5 ms·

This is of particular interest/concern to me. A colleague and I have devised[0] a messaging system that is encrypted, and resists traffic analysis. This is of

This is of particular interest/concern to me. A colleague and I have devised[0] a messaging system that is encrypted, and resists traffic analysis. This is of legitimate interest to people have have reason to fear the authorities in their areas ... people like journalists. And freedom fighters. And "The Resistance". And ordinary people like you and me who simply don't want the Government to sweep up all our communications, eventually break it, and then mine it for anything and everything. And yet, if it's genuinely secure we are at risk of being arrested and charged with anything they can think of, because it might be used by "the bad guys." So what do we do with our invention? [0] Please don't respond with things like "Never roll your own crypto".[1] [1] Nor with Schneier’s Law[2]: “any person can invent a security system so clever that she or he can’t think of how to break it.” [2] It dates back even earlier[3]: "One of the most singular characteristics of the art of deciphering is the strong conviction possessed by every person, even moderately acquainted with it, that he is able to construct a cipher which nobody else can decipher. -- Charles Babbage, 1864 [3] https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2011/04/schneiers_law.html https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2011/04/schneiers_law... Added in edit: I genuinely don't understand what's triggering the downvotes here. Is it just that you don't believe me? I was kinda hoping to get some genuinely useful feedback.

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
MrDrDr 2y ago
Its a very interesting problem and I suspect it will be very difficult to separate your ethical beliefs from your business model. However, if what you have, is genuinely novel and ‘works’, I think you need to decide on the vision of your business and are you primarily selling to consumers, companies or governments. The latter option may reduce the risks you describe.
killingtime74 2y ago
You can always open source it like signal. No one is trying to arrest those guys. Break it yes but not arrest them. They aren't marketing to criminals, anyone can use it. Actually those people you mention are already served by signal, so curious what additional value add you bring
- collyw 2y ago
  https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/8974 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/8974
- ColinWright 2y ago
  (Edited for clarity) You ask: > ... those people ... are already served by signal, so curious what additional value add you bring Signal is centralised, and is susceptible to traffic analysis. Our system uses standard, well-established existing cryptographic primitives in a novel way and is decentralised and, as I say, resists traffic analysis.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    They didn’t say to use Signal. Just mimic how they operate.
    - ColinWright 2y ago
      They said: > ... those people you mention are already served by signal, so curious what additional value add you bring. I was responding to that. (And thank you for this and your other response(s))
  - maxerickson 2y ago
    So open source it anonymously if you fear being arrested and don't want to deal with those consequences. Or move to the US and publish it as a book. We don't have laws quite that insane that you'd be subject for arrest from that.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
dhx 2y ago
I added a lot more in the previous thread from yesterday (didn't get on the front page but would be good to merge into this thread)[1]. In summary: Australia has laws such as [2][3] (in the state of NSW) which prohibit possession of encrypted communications devices which are deemed to be purpose designed for use in the illicit drug trade or some other defined criminal purposes. The accused application developer/administrator is alleged to have specifically built the application for use in the illicit drug trade with no other reasonable reason for the application existing. Access to the application was by invitation only with allegedly 600-something installations out there, with these installations stated to be overwhelming associated with the illicit drug trade and criminal groups. In addition to outlawing encrypted communications devices deemed to be designed only for use by criminal groups, Australia has multiple other laws that compel anyone able to assist with breaking into a computer system or messaging service to do so. In this case, it appears a warrant allowing the application to be backdoored was granted, and this backdoored app was then distributed to the 600-something devices allowing messages to be read. The accused application developer/administrator seemingly wasn't aware. Likely it won't be revealed what the exact method used was, but it could theoretically include black bag operations and compelling third parties to assist with access to data centres, servers, networks, etc. Seemingly the primary concern for you is if at least one person using your code is in the illicit drug trade (even if 99.99% of the other users of the code are law abiding citizens), you could perhaps be compelled in at least Australia (but also a rapidly growing list of other countries) to insert a targeted backdoor into the code. A similar situation to the xz-utils backdoor but with a law-abiding developer being compelled to insert the backdoor themselves. Or alternatively, if you host the code on GitHub or on a rented server, Microsoft or a hosting provider is compelled to hand over the GitHub account or rented server to assist with attacking the target illicit drug trade user. With more and more countries copying this attack model, it'll seemingly wreck havoc on software supply chains and the software industry generally. Software will become increasingly nationalised and the Internet's global reach further dismantled. Possibly it will become quite difficult for software developers to take a holiday or attend a conference in a different country. Possibly the best current defence against such supply chain attacks is something similar to Gentoo's package repository (monolithic Git repository) which ensures software cryptographic checksums are shared globally. For a supply chain attack to work, malicious software is required to be distributed to everyone at once, thus making the supply chain implant detectable and observable to everyone. Some of the more recent attempts at introducing Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) also try to achieve a similar objective. All of these have a single-point-of-failure aspect, which an alternative distributed ledger approach helps solve. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41566948 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41566948 [2] https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1900-040#sec.192O https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act... [3] https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1900-040#sec.192P https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act...
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> genuinely don't understand what's triggering the downvotes here This is an emerging story about a globally-coördinated takedown of an allegedly-criminal enterprise. Drawing equivalence between that and what you’re working on, and then pitching the latter as the protector of journalists, freedom fighters and presumably Bambi comes across as presumptuous. (Your comments 0 and 1 also partially undermine the notion that you’re genuinely seeking feedback.) More directly: talk to a lawyer. This isn’t a quirk of Australian law, given it was a coördinated mission including America, Canada, Europe, Australia and even Iceland. My guess is this guy was knowingly receiving payment from criminals doing crimes generally considered as much. But we don’t yet know, so any advice rendered is specious. TL;DR You may be getting downvoted because of the way your comment is written. Not its content.
- ColinWright 2y ago
  Thank you for the response ... genuinely helpful. > Your comments 0 and 1 also partially undermine the notion that you’re genuinely seeking feedback. We're not asking for feedback about the cryptographic aspects. Almost every post like this triggers the "Don't roll your own crypto" response, but we have that covered. That's why I put points [0] and [1]. I'm genuinely seeking feedback on: Assuming that what we have actually works, and given the current tension between security and freedom, how should/could we proceed? > pitching ... as the protector of journalists, freedom fighters and presumably Bambi comes across as presumptuous. I honestly didn't read it like that. Thank you for the different perspective. Next time I'll keep that in mind.
viraptor 2y ago
> because it might be used by "the bad guys." Start with a reality check. It's not "might". If it gets popular, this app will be used by criminals (in an objective way not politics-subjective) and you need to live with that idea. You'll be supporting people fighting for freedom as well as people planning murders for material gains. You don't get to choose and if it works correctly, you won't be able to tell them apart. You may end up running a 100% mafia-supported system. Are you ready for that? (I'm suggesting that, because your message seems to be still very rose tinted...)
mdhb 2y ago
You’re being paranoid. Here is a project out of DARPA https://github.com/tst-race/race-docs/blob/main/what-is-race.md https://github.com/tst-race/race-docs/blob/main/what-is-race...
huhtenberg 2y ago
> So what do we do with our invention? I've been in your exact shoes, 20 years ago. I came to realize that any privacy technology is very quickly adopted to cover up unsavory things. For every legitimate case you'd see 10x of shit you wouldn't want to touch with a long pole, ever. Unfortunately, that's life. Ultimately, your question is that of ethics, so the answer depends on you. It's only you who can decide if the benefits of providing journalists and freedom fighters (presumably those aligned with your world views) with secure messaging will balance out all the harm it will do when abused and misused. One (sort-of) solution here is to provide a self-hosted version of the system only. This will still have the same ethical baggage attached to it, but it will be somewhat dampened by the fact that you aren't directly enabling and facilitating any shady stuff. Not promoting it and keeping it reserved for your circle is another workaround.
phendrenad2 2y ago
> Please don't respond with things like "Never roll your own crypto" Always amuses me. If nobody makes their own crypto... there is no crypto.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

MrDrDr 2y ago

Its a very interesting problem and I suspect it will be very difficult to separate your ethical beliefs from your business model. However, if what you have, is genuinely novel and ‘works’, I think you need to decide on the vision of your business and are you primarily selling to consumers, companies or governments. The latter option may reduce the risks you describe.

killingtime74 2y ago

You can always open source it like signal. No one is trying to arrest those guys. Break it yes but not arrest them. They aren't marketing to criminals, anyone can use it. Actually those people you mention are already served by signal, so curious what additional value add you bring

collyw 2y ago
https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/8974 https://github.com/signalapp/Signal-Android/issues/8974
ColinWright 2y ago
(Edited for clarity) You ask: > ... those people ... are already served by signal, so curious what additional value add you bring Signal is centralised, and is susceptible to traffic analysis. Our system uses standard, well-established existing cryptographic primitives in a novel way and is decentralised and, as I say, resists traffic analysis.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  They didn’t say to use Signal. Just mimic how they operate.
  - ColinWright 2y ago
    They said: > ... those people you mention are already served by signal, so curious what additional value add you bring. I was responding to that. (And thank you for this and your other response(s))
- maxerickson 2y ago
  So open source it anonymously if you fear being arrested and don't want to deal with those consequences. Or move to the US and publish it as a book. We don't have laws quite that insane that you'd be subject for arrest from that.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

dhx 2y ago

I added a lot more in the previous thread from yesterday (didn't get on the front page but would be good to merge into this thread)[1]. In summary: Australia has laws such as [2][3] (in the state of NSW) which prohibit possession of encrypted communications devices which are deemed to be purpose designed for use in the illicit drug trade or some other defined criminal purposes. The accused application developer/administrator is alleged to have specifically built the application for use in the illicit drug trade with no other reasonable reason for the application existing. Access to the application was by invitation only with allegedly 600-something installations out there, with these installations stated to be overwhelming associated with the illicit drug trade and criminal groups. In addition to outlawing encrypted communications devices deemed to be designed only for use by criminal groups, Australia has multiple other laws that compel anyone able to assist with breaking into a computer system or messaging service to do so. In this case, it appears a warrant allowing the application to be backdoored was granted, and this backdoored app was then distributed to the 600-something devices allowing messages to be read. The accused application developer/administrator seemingly wasn't aware. Likely it won't be revealed what the exact method used was, but it could theoretically include black bag operations and compelling third parties to assist with access to data centres, servers, networks, etc. Seemingly the primary concern for you is if at least one person using your code is in the illicit drug trade (even if 99.99% of the other users of the code are law abiding citizens), you could perhaps be compelled in at least Australia (but also a rapidly growing list of other countries) to insert a targeted backdoor into the code. A similar situation to the xz-utils backdoor but with a law-abiding developer being compelled to insert the backdoor themselves. Or alternatively, if you host the code on GitHub or on a rented server, Microsoft or a hosting provider is compelled to hand over the GitHub account or rented server to assist with attacking the target illicit drug trade user. With more and more countries copying this attack model, it'll seemingly wreck havoc on software supply chains and the software industry generally. Software will become increasingly nationalised and the Internet's global reach further dismantled. Possibly it will become quite difficult for software developers to take a holiday or attend a conference in a different country. Possibly the best current defence against such supply chain attacks is something similar to Gentoo's package repository (monolithic Git repository) which ensures software cryptographic checksums are shared globally. For a supply chain attack to work, malicious software is required to be distributed to everyone at once, thus making the supply chain implant detectable and observable to everyone. Some of the more recent attempts at introducing Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) also try to achieve a similar objective. All of these have a single-point-of-failure aspect, which an alternative distributed ledger approach helps solve. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41566948 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41566948 [2] https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1900-040#sec.192O https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act... [3] https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-1900-040#sec.192P https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act...

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> genuinely don't understand what's triggering the downvotes here This is an emerging story about a globally-coördinated takedown of an allegedly-criminal enterprise. Drawing equivalence between that and what you’re working on, and then pitching the latter as the protector of journalists, freedom fighters and presumably Bambi comes across as presumptuous. (Your comments 0 and 1 also partially undermine the notion that you’re genuinely seeking feedback.) More directly: talk to a lawyer. This isn’t a quirk of Australian law, given it was a coördinated mission including America, Canada, Europe, Australia and even Iceland. My guess is this guy was knowingly receiving payment from criminals doing crimes generally considered as much. But we don’t yet know, so any advice rendered is specious. TL;DR You may be getting downvoted because of the way your comment is written. Not its content.

ColinWright 2y ago
Thank you for the response ... genuinely helpful. > Your comments 0 and 1 also partially undermine the notion that you’re genuinely seeking feedback. We're not asking for feedback about the cryptographic aspects. Almost every post like this triggers the "Don't roll your own crypto" response, but we have that covered. That's why I put points [0] and [1]. I'm genuinely seeking feedback on: Assuming that what we have actually works, and given the current tension between security and freedom, how should/could we proceed? > pitching ... as the protector of journalists, freedom fighters and presumably Bambi comes across as presumptuous. I honestly didn't read it like that. Thank you for the different perspective. Next time I'll keep that in mind.

viraptor 2y ago

> because it might be used by "the bad guys." Start with a reality check. It's not "might". If it gets popular, this app will be used by criminals (in an objective way not politics-subjective) and you need to live with that idea. You'll be supporting people fighting for freedom as well as people planning murders for material gains. You don't get to choose and if it works correctly, you won't be able to tell them apart. You may end up running a 100% mafia-supported system. Are you ready for that? (I'm suggesting that, because your message seems to be still very rose tinted...)

mdhb 2y ago

You’re being paranoid. Here is a project out of DARPA https://github.com/tst-race/race-docs/blob/main/what-is-race.md https://github.com/tst-race/race-docs/blob/main/what-is-race...

huhtenberg 2y ago

> So what do we do with our invention? I've been in your exact shoes, 20 years ago. I came to realize that any privacy technology is very quickly adopted to cover up unsavory things. For every legitimate case you'd see 10x of shit you wouldn't want to touch with a long pole, ever. Unfortunately, that's life. Ultimately, your question is that of ethics, so the answer depends on you. It's only you who can decide if the benefits of providing journalists and freedom fighters (presumably those aligned with your world views) with secure messaging will balance out all the harm it will do when abused and misused. One (sort-of) solution here is to provide a self-hosted version of the system only. This will still have the same ethical baggage attached to it, but it will be somewhat dampened by the fact that you aren't directly enabling and facilitating any shady stuff. Not promoting it and keeping it reserved for your circle is another workaround.

phendrenad2 2y ago

> Please don't respond with things like "Never roll your own crypto" Always amuses me. If nobody makes their own crypto... there is no crypto.