobile phone could not have two physical portions, one connected to the web and another for secure comms.

    1. Re:We require a new encryption scheme by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      ..so we don't actually need a new encryption scheme, just a system to make using what exists feasible in normal communications.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:We require a new encryption scheme by Prof.Phreak · · Score: 1

      For webmail, what would be wrong with: encrypt/decrypt via client side javascript, private key is stored in html5 storage thing, and is encrypted via user's password. The server never sees the user's private key, nor their password (authentication with server can happen via public/private keys (e.g. have the client digitally sign username/request, server can verify the signature, no need for passwords on the server).

      --

      "If anything can go wrong, it will." - Murphy

    3. Re:We require a new encryption scheme by DarkOx · · Score: 2

      One word: search.

      If you can figure out how to do server side search in a way that is reasonably efficient (storage and compute), does not require the server side to know the key, does not otherwise compromise the secrecy of the cipher text (user documents); I suspect you can make a great deal of money licensing your patent.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    4. Re:We require a new encryption scheme by dvaldenaire · · Score: 1

      About search : maybe you can permit some parts (mail addresses ? some words ? tags ?) to be indexed on the client, in an encrypted form ? To what extent it will compromise the security of a message if you know some words in it ?

      Anyway, a part of a security system is simply a good memory. The most you can remember (in your head only) the better.

      Still, that's simplified, but things to think about.

      --
      What does it mean, "appended to the end of comments you post"
    5. Re:We require a new encryption scheme by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      For webmail, what would be wrong with: encrypt/decrypt via client side javascript,

      The big problem is that the website can change the client side javascript that it sends to a version designed to send the key to the server. If the version designed to grab the key is only sent once per user and only to users of interest it is unlikely that users will notice this behaviour.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
  13. Humor by Sponge+Bath · · Score: 1

    Jabba Dotcom protecting us from the empire? Sign me up!

  14. Re:New Plan by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Or you could go to DEFCON and learn how to remove tamper seals without leaving traces. :)

    I DO suspect there's a product in there, but it's a lot more complex than that

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  15. Re:New Plan by DarkOx · · Score: 1

    This only works if the recipient knows you are sending it in your special high security envelop. If not dear old Uncle Sam can open the letter read it, and put it back in a regular secure envelope to send on to the recipient.

    --
    Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
  16. Searching on the client is hard? by loufoque · · Score: 1

    Don't all email clients do this?
    Are those people so infatuated with web applications that they don't realize true applications do everything on the client?

    1. Re:Searching on the client is hard? by Entropius · · Score: 1

      It seems so. I've talked to people that are shocked when I can get my email without internet access (alt-f2, "thunderbird")

    2. Re:Searching on the client is hard? by munch117 · · Score: 1

      Oh yes, they are completely infatuated with web apps.

      The problem is, if you want to read mail on more than one platform - phone, tablet and PC - you need one or more of them to use a remote message store. Otherwise you can't see and search the mails received on one platform when you're on the other. Unless you sync all mails between devices, which is going to cost you in battery lifetime and possibly in mobile data bills.

      Also, you don't really want to search email on a phone: That would be slow and run down your battery. It's more convenient to do on the server, using the phone as a thin client, but then the server needs access to the cleartext data.

      That's all the answers I have. I can't tell you why people want to read email on phones, it seems crazy to stress yourself like that when you don't really have to, but apparently they do.

    3. Re:Searching on the client is hard? by loufoque · · Score: 1

      The problem is, if you want to read mail on more than one platform - phone, tablet and PC - you need one or more of them to use a remote message store.

      Both POP3 and IMAP are protocols to access a remote message store.
      IMAP has more advanced features, like keeping track of what has been read and what hasn't.

      which is going to cost you in battery lifetime and possibly in mobile data bills.

      This is nothing compared to the average consumption of a smartphone like what the Facebook application requires.

      Also, you don't really want to search email on a phone: That would be slow and run down your battery.

      Yet all email clients on Android do this.

      can't tell you why people want to read email on phones, it seems crazy to stress yourself like that when you don't really have to, but apparently they do.

      Because emails contain important information, and you want to have it as early as possible even when you're on the move.

    4. Re:Searching on the client is hard? by bfandreas · · Score: 1

      Checking for new mail via IMAP every 30 minutes or so(I check every 5 minutes on my business account so I can react immediately for extra brownie points) is sufficient and doesn't drain battery too much.
      Who in his right mind would do Webmail on a phone/tablet? Also what does the used application protocol have to do with security? Wether you send unencrypted IMAP/SMPT or unencrypted HTTP doesn't make any difference. Also if your email is on some harddrive anywhere and it is unencrypted or somebody you can't trust has a key to it then it is quite public.

      --
      20 minutes into the future
    5. Re:Searching on the client is hard? by loufoque · · Score: 1

      There is also the PUSH variant of IMAP that doesn't even require to check at all.

  17. Re:New Plan by Darkness404 · · Score: 2
    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  18. Re:New Plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    No, it works. Uncle Sam can't read it. You just print your document, then scan it on a Xerox printer/scanner like the Workcenter 7335. http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/08/confused-photocopiers-randomly-rewriting-scanned-documents/. If your document is carefully crafted, your message will be obfuscated by the scanner. Print and send that. The receiving party must then send it through another Xerox to get your actual message back.

  19. Re:New Plan by SuricouRaven · · Score: 3, Informative

    Not at all.

    1. Press soft clay up to the seal to get an impression..
    2. Open envelope, read, close.
    3. Fire clay. Smooth it down a little carefully.
    4. Melt wax, apply clay stamp.

  20. Re:New Plan by SuricouRaven · · Score: 1

    Oh, it doesn't have to actually work. So long as the suckers believe it will work, and will fork over money for it. Because really, the government isn't going to care what the typical conspiracy-theorist paranoid is writing to his friends about.

  21. Eliminate mail servers by DeathGrippe · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The problem is that email is managed from a central location.

    If email clients opereated as fully encrypted standalone, "peer to peer" entities, the central mail server would be eliminated, and snoops would only be able to grab the encrypted content, and perhaps the locations of sender and receiver.

  22. Chasing the wrong target. by DerekLyons · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've said it before and I'll say it again, this concentration on encryption is fiddling while the house burns. Encryption is sexy, and easy, and kewl, and l33t... but it won't protect against the real threat - traffic analysis.

    1. Re:Chasing the wrong target. by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Why is traffic analysis more of a threat than the ability for the government to read the contents of your emails?

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:Chasing the wrong target. by memnock · · Score: 1

      Sometimes it's more important who you know and not what you know.

    3. Re:Chasing the wrong target. by Voyager529 · · Score: 1

      Sometimes it's more important who you know and not what you know.

      Not only this, but there's also, in theory, a greater threat between the combination of the two. Suppose I have three friends, Alice, Bob, and Carol. I send cleartext e-mails to Alice and Bob, but Carol gets encrypted messages, then those who are sniffing the traffic can discern the following information:

      1.) I know Alice, Bob, and Carol.
      2.) Since Alice and Bob get standard e-mails, I'm selectively encrypting my messages.
      3.) I'm selectively encrypting messages to Carol, and Carol is selectively encrypting messages to me.
      4.) Both Carol and I have the tools, understanding, and sense of requirement to encrypt what we are sending.

      Even if I'm sending Alice and Bob different Amazon links on pressure cookers and Carol is getting e-mails containing images of adorable kittens and sending photos of Victoria's Secret models, there's going to be more suspicion placed upon my communications with Carol.

      Ultimately, what I would really like to see is something like Retroshare replace e-mail...

    4. Re:Chasing the wrong target. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because if they can't directly read your e-mails, traffic analysis will be used to determine who you're talking to, what you're using to talk to them with, any number of bits of information that could identify one party or the other in a secure conversation. Once they have their hands on someone who holds a key, all they need to do is employ some "enhanced interrogation techniques" freshly passed as totally-not-torture by Bush and Obama.

      Traffic analysis isn't just a fall-back plan, it's just as powerful a weapon as the ability to read the e-mails directly. I'm not an expert on cryptography but I would think that if you're having trouble breaking a code, the next best option is to break the people who wrote the code. That's what traffic analysis is for.

    5. Re:Chasing the wrong target. by DarkOx · · Score: 1

      If you are trying to disrupt a terror cell, yes. If you are looking for dirt to stop the "wrong" guy from wining an election less so.

      --
      Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
    6. Re:Chasing the wrong target. by m00sh · · Score: 1

      Traffic analysis can be easily foiled by data poisoning. For each valid e-mail, generated 10,000 fake e-mails that are sent at random (or some other criteria).

      After the receiver decrypts the messages, the fake e-mails will say they are fake and the client discards it. Add in some forwards too to make the problem harder.

      Getting a list of e-mail addresses to send to is the problem. But, can be done with a client side solution.

      So, even if the server is compromised, there is still possibility of secure e-mail.

  23. Re:As a cloud product manager... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

    Going Galt then are we?

    I symphathize and have thought much the same myself.

    But I recommend you think first before adding one unwise decision on top of another.

    A restaurant is one of the most common business to fail, and that's in a good economy. It's hard work to boot.

    Plus now you have to deal with increasing taxes, Obamacare and on top of that you get to be on the top of the list of IRS targets.

    http://rt.com/usa/irs-taxes-small-business-898/

    Good luck. Maybe they'll let us bunk together at the re-education camps.

  24. Agencies becoming monsters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The amazing thing to me is that using any of these encrypted mail services will automatically flag you as a suspect for the NSA. Just like when detect patterns used by Tor and store all of the traffic in a special place.

    How long until the FBI and NSA keep files on everyone that they can identify using these services? Like a new era of McCarthyism but instead of a public trial you have a secret trial where the government has all of the cards. This is essentially what the guy Aaron Swartz and the Lavabit guy ran into right? At some point if you run afoul of these "public" agencies you are taken out of circulation.

    This reminds me of the movie "Firefox" in the 80s directed by Clint Eastwood. There was a scene where some english chap was telling Clint Eastwood's character about the KGB, he was comparing it to a monster. He was saying that your only real hope for safety was to sneak carefully by it and not awaken it. That is what I am thinking the "security" services of this country (and many other western countries) is becoming on an unprecedented scale. With more people in prison than ever and people (ohh sorry "terrorists") in jails all over the world without due process (or any judicial representation for that matter) how is this any different?

  25. Re:Kumar? by jonwil · · Score: 1

    No but I bet the US feds would love to see all those involved with mega sent to Guantanamo Bay :)

  26. Re:Warning by iluvcapra · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Step 1: Kim Dotcom starts Mega Crypto, which is promptly adopted by the world's political dissidents and leakers.

    Step 2: All pending government litigation against Mega suspiciously disappears and his assets are unfrozen.

    The guy's accustomed to his ill-gotten gains -- even setting aside the rampant piracy of Megaupload, he's a convicted fraudster and embezzler, and has bribed public officials for protection before.

    I suspect that if offered the choice between losing his $20 million house, his 12 cars, his yacht, and becoming a partner of the US government, it wouldn't take him much to crack.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  27. Archive.org by Selur · · Score: 1

    May be all the worlds email traffic should go through (and stay at) archive.org this way one would at least know where ones emails end up,...

  28. Old Plan by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    By court order your mail can be opened and read. It can also be read after opening when you get hit with a search warrant.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  29. We have secure mail now by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Just use mail on FreeNet,

    Sure, FreeNet, which would be the more secure option we have currently, doesn't have any outside gateways, but if you are concerned about security, you don't want one anyway.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:We have secure mail now by Clsid · · Score: 1

      Your solution is definitely the most sound technique of everything I have read so far on how to deal with this issue. So I guess you can establish a Darknet with your friends and family and some sort of encrypted e-mail using regular Thunderbird, and keep plain text e-mail for initial contact only. For business mail this would be tough though, and I guess you can set up a ticket support system to get in touch with your customers instead, but as dealing with providers and such, plain text e-mail will have to do.

  30. You can use Gmail + Penango! by m.pala · · Score: 3, Informative

    The matter of protecting your e-mail is a simple one - there are standards (S/MIME). What you need to look in a provider is:
    (1) They SHOULD NEVER have copies of your private keys
    (2) They should follow published standards
    (3) Allow S/MIME e-mails
    For example, if you want to use your Gmail account with military-grade security that neither NSA can read, just install Penango in your browser and send messages encrypted - this solution is also used by US military and corporations. Penango does not hold any of your private information and/or your keys - so they can not be forced by anybody to give out your secret.. simply because they do not have it!!!! For more info, go to http://www.penango.com/

    1. Re:You can use Gmail + Penango! by Fnord666 · · Score: 1

      For example, if you want to use your Gmail account with military-grade security that neither NSA can read, just install Penango in your browser and send messages encrypted - this solution is also used by US military and corporations. Penango does not hold any of your private information and/or your keys - so they can not be forced by anybody to give out your secret.. simply because they do not have it!!!! For more info, go to http://www.penango.com/

      Except that penango is not really compatible with any current browser releases except Internet Explorer. Firefox is supported, but only up to version 20. The current release is version 23.

      --
      'The tyrant will always find pretext for his tyranny.' - Aesop's Fables
  31. It's a plot by cellocgw · · Score: 1

    Look at it this way: everyone's all "we gotta have email encryption" and we've completely lost interest in "OMG 99% of all email is spam and we can't get rid of it." It's the NSA's way of encouraging Internet Businesses.
    (please please PLEASE don't make me bring out the whoosh or sarcasm tags m'kay?)

    --
    https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
  32. Privacy in 2 years by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This whole thing about privacy will be a non-issue in about 2 years.

    There's currently a mass-exodus away from US-based cloud services, and (within the US) away from all cloud services.

    Cloud services will have to provide privacy or go out of business. The only way to ensure privacy is client-based encryption keys and open-source software. Since it's impossible to control the distribution of open-source software, the client-side package will end up being free.

    This is a good thing, IMHO. Cloud services will focus on the actual service, they won't be able to rummage around in our lives (both corporate and personal), they won't be able to "monetize" their customers as products to advertisers, and the NSA will be shut out of much illegal snooping.

    People are already thinking about how to encrypt existing web-based mail services, and I'm even hearing rumors about replacing SMTP altogether with a more secure protocol.

    Expect a lot of wailing and gnashing-of-teeth from the government, proposals to make this or that protocol "illegal" or to require government backdoor access, but in the end it will come down to simple economics.

    There is an enormous market-driven push towards more privacy. Edward Snowden has had a measurable effect on the world, and probably deserves the Nobel peace prize he was nominated for.

    1. Re:Privacy in 2 years by gclef · · Score: 2

      I'm even hearing rumors about replacing SMTP altogether with a more secure protocol.

      There have been "rumors" and "proposals" to replace SMTP for almost a decade. It'll never happen. SMTP will die slowly, the same way NNTP is slowly dying. And that will only happen when there's a way to communicate that surpasses it. Web discussion boards basically killed NNTP. I don't think there's anything out there yet to kill SMTP.

      Also, encrypting your mail misses the point. Groups like the NSA can still do traffic analysis on the SMTP envelope to know who you're talking with even without reading the contents of the email. The fact that you're in regular communication with a "target" is enough to make you interesting. If the "target" is subject to an full-on investigation (not the browsing that they appear to be doing), then being in regular contact with that target, would be sufficient grounds to apply for (and probably get) a court order to put a keylogger put on your machine.

      Expect a lot of wailing and gnashing-of-teeth from the government, proposals to make this or that protocol "illegal" or to require government backdoor access, but in the end it will come down to simple economics.

      There won't be much public wailing...they've got the laws they need. Just like what happened with Lavabit, they don't need to ban anything anymore, they'll just show up at any provider & say "give us all of the data you have on person . If you don't have any, start collecting it. Now."

      Also, moving data out of the US (to Germany, for example), just means that the NSA has to ask the local spy agency (like the BND in germany) for the information. The Western governmental spy agencies seem to have no problem providing it. In fact, the NSA spying on data overseas would be *less* unconstitutional than what they're doing now....they'd love that.

      Face it, the only way forward is something like freenet. The problem is, freenet withered on the vine.

    2. Re:Privacy in 2 years by Okian+Warrior · · Score: 1

      There have been "rumors" and "proposals" to replace SMTP for almost a decade. It'll never happen...

      Um... there is now an enormous economic incentive to do this.

      Are you saying that the current situation is exactly like it was in the last decade?

    3. Re:Privacy in 2 years by Flere+Imsaho · · Score: 1

      Expect a lot of wailing and gnashing-of-teeth from the government, proposals to make this or that protocol "illegal" or to require government backdoor access...

      There was a classic example of "Think of the terrorists" FUD in NZ last week. The PM of New Zealand, who's cramming his legalized-spying-on-your-own-citizens bill through parliament at the moment, last week trotted out some "facts" about how the NZ government is "monitoring" several NZ residents with ties to Al Queda, several of which are in Yemen attending "training camps" at the moment.

      If that's true, then isn't letting these people know you're watching them a bit of a silly idea? And anyhow, it still doesn't justify eroding our rights. Is it election year yet?

      --
      It gripped her hand gently. 'Regret is for humans,' it said.
    4. Re:Privacy in 2 years by gclef · · Score: 1

      Spam was and still is an enormous economic incentive to replace SMTP....and yet, after a decade of avalanches of spam, we haven't replaced SMTP with something that addresses any of the aspects of SMTP that permit spam to happen. This situation isn't even on the same order of magnitude of economic burden as spam is every single day. So, yes, the current situation *economically* is exactly like it was the last decade: we're paying for the design decisions of SMTP, and will continue to do so until something shinier comes along that people move to. That migration will happen slowly, over years, and SMTP will slowly wither away as the migration happens.

  33. As always, it's a matter of trust by FuzzNugget · · Score: 1

    When you rely on a third party for security, you are placing an enormous amount of trust in them. You're trusting that they have not installed backdoors, that they do not copy your encryption keys and that they really are doing all the things they say they are. There are also external factors that may be beyond their control, like government demands, as we saw with Lavabit.

    Now, if Mega is going to do something like build plugins, extensions or local proxies for popular web and local mail clients that makes end-to-end encryption easy and commonplace -- and will release all the relevant source code -- then we'll talk.

  34. Re:searching emails by canadiannomad · · Score: 1

    I like this..
    Obviously use something better then md5, and salt it with something generated from the private key and create a b-tree with message ids. This could likely be stored and searched server side with very little risk.
    Otherwise actually have a clear text b-tree in client memory, update it locally, and send it encrypted to the server. Might take more bandwidth but it would just be an index.

    --
    Hmm, the humour and sarcasm seem to have been be lost on you.
  35. Goddammit, why can't people learn? by Hizonner · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you want secure email, don't put it in the cloud. People who try to set up new cloud services to get attacked aren't helping, and can't deliver on what they want to make people believe they can.

    1. Webmail can never be secure even if the decryption is done in the browser, because the decrypting JavaScript comes from the provider, who can change it at any time.
    2. If your email comes to your cloud provider in the clear, it doesn't matter if they then encrypt it, because they can be forced to start keeping the plaintext.
    3. Even if the crypto works, if everybody uses the same few providers, it's easier to do traffic analysis. Which was already uncomfortably easy. "Metadata", anyone?
    4. If your cloud provider is honest and doesn't want to get subverted, they may have to shut down at any instant, leaving you unable to communicate. As we've seen twice just this freaking week.

    It's not hard to set up a mail server. It's not hard to use PGP. Be at least a little harder target.

    Just say no to the goddamn cloud, already.

  36. Re:New Plan by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Only the outside of the envelope. They can't see contents unless they open the envelope, which requires a warrant. They can't retroactively open your letter once it has been delivered. If you want to encrypt the contents, you can do that too, but you can't encrypt the routing information.

    With encrypted email, the header is unencrypted because it's needed for routing, so the government can record every entire message that passes through a cooperating server. With encrypted email, you could copy every message that passes through a server and decide later which ones you want to try and decrypt.

    If you want to add real anonymity, you can use anonymous email accounts. But that's thin security. A government really interested in who's getting and sending anonymous emails can figure it out by tracing packet routing.

    For harder-to-crack anonymity, you can upload encrypted files anonymously to a server and download all the messages periodically. Whichever ones you can decrypt with your keys are addressed to you. It's very inefficient, but there's no way to figure out who got your messages without either seizing your computer or hacking it. They can still identify who sent it and what set or receivers might have gotten it by tracing packets.

  37. Re:As a cloud product manager... by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    A restaurant is one of the most common business to fail, and that's in a good economy. It's hard work to boot.

    Plus now you have to deal with increasing taxes, Obamacare and on top of that you get to be on the top of the list of IRS targets.

    http://rt.com/usa/irs-taxes-small-business-898/

    >

    Yeah, an industry-wide pattern of underreporting wages and tips will do that to you.

  38. Re:New Plan by modecx · · Score: 1

    Thing is, they aren't too interested in the contents of the envelope at all, at least until you're a person of interest. What they really want is use all that juicy metadata (outside of the envelope, i.e. headers) to establish ties between everyone.

    --
    Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
  39. Re:New Plan by Pichu0102 · · Score: 1

    PGP encrypted snail mail, then.

  40. Re: New Plan by iluvcapra · · Score: 1

    +1 Nothing has really changed post-Snowden, we've all always known that emails have the privacy expectation of a postcard-- how many of use were putting "Echelon Food" on out emails a decade ago. It's just, like the Nazis and Enigma, we always assumed the government would never put the brute force resources into collecting everything, so emails were basically "safe." And you're right, in that once you share information with any commercial entity, and there's no bailment, contract or NDA, you've got not privacy. Just accept it, and fight for change-- don't get hung up on some kind of phony "betrayal" narrative that just doesn't stand up to scrutiny. We need privacy on the Internet, strong legal protection. It has not existed up until this point, it will require new laws, the existing ones simply do not work, they're based on assumptions which no longer hold. Fight for new laws, not stupid rearguard actions over what the Constitution Really Means(tm). Courts interpret that, not us, and courts follow laws, not blogs.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  41. Re:New Plan by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

    How does searching work for this kind of tranport/storage?

    If you have a bevy of beautiful, friendly, young scantily-clad Polynesian girls that you can sit and watch go through the envelopes searching, who cares how long a search takes?

    Now *that's* what I call an upgraded mail service!

    Strat

    --
    Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  42. Re:New Plan by dkf · · Score: 1

    typical conspiracy-theorist paranoid

    friends

    There's a fatal flaw in your thinking right there...

    --
    "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
  43. Actually, it is by dutchwhizzman · · Score: 1

    Paper mail is not opened or scanned unless there is an actual warrant. Yes, they will "log" your mail and possibly take a picture of the envelope, but you don't have to put a "valid" senders address on the envelope and you can post away from home. As far as drag net "security" from the NSA and such, paper mail is more or less left alone. You can still encrypt the contents and sign it with a private key. Even if they open up the envelope, they won't be able to decrypt if they don't have the key and your encryption is sound.

    --
    I was promised a flying car. Where is my flying car?
    1. Re:Actually, it is by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      Paper mail is not opened or scanned unless there is an actual warrant.

      That's what they said about email.

      Yes, they will "log" your mail and possibly take a picture of the envelope,

      Yes, they will log your mail, including a picture of the envelope. If you don't know that they're taking pictures of all the envelopes, you don't know how the mail system works. If you think they're throwing that data away, you're a fool. If you tell people that they are throwing that data away in spite of the evidence to the contrary, you're a useful idiot.

      As far as drag net "security" from the NSA and such, paper mail is more or less left alone. You can still encrypt the contents and sign it with a private key. Even if they open up the envelope, they won't be able to decrypt if they don't have the key and your encryption is sound.

      Right, but now you either have to manually decrypt or you have to OCR. What a PITA. One of the great things about digital encryption is that it has the potential to be transparent.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  44. Re:New Plan by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I'm a Canadian living in the middle east. Canada's spooks simply just rip my mail open and seal it again with red tape when they feel like it. The funniest thing is that they *always* rip open my tax envelopes. That makes zero sense, since they can just open my tax file and read all about it, they really don't need to rip open their own mail, yet they do.

  45. Re:New Plan by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

    Actually it makes perfect sense AC, you see who are you most likely to send something nasty like a poisoned letter to? The taxman.

    --
    ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  46. Re:New Plan by __aaltlg1547 · · Score: 2

    It would be interesting to see what they are finding -- in a meta-metadata sort of way. How many degrees of separation between the average person and a known or suspected terrorist? Are there dense networks of association? How many degrees of separation do you have to go out before a terrorist's association look like everyone else's? One? Three?

  47. Why not let user give permission to decrypt mail? by RepliCounts · · Score: 1

    'If all the server can see is encrypted text, as is the case with true end-to-end encryption, then all the functionality has to be built client side. [That’s] not quite impossible but very, very hard."

    Why not let user the compromise on security in order to search, etc., by giving the server permission to decrypt for N minutes or seconds? Then client software sends the key, Mega promises to destroy the key and the unencrypted text at the allowed time. Standard legal advice in advance explains the resulting exposure risk (if the sovereign requires Mega to silently betray the user). But even then previous email stays secure, despite past permissions, provided there is no future permission.

    Most users won't need to encrypt a large volume of email anyway. So they could search locally by eye, and maintain full security.

  48. Encrypted VM? by greggman · · Score: 1

    I know this idea won't work but ... What about a encrypted virtual machine? Just like a hard drive can be encrypted I wonder if it would be possible to run an encrypted virtual machine on a real machine such that the real machine can not observe what the virtual machine is doing.

    1. Re:Encrypted VM? by doccus · · Score: 1

      But isn't that the very nature of a VM in the first place? That's what allows them to be such ideal sandboxes. I've occasionally needed to open and run an infected and uncleanable application, and used a (disposable) copy of the VM to open it, run it, and after that, rather than try to clean the entire OS, just deleted the whle thing. The host OS never had a clue.

  49. Re:New Plan by modecx · · Score: 1

    Well, some people, and by some people I mean the people who have been pushing the panic button for the last decade, say the spooks are routinely looking out for up to three degrees of separation. Three sounds like an entirely plausible optimal number.

    There was a relevant facebook study about the small world theory a couple years ago, and IIRC, the average distance between any two people (globally) on the network was 4.6 or some such. Of course, you have the people who have to friend anyone and everything even if they don't know them; probably skews the idea somewhat.

    The idea that you and I could be as few as 1.6 additional degrees of separation from some suspected individual is...unsettling. How much longer until the lidless eye wanders further?

    --
    Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
  50. Re:New Plan by LordLucless · · Score: 1

    Cut off the seal with a hot knife. When you're done violating someone's confidentiality, stick it back on.

    --
    Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
  51. publicity stunt by Tom · · Score: 1

    Kim Dotcom as usual enjoys filling the spotlight,

    you can put a period there, that's all there is to say about it.

    If you trust an e-mail service run by Kim, you are a stupid idiot. The guy ratted out people to the authorities before, when it served him.

    One thing is right about this idea, though: If you want a secure e-mail provider, it absolutely has to be located outside the USA. Nothing on US grounds can be considered secure anymore.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  52. Re:Warning by bfandreas · · Score: 1

    Step 1: Kim Dotcom starts Mega Crypto, which is promptly adopted by the world's political dissidents and leakers.

    Step 2: All pending government litigation against Mega suspiciously disappears and his assets are unfrozen.

    The guy's accustomed to his ill-gotten gains -- even setting aside the rampant piracy of Megaupload, he's a convicted fraudster and embezzler, and has bribed public officials for protection before.

    I suspect that if offered the choice between losing his $20 million house, his 12 cars, his yacht, and becoming a partner of the US government, it wouldn't take him much to crack.

    He also made a name for himself in Germany for selling out phreakers to the feds when he got cornered. The man is an unstrustworthy megalomaniac.

    --
    20 minutes into the future
  53. Needs by xenobyte · · Score: 1

    Truly anonymous email needs to be both encrypted and efficiently hide communication patterns.

    If the system is based on a central server that maps addresses and you have the ability to listen to inbound and outbound mail you can fairly easy generate a map that will link real and anonymous email addresses if the system runs in real time. Mails to be relayed should be delayed a random time and sent out in random sized pools. That would hide the link.

    An alternative would be a private bulletin board system where no messages ever leave the server and both sender and recipient must log in to send or receive mail. It will also hide the patterns provided the database is completely encrypted, including relations.

    --
    "For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong." -- H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) --
    1. Re:Needs by doccus · · Score: 1

      An alternative would be a private bulletin board system where no messages ever leave the server and both sender and recipient must log in to send or receive mail. It will also hide the patterns provided the database is completely encrypted, including relations.

      You're quite correct, and THIS (the BB system) is the method professional agents use the most.

  54. Re:New Plan by gregulator · · Score: 1

    What do you mean secure?

    USPS scans the front and back of every envelope that goes through their processing centers. They then use these images and OCR to create the same metadata they are capturing on phone records.

  55. Re:New Plan by claar · · Score: 1

    you can upload encrypted files anonymously to a server and download all the messages periodically. Whichever ones you can decrypt with your keys are addressed to you. It's very inefficient, but there's no way to figure out who got your messages without either seizing your computer or hacking it..

    I like this idea, and think it can be made plenty efficient by decreasing the number of recipients that "share" a given inbox -- say 1000 users or so.

    Yes, please secure email me at 3013@mailinator.com using my public key.

    --
    I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous...
  56. No professional spies here, I gather.. by doccus · · Score: 1

    Wow. All these brilliant ideas on encrypting communication like snail mailed rubber envelopes wax seals etc Nothing screams "I have a secret" as loud as obvious encryption attempts. And nothing is as tempting for CIA or DHS operatives to try and circumvent. Security services in *other* countries don't waste their time trying to crack "encrypted email" or rubber envelopes in snail mail. Why? Becaus professional agents don't ever use an *obvious* encryption method at all!. A REAl spy's email might look like "H mom how are you.. yadayada" Instead if, say, looking for foreign spies, they uase psychology to try and discern odd behavior.. and once they have a solid target THEN they try to see if the correspondence looks suspicious. If the US tries to crack MEGA's new encrypted email service, it'll be sour grapes and not any hope of success in catching a "spy". After all they didn't think to start checking Snowden's emails until AFTER he came out ;-)