NSA Breaks Internet Encryption Completely

JT-Money

Superstar
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
11,665
Reputation
3,880
Daps
50,746
Reppin
NULL
I wonder how long it will take for Obama and the democrats to kill this legislation.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/07/u...-nsa-tactic-in-encryption.html?pagewanted=all

Legislation Seeks to Bar N.S.A. Tactic in Encryption

After disclosures about the National Security Agency’s stealth campaign to counter Internet privacy protections, a congressman has proposed legislation that would prohibit the agency from installing “back doors” into encryption, the electronic scrambling that protects e-mail, online transactions and other communications.

Representative Rush D. **** Jr., a New Jersey Democrat who is also a physicist, said on Friday he believed that the N.S.A. was overreaching and could hurt American interests, including the reputations of American companies whose products the agency may have altered or influenced.

“We pay them to spy,” Mr. **** said. “But if in the process they degrade the security of the encryption we all use, it’s a net national disservice.”

Mr. ****, whose Surveillance State Repeal Act would eliminate much of the escalation in the government’s spying powers undertaken after the 2001 terrorist attacks, was responding to news reports about N.S.A. documents showing that the agency has spent billions of dollars over the last decade in an effort to defeat or bypass encryption. The reports, by The New York Times, ProPublica and The Guardian, were posted online on Thursday.
 

Dooby

إن شاء الله
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
8,383
Reputation
-411
Daps
10,408
These guys don't realize that the Army for instance keeps technology 75yrs into the future on deck (FACT)
The Microwave, the technology was used by the Army 50yrs before we got it
The internet was created in the 60's, THE 60's :wow:

The Philadelphia Experiment is when the military teleported a boat from Phi to Va and back again in 1943

I could go all day :manny:

Teleportation though? Come on...I'm gonna need some kind of source. And please don't let it be BS.
 

PS5 Pro

DC looking a 1/2 seed right about nuh
Joined
Feb 28, 2013
Messages
31,610
Reputation
-10,523
Daps
21,834
Reppin
The Original Rec Room Gang
Teleportation though? Come on...I'm gonna need some kind of source. And please don't let it be BS.
Now we discussing top secret technologies, I can't just hand you the secrets to the universe on demand.
I didn't make up the Philadelphia experiment, it happened. Then as the years go by, they debunk literally everything.
The movie Battle of LA is based on a true story. It didn't go down like the movie, just a giant UFO hovered over LA for an hour and we tried to shoot it down

One of my favorite UFO cases - The Battle Over Los Angeles in 1942.




What was hovering above Los Angeles on February 25, 1942? MSNBC.com's Dara Brown has the story on this 65th anniversary of the 'Battle of L.A.'



The Battle of Los Angeles is the name given by contemporary news agencies to a sighting of one or more unidentified flying objects, which took place from late February 24 to early February 25, 1942. Eyewitness reports of an unknown object or objects over Los Angeles, California, triggered a massive anti-aircraft artillery barrage. The Los Angeles incident occurred less than three months after America's entry into World War II as a result of the attack on Pearl Harbor.


The following are excerpts from the primary front page story of the LA Times on February 26th. Note that there is not a SINGLE description of the object, even though is was clearly locked in the focus of dozens of searchlights for well over half an hour and seen by hundreds of thousands of people:

Army Says Alarm Real Roaring Guns Mark Blackout

Identity of Aircraft Veiled in Mystery; No Bombs Dropped and No Enemy Craft Hit; Civilians Reports Seeing Planes and Balloon

Overshadowing a nation-wide maelstrom of rumors and conflicting reports, the Army's Western Defense Command insisted that Los Angeles' early morning blackout and anti-aircraft action were the result of unidentified aircraft sighted over the beach area. In two official statements, issued while Secretary of the Navy Knox in Washington was attributing the activity to a false alarm and "jittery nerves," the command in San Francisco confirmed and reconfirmed the presence over the Southland of unidentified planes. Relayed by the Southern California sector office in Pasadena, the second statement read: "The aircraft which caused the blackout in the Los Angeles area for several hours this a.m. have not been identified." Insistence from official quarters that the alarm was real came as hundreds of thousands of citizens who heard and saw the activity spread countless varying stories of the episode. The spectacular anti-aircraft barrage came after the 14th Interceptor Command ordered the blackout when strange craft were reported over the coastline. Powerful searchlights from countless stations stabbed the sky with brilliant probing fingers while anti-aircraft batteries dotted the heavens with beautiful, if sinister, orange bursts of shrapnel.

City Blacked Out For Hours

The city was blacked out from 2:25 to 7:21 am after an earlier yellow alert at 7:18 pm was called off at 10:23 pm. The blackout was in effect from here to the Mexican border and inland to the San Joaquin Valley. No bombs were dropped and no airplanes shot down and, miraculously in terms of the tons of missiles hurled aloft, only two persons were reported wounded by falling shell fragments. Countless thousands of Southland residents, many of whom were late to work because of the traffic tie-up during the blackout, rubbed their eyes sleepily yesterday and agreed that regardless of the question of how "real" the air raid alarm may have been, it was "a great show" and "well worth losing a few hours' sleep." The blackout was not without its casualties, however. A State Guardsman died of a heart attack while driving an ammunition truck, heart failure also accounted for the death of an air raid warden on duty, a woman was killed in a car-truck collision in Arcadia, and a Long Beach policeman was killed in a traffic crash enroute to duty. Much of the firing appeared to come from the vicinity of aircraft plants along the coastal area of Santa Monica, Inglewood, Southwest Los Angeles, and Long Beach.

In its front page editorial, the Times said: "In view of the considerable public excitement and confusion caused by yesterday morning's supposed enemy air raid over this area and its spectacular official accompaniments, it seems to The Times that more specific public information should be forthcoming from government sources on the subject, if only to clarify their own conflicting statements about it."

"According to the Associated Press, Secretary Knox intimated that reports of enemy air activity in the Pacific Coastal Region might be due largely to 'jittery nerves.' Whose nerves, Mr. Knox? The public's or the Army's?

Or maybe the military wanted to troll the country back in the 40's :manny:
Will you ignore this then continue to ask how Teleportation is possible?
Hope not...
 

mrken12

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 16, 2013
Messages
80,804
Reputation
20,880
Daps
300,341
Reppin
Maryland
Now we discussing top secret technologies, I can't just hand you the secrets to the universe on demand.
I didn't make up the Philadelphia experiment, it happened. Then as the years go by, they debunk literally everything.
The movie Battle of LA is based on a true story. It didn't go down like the movie, just a giant UFO hovered over LA for an hour and we tried to shoot it down

It's top secret but you know about it and told it to a forum? :duck:

Tell us about the time traveling top secrets. :lupe:
 

Liu Kang

KING KILLAYAN MBRRRAPPÉ
Supporter
Joined
May 3, 2012
Messages
13,769
Reputation
5,513
Daps
29,956
It's impressive how the USA continuously does his best to be hated by every countries in the world.
 

keepemup

Banned
Joined
Jun 9, 2012
Messages
4,743
Reputation
-982
Daps
5,350
nikka please :russ:

Yes, 75yrs. I didn't just pull this number out my ass bruh. No, I don't have a link either, everything in life doesn't start or end with a link. I can look it up, if I find it, yeah. And while I never said the internet in the 60's is the same as it is now, you can't really say how it was then because you wasn't privied to what they are or were up too. Just like you don't know shyt now unless they tell you about it. The same ppl you relying on once told you the world was flat, that Pluto was a planet, or when they was in space they didnt' see anything :whistle:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-...gy-1000s-years-ahead-civilian-technology.html

You don't have any scientific rigor to support what you're saying but yet you somehow believe it. That's utterly ridiculous.

When it comes to science it's not about belief, it's about understanding.

The rest of what you're saying doesn't deserve warrant a response.
 

badvillain

Rookie
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
590
Reputation
40
Daps
423
Reppin
NULL
To put into magnitude what they did, here are some tech articles:
Did the NSA secretly make a major math breakthrough?

In a recent story about the U.S. National Security Agency’s controversial Internet surveillance operations, the New York Times reported that “the agency has circumvented or cracked much of the encryption, or digital scrambling, that guards global commerce and banking systems.”

The bolding is mine, because if in fact the agency did crack the encryption schemes used for bank transactions (the Times is somewhat unclear on that point), then in doing so it may have solved a math problem that has long puzzled cryptographers and number theorists alike.

The problem in question is that of integer factorization. It has been shown that every integer (e.g. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5...) can be written as the product of prime numbers. To review, a number is said to be prime if it is divisible only by itself and 1. (The first 10 prime numbers are 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, 17, 19, 23, and 29.)

That means if we pick a number, say 50, we should be able to write it as a product of primes: In this case, it would be 5 x 5 x 2. For small numbers like 50, determining prime factors is within reach of any middle schooler. However, take a sufficiently large number—one that is hundreds of digits long—and the problem quickly becomes intractable, not only for humans but even for modern computers.

To date, there is no known shortcut to quickly factor large integers into primes. It has never been proven that no such shortcut exists. We’ve just never found one.

If the unfactorable nature of these large integers doesn't interest you, consider that it has been the reason many of your most personal messages are kept private as they move across the Internet.

But the Times report about how the NSA penetrated banking encryption seems to suggest the agency may have cracked the problem. Here’s why (and this is going to take some explaining):

In the most basic sense, encryption works like this: Say Alice wants to send Bob a piece of sensitive information. Her computer first asks his to generate two keys: a “public key” and a “private key.” The public key can encrypt the message, and the private key can decrypt it. (Note that the public key cannot decrypt the messages after encrypting it.)

So Bob’s computer creates the two keys and sends Alice the public key. He keeps the private key for himself. Alice then encrypts her message with the public key and sends it to Bob’s computer. Once Bob has the message, he uses his private key (which he has shared with no one) to decipher the encryption.

So, the essence of an encryption algorithm is to create a public key and a private key such that only the private key can decode the messages.

One popular technique is the RSA algorithm, which gets its name from the three students who invented it. Here is how the algorithm accomplishes the task of generating a public and private key.

First, the public key:

  • The algorithm randomly selects two prime numbers, let’s call them p and q.
  • Next, the algorithm computes p x q. Call that result n. (So, n = p x q).
  • Then, it calculates a number z, where z = (p - 1)(q - 1).
  • Finally, the algorithm picks an odd number k such that z is larger than k and z is not divisible by k. (For example, if z were 20, we could pick k to be 11, since 20 is not divisible by 11.)
  • The public key--the one Alice sends to Bob--is the two numbers n and k.
Now for the private key:

  • We need to find a number, call it j, such that (k x j) divided by z will give a number with a remainder of 1. Note, that it doesn’t matter what number we choose, as long as it has a remainder of 1.

    Note here that “remainder” refers to the remainders computed in long division. So, for example, if you took 30 and divided it by 9 using long division you would get 3with a remainder of 3, because 9 goes into 30 3 times, leaving a remainder of 3.

    Here’s a concrete example: If, say, k = 7 and z = 20, then we need to pick a number j such that (7 x j) / 20 = some number with a remainder of 1. So, j could be3 because (7 x 3) / 20 = 21/20 = 1 with a remainder of 1. Or we could choose j to be 23, since (7 x 23) / 20 = (161 / 20) = 8 with a remainder of 1. Whatever j we chose, that along with n becomes our private key.
So, returning to the Alice example: Alice has a confidential message she wants to give Bob. Let’s call it M. Before sending it, she asks Bob to generate a public and private key. Using the RSA algorithm, Bob’s computer generates the public key (n,k) and the private is (n,j). Bob then sends Alice the public key and she encrypts her message this way:

  • First she computes (M^k) / n.
  • The remainder of the resulting number is her encrypted message E. She sends E to Bob. We won’t get into how exactly Bob’s private key decrypts the message because his key would never be intercepted by a hacker. The important point here is why a hacker can’t decrypt Alice’s message with the public key--that is, the numbers (n,k).
Imagine you intercepted the public key and the encrypted message. So, you have k, n andE. The question is, can you solve for M?

(M^k) / n = some number with a remainder of E

In short, the problem is that the encrypted message E is the remainder of some number—but you don’t know which one. When you are dealing with huge numbers, as RSA does, there are a ton of possibilities for M that, plugged into that equation, would have a remainer of E.

(If that doesn’t make sense, consider the two long division calculations 10 / 9 and 19 / 9. The first yields 1 with a remainder of 1. The second gives you 2 with a remainder of 1. So, you can’t definitely determine what number divided by 9 was used to calculate the remainder of 1, since clearly both 10 and 19 satisfy that requirement.)

And here, at last, is where we come to the possibility that the NSA figured out how to crack the RSA algorithm. It turns out if, in the above public key equation, you know the prime factors of n—that is, the p and q we started with, then it is rather easy to solve for the original message.

As I mentioned above, as far as the academic world knows, when n is large, factoring it into the product of prime numbers is all but impossible. But, if the NSA cracked the RSA algorithm, they likely figured out a way to do it. That would be a serious mathematical accomplishment, far beyond being just Internet security.

So how likely is it that the NSA actually solved this long-standing problem?

It’s hard to say. Presumably for security reasons, the Times was quite vague about the NSA’s specific capabilities. In some cases, the NSA got around encryption through partnerships with companies. Other times, they apparently cracked the encryptions with supercomputers.

It is possible the NSA simply partnered with banks to find a backdoor through their encryption schemes. Furthermore, security expert Bruce Schneier, who worked with theGuardian on the same story, said, based on the documents he saw, that the “math is good.” That would seem to imply that he wasn't shown anything to indicate the NSA figured out a prime factorization shortcut.

That said, if anyone could crack it, it’s the U.S. government. The Department of Defensespends $11 billion a year on cryptanalysis, employing some 35,000 people full time to the task—easily one of the most powerful mathematical armies in the world.

If nothing else, the incident stands as a reminder that in many case, our most private transactions on the Internet hinge on simple mathematical problems like prime factorization that, on a small scale, can be solved by a child. Whether or not that simplicity scales up to the large integers that secure online communications, no one knows—except, perhaps, the NSA.

Illustration by Niek Sprakel/Flickr
http://www.dailydot.com/politics/nsa-rsa-encryption-crack-prime-numbers/
 

badvillain

Rookie
Joined
May 21, 2012
Messages
590
Reputation
40
Daps
423
Reppin
NULL
Spooks break most Internet crypto, but how?
Thursday's revelation that US and British intelligence agencies are able to decode most Internet traffic was a transforming moment for many, akin to getting definitive proof of intelligent extraterrestrial life. It fundamentally changed the assumptions that many of us have about the tools hundreds of millions of people rely on to shield their most private information from prying eyes. And it challenged the trust placed in the people who build and provide those tools.

But the reporting from The New York Times, ProPublica, and The Guardian was short on technical details about exactly how cryptographic technologies such as virtual private networks and the secure sockets layer (SSL) and transport layer security (TLS) protocols are bypassed. As stated recently by Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor who leaked highly classified documents leading to the reports, "Encryption works. Properly implemented strong crypto systems are one of the few things you can rely on." How is it, then, that agents from the NSA and its British counterpart, known as the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), are reportedly able to bypass the crypto protections provided by Internet companies including Google, Facebook, Microsoft, and Yahoo?

The short answer is almost certainly by compromising the software or hardware that implements the encryption or by attacking or influencing the people who hold the shared secrets that form one of the linchpins of any secure cryptographic system. The NYT alludes to these techniques as a combination of "supercomputers, technical trickery, court orders, and behind-the-scenes persuasion." The paper went on to refer to technologies that had been equipped with backdoors or had been deliberately weakened. Snowden put it slightly differently when he said: "Unfortunately, endpoint security is so terrifically weak that NSA can frequently find ways around" encryption. Exploiting the implementations or the people behind these systems can take many forms. What follows are some of the more plausible scenarios.

Can’t you hear me knocking?
Backdoors are among the easiest ways to bypass encryption, and they can take many forms. Most often, they're considered to be hidden code that allows an outsider surreptitious access to privileged information or functions without a password or other official credential. But backdoors can just as easily be vulnerabilities that are inserted into source code or designs, or are allowed to remain there after being discovered. The NYT specifically mentioned backdoors placed in micro chips used for encryption, and it also alluded to crypto standards that were manipulated in ways to make them easier to exploit.

One such way would be to tamper with pseudo random number generators used to create strong keys. An NSA-controlled flaw that made these numbers easy to predict would provide agents with a covert and easy-to-use method to extract a key protecting a target's communications. Given the staggering volume of data that the NSA wants the capability of reading, it's reasonable to assume analysts want techniques that work across huge swaths of the Internet. To make the backdoor exploitable on a mass scale, the flaw would have to be present in a widely used design, say, in the cryptographic libraries included in Microsoft's Windows or Web server software, or the OpenSSL package that enables cryptographic functions in Apache and other Web servers.

Rumors of backdoors placed in popular crypto standards at the behest of the NSA have existed since at least 2007. Similar theories surfaced again in 2008 following the discovery of an almost catastrophic vulnerability in the Debian distribution of Linux. It also involved random numbers and caused vulnerable machines to generate dangerously weak cryptographic keys. I used to dismiss those kind of thoughts as conspiracy theories that bordered on paranoia. After all, crypto is hard, and it's painfully easy to make honest mistakes. Now, I'm not so sure.

Stealing (or asking for) the keys
Another way to easily break encryption is to obtain the keys that encrypt and decrypt data. The easiest way to get the keys is to simply ask for them, and if that doesn't work, one could use a combination of court orders, persuasion, or threats to coerce them out of the holder. Barring any of those methods, the feds might hack into the servers of large companies and steal them. This method has a few inefficiencies to it. For one, under some versions of this scenario, the feds must obtain a different set of keys for each service they want to monitor, making this method less scalable. And for another, in theory at least, it wouldn't be practical against sites such as Google that have implemented perfect forward secrecy into their cryptographic protections. That's the property that blends private keys held by both the website and an end-user to create a new temporary key that changes all the time. Unless the feds know of a flaw in the Diffie-Hellman key exchange process at the heart of this scheme, it wouldn't be enough to simply obtain the private key of Google or other sites that use perfect forward secrecy.

The feds might also hack or coerce one of the many certificate authorities who validate SSL and TLS keys into providing a master certificate that would work across one or more Internet addresses. While not impossible, this method also seems impractical. First, such certificates would be useful only if the NSA was able to impersonate the website in what's known as an active man-in-the-middle attack, which can make the attack less scalable and harder to pull off. That forecloses the possibility of a passive eavesdropping, in which the NSA simply monitors and decrypts traffic passing between a website and a target. More importantly, the technique is easily detected through what's known ascertificate pinning that's built into Google's Chrome browser, dedicated Twitter apps, and some security software.

The take away
One of the more frustrating aspects to the reporting on the Snowden leaks is the lack of specifics. If we don't know exactly how the NSA bypasses Internet crypto it's hard to take any action to prevent it. That said, crypto and security expert Bruce Schneier has compiled a list of concrete things readers can do to at least make intelligence agency surveillance harder. The measures include the use of the Tor anonymity service; the use of software such as GPG, TextSecure, RedPhone, TrueCrypt, OTR, SilentCircle, and BleachBit to encrypt messages, calls, and files; and a robust operations security regimen to lock down endpoints, including the use of air-gapped computers when working with truly sensitive data.

Snowden and Schneier have both counseled people to trust the math that underlies cryptography. Of course, the challenge is ensuring that the software, hardware, or people implementing that math haven't been compromised, and that's becoming increasingly hard to gauge in this post-Snowden era.
http://arstechnica.com/security/201...how/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=pulsenews
 
Top