-Original Message-
From: "Major Variola (ret)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Jul 30, 2004 10:25 PM
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Email tapping by ISPs, forwarder addresses, and crypto proxies
The "profitably&quo
This is what J.A. Terranson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said
about "Re: Email tapping by ISPs, forwarde" on 24 Jul 2004 at 18:44
>
> On Sat, 24 Jul 2004, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
>
> > There might be blind cypherpunks, we don't discriminate[1],
>
> There Is No We.
>
> > [1] the original phone phreak
At 12:36 PM 7/29/04 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
>"Remember that the spookfabs don't have to contend with *economics and
>yield*."
>
>Damn, this is precisely where I wish Tim May was still around.
We are all just echoes of the voices in his head.
But I did work for a company that owned fabs. And h
At 12:07 AM 7/29/04 -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
>On Wed, 28 Jul 2004, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
>
>> Did you know that your teeth enamel contain isotope ratios that
>> encode regions where you might have grown up around age 6?
>
>Yes. I am also aware that tooth enamel has the interesting propert
hey can do with a chip or chipset, and implies that they won't be orders of
magnitude better at opening up LOTS of traffic.
(In non-troll mode.)
-TD
From: "Major Variola (ret)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Email t
Variola wrote...
While this cannot be discounted in toto, the tech comes to them from
academia (most of the time), so generally, if you are widely read,
you'll
have a pretty good idea of what's *possible*. You are likely dead-on
accurate about the fabs though.
In the *public* lit.
Well, perhaps b
On Sun, 25 Jul 2004, Bill Stewart wrote:
> Cap'n Crunch may have bad teeth, but his eyes were fine the last time I saw
> him.
Yeah, but what's left of his mind is more like what's left of his teeth
:-(
--
Yours,
J.A. Terranson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
0xBD4A95BF
"...justice is a duty towards tho
At 04:44 PM 7/24/2004, J.A. Terranson wrote:
> [1] the original phone phreaks were blind,
This is a ridiculous statement, and even worse, leaks information about
your nym: [young enough to have not been there].
You are thinking of Joe "Whistler" Joe Egressia (sp?), and the kid form
New York whose n
On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 10:35:19PM -0700, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> You don't know about tape robots, or offline indexing, eh?
FYI from a recent trip to the NSA crypto museum:
http://www.mccullagh.org/image/10d-15/storagetek-automated-cartridge-system.html
http://www.mccullagh.org/image/10d-15/
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 01:11:58AM -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
> Google's Gmail is an interesting case.
> Unlike Councilman's ISP, who were sneaky greedy wiretapping bums,
> Google tells you that they'll grep your mail for advertising material,
> and tells you how much of that they'll leak to the ad
--
On 23 Jul 2004 at 12:40, Thomas Shaddack wrote:
> Depends on whom. Often the money are the main motivation. Of
> course, your own country won't pay you as well as the other
> one, and will try to appeal to your "patriotism" like a bunch
> of cheapskates - it's better to be a contractor.
The
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004, Riad S. Wahby wrote:
> for free. You just have to start pulse dialing with the hook before the
> autodialer kicks in;
The easier way is to wait for the retard to answer, then curse at them.
They'll hang up, and in ~60 seconds you'll be back to a dial tone, and the
dialer w
"Major Variola (ret)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Back when the protocols were unprotected... much like the 'net today :-)
Hell, as recently as three years ago the pay phones in Boston could
still be red boxed. It may actually still be possible---I haven't tried
in a while. Haven't done it here
On Sat, 24 Jul 2004, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> There might be blind cypherpunks, we don't discriminate[1],
There Is No We.
> [1] the original phone phreaks were blind,
This is a ridiculous statement, and even worse, leaks information about
your nym: [young enough to have not been there].
Y
At 09:47 PM 7/23/04 -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
>> What I meant was, Ames and that FBI dude Hansen (sp?), at least the
KGB
>> got Ames' wife as part of the package, whereas the FBI CI dude
>> let his wife off as part of the deal he cut. Nice xian that he was,
he
>> was into strippers.
>
>Aren't w
At 12:39 AM 7/22/04 -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
>
>> I'm following the Principle of not underestimating the
>> adversary,
>
>Don't go overboard: remember that there is a difference between
>underestimating your adversary and unrealistically *over*es
At 10:27 AM 7/22/04 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
>>Gilmore et al used a bunch of old Sun Chassis for his & Kocher's
>>DEScracker. You think this is somehow more than 100 watts, in a
>>diplo suitcase, nowadays?
My point was, Gilmore et al were way behind what's capable.
Proof of concept needn't be c
Variola:
You say a lotta good shit here, but you're really out of your area in this
case. You seem to miss the basic points, and then fill in your blindspot
with pure theoretical conjecture. Let me point out some of the lil' flaws in
your thinking
With all due respect, you think Ft. Meade
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> I'm following the Principle of not underestimating the
> adversary,
Don't go overboard: remember that there is a difference between
underestimating your adversary and unrealistically *over*estimating your
adversary.
> who does plenty of R&D, jus
At 10:12 PM 7/21/04 -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
>On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
>>
>> With all due respect, you think Ft. Meade uses the same COTS crap
>> as you are forced to deal with? Bwah hah hah.
>
>Sorry Major, I'm gonna have to call you on that one. Yes, they are
>lightin
On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> At 10:09 AM 7/21/04 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
> >Variola wrote...
> >
> >Dark fiber.
> >
> >"Dark Fiber" ain't a talisman you merely wave at data to get it to
> magically
> >move to where you want it to.You've got to LIGHT that fiber, and to
> li
At 11:28 AM 7/21/04 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
>
>As for the cable landings, likewise I've never heard anyone mention
that
>they saw any government equipment at the landings, so I suspect it's
>relatively minimal.
I'm sorry but I have to puke at your cluelessness. Do you actually
think the folks
At 10:09 AM 7/21/04 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
>Variola wrote...
>
>Dark fiber.
>
>"Dark Fiber" ain't a talisman you merely wave at data to get it to
magically
>move to where you want it to.You've got to LIGHT that fiber, and to
light
>that fiber you need LOTS and LOTS of power-hungry, space-occupy
On Tue, Jul 20, 2004 at 08:55:36PM -0700, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> The thread was about wiretapping. My point was that you can record
> at linespeed an analyze at leisure. Nothing more, nothing less.
This makes no sense. Most of the traffic out there is garbage, and it is
ridiculously expen
At 09:00 PM 7/20/2004, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
At 10:12 AM 7/19/04 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
>No, I think I'm becoming convinced that they can't yet get ALL of it.
Enjoy your childhood while it lasts. Its a beautiful time.
I think you're talking at cross-purposes.
If you're the Good Guy, tryin
At 10:12 AM 7/19/04 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
>"Gimme an intel IXA network processor and no problem. ATM is fixed
>size data, not as tricky as IP decoding. Predicatable bandwidth.
>Stream all into megadisks, analyze later."
>
>I'm gonna have to challenge this bit here, Variola.
Please. Truth r
At 07:56 AM 7/19/04 -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
>On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
>> You don't know about tape robots, or offline indexing, eh?
>
>None of which qualify here - remember, the discussion was based upon a
>"quiet" implementation.
The thread was about wiretapping. My
As suggested, tapping oversea fibres in shallow waters is probably the Way
To
Do It.
Apparently NSA has it's own splicing sub for this purpose. As for US fibers,
I've spoken to folks who have actually seen the splice in cable landings
that went over to W. VA or wherever.
-TD
__
it will be packed into a GIG-BE OC-768
back to storage and processing.)
-TD
From: "Major Variola (ret)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Email tapping by ISPs, forwarder addresses, and crypto
proxies
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 200
On Mon, Jul 19, 2004 at 07:56:05AM -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
> None of which qualify here - remember, the discussion was based upon a
> "quiet" implementation.
A VPN link from a *nivore box streaming filtered info is pretty quiet.
There are plenty of dedicated network processors for packet fi
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> >Besides that old fashioned transport diversity, we have the original
> >problem: even if you could do it (maybe in three to five years), what
> are
> >you going to do with the data you've snarfed? Backhaul it? Shove it
> into
> >TB cassettes?
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Tyler Durden wrote:
> JA, ya' gotta good point here. Or at least, this sheds a lot of doubt on
> things.
>
> But then again, the purpose of GIG-BE may be precisely to move an optical
> copy (use a $100 splitter) back to processing centers where the traffic is
> stored. In thi
nd then CALEA whatever circuit
that conversation came out of.
-TD
From: "J.A. Terranson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Email tapping by ISPs, forwarder addresses, and crypto proxies
Date: Sun,
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Tyler Durden wrote:
> "I think it would be far easier if WAN protocols were plain GBit Ethernet."
>
> WAN won't be 1GbE, but it will probably be 10GbE with SONET framing, or else
> OC-192c POS (ie, PPP-encapsulated HDLC-framed MPLS). In either case, I
> suspect it will be far
a big fat pipe
than to try to break out a zillion lil' tiny DS1s.
-TD
From: Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "J.A. Terranson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Email tapping by ISPs, forwarder addresses, and crypto proxies
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 15
.
-TD
From: Eugen Leitl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "J.A. Terranson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Email tapping by ISPs, forwarder addresses, and crypto proxies
Date: Sun, 18 Jul 2004 14:46:10 +0200
On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 06:13:49AM -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 07:50:16AM -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
> I have seen a passive tap on a gig line used for IDS, true, but that's
> pretty close to the state of the art right now. There's an issue with
There are dedicated network processors, though, and one can outsorce the
filter bottlen
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 06:13:49AM -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
>
> > A NIC? You gotta realize that we're talking about mesh circuits here:
> > OC3-OC48 trunks, OC192 backbones... This is no small job. A mom/pop or
>
> At times of 10 GBit Ethernet, OC19
On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 06:13:49AM -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
> A NIC? You gotta realize that we're talking about mesh circuits here:
> OC3-OC48 trunks, OC192 backbones... This is no small job. A mom/pop or
At times of 10 GBit Ethernet, OC192 data rate doesn't seem all that
intimidating.
A
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> I was thinking about a box at each incoming/outgoing point with a NIC in
> passive mode.
A NIC? You gotta realize that we're talking about mesh circuits here:
OC3-OC48 trunks, OC192 backbones... This is no small job. A mom/pop or
midsized regional mayb
On Sun, Jul 18, 2004 at 05:55:02AM -0500, J.A. Terranson wrote:
> Now, *mirroring* to a couple of choke points, sure, but then you ave
> transit and other associated costs (you gotta haul the data to all of the
> collectors).
I was thinking about a box at each incoming/outgoing point with a NIC i
On Sun, 18 Jul 2004, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> For those of you who have worked at major ISPs, can the fact that traffic is
> routed through a few "customer" boxes be hidden from employees?
Speaking as someone who qualifies: no. However, the fact that you even
asked the question begs another questio
On Sat, Jul 17, 2004 at 02:06:40PM -0700, Bill Stewart wrote:
> On the other hand, 100,000 employees times two disk drives per desktop
> and a few departmental servers can get you that much capacity.
I understand there is this thing called a black budget. The production
rate limit of plain text
You could try sending an email to Austin Hill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> to see
if he could organize releasing source for remaining freedom related
source that they are not currently using.
Adam
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 02:34:04PM -0700, Steve Schear wrote:
> I wonder if the mail 2.0 code could be public
>I can't imagine any intelligence professional wasting her time reading
>the crap at times coming over this list.
As of mid 2000 most of traffic is recorded. By this time 'most' is very close to
'all'. But if you e-mail someone with account on the same local ISP, using dial-in at
the recipient
At 07:28 AM 7/7/2004, Tyler Durden wrote:
"If you think the cable landings in Va/Md are coincidental, you are
smoking something I've run out of. Its all recorded. I'm sure the
archiving and database groups in Ft. Meade will get a chuckle out of your
"the right to" idioms."
Well, I don't actually
On Wed, Jul 07, 2004 at 10:28:01AM -0400, Tyler Durden wrote:
> Well, I don't actually believe it's all recorded. As I've attempted to
> explain previously, "they" almost certainly have risk models in place. When
> several variables twinkle enough (eg, origination area, IP address,
> presence o
.
There's probably some kind of key word search that either diverts the copy
into storage or into the short list for an analyst to peek it.
-TD
From: "Major Variola (ret)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Email tappin
At 02:47 PM 7/6/2004, Hal Finney wrote:
Thomas Shaddack writes:
> There are various email forwarding services, which are nothing more than a
> SMTP server with pairs of [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Right, mostly for use as disposable email addresses.
I've used spamgourmet to good effect
On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 11:36:11PM -0700, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> At 06:58 AM 7/7/04 +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
> >I can't imagine any intelligence professional wasting her time reading
> >the crap at times coming over this list.
>
> Frankly sir, that's because you have no idea of their budget
At 06:58 AM 7/7/04 +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote:
>I can't imagine any intelligence professional wasting her time reading
>the crap at times coming over this list.
Frankly sir, that's because you have no idea of their budget,
or their fascistic urges.Its not paranoia to think you're tapped,
its rat
On Tue, Jul 06, 2004 at 09:40:29PM -0700, Major Variola (ret) wrote:
> smoking something I've run out of. Its all recorded. I'm sure the
> archiving
> and database groups in Ft. Meade will get a chuckle out of your
> "the right to" idioms.
All this stuff goes into some database slot. It will on
>> Absolutely, look at the threat model. You're not worried about
someone
>> breaking into your computer, you're worried about your ISP legally
>> reading your email.
Guaranteed, and encryption is bait. Use stego.
>That's very true, however there can be operators you trust more than
your
>ISP,
At 02:47 PM 7/6/04 -0700, Hal Finney wrote:
>> Messages in storage have much lower judicial protection than messages
in
>> transit. (This does not have much technical merit, in the current
>> atmosphere of "damn the laws - there are terrorists around the
corner",
>> but can be seen as a nice little
On Tue, 6 Jul 2004, Hal Finney wrote:
> > There are various email forwarding services, which are nothing more than a
> > SMTP server with pairs of [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> Right, mostly for use as disposable email addresses. I've used
> spamgourmet to good effect, myself
Thomas Shaddack writes:
> Reading some news about the email wiretapping by ISPs, and getting an
> idea.
>
> There are various email forwarding services, which are nothing more than a
> SMTP server with pairs of [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Right, mostly for use as disposable email
Reading some news about the email wiretapping by ISPs, and getting an
idea.
There are various email forwarding services, which are nothing more than a
SMTP server with pairs of [EMAIL PROTECTED] --
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Messages in storage have much lower judicial protection than messages in
tra
57 matches
Mail list logo