Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy The Internet News Your Rights Online

Anonymous, People's Liberation Front Build Anonymous Data-Sharing Site 137

Posted by timothy
from the for-all-your-library-science-needs dept.
suraj.sun writes with these snippets from an article at Ars Technica: "Hacker group Anonymous and the People's Liberation Front have created a data-sharing site called AnonPaste.tk, meant to host pastes of code and other messages without any moderation or censorship of the information posted. The new site, which uses a free .tk web address, allows users to set a time for the paste to expire. It claims that data is encrypted and decrypted in the browser using 256 bit AES, so the server doesn't see any of the information included in the paste.The site says it's taking donations in the form of WePay or BitCoins. ... AnonPaste is built using open-source software called ZeroBin, created by French developer Sebastien Sauvage. According to Infoweek Sauvage has experience in creating online authentication systems for French banks, suggesting the creator knows a thing or two about encryption of data. Still, on the software's information page, Sauvage reminds potential users that ZeroBin software can not protect against potential Javascript attacks. 'Users still have to trust the server regarding the respect of their privacy,' he says. 'ZeroBin won't protect the users against malicious servers.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Anonymous, People's Liberation Front Build Anonymous Data-Sharing Site

Comments Filter:
  • by xiando (770382) on Sunday April 22, 2012 @08:33AM (#39762073) Homepage Journal
    I am NOT about to let you or your anonymous friends run JavaScript in my browser. No. That would compromise my security. The idea outlined in the summary sounds good, but the JavaScript-based implementation is bad. EPIC FAIL. Think of the Tor-users! They are not about to let their anonymity go by submitting to the evil JavaScript World Order.
  • Cool, but... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by betterunixthanunix (980855) on Sunday April 22, 2012 @08:34AM (#39762079)
    ...we already have lots of ways to do this. We can encrypt and post to Usenet. We can use extensions like FireGPG to encrypt on post to websites. So why use a system where we place all our trust in the service provider, which is both theoretically risky and has failed in the past:

    http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2007/11/encrypted-e-mai/ [wired.com]
  • by elucido (870205) on Sunday April 22, 2012 @10:05AM (#39762709)

    According to what Pastebin says about Anonpaste just using Anonpaste could mean you have something to hide and if you have something to hide it means you need to be investigated.

    Although Anonymous has used the news of AnonPaste to taunt Pastebin, Vader isn't worried about the popularity of his own site. He does see problems with the general idea of the new paste site though. "Having this new anonymous paste service online will most likely mean that less 'sensitive information' is posted on Pastebin.com, which we like," Vader told Ars, "But we think this new totally anonymous Paste site will be used mainly by people who have something to hide, people who are posting things that really shouldn't be posted. We see no benefit for normal legitimate users to use it over the currently existing paste websites. We are afraid that this site will be bombarded with people's personal information, credit-card details, and things such as child pornography."

    If you use Anonpaste then the governments will claim you're a credit card thief, a child pornography, or a terrorist, because why else would you want to use something like Anonpaste?

    My advice is don't post on Anonpaste. Read Anonpaste but don't post a damn thing. If someone really knows what they are doing they probably don't need Anonpaste but if they somehow did then they weighed the risks already.

  • by spydir31 (312329) <hastur@@@hasturkun...com> on Sunday April 22, 2012 @12:08PM (#39763697) Homepage

    The server operator could modify the javascript it sends to the client, so that the client sends either the key or the plaintext to a place of the operator's choosing.

    That would fall under the same category as MITM in this case. You still need to trust the server (or a server, if you prefer)

    You could move the client side code to a browser addon/extension, but you'd still have the problem of trusting the extension to behave

Felson's Law: To steal ideas from one person is plagiarism; to steal from many is research.

Working...