Posted on 05/10/2009 5:43:05 PM PDT by A Navy Vet
With the ever encroaching Fedgov looking in and trying to control our personal lives, I'm looking for way that Americans can still communicate privately.
I understand that any answers given on this public forum, may alert the various gov agencies to a new work-around. I'm hoping someone can provide a fool proof answer even on this public board.
Internet e-mail and forums are easily compromised (ISP's easliy traceable); phone conversations, well, we all know about taps; Ham radio can be intercepted; CB radio the same. And no, face to face comms and devised codes are not the answer I'm looking for - too cumbersome and too slow. Same as snail-mail.
Although there are a few encrypted Internet programs out there such as PGP phone, that particular one is buggy depending on your computer setup (power, memory, firewalls, anti-virus, etc.).
Is anyone aware of any other encrypted Internet programs that the average person doesn't need an expensive doomsday program and a $10,000 server that will simply facilitate privacy? If not Internet, how can anyone possibly have a private conversation? What am I missing...???
“True, but computer time is a finite resource. Thus gubmint agencies who wish to snoop encrypted messages must pick and choose messages that are likely to be interesting.”
Thats why they use key words. By focusing on only a few words it allows them to monitor everything. When the flags show they dig deeper.
The phone network has been modified to allow them to do this. I’m guessing the internet has also since everything goes through core routers at some point.
No tractors or surfboarding? I see.
Yup, STU III is good. Expensive, though, and not readily accessible.
P3r50n4||y 1 u53 |337 f0r 4ny7h1n6 1mp0r74n7, 70 d0d63 k3yw0rd pr06r4m5. 17’5 dyn4m173 f0r 7h47!
Aye, it’s the gist I was getting at.
The point to the Kryptos monument is- even the CIA haven’t cracked it yet in almost 20 years and they REALLY want to.
What you’re after is do-able, completely do-able. You apply something similar to text in real time and there would be no way for them to crack it in a reasonable enough time.
Now, how to go about that- I don’t know. I’m not a tech kind of guy. Not too much help there I guess :-\ It just doesn’t seem like it ought to be that hard to do what you’re talking about.
I am no computer expert, but I imagine that even the so-called “encrypted” computer programs aren’t that secure. At least the government will be able to crack them. Unfortunately, the best way is probably “snail-mail.” Maybe not for speed, but in terms of security. We would need to start our own postal service typed thing. The pony express?
Ironically WorldNut Daily has this headline right now
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=97489
Electronic Police State’ report cites U.S.
Your guess is as good as mine.
Lao Tzu said it best, Tao Te Ching, Chapter 56...those who know do not speak and those who speak do not know. I’m just a speaker.
If you come up with some kind of secret code that still sounds like an everyday conversation. “how’s the weather?”=
“I have the component.” LOL
I’ll tell you, but then I’d have to kill you.
Thanks, I'll have to look into that, but it sounds very expensive.
"The best communication is no communication. Think: leaderless single-cell resistance."
I'm not thinking "leaderless single-cell resistance". I'm thinking basic comms between like-minded individuals who want to talk about the Fedgov without being interpreted as a "terrorist", according to the recent DHS memo and the obami triad.
We just want to talk without being heard...no matter who is talking. If one of the talkers turn out to be a McVeigh, we would turn them in immediately. In fact, the people I'm talking about would probably go to his house and drag his terrorist ass out and beat the holy crap out of him! Then we would use our secure comms to protect each other legally after turning him into pulp.
If the WE were to devise a political plan to re-instate our Constitution in a peaceful manner (although I'm not adverse to civil disobedience), then we need to have private comms, so the Marxists now in our Fedgov wouldn't have the advance warning. Get my drift?
That’s pretty much the conclusion I’ve come to. Thank you.
Yup. That’s it :) I had to find an example.
Interesting, but kinda slow, but could be very secure. Thanks.
The man makes a point. But then we’re not talking about anything as nefarious.
I think we can all agree it’s important that the good guys be able to talk amongst ourselves without fear of scrutiny or compromise. Really, it’s a valid idea, but game it out the next step...let’s say a suitable mode of communication exists. How and to whom do you distribute it in a way that guarantees that only the good guys get it?
Things are not so bad. As an example, OTP encryption can not be broken at all:
The Vernam-Mauborgne one-time pad was recognized early on as difficult to break, but its special status was only established by Claude Shannon some 25 years later. He proved, using information theory considerations, that the one-time pad has a property he termed perfect secrecy; that is, the ciphertext C gives absolutely no additional information about the plaintext. (link)
OTP's flaw is in lack of secure key exchange mechanism. Diplomats usually send OTP keys with a trusted courier. Also, each OTP can be used only once. As long as you do that, they are unbreakable, in theory and in practice.
AES is one of the newer ciphers that is seen as fairly secure. As matter of fact, there is no viable attack on it so far (except if you can run your own program on the encrypting computer... and then you don't need to bother cracking the code.)
If you are interested in highest security then you must use open source encryption software (such as GnuPG) because it is widely peer-reviewed. Closed source software, like today's PGP, may contain security flaws that nobody knows about (and those who do have means of breaking the code.) Also, as other people mentioned, keep the private key password-protected, on a USB disk, and do encryption only on a computer that is never connected to the Internet. Windows or Linux - that does not matter in this case.
High security of modern encryption is the reason why UK has a law that every UK subject must reveal their private encryption key upon demand by authorities, or go to jail. They would not need to do that if they could crack AES on their quantum computers. (They can't, and they don't have quantum computers either.) In most scenarios your privacy will be very well protected if you use modern ciphers; the attacker would have a much better chance of getting the plaintext by beating you with a rubber hose until you provide the key.
But security of your message also depends on the recipient. If you send a super-secret message to Alice, and she then proceeds to decrypt it, print it, and leave on her desk in front of the window that faces the street, or save as plaintext on her Internet-connected, insecure computer, then your message is revealed to anyone who cares to have it.
That’s just the thing. Encrypted doesn’t mena never breakable. The main concern you need to have with encryption is that it is not breakable until it’s no good because whatever the message is has already occurred. Encyrption strength is only important about delaying the inevitable, you pick the strength you need to keep the info secure until it’s too late to be any good.
If they are already looking at you it’s too late. If they aren’t and they see you using super-strength encryption for nothing (but they don’t know that) you will become a subject of interest.
I don’t think green phones are for sale on the civilian market.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.