4 ms·
Requests aren't guaranteed to be received in the same order to reassemble the files.
by joaomsa 13y ago
Requests aren't guaranteed to be received in the same order to reassemble the files.
- sadfnjksdf 13y agoFor the described technique, no. However, it would be easy enough for one request to have a different length hostname than the rest which contained a checksum, and if then try different combinations of the rest until it matched the checksum, which it would only need to do if it were out of order. And if that happened, you could increase the time between requests, to compensate.
- jamiesonbecker 13y agoOr just add an incrementing prefix.
- wfn 13y agoedit whoops, hit the reply link under the wrong comment. This was supposed to be a comment under "This is a prime example of a covert communication channel." If anyone is interested in having more fun with this kind of stuff, take a look at Tor's pluggable transports[1], for example. A taste specimen of 'covert channels': * various 'have everything appear to be random TCP with no other marks' transports (+/- padded packet lengths, time intervals, etc.) * skype-look-alike transport * various-stuff-over-http-look-alike (html, etc) transport * a transport that imitates git's push/pull * a transport that, given enough 'permitted'/non-censored data, learns to imitate arbitrary protocols (learns and encodes them as regular expressions; some interesting and crazy CA madness) * etc. [1]: https://www.torproject.org/docs/pluggable-transports.html.en https://www.torproject.org/docs/pluggable-transports.html.en and https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/PluggableTransports https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/wiki/doc/PluggableT...