Our attack is performed on a different system, but our level of control is much higher (and also works with near 100% efficiency) than in Makarov's paper.
Measuring the optical power is not a solution to this attack. Sure, it'll detect it, but the attacker would just adapt. Instead, fix the actual flaw at hand, the incorrect security proof.
Oh, sorry. I confess I know nothing about quantum cryptography, I just happened to break it.
First of all, quantum key distribution is not a method for encrypting information. As its name judiciously indicates, it is a method to securely exchange encryption keys. This is not the same thing at all.
Semantics. QKD is a way of obtaining a secure key which we then use to perform one-time pad encryption. In other words, we use it for encrypting information.
Second, the speed of the attacker's computer has no role in this attack and quantum key distribution has never claimed a code is unbreakable since there is no code to break here.
It's a layman's definition of the concept of information-theoretic security (ITS). Normal crypto is secure under certain hardness assumptions (i.e. hard to factor integers, hard to do discrete logarithms). If you give the attacker an infinitely fast computer, all those crypto methods will be broken. QKD on the other hand remains secure.
Of course, if you are blinding the receiver, it may be possible to tamper with the key, however, the blinded party should notice it has been blinded.
This is a very good question and there is a very good answer (one I even answer in the paper itself!) You can surely detect my attack by using an optical power meter, but eventually I'll figure out a way around this as well. What our paper really shows is that there is a missing link in the security proof. Fix the proof and you'll be safe forever.
The whole thing rests on very low luminosity photons exchange. If the light beam is too strong, it clearly no longer depicted the quantum characteristics needed to secure the key exchange.
Which makes our attack even juicier. We don't even need to use quantum phenomena to break the security of the QKD device, we just good ol' classical pulses of light.
The point of quantum crypto is to be able to detect whether someone is eavesdropping on you. Blinding detectors is kind of a tell-tale sign that something is wrong and parties should stop transmitting.
Paper author here. You can try detecting my specific attack, but it won't help. Sooner or later I'll find a way around your countermeasure and break it again. What we actually show in the paper is that the security proof is flawed. Fix the security proof and I won't ever be able to break it.
radioactive gold kept disappearing. After a while a staff member's wife or fiance turned up and had radiation poisoning to her hand--someone was taking the gold to make a wedding ring, and didn't know it was radioactive.
Source for that? I'd love to read more about this. I didn't find anything through google-fu.
This lab will demonstrate how power analysis of cryptographic hardware can reveal the key. We will be using basic electronic measurement tools such as oscilloscopes to demonstrate this side-channel attack.
You will be using a small hardware board (fig. 1) with a generic microprocessor programmed to perform DES encryption and decryption. The scenario is that you are the attacker and want to find out the secret key stored inside the board. There is no way of getting to the key directly, so you will need to perform a side-channel attack by measuring the power consumption of the board while the algorithm is running. The hardware board also allows the user to load a custom key in order to compare the power consumption.
Hey, I'm the author of that lab instruction. How on earth did you find this humble little document?:)
This is excellent news and has changed my mind regarding Wayland. A successor to X11 really needs good remote control functionality, but it doesn't have to be done the way X11 did it. I now look forward to a future with Wayland.
I remember this being discussed on the FF bugzilla years ago. It was seen as a very good idea, but the issue was (at least then) that most audio is played by Flash applets which the browser can't control, thus making it useless in most scenarios. I wonder how Chrome tackles the issue of plugin content playing audio.
Correct. On the ship, we had a really large copper plate on the underside of the ship that was connected to the radio by means of a 10cm*1mm copper strip that went from the hull all the way to the radio room. Note: a really thick strip of copper, not a wire! We had to take precautions not to get this strip in electrical contact with the rudder hydraulics in order to avoid having the rudder disappear via galvanic corrosion. For fun, I measured the possible galvanic current with an ammeter between the grounding and the hydraulic pipes and got several milliamps. That's a lot of corrosion.
Get an EPIRB. If the ship collides with a floating container and sinks quickly you will have no time to manually send a distress signal before abandoning ship. A free-floating EPIRB will automatically engage in case of sinking and with its encoded distress signal you will get aid within hours. For communications on the oceans I recommend getting a good shortwave radio with a decent grounding and antenna that can communicate further than any VHF-based system. Source: I helped build and design a Swedish 131' sailing yacht.
+1 for Think Tank products. I use several of their products, including the aforementioned Streetwalker Harddrive. Like you, I lug around some serious SLR gear (plus laptop, accessories and heavy tripod) and this bag has performed well and has got very good build quality. Of course, it's quite pricey, but so is your gear.
I've worked on a passenger ship that used RO for drinking water distillation. The RO water is so clean straight out of the membrane that we had to "pollute" it by letting it go through a sand filter. The sand adds taste, ions and minerals (and pH stability?) to the water.
I find this whole audiophile thing pretty interesting, especially now something very similar starting to spill over into mainstream photography. JPEGS are out!, we need 16 bit RAW files for out holiday snaps! As a digital artist, I find it disturbing that people are going to let a JPEG artefact (real or imaginary) spoil their enjoyment of a picture: you're looking at it wrong!
I just couldn't let this pass by without comment. Yes, I am a flac kind of a person, and take pride in ripping music with the absolute highest quality. I am also a photographer, and yes, I shoot in raw format. Why? Because I do post-processing. On every photo I take. A good-quality jpeg is indistinguishable from raw until you start doing the least bit of editing. Then the differences will be clear as day and night. Ever tried rescuing an underexposed 8-bit JPEG and then try the same with a 12-bit raw? And don't get me started about color spaces...
JPEG is perfect for the holiday shooter, though, but personally I long for the 16-bit raw files (best available today on 35-mm SLR:s is 14-bit). That will take care of *some* of the imaging artifacts that come from the rounding errors between the sensor and the memory card.
And the ability to zoom in to certain views was pretty awesome. If Ansel Adams were alive today, I wonder what his opinion would be and if he would use such a technique. He would have ot do something. Many of the films he liked to use are no longer in production - at least in the 4x5 format he liked.
Don't insult the name of Ansel Adams.
I'm a photographer myself, and I have yet to see a gigapan that looks lood. Why do people think that the resolution is interesting at all? A photo is all about capturing something interesting, and that requires hard work from the guy behind the camera. Gigapixel is the latest excuse for lazy photographers to make boring photos. A great (no, let me say legendary) photographer like Adams doesn't need gigapans. And large format photography is alive and kicking, btw.
The parent is somewhat correct; the delete option has existed for a long time, though it has been extremely well-hidden. I would describe it as a hack. When I deleted my account in early 2008, I had to create a new fake account and "overwrite" the e-mail of the old one. Everything I had done vanished, including all my messages in groups and on other people's "walls". There's a better explanation of the procedure here.
In some countries the NMT system is still operational and is used by ships for it's excellent coverage (compared to GSM, that is). Don't have any links at the moment, but I know some ships that are using NMT to get an OK network connection when out on the sea. Other than that, I think I remember you can surf using VHF. Don't know about SSB, internet over SSB would be slow but with an awesome coverage. Last resort: Satellite.
You expect the Swedish Parliament to give up prosecutorial immunity?
I certainly don't hope for it, but in the case I referred to above copyright was put above the constitutional Offentlighetsprincipen. Anything is possible when dealing with pirates, it seems. Thanks to IPRED we now have private entities doing policework and the government spies on our internet traffic thanks to FRA.
Slashdot Mirror
You misunderstand what is supposed to happen here. As soon as any form of attack is detected, communication stops. You can not adapt to that.
Sure I can. I just have to figure out how your detection mechanism works and then circumvent it so that no detection occurs.
You probably read the paper from Makarov: http://www.nature.com/nphoton/...
Our attack is performed on a different system, but our level of control is much higher (and also works with near 100% efficiency) than in Makarov's paper.
Measuring the optical power is not a solution to this attack. Sure, it'll detect it, but the attacker would just adapt. Instead, fix the actual flaw at hand, the incorrect security proof.
Submitter has no clue what QC is.
Oh, sorry. I confess I know nothing about quantum cryptography, I just happened to break it.
First of all, quantum key distribution is not a method for encrypting information. As its name judiciously indicates, it is a method to securely exchange encryption keys. This is not the same thing at all.
Semantics. QKD is a way of obtaining a secure key which we then use to perform one-time pad encryption. In other words, we use it for encrypting information.
Second, the speed of the attacker's computer has no role in this attack and quantum key distribution has never claimed a code is unbreakable since there is no code to break here.
It's a layman's definition of the concept of information-theoretic security (ITS). Normal crypto is secure under certain hardness assumptions (i.e. hard to factor integers, hard to do discrete logarithms). If you give the attacker an infinitely fast computer, all those crypto methods will be broken. QKD on the other hand remains secure.
Of course, if you are blinding the receiver, it may be possible to tamper with the key, however, the blinded party should notice it has been blinded.
This is a very good question and there is a very good answer (one I even answer in the paper itself!) You can surely detect my attack by using an optical power meter, but eventually I'll figure out a way around this as well. What our paper really shows is that there is a missing link in the security proof. Fix the proof and you'll be safe forever.
The whole thing rests on very low luminosity photons exchange. If the light beam is too strong, it clearly no longer depicted the quantum characteristics needed to secure the key exchange.
Which makes our attack even juicier. We don't even need to use quantum phenomena to break the security of the QKD device, we just good ol' classical pulses of light.
And finally, it seems to me this is old news.
Please tell me more!
The point of quantum crypto is to be able to detect whether someone is eavesdropping on you. Blinding detectors is kind of a tell-tale sign that something is wrong and parties should stop transmitting.
Paper author here. You can try detecting my specific attack, but it won't help. Sooner or later I'll find a way around your countermeasure and break it again. What we actually show in the paper is that the security proof is flawed. Fix the security proof and I won't ever be able to break it.
Thanks for clearing it up to me, I'll have to check the complete quote. Link?
The parent comment claimed she never said that, but that was obviously incorrect as my link proves.
By the way, she never said what you claim she did. If I'm wrong you will provide a reliable source, I'm sure.
This enough for ya? https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
radioactive gold kept disappearing. After a while a staff member's wife or fiance turned up and had radiation poisoning to her hand--someone was taking the gold to make a wedding ring, and didn't know it was radioactive.
Source for that? I'd love to read more about this. I didn't find anything through google-fu.
Breaking DES with side-channel attacks
This lab will demonstrate how power analysis of cryptographic hardware can reveal the key. We will be using basic electronic measurement tools such as oscilloscopes to demonstrate this side-channel attack.
You will be using a small hardware board (fig. 1) with a generic microprocessor programmed to perform DES encryption and decryption. The scenario is that you are the attacker and want to find out the secret key stored inside the board. There is no way of getting to the key directly, so you will need to perform a side-channel attack by measuring the power consumption of the board while the algorithm is running. The hardware board also allows the user to load a custom key in order to compare the power consumption.
Hey, I'm the author of that lab instruction. How on earth did you find this humble little document? :)
This is excellent news and has changed my mind regarding Wayland. A successor to X11 really needs good remote control functionality, but it doesn't have to be done the way X11 did it. I now look forward to a future with Wayland.
Vs lbh nfxrq Oehpr Fpuarvre gb qrpelcg guvf, ur'q pehfu lbhe fxhyy jvgu uvf ynhtu.
I, for one, use ROT26 to protect my comments. Everybody knows that it offers the level of security that slashdot really needs.
I remember this being discussed on the FF bugzilla years ago. It was seen as a very good idea, but the issue was (at least then) that most audio is played by Flash applets which the browser can't control, thus making it useless in most scenarios. I wonder how Chrome tackles the issue of plugin content playing audio.
Correct. On the ship, we had a really large copper plate on the underside of the ship that was connected to the radio by means of a 10cm*1mm copper strip that went from the hull all the way to the radio room. Note: a really thick strip of copper, not a wire! We had to take precautions not to get this strip in electrical contact with the rudder hydraulics in order to avoid having the rudder disappear via galvanic corrosion. For fun, I measured the possible galvanic current with an ammeter between the grounding and the hydraulic pipes and got several milliamps. That's a lot of corrosion.
No problem! All the info can be found on the ship's homepage.
Get an EPIRB. If the ship collides with a floating container and sinks quickly you will have no time to manually send a distress signal before abandoning ship. A free-floating EPIRB will automatically engage in case of sinking and with its encoded distress signal you will get aid within hours. For communications on the oceans I recommend getting a good shortwave radio with a decent grounding and antenna that can communicate further than any VHF-based system. Source: I helped build and design a Swedish 131' sailing yacht.
Starting my PhD in quantum cryptography in August and this is of course a very interesting idea.
+1 for Think Tank products. I use several of their products, including the aforementioned Streetwalker Harddrive. Like you, I lug around some serious SLR gear (plus laptop, accessories and heavy tripod) and this bag has performed well and has got very good build quality. Of course, it's quite pricey, but so is your gear.
I've worked on a passenger ship that used RO for drinking water distillation. The RO water is so clean straight out of the membrane that we had to "pollute" it by letting it go through a sand filter. The sand adds taste, ions and minerals (and pH stability?) to the water.
I find this whole audiophile thing pretty interesting, especially now something very similar starting to spill over into mainstream photography. JPEGS are out!, we need 16 bit RAW files for out holiday snaps! As a digital artist, I find it disturbing that people are going to let a JPEG artefact (real or imaginary) spoil their enjoyment of a picture: you're looking at it wrong!
I just couldn't let this pass by without comment. Yes, I am a flac kind of a person, and take pride in ripping music with the absolute highest quality. I am also a photographer, and yes, I shoot in raw format. Why? Because I do post-processing. On every photo I take. A good-quality jpeg is indistinguishable from raw until you start doing the least bit of editing. Then the differences will be clear as day and night. Ever tried rescuing an underexposed 8-bit JPEG and then try the same with a 12-bit raw? And don't get me started about color spaces...
JPEG is perfect for the holiday shooter, though, but personally I long for the 16-bit raw files (best available today on 35-mm SLR:s is 14-bit). That will take care of *some* of the imaging artifacts that come from the rounding errors between the sensor and the memory card.
And the ability to zoom in to certain views was pretty awesome. If Ansel Adams were alive today, I wonder what his opinion would be and if he would use such a technique. He would have ot do something. Many of the films he liked to use are no longer in production - at least in the 4x5 format he liked.
Don't insult the name of Ansel Adams.
I'm a photographer myself, and I have yet to see a gigapan that looks lood. Why do people think that the resolution is interesting at all? A photo is all about capturing something interesting, and that requires hard work from the guy behind the camera. Gigapixel is the latest excuse for lazy photographers to make boring photos. A great (no, let me say legendary) photographer like Adams doesn't need gigapans. And large format photography is alive and kicking, btw.
The parent is somewhat correct; the delete option has existed for a long time, though it has been extremely well-hidden. I would describe it as a hack. When I deleted my account in early 2008, I had to create a new fake account and "overwrite" the e-mail of the old one. Everything I had done vanished, including all my messages in groups and on other people's "walls". There's a better explanation of the procedure here.
I can still remember "getting" how binary worked standing there and to a 10 year old geek-wannabe,
I don't believe you could have understood binary when you were only two years old!
There are 10 types of people in the world:
Those who understand binary,
those who don't,
and then there's people who don't understand zero-based indices
In some countries the NMT system is still operational and is used by ships for it's excellent coverage (compared to GSM, that is). Don't have any links at the moment, but I know some ships that are using NMT to get an OK network connection when out on the sea. Other than that, I think I remember you can surf using VHF. Don't know about SSB, internet over SSB would be slow but with an awesome coverage. Last resort: Satellite.
Umm, dude, prostitution is legal in many European countries.
Not legal in Sweden
You expect the Swedish Parliament to give up prosecutorial immunity?
I certainly don't hope for it, but in the case I referred to above copyright was put above the constitutional Offentlighetsprincipen. Anything is possible when dealing with pirates, it seems. Thanks to IPRED we now have private entities doing policework and the government spies on our internet traffic thanks to FRA.