Gentoo Archives: gentoo-catalyst

From: Erick M <balkira@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-catalyst@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Encrypted livecd's - need testers
Date: Sun, 01 Jul 2007 12:32:35
Message-Id: e47df0b0707010532v24bed593we2924f46c6fbbd1d@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Encrypted livecd's - need testers by Erick M
1 I forgot a valuable argument!
2
3 Because you mainly intend to read from the hidden container (you want your
4 TOR demon binary and libraries to be readable and not writable after you
5 mounted your container) the steganographic technology provided is very
6 suitable for your purpose achieving in a more efficient way the "hiding"
7 property of the task.
8 Just so that you know there other different ways to achieve your goal.
9
10 Thanks for reading
11
12 On 7/1/07, Erick M <balkira@×××××.com> wrote:
13 >
14 > Nelson,
15 >
16 > Ok, I understand, thanks for clarifying.
17 > So we can narrow down all those scenarios to one type of attack: theft by
18 > third part (or yourself).
19 >
20 > It does not protect more the user while he uses it nor from potential
21 > "after-use" trails. Either you lose the livecd along with your identity (or
22 > data that leads to your identity) and you get caught or while using the
23 > software you get caught (like your TOR connections have been detected).
24 > The only purpose and advantage encryption would have is to obfuscate some
25 > passwords like in the firefox example you gave.
26 >
27 > Now, from a legal point of view, being caught with an encrypted material
28 > whether livecd or not in major countries (UK,GER,FR,US,china) requires from
29 > you the decryption key (us patriot act, uk RIP act, etc) or else you can
30 > straight take up to few years in some cases without much chance of having of
31 > good defense (china=torture?). So in 95% of cases you end up giving away
32 > your key to prove that you are not a spy from whatever organisation and that
33 > at least you hadn't that bad intention with your encrypted software. And you
34 > do handle the key in the objective of lowering the sentence you get for
35 > being caught in the first place.
36 >
37 > I think that encryption has nothing to do with hiding. In the contrary, it
38 > is like a big flag standing saying "hey look at me I got something to hide,
39 > come and get me!". It is just obfuscating technology.
40 >
41 > The real solution to your problem would be to use a steganographic layer (
42 > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steganography ) . Not for the whole squashfs
43 > but only for a single file (whatever the size) inside a clear livecd. Note
44 > that 20% of the size of that file is really containing data, you do not want
45 > to push too much (50%) or we get data loss (blocks from different containers
46 > overwriting them) in an exponentially manner.
47 >
48 > You want to be able to *deny* that you are in possession of such material.
49 > Go from the basis that if you get caught you will *have to* handle your key
50 > away. That is real practice because you can get 5 times more being secretive
51 > than actual real sentence against the data you want to hide.
52 > A steganographic FS will allow you when being caught with your livecd of
53 > saying first: "it is a clear livecd!" Sounds idiotic but believe me, it is
54 > the best start for the official police questioning. Then in the worst case
55 > scenario, they find your single encrypted file and ask you for the key which
56 > you will provide one of the many different you have set up (properties of a
57 > steganographic FS), which will decrypt a part of that encrypted file,
58 > discovering data that will not incriminate you so far for just having a
59 > picture of your dog.
60 > Charges are dropped, you justify your secretive attitude as being
61 > respectful of your privacy rights and next morning you wake up in your bed!
62 >
63 > Because I want to be fair, I think having an encryption layer is great for
64 > catalyst, but when related to the specific purpose you described you would
65 > better at least give a try to a steganographic FS if you really fear the
66 > sentence you can get for the data you are hiding.
67 >
68 > You will not find much (I mean actual real software) besides some
69 > linux-2.2 tweak over ext2 "proof-of-concept" (10years old not stable
70 > unreliable) and an update by some chinese with 2.4 but the whole is mainly
71 > broken and I guess somehow a little taboo, the projects seems dead, no main
72 > other projects have been replaced.
73 >
74 > You can try an implementation I have worked on few years ago. It does
75 > everything that I have described (in a non friendly C hardcore way) so far
76 > and is called denyfs.
77 >
78 > It is not a driver, and can be started in userland if the correct losetup
79 > and cryptsetup have been done.
80 >
81 > http://www.openchill.org/2005/06/denyfs_a_steganographic_file_s.php#more
82 >
83 > have a look there, it is not fully stable, requires manual compilation and
84 > configuration though it does the job (I made a quick GUI in gtk if you
85 > provide the gtk USE flag). Follow the howto to get a grip on it. And
86 > remember if you want to retrieve with a 90% probability your data as you
87 > have put them in the box, do not exceed 15-20% of the total size of the
88 > file! And even do not be surprised when it happens.
89 >
90 > Steganography is a concept that aims at small and *static* file system. Do
91 > not even think about putting an OS(where files are dynamically arranged
92 > again and again) inside a steganographic FS, it is as of the concepts and
93 > mathematics we have simply impossible.
94 >
95 > I didn't realized I wrote so much, I'm just passioned by this topic
96 > because of past experiences moving from one country to another. I am
97 > currently developing a Portage based GNU/Linux natively encrypted OS and I'm
98 > about to re open DenyFS inside that distribution by stabilizing it, hence my
99 > reason for being so communicative.
100 >
101 > Thanks for reading
102 >
103 > erick
104 >
105 > On 7/1/07, Nelson Batalha <nelson_batalha@××××.pt> wrote:
106 > >
107 > > Hi Erick,
108 > >
109 > > There are many uses for this!
110 > >
111 > > They mainly come from the fact that now you can have sensitive
112 > > information everywhere on your cd root, and not be afraid of losing your cd,
113 > > either physically (happens to me all the time), or in the net if you don't
114 > > want an open distribution.
115 > >
116 > > -Read on for examples:
117 > >
118 > > 1) If you're in a country like China and you can't have applications
119 > > like Tor on your desktop (suspicious), you can just make a livecd and try to
120 > > disguise it as something else by filling the filesystem. Also it's portable
121 > > and replicable. You could also encrypt your hard drive, but this way you
122 > > don't have to worry if they take it for testing. Specially if using luks on
123 > > the desktop (no plausible deniability). It's also much easier to hide a
124 > > mini-cd/dvd physically.
125 > >
126 > > 2) Also for instance, I'm going away next semester and I won't be taking
127 > > a laptop. However I would like to use gentoo, my favourite programs and have
128 > > my passwords stored in them (like Firefox), and transport some personal
129 > > and/or sensitive files. (only option is put those files in an encrypted
130 > > container and extract them on *every* boot).
131 > >
132 > > 3) If you're creating some official livecd and would like to test it
133 > > with some group, but for security reasons you prefered if nobody else tested
134 > > it.
135 > >
136 > > 4) In general companies/organizations can create a easily updatable
137 > > portable working environment and mail it or publish it online.
138 > >
139 > > Etc.
140 > >
141 > > Take care,
142 > > Nelson
143 > >
144 >
145 >