1993-03-11 - Re: Hidden encrypted messages

Header Data

From: uri@watson.ibm.com
To: J.Michael Diehl <mdiehl@triton.unm.edu>
Message Hash: 2e3233009c244c910127765c41de7fd47ec65cf71a1cb5e41699c7b01a7082ec
Message ID: <9303112216.AA15346@buoy.watson.ibm.com>
Reply To: <9303111501.AA26622@lynx.cs.wisc.edu>
UTC Datetime: 1993-03-11 22:18:16 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 14:18:16 PST

Raw message

From: uri@watson.ibm.com
Date: Thu, 11 Mar 93 14:18:16 PST
To: J.Michael Diehl <mdiehl@triton.unm.edu>
Subject: Re:  Hidden encrypted messages
In-Reply-To: <9303111501.AA26622@lynx.cs.wisc.edu>
Message-ID: <9303112216.AA15346@buoy.watson.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain

 > So I say, "Damn! CRC Error!  Must be a bad disk.  Well, no point in keeping
 > THIS sitting around."

Yeah, but remember, in the world we're heading to, presumption
of innocence is worth even less, than President's word!
Then it will be *your* responsibility to satisfy the
Inquisitor, or he might not let you out from his
building, where you were invited to explain
yourself and your messages. (:-) (:-(

 > > is how to produce on demand a causal explanation of data (which actually
 > > contains an encrypted message) that satisfies an investigator and
 > > doesn't reveal the encrypted message.  Some simple scheme like, "Uh,
 > > it's the result of my new random number generation algorithm" isn't
 > > likely to be *satisfying* and is certain to produce the response,
 > > "OK, let's see the algorithm."

And the response to this will be: "Sure, here it is, this
nice hardware implementation. You may have it, if you
wish!" (:-)  It's fool-proof, but  still the Big
Brother might dislike your desire to play with
those bad random generators, and decide,
that you better be kept in KZ-camp...

Probably creating a  GIF/TIFF/whatever  file yourself,
with normal consumer-grade equipment (noise-prone :-)
and substituting it's LSB (or whatever certainly lies
BELOW the noise floor) with bits of the message, does
sound like the best choice today.

	1) Doesn't look suspicious, no more, than
	   "traditional" sending photos of your
	   house, family, yourself...

	2) Has enough of bandwidth to communicate
	   reasonably large personal messages
	   (though a binary og PGP might
	   not fit into a "normal"
	   GIF file :-).

	3) Requires only widely available consumer
	   appliances (Camcoder, digitizer, .....).

	4) The image doesn't have to be known to your
	   correspondent in advance (a big one!).

	1) Somebody has to do it, to write code, to
	   buy a Camcoder (:-).

	2) May lead to outlawing of ALL the image and
	   sound transmission  via  electronic media,
	   if Big Brother gets really annoyed (:-).

	   [Don't laugh, you! Look at the latest
	    Scanner Bill! :-]