Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Encrypted cell 2 gentoo

[Max R.D. Parmer]

I think the paper on Intel issues Mick is referring to is the one I
linked not too long ago:
http://blog.invisiblethings.org/papers/2015/x86_harmful.pdf

It seems like you're looking for something like the EFF's "surveillance
self-defense"[1] site but with some stuff specific to Gentoo.

[1]: https://ssd.eff.org/

--
0x7D964D3361142ACF

On Mon, Mar 28, 2016, at 10:25, James wrote:
> Mick <michaelkintzios <at> gmail.com> writes:
>
> > > Ahh, OK. So secure communications between all these clients.
> > > The two big players for client-side encryption for email or messaging
> > > data would be GPG and OTR;
>
> Good 2 know. I'll keep searching for docs.
>
> > Also S/MIME encryption of the email message body using SSL certificates
> > achieves the same end result (i.e. encrypted payload) as GnuPG offers.
> > For GPG you may need a plugin (e.g. enigmail on T'bird) or something
> > similar for phone clients, but S/MIME is usually available by default for
> >  most email clients and platforms.
>
> OK, so maybe I'll test out a few devices, provide some feedback and then
> seen about a (gentoo wiki) page. If the community is not interested in
> that I bet these guys would put up some sort of community cook-book on
> this topic:: [1]
>
> Dont know who they are, but they seem to be on the right track,
> and they big on Gentoo!
>
> > A word of caution:  Snowden warned us that the end devices do not ossess
> > strong enough randomness generators to ensure that the encryption they
> > perform cannot be reverse engineered.
>
> Intel has long been hiding extra hardware inside of their processors, for
> a
> variety of nefarious activities. Here is a link where they now let the
> retail world in on what has been going on for decades [2].
>
> This is why the US gov keeps hyping how bad security is, so the gov can
> take
> steps and the sub-contract out the details for billions (it's the new
> cold
> war and we have to be scared enough to get the govs to protect us, right?
> And all of that horse_feathers....
>
> Anyone doing gate/register design/validations with Intel parts, decades
> ago,
> stumbled into areas of the the intel chips with hidden hardware. Just
> slice
> them and put them under any high res scanner nowadays.... Sadly,
> everybody
> in the chip bidness does this routinely now. SoCs are all full
> of this crap.
>
> The old AT&T phone switches (think 3B2) had this sort of 'undefined
> hardware'. Nothing new 'signal intercept' is good to search on, but most
> of the Intel (get the pun?) has been scrubbed form the internet on
> 'signal intercept'; particularly the Rf stuff.
>
> > A recent article shared on this M/L also showed that anything with Intel
> > inside® can be deemed as intentionally weakened to enable potential
> > interference with our privacy.
>
> Got that link handy? Part of the SSL v2 v3 stuff? I was hoping somebody
> would write up a summary, and  detail action plans from a gentoo
> workstation, gentoo server and gentoo-cluster perspective on the state
> of SSL.* issues.
>
> > Therefore treat your encrypted communications and their content with
> > caution, because you don't know how private these may remain in the
> > future.
>
> Kinda like a very gorgeous woman, with a low credit score (yak yak yhak)?
> Or like an 'old bug' flying towards the light (ZAP)?
> Certainly, but, the low rent hacks might be held at bay a little longer.
> Still, we should make the effort to streamline and document pathways,
> with
> ample warnings of cautions.
>
>
> [1] https://wiki.installgentoo.com/index.php/Encryption
>
> [2]
> http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/184828-intel-unveils-new-xeon-chip-with-integrated-fpga-touts-20x-performance-boost
>
>