News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Bypassing anti-incognito detection in Google Chrome by btown on Saturday July 20, 2019 @07:34AM (#20485204)
Why not let incognito mode write to disk, but entirely encrypted and randomly padded (to avoid size memorization attacks), with keys only stored in memory? That way you can use practically the entire storage space and avoid quota mismatches, as well as service attempts to fill the storage for detection. And in the event of a crash or power outage, no data is recoverable.
Re:Bypassing anti-incognito detection in Google Chrome by inlined on Saturday July 20, 2019 @10:53AM (#20486085)
Random padding can be detected and the existence of encrypted files would be a giveaway that users use incognito often (which may not be wanted)

Iirc on *nix there’s a difference between inodes and vnodes that you might be able to take advantage of as well. The supervisor would create, open, and delete the directory before filling it. Holding the directory open gives it a vnode count of one and deleting it gives an inode count of zero thus making the current process the last thing to ever be able to reach the directory. You’d have to make sense of a full disk binary scan to guess what used to there if the disk wasn’t zeroed out, so encryption could help there too.

Re:Bypassing anti-incognito detection in Google Chrome by xg15 on Saturday July 20, 2019 @08:20AM (#20485329)
I wonder if encryption is even necessary.

Isn't the purpose of Incognito mode to protect against tracking inside the browser? At least I haven't heard so far that its also supposed to shield data from access outside the browser.

So, wouldn't be enough to simply delete the space after closing the tab? (Or use a new, empty storage location for each newly opened tab)

Re:Bypassing anti-incognito detection in Google Chrome by AbacusAvenger on Saturday July 20, 2019 @08:25AM (#20485344)
Deletion doesn't mean the data is actually gone from disk though, so it would basically leave unencrypted evidence of incognito browsing history. There are multiple use cases for incognito, and tracking inside the browser is only one of them.
Re:Bypassing anti-incognito detection in Google Chrome by kpU8efre7r on Saturday July 20, 2019 @08:17AM (#20485320)
I've wondered why many things don't do this. Is it because it's difficult to guarantee that writing to memory doesn't eventually get swapped to disk by the OS?
Re:Bypassing anti-incognito detection in Google Chrome by atonse on Saturday July 20, 2019 @08:38AM (#20485390)
In some OS’s you can specify that certain pages of memory should never be swapped.