3 ms·
>Your proposal is that they're going to go house to house and search your attic for the last of those t-shirts the EFF printed the last time this happened? As
by chopin 11y ago
>Your proposal is that they're going to go house to house and search your attic for the last of those t-shirts the EFF printed the last time this happened?
As every comms is under surveillance its vastly easier than that. You just need to look for traffic you can't read. And then go after the sender. If you make encrypted communication a criminal offense, that's an easy task.
- AnthonyMouse 11y ago> You just need to look for traffic you can't read. And what precisely is that supposed to mean? If I send you a spreadsheet purporting to be "the latest numbers for the current period" but the low bits of each field (which would reasonably be statistically random) are really encrypted data, how do you propose an observer can figure that out?
- mirimir 11y agoIt's not that simple. There may also be covert channel traffic that you don't see, encoded in packet timing. You can only use maybe 1% of "carrier" throughput. But that's easily enough for text messages hidden in HD video streams.
- chris_wot 11y agoThen people resort to stenography. And activists start throwing binary chaf into emails and webpages. Or they do weird things like setup a weak encryption channel that encapsulates a stronger encrypted tunnel. The amount of ways around this is kind of silly.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]