News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by module0000 on Thursday November 17, 2016 @02:59PM (#12980878)
Protect your privacy with a VPN, either run your own or use one of the available providers. It's a shame you need to do this, but that's just the state of things.

Run your own with OpenVPN: https://openvpn.net

VPN providers(not affiliated, just ones myself or colleagues use): https://www.expressvpn.com https://www.goldenfrog.com/vyprvpn https://nordvpn.com

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by jwtadvice on Thursday November 17, 2016 @04:15PM (#12981671)
VPN will not protect your privacy, as VPN providers are monitored by state police and VPN protocols have been broken and backdoored by intelligence agencies (as disclosed in the Snowden Documents).
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by EugeneOZ on Thursday November 17, 2016 @04:19PM (#12981718)
just setup own vps with vpn and use encryption
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by jwtadvice on Thursday November 17, 2016 @04:22PM (#12981752)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma_Police_(surveillance_pro...

The GCHQ sit on the internet infrastructure, decrypt TLS sessions, and correlate accounts and activity to individual granularity.

The backbone of the internet is tapped, including from the termination of IPSEC/IKE into your VPN out to the internet again.

Giving the advice to people to "use encryption" and "use VPN" is going to get people killed.

Please, be responsible.

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by jamez1 on Thursday November 17, 2016 @11:13PM (#12984280)
>decrypt TLS sessions

How do they do that? Do you understand how TLS works? They would have to MITM every session, and it would be immediately obvious as the key exchange wouldn't line up.

Unless you're implying they've found a way to solve the discrete logarithm problem?

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by EugeneOZ on Thursday November 17, 2016 @04:37PM (#12981904)
Decrypt tls sessions? Please fuck off.
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by jwtadvice on Thursday November 17, 2016 @05:19PM (#12982263)
Oh there's a ton of ways to do it, from stripping, downgrade attacks, backdoored constants, precomputed tables for low order groups, shadow ca certs, etc.

I recommend reading the Snowden Documents, which disclosed a number of successful at-scale attacks on the PKI infrastructure.

I find it surprising there's so much ignorance in the Hacker News community about the state of encryption, especially given the newsworthiness of the Snowden Disclosures.

I also find the prevalence of 'shoot the messenger' regarding HN folks getting angry at me for pointing out publicly known issues with the current practice of commercial and consumer encryption.

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by EugeneOZ on Thursday November 17, 2016 @05:39PM (#12982415)
Quote from his documents about tls DECRYPTION (exactly decryption) would be much more convincing than "oh there is a ton".
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by jwtadvice on Thursday November 17, 2016 @05:55PM (#12982536)
Sure, there's been good journalist work compiling the state of the art here: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/nsa-documents-atta...

But also, being familiar with the cryptography you are attempting to have conversation about is a basic starter. For example, there were attacks listed in the prior comment following the "oh there's a ton" header. You seemed to have glazed past those, but they are familiar topics to those who habituate themselves with the technicalities of cryptography and its practice.

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by EugeneOZ on Thursday November 17, 2016 @06:35PM (#12982865)
Thanks for the link. I've read all of the docs (presentations slides) related to ssl/tls and found only one weak point (Debian sessions). And none of them have information about decryption of collected traffic - collected encrypted traffic is useless, only possible (at this moment) way is to intercept multiple things in live mode and try to decode data.

It's sad, but I'm still saying "use encryption", because alternative is "don't use encryption" and it's obviously worse. So I'm much more responsible than those who are trying to propose second option.

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by jwtadvice on Thursday November 17, 2016 @06:48PM (#12982961)
Sure thing!

Unfortunately I'm afraid that you missed a lot of the content! You had asked for specific documents, not news reporting that pieced the context together (for example following the code names of the various programs together to understand how the system works as a pipeline).

In doing so, I'm afraid you're deeply underestimating the capabilities of the NSA, which expert analysis of the documents in question along with the technologies, related programs and internal customer requests indicate something much more startling than Debian session issues.

To put a point on that: TLS is broken at scale for billions of internet browsing sessions across platforms.

Give the short amount of time you've looked at the documents, I understand the misinterpretation you've arrived at. At the same time it's really impressive that you bothered to try to read the documents at all and should be commended.

Please feel encouraged to continue reading.

A large number of documents are hosted on edwardsnowden dot com and search functionality is provided here: https://search.edwardsnowden.com/

Der Spiegel, The Guardian and The Intercept provided good analysis of the documents as they were being released and that can be found at the websites respectively.

> It's sad, but I'm still saying "use encryption", because alternative is "don't use encryption" and it's obviously worse. So I'm much more responsible than those who are trying to propose second option.

Yes. I agree with this. Just don't recommend this as 'enough' to people who have serious need to protect their communications. If someone is worried about their porn habits, sure. But recommending this for sensitive use (journalists, dissidents, organizers, politicians, administrators) can lead to very serious outcomes.

For these cases, it is important to have frank conversations about the limitations of freely available and widely distributed tools.

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by xorxornop on Thursday November 17, 2016 @05:18PM (#12982254)
They do, if your connection can be forced into using a low grade cipher, or you made the mistake of allowing DH[E] with a common group. Both mistakes which were (are?) common, incidentally. They were decrypting a good fraction of global TLS traffic not so long ago...
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by EugeneOZ on Thursday November 17, 2016 @05:40PM (#12982424)
It's social engineering, not tls decryption.
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by jwtadvice on Thursday November 17, 2016 @06:06PM (#12982627)
If you go down that route, convincing the public to use and standardizing backdoored and broken cryptography would also count as social engineering.

The communications are decrypted.

This is done through a combination of backdoored cryptography, state of the art cryptanalysis, and mass social engineering (propaganda).

Namely, you're not proposing something that's mutually exclusive to decryption of data.

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by EugeneOZ on Thursday November 17, 2016 @06:23PM (#12982756)
I wrote what I wanted to write, enough with sophisms.
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by jwtadvice on Thursday November 17, 2016 @06:27PM (#12982778)
I understand that you wrote what you wanted to write.

Unfortunately what you wrote was FUD in the worst case and misinformed in the best.

Anyway I think we both are at a point where we understand the other's point of view. Thank you for the conversation. I believe we both hope a lot of HN folks will stumble over it over the next few days. :)

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by EugeneOZ on Thursday November 17, 2016 @06:44PM (#12982927)
And again you are trying to offend me even when i'm trying to stay calm in this conversation. And it's all just because I recommended to use encryption, lol. Fuck off and bye.
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by jwtadvice on Thursday November 17, 2016 @06:52PM (#12982989)
Eugene.

We agree about the need to use encryption.

We disagree about it's limitations, and how to use it effectively.

Unfortunately this isn't a theoretical debate. Journalists, for example, around the world are being killed at increasing rates by governments, with this year reaching an all time high. State surveillance is an issue of tremendous importance for civil rights and personal freedoms. Our conversation and recommendations have to be sober and give candid, informed advice.

I think you absolutely have the right motivations: to encourage people to protect themselves from state coercion and violence.

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by JumpCrisscross on Thursday November 17, 2016 @03:04PM (#12980925)
What is your view of Private Internet Access [1] in terms of their claims of "zero knowledge" privacy?

[1] https://www.privateinternetaccess.com

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by josscrowcroft on Thursday November 17, 2016 @04:50PM (#12982035)
I use https://ipredator.se.

"IPredator was launched in 2009 as a response to a growing trend of Internet censorship, in restrictive regimes as well as so-called open societies. Our main goal is to provide a seriously non-discriminating access flatrate for the Internet."

I may be mistaken, but I believe it was built by or connected somehow with The Pirate Bay.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPredator

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by TomAnthony on Thursday November 17, 2016 @03:35PM (#12981246)
If you run your own VPN will they not just log traffic from the endpoint (if in the UK) then tie it to you with billing records?
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by pfista on Thursday November 17, 2016 @05:41PM (#12982434)
Depends where you're running your VPN. If you're running it on a server in the US they might not have access to that information.
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by uabstraction on Thursday November 17, 2016 @06:40PM (#12982901)
Skip the US. Our surveillance agencies are in bed, and American VPN providers can be strong-armed with an NSL. Use a VPN incorporated and with exit points in a more neutral/second-world country.
Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by ionised on Friday November 18, 2016 @10:07AM (#12987206)
I personally recommend;

https://www.mullvad.net/

Re:Britain passed the “most extreme surveillance law ever pa... by mcorrand on Thursday November 17, 2016 @03:55PM (#12981456)
Second that! Vultr offers OpenVPN as a one click app, it's super easy to get it running on a $5 vps.