This is a good (or at the very least, an interesting) idea, but this
isn't the place for hashing out implementation ideas. The fundamental
concept is, Ubuntu should employ deniable encryption by default. And
then instead of discussing 1% partitions and UK laws, we leave the
details to FOSS crypto
With a fixed value of 1% you would kinda be able to deduct if the file has been
used by checking if file_size == 1%;
File size should be a random value of 0.1-1%.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
** Tags added: privacy
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/148440
Title:
General rubberhose vulnerability
To manage notifications about this bug go to:
This is a good idea to implement. One mentioned that this should be put
on brainstorm, however, it is my impression that the brainstorm site is
just a black hole. Especially for security and privacy related ideas.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs,
Edward: Section 49 notices are supposed to be served where there is
already a reasonable suspicion (ie other evidence) of the key's
existence (or the knowledge of a passphrase).
This is not a bug, this is political activism trying to use an entire userbase
as leverage against a law some people
Woo typing. I of course meant to say RIPA is *not* about systematic
trawling...
--
General rubberhose vulnerability
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/148440
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
As a UK citizen, I am curious how having encrypted data on my disk that I do
not know the password for, is going to help me when MI5 are clubbing me
senseless demanding to know my password.
I will say I don't know it and they will say we don't believe you. Thanks
for guaranteeing that every UK
As law enforcement have conveniently found out, if you have a notebook,
you have a tomb of information about what you do and everything you have
ever done. There could be cookies there for your bank account. A list
of search results. I list of websites you've visited.
If every notebook was
This is an idea, not a bug, as far as I can tell. Shouldn't you post it
on brainstorm.ubuntu.com?
--
General rubberhose vulnerability
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/148440
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs
I really hope this feature is added to Ubuntu. We all would be safer for
abusive governments.
--
General rubberhose vulnerability
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/148440
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
ubuntu-bugs
blastzilla: if every notebook was encrypted and nobody knew their
encryption key, nobody would be able to use their laptop. What you
appear to mean is that there should be an encryption which the system
knows the password to. At which point, why would they ask the human
owner?
--
General
Chris Jones: blastzilla was just generalizing a bit.
Scenario A:
Every notebook has an encrypted partition that's created by default with a
randomized key.
Only a few users set a key and use the encrypted partition.
When asked for a key everybody says Huh?.
Those Certain People trying to
The idea is to encrypt about 1% of every laptop with a random password, thus
rendering that 1% of the disk useless to the user. It would be possible
however, to re-encrypt this with a password you choose and actually store
things in it.
This means the 90%(or whatever, probably even more) of the
God, what a sad world we live in. I still think this is a good idea,
though.
@Chris Jones: I don't see how this makes you any more or less likely to
be tortured -- if you're already in a situation where you're about to be
clubbed, I don't think simply the absence of encryption software on your
mdm-adph: you are exactly right, this is basically never a problem.
I'm do happen to encrypt my whole disk so my laptop is worthless to simple
thieves motivated by data, but I would be very unlikely to be in a situation
where my key is being forcibly demanded of me. And were that situation to
Mr. Jones complains of laws requiring us to give up our crypto keys.
This is a strawman. You can't be legally compelled to surrender
something you don't possess. Claiming to not know the key is an issue
of fact for the jury. If they believe that you do not have a key, then
you can not be guilty
Hardy has LUKS support + encrypted partitions and all the rest of the
funky tools by default.
** Changed in: ubuntu
Status: Confirmed = Fix Released
--
General rubberhose vulnerability
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/148440
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
See 2)
I haven't downloaded Hardy. Does the installer always create an
encrypted partition by _default_ (as long as the user says its legal)?
If it doesn't, then it does not really deal with the problem I
mentioned.
Encryption must appear to be in _use_ by default by all users.
--
General
Either
5a) The last modified or last accessed time of the container file should not be
changed automatically.
Or
5b) There should be a service that regularly randomly updates the last modified
and last accessed date on the container file to a recent time.
--
General rubberhose vulnerability
** Visibility changed to: Public
** This bug is no longer flagged as a security issue
** Changed in: ubuntu
Importance: Undecided = Wishlist
Status: New = Confirmed
--
General rubberhose vulnerability
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/148440
You received this bug notification because
20 matches
Mail list logo
