News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Snowflake.

Re:Snowflake by batch12 on Saturday July 29, 2023 @09:51PM (#36926937)
So, I'm reminded of the old 'store your files on youtube' thing[0] and I wonder how much bandwidth one could get using the same concept on one of the widely used voice conferencing solutions (like zoom) to further blend in. Bonus if you can do some kind of video steganography to transfer the data and have a 'real' call.

[0] https://github.com/DvorakDwarf/Infinite-Storage-Glitch

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Snowflake by dpkonofa on Saturday July 29, 2023 @10:13PM (#36927100)
That would be amazing. If that worked regardless of network, though, I can see people setting up a node and accidentally taking it to work or some other public network by mistake. I’m not sure if that’s better or worse than using it in a persistent connection.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Snowflake by darkclouds on Sunday July 30, 2023 @03:49AM (#36928851)
> Bonus if you can do some kind of video steganography to transfer the data and have a 'real' call.

What you are suggesting would bring the proposed UK Online Safety Bill (OSB) into operation, and by virtue of the encoding/stenography means that GCHQ govt code crackers will be involved in what would be classed Police matters, not govt regulator aka OfCom matters, despite the UK govt suggesting its just a function of the regulator. The OSB also reads like it will extend beyond borders, simply on the grounds that it could be used in the UK.

[ Parent | on HN ]