Jack Spine writes "The inventor of the World Wide Web has pointed out some of the dangers of deep packet inspection. Sir Tim said that ISPs 'snooping' on data was similar to the interception of mail. 'This is very important to me, as what is at stake is the integrity of the internet as a communications medium,' Berners-Lee said on Wednesday. TBL's comments come as the UK government is gearing up to intercept all web communications in the UK through the Intercept Modernisation Programme, and echo comments he made last year about Phorm."
I remember 10 years ago that every nerd had a PGP key and Schneier's Applied Cryptography [amazon.com] was a standard text for our crowd. Now, the majority of even the hard-core geeks no longer have much interest in encryption. Somewhere along the way we forgot that every step forward on the net demands a way to guarantee privacy. Berners-Lee might regret the lack of privacy now, but he and other luminaries weren't vocal enough about the need for encryption and lots of it.
Well that's the thing. Anonymous posting provided one form of security that's no longer feasibly available. Encryption allows better privacy. As more and more cultures/subcultures/thought-pattern-sharers participate on the web, conflicts and clashes are more and more likely to happen. Opportunistic encryption, as long as it is controllable, will make the web a mutual haven for all cultures. One community can keep their convos/files/culture to themselves, while others can still broadcast theirs. The he
the promise of the internet is free and open communications.
What we do with our data is entirely up to us, and nobody else. Not "the government", not ISPs. This includes encrypting whatever is being transmitted.
You may share any paper, report, program, comment that is yours to publish. Some communications using the Internet should be more like a phone conversation (before USAPATRIOT stupidity), in which a modicum of privacy is a reasonable presumption.
1. I have _multiple_ active GPG keys. All Ubuntu has GPG on them by default. 2. I use TOR regularly, which uses multiple levels of encryption. 3. I use HTTPS sites regularly. Not the old dinky 40bit keys either. 4. My filesystem on my laptops are encrypted via DM_CRYPT and Luks. 5. Every machine I communicate with has SSH. Therefore, I also have encrypted data tunnels for everything. 6. I use W.A.S.T.E.
Yeah. That whole encryption thing died out a while back. Uh huh.
Anybody that uses a Unix based system (BSD, Linux, Solaris) all use a variant of OpenSSH. Anybody that buys stuff on the net uses 128bit SSL. Even that child porn dude that's in the supreme court knew enough to use TrueCrypt.
Or even another encryption used: WEP and WPA. There's 2 very standard, "non-weird" encryptions. They just arent terribly strong.
And you just accidently hit on the reason why having that stuff can have you sent to PMITA prison. Did you catch it? Here I'll point it out-"Even that child porn dude that's in the supreme court knew enough to use TrueCrypt.". The simple facts are that law enforcement HATES encryption, because it means they have to bust their ass instead of running a simple scan for *.whatever. So I have no doubt you will see more and more prosecutors using "You know why he has that stuff and won't let us go through his fil
1. I have _multiple_ active GPG keys. All Ubuntu has GPG on them by default.
2. I use TOR regularly, which uses multiple levels of encryption.
3. I use HTTPS sites regularly. Not the old dinky 40bit keys either.
4. My filesystem on my laptops are encrypted via DM_CRYPT and Luks.
5. Every machine I communicate with has SSH. Therefore, I also have encrypted data tunnels for everything.
6. I use W.A.S.T.E.
Yeah. That whole encryption thing died out a while back. Uh huh.
Is W.A.S.T.E. still under active dev? I used that thing for around a year after aol killed it in ~2003/4, and then me and my cousin stopped sharing files as frequently (really the only person I shared files with via WASTE)
Ha! I always send text written with an Enochian font (look it up) after first translating into Voynich script! Now if only I could figure out how to decode it I would be able to read this shopping list....
Because most of us came to this realization: http://xkcd.com/538/ [xkcd.com] or the fact that 90% of it doesn't matter.
All of my Tax documents and other financial stuff is on a 256-bit encrypted disk image. But why the hell do I need to encrypt the message to my mom about my Easter plans? Furthermore, how do I explain to someone that just learned to use a computer that Obama wants to know if it's going to be Ham or Turkey.
And the last time I planned something big and illegal we sure as hell didn't EMAIL each other about it, we met in person. (3 friends of mine all worked at Taco Bell through High School. Summer before college we planned a heist of the flags off the top. I still have a flag I fly on Rugby trips with the Taco Bell Dog.)
Because most of us came to this realization: http://xkcd.com/538/ [xkcd.com] or the fact that 90% of it doesn't matter.
The problem with the xkcd cartoon is that it only applies if whoever wants your information knows that you have it.
The point of general encryption is that fishing expeditions are impossible... so the "juicy" stuff that would warrant attention from the powers that be is hidden in the morass of all the other encrypted data.
Yes, a ten-dollar hammer can be used to get my keys from me... but how do you know I've got the goods if you've never been able to read anyone's data?
Because most of us came to this realization: http://xkcd.com/538/ [xkcd.com] or the fact that 90% of it doesn't matter.
All of my Tax documents and other financial stuff is on a 256-bit encrypted disk image. But why the hell do I need to encrypt the message to my mom about my Easter plans?
Because if somebody's watching you send all those messages to your mom about Easter plans and then suddenly see encrypted traffic, they're going to know that the encrypted traffic must have been special and then come after you with the wrench?
The world has moved beyond simply sending encrypted e-mails back and forth. Steganography, torrents, tor, etc.
If I REALLY wanted to coordinate killing the president or something big. I'd probably use YouTube or Craigslist where the Signal to Noise is infinitely small. I'd embed an encrypted stegano message inside video of a guy lighting farts on fire or 'casual encounter' ad. Heck, put up some eBay listings with big pictures. How do you know that latest version of Heroes you downloaded from Bit Torrent doesn't have a 5MB image embedded in it with the President's route on some foreign trip?
How about those Spam messages that look like a ton of gibberish, do you know they're not some secret code?
I'm sure if a few Slashdoters put their minds to it, they could come up with a bit more ingenious ways of sending messages than 'plain text' encrypted PGP e-mails.
The next terrorist isn't going to suddenly start sending encrypted messages from a normal account.
Encryption works for very important data (that you would die to protect), less important data transferred over a network (moderately important e-mails), and unimportant data as a form of misdirection (if everything is encrypted, no one can tell what's important or not).
Full disk encryption, while nice, is not a protection for your data from someone who really wants it, unless you will die to protect it. It is protection from casual thieves for things like passwords, credit card data, personal information (y
A lot of very foolish people have overgeneralized the point of that cartoon.
The $5 wrench attack does work to defeat encryption, but it only works when someone is specifically interested in you.
The bad guys cannot put a $5 wrench on the backbone and slurp up everything. The only way they can do that, is if people agree to not encrypt.
If you encrypt, you defeat massive-scale surveillance. And you are not defeating a theoretical attack; you're not even defeating a plausible attack. You defeat an attack that the US government is known to be using.
You don't need to read phrack or 2600 to know about this; read the New York Times or turn on your TV and watch Frontline. Get your head out of the sand.
If I suddenly had a need to send something encrypted, but I didn't want it to appear encrypted, I would take the encrypted block and bury it steganographically in an image attached to the email, an image relevant to the innocuous message about Easter dinner that is in the body of the message...like a picture of a ham or something.
In fact, I suspect that most of the innocuous-looking traffic that's flying around the web right now is actually bearing a different encrypted message to the intended recipient as
But why the hell do I need to encrypt the message to my mom about my Easter plans?
Because I might be looking for houses to burgle on Easter.
Because privacy should be the default. Instead of asking why your plans should be secret, ask why your plans should be public. It's just as legitimate of a question.
And the last time I planned something big and illegal we sure as hell didn't EMAIL each other about it, we met in person.
Good for you. But there's more to life than planning crimes, and there are other threats than government law enforcement (they just happen to be the most high-profile). I know some people think that the only purpose of the internet is for pedophiles to trade porn, but really, people do have other uses for it. Most of those uses are nobody else's business. If you wanted the world to know your Easter plans, you could have posted them to Usenet. Instead, you chose email.
Encryption gives a sometimes false sense of security, and the technology is a hassle. It's better to reinforce societal expectations for privacy where it is due, and let social mechanisms (like laws and market reputation) do the job.
Consider e.g. that if you use https from your workplace and see the happy little lock icon in FF or IE, you probably feel safe.
But some workplaces insert a proxy in between you and gmail (or what have you), having stuffed the proxy's certificate on your (their) work machine through local policy. Unbeknownst to you, your employer then sees the communication which you thought was totally private. Now imagine if an ISP could do that and get away with it.
The point is that even if you do *care*, the technology is hard to keep track of, and there is an arms-race ladder of one-upmanship that makes this a never-ending game, which some nerds can win, and most of us will lose.
What will really keep you safe is to stand up for a reasonable expectation of privacy where it should exist, and create norms and laws that protect this. Saying "NO" to Phorm or other invasions by ISPs is part of that approach, and creates legal and commercial consequences that are more effective than asking every grandma to mess with PGP.
Now, the majority of even the hard-core geeks no longer have much interest in encryption.
Then they're not hard-core geeks.
Geez, they're not even soft-core geeks. In December 2005, paranoid what-if rants about theoretical risks, became mainstream knowledge. If you're awake (geek or not), you know we have to start encrypting.
We never went anywhere. I still read Applied Cryptography from time to time. I also:
Run a private XMPP server for me and my girlfriend which only accepts SSL connections.
Operate a tor exit.
Attach a PGP signature to every e-mail I send.
Still think anonymous digital cash schemes are a really cool idea.
The problem is mostly that there are so few other people who seem to care. I send a digital signature on every e-mail, but as far as I know no one ever verifies it. I've sent and received maybe two *enc
Which side are you on: CONTROL or KAOS? That is the question. The Government can only answer that question if it can intercept your communications. Are you going to let them? Can you stop them? Do you care?
People like Sir Tim need to speak out on such issues, because their contributions to science and technology are touted by our leaders as 'proof' of Britain being a modern, forward thinking society - rather than the withered, reactionary, largely technophobic old empire we in fact are.
When governments start snooping on everything they make it harder to snoop on criminals in the future. This makes lots more people want secure networks, which makes more people create tools to make it easy to send/receive encrypted data, which makes even the people who don't know about the issues aware of the issues and tools. Once the tools/protocols become normal, police won't be able to snoop on suspected criminals even with a court order because everything is encrypted.
That'll just make them pass more laws and restrict ISPs so that unsnoopable content isn't allowed. Which will make people start creating stenogrphy tools so things look snoopable, which will make other people aware of the issues and wonder why the gov't is so concerned and start using them.
Then people start using those tools and snooping becomes more expensive (trying to detect stenogaphy) and still useless. But it will get lots of otherwise innocent people in trouble for using encryption or stenography to do something unimportant like send email to their mother.
If police stick to treating everyone as innocent until they had a valid reason to think otherwise and then got a court order they will have a lot more ability to snoop in the future.
Then I lost the key due to a hard drive and floppy disk failure within the same week (wow, that dates this a bit...)
Now I have these wonderful encrypted documents that contain proof of alien intervention with the history of our planet and I can't get at it anymore...
Now I have these wonderful encrypted documents that contain proof of alien intervention with the history of our planet and I can't get at it anymore...
Just mail a copy of each one to yourself at another account and someone will decrypt them for you. I can't tell you who, I've already told you too much and I'm afraid awi3qu91 108OI)
Not because it will bite you in the ass, but because by encrypting everything you 1) give them more stuff to look at and if they are looking at you they aren't looking at me, and 2) it won't be obvious that you are trying to hide something when you DO encrypt that particularly incriminating file. They'll have to spend time decrypting your email to Mom as well as the picture of cousin Julie when she was 4.
Dude, there are these things here at slashdot called "journals" [slashdot.org] where you can post any damned fool thing you want without wasting your sock puppet's karma on needless "offtopic" mods.
I usually write about hookers and other women (oddly, people actually read them!). You could post your Israel trolls.
So basically the consequence of what you're saying is "Ban encryption, because those bloddy terrorists/chinese spies/pedophiles/software pirates might use it to do something evil"? Yeah, good idea. Tomorrow on CNN: Door locks banned. They prevent police from entering criminals' homes, police say.
Lack of QoS is not a good thing. I want routers to respect the IP TOS field. It's there for a reason. Lack of non-standard QoS is the bad thing. With QoS I can use bittorrent and play games at the same time, without it there's no prioritization and the game lags. It's the deep-packet inspection that's intrusive crap.
Inventor of the world wide (Score:5, Funny)
The inventor of the world wide what?
Re:Inventor of the world wide (Score:5, Funny)
Its a typo. It should read "word wide". TBL invented the word "wide" because prior to then most things were narrow.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Not the world wide what, the world wide has. If you elide the prepositional (of) clause, you get "The inventor pointed out...".
The dream of encryption (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
The promise of the internet is free and open data. Encryption is anti-everything the internet is about.
The real death of the internet was ~10 years ago, when anonymous posting disappeared.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Well that's the thing. Anonymous posting provided one form of security that's no longer feasibly available. Encryption allows better privacy. As more and more cultures/subcultures/thought-pattern-sharers participate on the web, conflicts and clashes are more and more likely to happen. Opportunistic encryption, as long as it is controllable, will make the web a mutual haven for all cultures. One community can keep their convos/files/culture to themselves, while others can still broadcast theirs. The he
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:5, Interesting)
the promise of the internet is free and open communications.
What we do with our data is entirely up to us, and nobody else. Not "the government", not ISPs. This includes encrypting whatever is being transmitted.
You may share any paper, report, program, comment that is yours to publish. Some communications using the Internet should be more like a phone conversation (before USAPATRIOT stupidity), in which a modicum of privacy is a reasonable presumption.
Parent
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:4, Insightful)
"The promise of the internet is free and open data."
I thought the promise of the internet was free porn.
Seriously, it started as a government program and open and free communications was not the goal.
Parent
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:4, Interesting)
PGP keys only help with email.
Far better to move the entire web to ONLY ssl based servers, (after fixing ssl of course).
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
And the way to fix SSL, is to switch to using PGP keys [gnu.org].
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:5, Interesting)
Where have YOU been living?
1. I have _multiple_ active GPG keys. All Ubuntu has GPG on them by default.
2. I use TOR regularly, which uses multiple levels of encryption.
3. I use HTTPS sites regularly. Not the old dinky 40bit keys either.
4. My filesystem on my laptops are encrypted via DM_CRYPT and Luks.
5. Every machine I communicate with has SSH. Therefore, I also have encrypted data tunnels for everything.
6. I use W.A.S.T.E.
Yeah. That whole encryption thing died out a while back. Uh huh.
Parent
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:4, Funny)
Parent
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:5, Informative)
What do you mean "Weirdo"?
Anybody that uses a Unix based system (BSD, Linux, Solaris) all use a variant of OpenSSH.
Anybody that buys stuff on the net uses 128bit SSL.
Even that child porn dude that's in the supreme court knew enough to use TrueCrypt.
Or even another encryption used: WEP and WPA. There's 2 very standard, "non-weird" encryptions. They just arent terribly strong.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Apparently, you've turned off your sarcasm detector.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
It did, you just bought the Vista version...
A slashdot poster would like to use sarcasm.
[Cancel] [Allow]
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And you just accidently hit on the reason why having that stuff can have you sent to PMITA prison. Did you catch it? Here I'll point it out-"Even that child porn dude that's in the supreme court knew enough to use TrueCrypt.". The simple facts are that law enforcement HATES encryption, because it means they have to bust their ass instead of running a simple scan for *.whatever. So I have no doubt you will see more and more prosecutors using "You know why he has that stuff and won't let us go through his fil
Re: (Score:2)
Where have YOU been living?
1. I have _multiple_ active GPG keys. All Ubuntu has GPG on them by default. 2. I use TOR regularly, which uses multiple levels of encryption. 3. I use HTTPS sites regularly. Not the old dinky 40bit keys either. 4. My filesystem on my laptops are encrypted via DM_CRYPT and Luks. 5. Every machine I communicate with has SSH. Therefore, I also have encrypted data tunnels for everything. 6. I use W.A.S.T.E.
Yeah. That whole encryption thing died out a while back. Uh huh.
We Await Silent Tristero's Empire.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is W.A.S.T.E. still under active dev? I used that thing for around a year after aol killed it in ~2003/4, and then me and my cousin stopped sharing files as frequently (really the only person I shared files with via WASTE)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:5, Insightful)
Because most of us came to this realization: http://xkcd.com/538/ [xkcd.com] or the fact that 90% of it doesn't matter.
All of my Tax documents and other financial stuff is on a 256-bit encrypted disk image. But why the hell do I need to encrypt the message to my mom about my Easter plans? Furthermore, how do I explain to someone that just learned to use a computer that Obama wants to know if it's going to be Ham or Turkey.
And the last time I planned something big and illegal we sure as hell didn't EMAIL each other about it, we met in person. (3 friends of mine all worked at Taco Bell through High School. Summer before college we planned a heist of the flags off the top. I still have a flag I fly on Rugby trips with the Taco Bell Dog.)
Parent
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem with the xkcd cartoon is that it only applies if whoever wants your information knows that you have it.
The point of general encryption is that fishing expeditions are impossible... so the "juicy" stuff that would warrant attention from the powers that be is hidden in the morass of all the other encrypted data.
Yes, a ten-dollar hammer can be used to get my keys from me... but how do you know I've got the goods if you've never been able to read anyone's data?
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
I hit the guy who gave you the goods with a ten-dollar hammer.
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:5, Insightful)
Because most of us came to this realization: http://xkcd.com/538/ [xkcd.com] or the fact that 90% of it doesn't matter.
All of my Tax documents and other financial stuff is on a 256-bit encrypted disk image. But why the hell do I need to encrypt the message to my mom about my Easter plans?
Because if somebody's watching you send all those messages to your mom about Easter plans and then suddenly see encrypted traffic, they're going to know that the encrypted traffic must have been special and then come after you with the wrench?
Parent
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:5, Insightful)
The world has moved beyond simply sending encrypted e-mails back and forth. Steganography, torrents, tor, etc.
If I REALLY wanted to coordinate killing the president or something big. I'd probably use YouTube or Craigslist where the Signal to Noise is infinitely small. I'd embed an encrypted stegano message inside video of a guy lighting farts on fire or 'casual encounter' ad. Heck, put up some eBay listings with big pictures. How do you know that latest version of Heroes you downloaded from Bit Torrent doesn't have a 5MB image embedded in it with the President's route on some foreign trip?
How about those Spam messages that look like a ton of gibberish, do you know they're not some secret code?
I'm sure if a few Slashdoters put their minds to it, they could come up with a bit more ingenious ways of sending messages than 'plain text' encrypted PGP e-mails.
The next terrorist isn't going to suddenly start sending encrypted messages from a normal account.
Parent
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Encryption works for very important data (that you would die to protect), less important data transferred over a network (moderately important e-mails), and unimportant data as a form of misdirection (if everything is encrypted, no one can tell what's important or not).
Full disk encryption, while nice, is not a protection for your data from someone who really wants it, unless you will die to protect it. It is protection from casual thieves for things like passwords, credit card data, personal information (y
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:5, Insightful)
A lot of very foolish people have overgeneralized the point of that cartoon.
The $5 wrench attack does work to defeat encryption, but it only works when someone is specifically interested in you.
The bad guys cannot put a $5 wrench on the backbone and slurp up everything. The only way they can do that, is if people agree to not encrypt.
If you encrypt, you defeat massive-scale surveillance. And you are not defeating a theoretical attack; you're not even defeating a plausible attack. You defeat an attack that the US government is known to be using.
You don't need to read phrack or 2600 to know about this; read the New York Times or turn on your TV and watch Frontline. Get your head out of the sand.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
If I suddenly had a need to send something encrypted, but I didn't want it to appear encrypted, I would take the encrypted block and bury it steganographically in an image attached to the email, an image relevant to the innocuous message about Easter dinner that is in the body of the message...like a picture of a ham or something.
In fact, I suspect that most of the innocuous-looking traffic that's flying around the web right now is actually bearing a different encrypted message to the intended recipient as
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:5, Insightful)
Because I might be looking for houses to burgle on Easter.
Because privacy should be the default. Instead of asking why your plans should be secret, ask why your plans should be public. It's just as legitimate of a question.
Good for you. But there's more to life than planning crimes, and there are other threats than government law enforcement (they just happen to be the most high-profile). I know some people think that the only purpose of the internet is for pedophiles to trade porn, but really, people do have other uses for it. Most of those uses are nobody else's business. If you wanted the world to know your Easter plans, you could have posted them to Usenet. Instead, you chose email.
Parent
Privacy for the rest of us (Score:5, Insightful)
Encryption gives a sometimes false sense of security, and the technology is a hassle. It's better to reinforce societal expectations for privacy where it is due, and let social mechanisms (like laws and market reputation) do the job.
Consider e.g. that if you use https from your workplace and see the happy little lock icon in FF or IE, you probably feel safe.
But some workplaces insert a proxy in between you and gmail (or what have you), having stuffed the proxy's certificate on your (their) work machine through local policy. Unbeknownst to you, your employer then sees the communication which you thought was totally private. Now imagine if an ISP could do that and get away with it.
The point is that even if you do *care*, the technology is hard to keep track of, and there is an arms-race ladder of one-upmanship that makes this a never-ending game, which some nerds can win, and most of us will lose.
What will really keep you safe is to stand up for a reasonable expectation of privacy where it should exist, and create norms and laws that protect this. Saying "NO" to Phorm or other invasions by ISPs is part of that approach, and creates legal and commercial consequences that are more effective than asking every grandma to mess with PGP.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Key exchange is hard.
If we had signed DNS, and DNS started distributing X.509 certificates ("type CERT queries"), then secure email really would hit the mainstream.
Re:The dream of encryption (Score:4, Insightful)
Then they're not hard-core geeks.
Geez, they're not even soft-core geeks. In December 2005, paranoid what-if rants about theoretical risks, became mainstream knowledge. If you're awake (geek or not), you know we have to start encrypting.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
We never went anywhere. I still read Applied Cryptography from time to time. I also:
The problem is mostly that there are so few other people who seem to care. I send a digital signature on every e-mail, but as far as I know no one ever verifies it. I've sent and received maybe two *enc
Freedom to Conspire (Score:5, Funny)
Which side are you on: CONTROL or KAOS? That is the question. The Government can only answer that question if it can intercept your communications. Are you going to let them? Can you stop them? Do you care?
All I can say is that you should Get Smart!
This is good (Score:5, Insightful)
People like Sir Tim need to speak out on such issues, because their contributions to science and technology are touted by our leaders as 'proof' of Britain being a modern, forward thinking society - rather than the withered, reactionary, largely technophobic old empire we in fact are.
bad long-term solution (Score:5, Interesting)
When governments start snooping on everything they make it harder to snoop on criminals in the future. This makes lots more people want secure networks, which makes more people create tools to make it easy to send/receive encrypted data, which makes even the people who don't know about the issues aware of the issues and tools. Once the tools/protocols become normal, police won't be able to snoop on suspected criminals even with a court order because everything is encrypted.
That'll just make them pass more laws and restrict ISPs so that unsnoopable content isn't allowed. Which will make people start creating stenogrphy tools so things look snoopable, which will make other people aware of the issues and wonder why the gov't is so concerned and start using them.
Then people start using those tools and snooping becomes more expensive (trying to detect stenogaphy) and still useless. But it will get lots of otherwise innocent people in trouble for using encryption or stenography to do something unimportant like send email to their mother.
If police stick to treating everyone as innocent until they had a valid reason to think otherwise and then got a court order they will have a lot more ability to snoop in the future.
Post office also ask about the content in mail (Score:2, Interesting)
>> Sir Tim said that ISPs 'snooping' on data was similar to the interception of mail
Actually, if you think about it, the Post Office also ask about the _type_ of content in your mail: document (letter) ? CD/books ? or fire arms ? ;-)
i admit Post office does not read the words in your letter.
Heh. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Even if you have no reason to, encrypt everything, because someday it might bite you in the ass.
Like when you forget your encryption key ;)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Yeah, I used to do this...
Then I lost the key due to a hard drive and floppy disk failure within the same week (wow, that dates this a bit...)
Now I have these wonderful encrypted documents that contain proof of alien intervention with the history of our planet and I can't get at it anymore...
D*MN YOU GRAYS!!!
--
I drank what?
Re:At this point does it need to be said? (Score:5, Funny)
Just mail a copy of each one to yourself at another account and someone will decrypt them for you. I can't tell you who, I've already told you too much and I'm afraid awi3qu91 108OI)
[NO CARRIER]
Parent
Re:At this point does it need to be said? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Dude, there are these things here at slashdot called "journals" [slashdot.org] where you can post any damned fool thing you want without wasting your sock puppet's karma on needless "offtopic" mods.
I usually write about hookers and other women (oddly, people actually read them!). You could post your Israel trolls.
Re:What a fucking fantasy land Sir Timmy lives in. (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
Investigate encrypted IP streams from US IP ranges to Chinese ones? You betcha.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Obscure reference (Score:2)
That's like asking Al's father what he thinks of the CHP or state troopers.