Re:Fake girlfriend, revisited
by DanBC on Wednesday February 24, 2016 @06:52AM
(#11166028)
When someone suggests rolling their own crypto a bunch of people pop up to point out the considerable risks.
We need the same for these "wheat / chaff" steganographic noise generation schemes. Steganography is probably secure, but people tend to vastly underestimate the amount of cover material needed.
Considerable money and time has been devoted to "finding the real signal".
The Usenet keyword triggers were trivially easy to filter. Mostly because people just put a list, in all caps, at the end of their post.
We know these are trivially easy to filter because putting a list like [ECHELON CIA NSA GCHQ IRA BOMB inurl:groups.google.com] returns loads. Here's one example, with the handy words "anti echelon block" https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/uk.media/KqhWP1rLF9U/G...
We need the same for these "wheat / chaff" steganographic noise generation schemes. Steganography is probably secure, but people tend to vastly underestimate the amount of cover material needed.
Considerable money and time has been devoted to "finding the real signal".
The Usenet keyword triggers were trivially easy to filter. Mostly because people just put a list, in all caps, at the end of their post.
We know these are trivially easy to filter because putting a list like [ECHELON CIA NSA GCHQ IRA BOMB inurl:groups.google.com] returns loads. Here's one example, with the handy words "anti echelon block" https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/uk.media/KqhWP1rLF9U/G...