4 ms·
If I were tasked with dealing with this I would disturb the rice every single shipment, and then let the item continue to its destination. When every single sh
by ars 4y ago
If I were tasked with dealing with this I would disturb the rice every single shipment, and then let the item continue to its destination.
When every single shipment shows sign of tampering I would expect them to give up on this method.
- kragen 4y agoThe shippers would probably find a different way to ship things.
- ungamedplayer 4y agoNegative, do not change. While you are incurring a cost to the attacker keep it as is. Ship nulls regularly AND find another method.
- daenz 4y agoIf you were disturbing every single shipment, I would assume someone was tampering. Once I find a shipping route where none of the items were disturbed, I would know it is secure.
- 8organicbits 4y agoRight, if you are worried about covert tampering and every shipment shows up tampered, you have proven that someone along the shipping route is tampering. You react by distrusting any packages that were previously shipped without anti-tamper protection. And you find a different shipping route. This is costly, but it's a reaction to a threat you can prove to be targeting you. The tamperer is probably better off not tampering with packages, unless they can do so in a plausibly deniable way.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- walterbell 4y ago> I would disturb the rice every single shipment Increasing attacker costs = success.
- pmoriarty 4y agoIt would also increase defender costs, if the defender has to throw out our re-ship some perfectly good hardware every time some of the rice it was packed in was disturbed.
- walterbell 4y agoDecoys are a tried and true response to surveillance, with decades if not centuries of best practices.