Links for 2008-10-06

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Ross Anderson not quite so cool anymore

Security: Ross Anderson, crypto and security guru extraordinaire, moonlights as – wait for it — a street bagpipe player:

I play the pipes (the Great Highland Bagpipe and the Scottish smallpipes). I played competitively as a teenager, and thereafter paid my way through university by working as a street musician in Germany, France, the Netherlands and Denmark.

NOOOOOO! ANYTHING BUT THE BAGPIPES!!!

Only joking. But yes, he really does play the bagpipes. And that submission to the EU’s consultation on the management of copyright and related rights is worth a read, to get an idea of how the new increased enforcement of music copyright has had chilling effects on the viability of the UK’s folk music scene. (found via Karl-Friedrich Lenz.)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Ahmed Chalabi and Iran’s encryption

Security: some crypto drama.

Ahmad Chalabi apparently told the Iranian government that the NSA had broken their secret code, according to ‘US intelligence officials’: NYTimes: Chalabi Reportedly Told Iran That U.S. Had Code. This story is still running — Bruce Schneier has just posted his expert opinion, as has Ross Anderson. As I noted on Eric Rescorla’s weblog, here’s my (non-expert) theory ;)

It’s known that the Iranians used Crypto AG equipment up until about 1992, and it’s been widely reported that Crypto AG’s systems were backdoored by the NSA and traffic routinely decrypted. (also, Baltimore Sun story, 1995)

Reportedly, the Anglo-Irish discussions of the 1985 were a rather one-sided affair, because the Irish government used Crypto AG machines to communicate between their Embassy in London and Dublin, and intercepts of their reports were fed back to the UK government.

In addition, according to this article (backup), the NSA also provided Iraq with intercepts of Iranian secret traffic, while Iraq was a US ally — which could explain why Chalabi would have known about it.

It also speculates as to how it was done:

‘Knowledgeable sources indicate that the Crypto AG enciphering process, developed in cooperation with the NSA and the German company Siemans, involved secretly embedding the decryption key in the cipher text. Those who knew where to look could monitor the encrypted communication, then extract the decryption key that was also part of the transmission, and recover the plain text message. Decryption of a message by a knowledgeable third party was not any more difficult than it was for the intended receiver. (More than one method was used. Sometimes the algorithm was simply deficient, with built-in exploitable weaknesses.)’

So my opinion is that Chalabi’s claim was very old news from the 80’s and early 90’s — which pretty much fits in with the rest of his tip-offs to everyone else ;)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Using a Web of Trust to stop spam

Spam: Been thinking about a distributed ‘web of trust’ approach to fighting spam.

Combine those with another key point — that we do not need PKI, crypto, or any other changes to identify senders in current SMTP — and it could be done today, I think.

Why we don’t need crypto to identify an SMTP sender

Every email message delivered via SMTP across the internet will contain these headers:

  • the From line
  • one or more Received headers

Traditionally, whitelisting uses just the From line, which is vulnerable to spoofing. SpamAssassin used this up to version 2.3x. Spammers started spoofing mails where ‘From’ was the same as ‘To’, and since most people had themselves in the whitelist, that worked. boo.

In 2.3x or 2.4x, we added code to extract the IP addresses from the Received headers, and use a combined token — ( from_address, ip_address ) — as the sender’s address.

(In fact, we use just the top 24 bits of each IP to deal with situations like DHCP or dialup pools, where a relay may get a different IP every now and again. That’s close enough, at least.)

This is much harder to forge without doing a full-scale TCP spoofing attack; which is why the SpamAssassin auto-whitelist generally works well.

So basically, to identify someone strongly enough to provide a spam fix in plain old vanilla current SMTP, gen up a string containing their ‘From’ address, along with all the /24 masks of the IP addresses found in the ‘Received’ headers.

Remove your relays’ IP addresses, and you have an unspoofable ID for that person’s SMTP traffic. Any spammer who wants to spoof that, will have to compromise their mail server (or a server in the same /24). That’s not cost-effective for spamming.

Note that whitelisting based on that is effectively what the SpamAssassin auto-whitelist does. But for that to be more useful than the AWL, it has to extend over the internet to those people your friends haven’t corresponded with yet; ie. it’s got to be distributed.

(If you would like to comment on this scheme, I’d prefer if you could post comments at this QuickTopic forum.)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Using a Web of Trust to stop spam

Been thinking about a distributed ‘web of trust’ approach to fighting spam.

Combine those with another key point — that we do not need PKI, crypto, or any other changes to identify senders in current SMTP — and it could be done today, I think.

Why we don’t need crypto to identify an SMTP sender

Every email message delivered via SMTP across the internet will contain these headers:

  • the From line
  • one or more Received headers

Traditionally, whitelisting uses just the From line, which is vulnerable to spoofing. SpamAssassin used this up to version 2.3x. Spammers started spoofing mails where ‘From’ was the same as ‘To’, and since most people had themselves in the whitelist, that worked. boo.

In 2.3x or 2.4x, we added code to extract the IP addresses from the Received headers, and use a combined token — ( from_address, ip_address ) — as the sender’s address.

(In fact, we use just the top 24 bits of each IP to deal with situations like DHCP or dialup pools, where a relay may get a different IP every now and again. That’s close enough, at least.)

This is much harder to forge without doing a full-scale TCP spoofing attack; which is why the SpamAssassin auto-whitelist generally works well.

So basically, to identify someone strongly enough to provide a spam fix in plain old vanilla current SMTP, gen up a string containing their ‘From’ address, along with all the /24 masks of the IP addresses found in the ‘Received’ headers.

Remove your relays’ IP addresses, and you have an unspoofable ID for that person’s SMTP traffic. Any spammer who wants to spoof that, will have to compromise their mail server (or a server in the same /24). That’s not cost-effective for spamming.

Note that whitelisting based on that is effectively what the SpamAssassin auto-whitelist does. But for that to be more useful than the AWL, it has to extend over the internet to those people your friends haven’t corresponded with yet; ie. it’s got to be distributed.

(If you would like to comment on this scheme, I’d prefer if you could post comments at this QuickTopic forum.)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

Quantum Cryptography – up and running in Boston (fwd)

Wow. Things move pretty fast in the world of quantum crypto it seems; according to this IP mail, BBN have had a VPN protected using quantum cryptography up and running since December 2002.

Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 18:18:26 -0400
From: Dave Farber (spam-protected)
To: ip (spam-protected)
Subject: Quantum Cryptography – up and running in Boston

From: Chip Elliott (spam-protected)
Date: Mon, 09 Jun 2003 16:51:09 -0400
To: (spam-protected) (spam-protected)
Cc: craig Partridge (spam-protected) Chip Elliott (spam-protected)
Subject: Quantum Cryptography – up and running in Boston

Dave, Bob,

Craig Partridge has forwarded me your message on the BBC’s article on quantum cryptography. Indeed, quantum cryptography is much closer than most IP folks might think!

We’ve had an Internet protected by quantum cryptography up and running in our lab since Dec 2002. It’s a full Virtual Private Network (VPN) protected by our own quantum cryptography apparatus running through dark fiber. This is a DARPA project, in collaboration with the BU Photonics Center and Harvard University Applied Physics Dept, and next steps will be a build-out in metro Boston to link our campuses.

We’ll be announcing our work at SIGCOMM 2003 later this summer.

Cheers,

– Chip

Chip Elliott Principal Engineer, BBN


You are subscribed as (spam-protected) To manage your subscription, go to

http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

GNOME 2.2

GNOME 2.2 includes nifty new font technology, I see; including ‘drag into ~/.fonts’ font installation, at last, thanks to Keith Packard. I especially like this:

Jim Gettys and the GNOME Foundation Board worked with Bitstream, Inc. to arrange the donation of the Vera font family to the Free Software community.

Here’s what Vera looks like; very nice. Finally, some decent free fonts – kudos to Bitstream.

And I see subpixel smoothing is now right in there, in the basic font preferences. Excellent news!

But where TF is the Metacity documentation? Maybe there’s none, in the tradition set down over generations of GNOME hacks^Wapplications. (Pet peeve: every command in the default PATH should have a manual page IMO.)

The ‘documentation’ and ‘home page’ links I can find all lead to a directory of tarballs. Great. The best result Google can find, after the aforementioned tarballs, is a blog posting complaining about Metacity. Hmm — scary — I really don’t like the implication that the only way to do my own key-binding prefs, is to run a batch of 15 gconftool commands every time I log in… ah shaggit, I’ll use sawfish ;)

(PS: yes, I’m still on GNOME 1. That’s what happens when you’re stuck on the wrong end of dial-up.)

Crypto: The Crypto Gardening Guide and Planting Tips by Peter Gutmann. Excellent advice on how crypto designers should design protocols so that they can actually get implemented. Also, as a corollary; good tips on common crypto gotchas for implementors to watch out for. Some bonus funnies, too:

Note: PGP adopts each and every bleeding-edge technology that turns up, so it doesn’t figure in the above timeline. Looking at this the other way, if you want your design adopted quickly, present it as the solution for an attack on PGP.

A little bit more introduction on some of the items would be worthwhile though. I don’t have a clue what OAEP is for example ;)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments

more on Crypto AG

Comments

Who 0wnz your government?

Danny reports “the always excellent c’t magazine analyses the hypotheticals of the Dutch IP-surveillance scandal:

According to anonymous sources within the Dutch intelligence community, all tapping equipment of the Dutch intelligence services and half the tapping equipment of the national police force, is insecure and is leaking information to Israel. …”

Yikes. You’d think they’d have learnt from Ireland’s mistakes…. this article (update: moved to here) reports that massive back-door use by a third-party government occurred before in similar circumstances, during the Anglo-Irish negotiations of 1985.

For those of you who don’t know, these discussions were between the Republic of Ireland and the UK, and took place in London.

In order to allow the negotiating team to contact their government and civil service securely, a million-pound cryptographic system had been bought in order to secure the link between the Irish Embassy in London and the government in Dublin.

Unfortunately, this equipment was thoroughly compromised.

It turns out that the Swiss company from which the equipment was bought, namely Crypto AG, had cooperated with the NSA and the BND (the NSA’s German equivalent), to allow them to decipher the traffic trivially. (Judging from the snippet from another article below, sounds like this was done using a known-plaintext attack).

The NSA routinely monitored and deciphered the Irish diplomatic messages. All it took then was for the UK’s NSA equivalent, GCHQ, to pull some strings, and the UK government had a distinct advantage in the negotiations from then on.

Another source for details on Crypto AG’s breakage is Der Spiegel, issue 36/96, pages 206-207. Here’s some snippets:

The secret man (sic) have obviously a great interest to direct the trading of encryption devices into ordered tracks. … A former employee of Crypto AG reported that he had to coordinate his developments with “people from Bad Godesberg”. This was the residence of the “central office for encryption affairs” of the BND, and the service instructed Crypto AG what algorithms to use to create the codes.

Members of the American secret service National Security Agency (NSA) also visited the Crypto AG often. The memorandum of the secret workshop of the Crypto AG in August 1975 on the occasion of the demonstration of a new prototype of an encryption device mentions as a participant the cryptographer of the NSA, Nora Mackebee. …

Depending on the projected usage area the manipulation on the cryptographic devices were more or less subtle, said Polzer. Some buyers only got simplified code technology according to the motto “for these customers that is sufficient, they don’t not need such a good stuff.”

In more delicate cases the specialists reached deeper into the cryptographic trick box: The machines prepared in this way enriched the encrypted text with “auxiliary informations” that allowed all who knew this addition to reconstruct the original key. The result was the same: What looked like inpenetrateable secret code to the users of the Crypto-machines, who acted in good faith, was readable with not more than a finger exercise for the informed listener.

Full text here.

So what’s the bottom line? Use GPG! ;)

From: Julian Assange (spam-protected)

To: (spam-protected) (spam-protected)
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 1996 13:24:31 +1000 (EST)

Approved: (spam-protected)

Subject: BoS: Crypto AG = Crypto NSA/BNG ?

Thanks to Anonymous for this English translation of the German original.


secret services undermine cryptographic devices


Archive of “DER SPIEGEL” issue 36/96 pages 206-207


“Who is the authorized fourth”

Secret services undermine the protection of cryptographic devices.

Switzerland is a discreet place. Uncounted millions of illegal money find an asylum in the discreet banks of the republic. Here another business can prosper, which does not need any publicity: the production of cryptographic devices.

A top address for tools of secrecy was for several decades the company Crypto AG in Zug. It was founded in 1952 by the legendary Swedish cryptographer Boris Hagelin. Hundreds of thousands of his “Hagelin-machines”, pendants of the German “Enigma” devices, were used in World War II on the side of the Allies.

A prospectus of the company states: “In the meantime, the Crypto AG has built up long standing cooperative relations with customers in 130 countries.” Crypto AG delivers enciphering devices applicable to voice as well as data networks.

But behind this solid facade the most impudent secret service feint of the century has been staged: German and American services are under suspicion of manipulation of the cryptographic devices of Crypto AG in a way that makes the codes crackable within a very short time, and this allegedly happened until the end of the eighties.

Customers of Crypto AG are many honorable institutions, like the Vatican, as well as countries like Iraq, Iran, Libya, that are at the top of the priority list of U.S. services. At the beginning of the nineties the discreet company was suspected to play an unfair game. What was the source of the “direct precise and undeniable proofs” U.S. president Reagan referred to when he ordered the bombardment of Libya, the country he called the wire puller of the attack against the disco La Belle? Obviously the U.S services were able to read encrypted radio transmissions between Tripoli and its embassy in East Berlin.

Hans Buehler, a sales engineer of Crypto AG, got between the fronts of the secret service war. On March 18, 1992, the unsuspecting tradesman was arrested in Teheran. During the nine and a half months of solitary confinement in a military prison he had to answer over and over again, to whom he leaked the codes of Teheran and the keys of Libya.

In the end Crypto AG paid generously the requested bail of about one million German marks (DM), but dismissed the released Buehler a few weeks later. The reason: Buehlers publicity, “especially during and after his return” was harmful for the company. But Buehler started to ask inconvenient questions and got surprising answers.

Already the ownership of the Crypto AG was diffuse. A “foundation”, established by Hagelin, provides according to the company “the best preconditions for the independence of the company”.

But a big part of the shares are owned by German owners in changing constellations. Eugen Freiberger, who is the head of the managing board in 1982 and resides in Munich, owns all but 6 of the 6,000 shares of Crypto AG. Josef Bauer, who was elected into managing board in 1970, now states that he, as an authorized tax agent of the Muenchner Treuhandgesellschaft KPMG [Munich trust company], worked due to a “mandate of the Siemens AG”. When the Crypto AG could no longer escape the news headlines, an insider said, the German shareholders parted with the high-explosive share.

Some of the changing managers of Crypto AG did work for Siemens before. Rumors, saying that the German secret service BND was hiding behind this engagement, were strongly denied by Crypto AG.

But on the other hand it appeared like the German service had an suspiciously great interest in the prosperity of the Swiss company. In October 1970 a secret meeting of the BND discussed, “how the Swiss company Graettner could be guided nearer to the Crypto AG or could even be incorporated with the Crypto AG.” Additionally the service considered, how “the Swedish company Ericsson could be influenced through Siemens to terminate its own cryptographic business.”

The secret man have obviously a great interest to direct the trading of encryption devices into ordered tracks. Ernst Polzer*, a former employee of Crypto AG, reported that he had to coordinate his developments with “people from Bad Godesberg”. This was the residence of the “central office for encryption affairs” of the BND, and the service instructed Crypto AG what algorithms to use to create the codes. (* name changed by the editor)

Members of the American secret service National Security Agency (NSA) also visited the Crypto AG often. The memorandum of the secret workshop of the Crypto AG in August 1975 on the occasion of the demonstration of a new prototype of an encryption device mentions as a participant the cryptographer of the NSA, Nora Mackebee.

Bob Newman, an engineer of the chip producer Motorola, which cooperated with Crypto AG in the seventies to develop a new generation of electronic encryption machines, knows Mackebee. She was introduced to him as a “counselor”.

“The people knew Zug very good and gave travel tips to the Motorola people for the visit at Crypto AG”, Newman reported. Polzer also remembers the American “watcher”, who strongly demanded the use of certain encryption methods.

Depending on the projected usage area the manipulation on the cryptographic devices were more or less subtle, said Polzer. Some buyers only got simplified code technology according to the motto “for these customers that is sufficient, they don’t not need such a good stuff.”

In more delicate cases the specialists reached deeper into the cryptographic trick box: The machines prepared in this way enriched the encrypted text with “auxiliary informations” that allowed all who knew this addition to reconstruct the original key. The result was the same: What looked like inpenetrateable secret code to the users of the
Crypto-machines, who acted in good faith, was readable with not more than a finger exercise for the informed listener.

The Crypto AG called such reports “old hearsay” and “pure invention”. But the process, that was started by the company against the former employee Buehler, on the grounds that he had said that there might be some truth in the suspicions of the Iranian investigators, surprisingly ended in November of last year.

After the trial, that could have brought embarrassing details to the light, the company agreed to an settlement outside the court. Since that time Buehler is very silent with regard to this case. “He made his fortune financially,” presumed an insider of the scene.

“In the industry everybody knows how such affairs will be dealed with,” said Polzer, a former colleague of Buehler. “Of course such devices protect against interception by unauthorized third parties, as stated in the prospectus. But the interesting question is: Who is the authorized fourth?”

– “Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies, The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.” – C.S. Lewis, _God in the Dock_ +———————+——————–+———————————-+ |Julian Assange RSO | PO Box 2031 BARKER | Secret Analytic Guy Union | (spam-protected) | VIC 3122 AUSTRALIA | finger for PGP key hash ID = | (spam-protected) | FAX +61-3-98199066 | 0619737CCC143F6DEA73E27378933690 | +———————+——————–+———————————-+

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments