On 2010/12/15 12:20, Gregory Edigarov wrote: > On Wed, 15 Dec 2010 07:48:46 +0100 > Otto Moerbeek <o...@drijf.net> wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 10:26:44PM -0500, Brandon Mercer wrote: > > > > > If this type of thing really did happen and this actually is going > > > on something as simple as systrace or dtrace would have found it > > > correct? Surely folks have monitored and audited the actual > > > function and traffic that goes across the wire... conversely amd
I think you misunderstand what systrace does. > > > has a "debugger" that'll get you access to more goodies than you > > > could imagine and just recently I discovered a similar "debugger" > > > on the wifi chip on my phone. Guess its better it doesn't work > > > anyhow ;) > > > > It's generally impossible to see from a datastream if it leaks key > > data. It can be pretty damn hard to verify code to show it does not > > leak key data > > I think if it leaks data, it must leak data somewhere, i.e. there must > be a server somewhere, and this server must have an ip. > so if you look at your traffic, and you will find an ip other then ip > of your server, you will know where the leak goes. > > just my 0.5 cents That's not necessary, key data can be leaked in or alongside the encrypted datastream itself, there's no need to send it anywhere. And it doesn't have to be a whole key, just something that makes things cryptanalysis simpler. *If there's something there*. Remember these are still just allegations at this stage.
