No, the NSA Isnt Like the StasiAnd Comparing Them Is Treacherous

Jasper Rietman

Ever since Edward Snowden handed thousands of National Security Agency documents over to filmmaker Laura Poitras and writer Glenn Greenwald in a Hong Kong hotel room, the NSAs mass surveillance of domestic phone calls and Internet traffic has been widely compared to the abuses of East Germanys secret police, the Stasi.

The communist republic may have imploded in 1989, but it has nonetheless become synonymous with a smothering, all-knowing spy apparatus.

A year ago, President Obama himself cited East Germany as a cautionary tale of what could happen when vast, unchecked surveillance turned citizens into informers and persecuted people for what they said in the privacy of their own homes. He was responding to accusations that just such a vast, unchecked effort to collect data has metastasized on his watch.

It was no coincidence that Poitras chose Leipzig, a city in the heart of the former East Germany, for the recent German debut of her documentary Citizenfour, about Snowden and the NSA. If the government is doing that kind of surveillance, it has a corrosive effect on democracy and society, Poitras said after the premiere. People who lived through it can tell you what it was like.

Indeed. When it was revealed that the NSA had been listening to her cell phone calls, German chancellor Angela Merkelwho came of age in communist East Germany, under the Stasis watchful eyetold President Obama, This is just like the Stasi. In an interview last year, NSA whistle-blower and Poitras source William Binney likened the agency to the Stasi on supersteroids.

Theyre wrong. In crucial ways, the two agencies are very different. In its effort to control East Germany, the Stasi made its presence felt in every sphere of life. Its power rested not only in the information its surveillance yielded but in the fear and distrust that collection instilled. The NSA, on the other hand, operates best in the dark, its targets unaware of its existence, let alone its dragnet data-gathering. Even Poitras, when asked, acknowledged a line between the two. The NSAs broad, mass collection is fundamentally different than what the Stasi did, she said in Leipzig.

Calling the Stasi secret police is misleading. The name is an abbreviation of STAatsSIcherheit, or State Security. Founded in 1950 as the East German Communist Partys sword and shield, it never hid the fact that it was spying. By the late 1980s, more than 260,000 East Germans1.6 percent of all adults in the countryworked for the organization, either as agents or as informants. (If the NSA employed as many analysts to spy on 320 million Americans, it would have 5 million people on the payroll.) It wanted you to constantly wonder which of your friends was an informant and, ideally, tempt or pressure you into the role of snitch too.

At times, the scrutiny reached absurd proportions. Every apartment building and workplace had a designated informer. Spies used specially built equipment to steam open mail; a Division of Garbage Analysis was on the lookout for suspect trash. Stasi agents let the air out of targets bicycle tires and rearranged the pictures in their apartments in an effort to drive class enemies crazy.

Cooperation was often a prerequisite for career advancement, academic success, even a new apartment. The Stasi had the power to take your children away or keep you from getting into a university. Its visibility and ubiquity forced East Germans to make moral choices every day: Collaborate with an unjust, undemocratic system or suffer the consequences.

Continue reading here:

No, the NSA Isnt Like the StasiAnd Comparing Them Is Treacherous

Posted in NSA

NSA: SO SORRY we backed that borked crypto even after you spotted the backdoor

The NSA's director of research Michael Wertheimer says it's "regrettable" that his agency continued to support Dual EC DRBG even after it was widely known to be hopelessly flawed.

Writing in Notices, a publication run by the American Mathematical Society, Wertheimer outlined the history of the Dual Elliptic Curve Deterministic Random Bit Generator (Dual EC DRBG), and said that an examination of the facts made it clear no malice was involved.

Dual EC DRBG is a random number generator championed by the NSA in the 2000s. Number generators are an essential component of encryption systems; a weak generator will leave encrypted data vulnerable to decoding by an attacker.

This random number generator was eventually approved as a trustworthy algo by the US National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), despite concerns that it could be faulty, and RSA made it the default encryption systems in its BSAFE toolkits. A subsequent report suggested the NSA paid RSA $10m to include the flawed algorithm a claim RSA denies.

In 2007 two Microsoft security researchers, Dan Shumow and Niels Ferguson, pointed out that there were serious flaws with Dual EC DRBG, and that using it with elliptic curve points generated by the NSA could create a "trap door" that would allow encryption to be easily broken.

"With hindsight, NSA should have ceased supporting the Dual EC DRBG algorithm immediately after security researchers discovered the potential for a trapdoor. In truth, I can think of no better way to describe our failure to drop support for the Dual EC DRBG algorithm as anything other than regrettable," Wertheimer wrote [PDF].

"The costs to the Defense Department to deploy a new algorithm were not an adequate reason to sustain our support for a questionable algorithm. Indeed, we support NIST's April 2014 decision to remove the algorithm. Furthermore, we realize that our advocacy for the Dual EC DRBG casts suspicion on the broader body of work NSA has done to promote secure standards."

The case doesn't prove the NSA is actively trying to subvert crypto standards, Wertheimer argued, merely that a mistake had been made and then rectified. He pointed out that the NSA was keen to fund more mathematical research and post September 11 this work was vitally needed.

But Wertheimer's version of events isn't sitting well with some experts in the field. Assistant research professor Matthew Green of Johns Hopkins University Information Security Institute in Maryland has written a rebuttal to Wertheimer, pointing out several holes in his story.

For a start, Prof Green said problems with Dual EC DRBG systems that used the NSA's elliptic curve points were first noticed way back in 2004 by members of an ANSI standards committee, when NIST was still considering backing the algorithm. Someone on the panel even went as far as to file a patent on breaking encryption using the system.

Read the rest here:

NSA: SO SORRY we backed that borked crypto even after you spotted the backdoor

Posted in NSA

US Supreme Court: Can Government Restrict How a Church Can Use Signs?

January 15, 2015|7:42 am

(Photo: REUTERS/Gary Cameron)

The exterior of the U.S. Supreme Court is seen in Washington March 5, 2014. U.S. Supreme Court justices on Wednesday appeared to look for a compromise that would enable them to avoid overruling a 26-year-old precedent that made it easier for plaintiffs to negotiate large class action settlements.

On January 12th, I attended Supreme Court oral arguments in a caseReed v. Town of Gilbertwhich will determine how easily the government can restrict signs giving directions to church services. Specifically, the Court is set to decide whether, under free speech protections of the First Amendment, a local government's mere assertion that its sign code (despite on its face discriminating based on content) lacks a discriminatory motive renders the sign code content-neutral and justifies the code's differential treatment of signs pointing the way to a church's meeting location.

In this case, the Town of Gilbert had divided signs up based on whether they were ideological, political, or directionaland imposed different restrictions on each category of sign. Good News Community Church in Gilbert, Arizona, and its pastor, Clyde Reed, sued, claiming that signs pointing the way to their Sunday morning service (which contained religious speech and directions, and thus resulted in them being placed in the directional sign category) were treated less fairly and that this unfair treatment violated the First Amendment.

At oral arguments, both sides received their fair share of questions, but the justices were noticeably more skeptical of the town's argumentespecially its claim that it could severely restrict a sign containing ideological content announcing an event if the sign also included directions to that event, while at the same time easing restrictions on a sign containing the same exact ideological content and yet lacking directions.

The town attempted to defend itself by arguing it had an interest in preventing roadside clutter arising from numerable directional signs. But then it admitted it was granting preference to ideological and political signs because of the special First Amendment protection offered them, which prompted questions from the justices asking how the town was not impermissibly discriminating based on the content of the signs.

A breakthrough moment occurred when the town's counsel admitted under questioning by Justice Breyer that the town could put up a sign saying: "Come to the next service next Tuesday, 4th and H Streets," but could not add "three blocks right and two blocks left" to that same sign because that would make it a directional sign. Justice Breyer's response: "Well, my goodness. I meanI mean, on that, it does sound as if the town is being a little unreasonable, doesn't it?", pretty well captured the justices' view of the case.

The justices will now consider the legal issues and issue a written opinion deciding the case sometime before the end of June 2015.

While seeming more innocuous than some of the other high profile social issues which have reached the court over the last year or so, this case matters (significantly) to free speech law. It therefore matters a lot to Americans of all opinions and interests who want to take part in public debates and discussions over numerable issues in our country. Even if it doesn't matter to them personally, it shouldfor it affects their legal rights under the First Amendment.

Go here to see the original:

US Supreme Court: Can Government Restrict How a Church Can Use Signs?

CryptoWall ransomware is back with new version after two months of silence

Attackers have started distributing a new and improved version of the CryptoWall file-encrypting ransomware program over the past few days, security researchers warn.

The new version, dubbed CryptoWall 3.0, uses localization and passes traffic to a site where users can pay for their decryption keys through two anonymity networksTor and I2P (the Invisible Internet Project).

CryptoWall is a sophisticated ransomware program that encrypts the victims files with a strong cryptographic algorithm. Users are asked to pay the equivalent of $500 in bitcoin virtual currency in order to receive the decryption key that allows them to recover their files.

The ransomware program provides users with links to several sites that act as Tor gateways. These proxy servers are supposed to automatically connect the users browser to the CryptoWall decryptor service hosted on the Tor network. However, it seems that with CryptoWall 3.0, the users traffic is also passed through another anonymity network called I2P.

A malware researcher who uses the online alias Kafeine discovered this change after infecting his test system with a CryptoWall 3.0 sample. When he tried to visit one of the Tor gateway links as instructed by the malware he received an error in Russian that roughly translates to: I2P website is unavailable. Perhaps it is disabled, the network is congested or your router is not well integrated with other nodes. You can repeat the operation.

This suggests that the site where users can pay the ransom and get their decryption keys from is no longer hosted on Tor, but on I2P. The Tor gateway likely passes the users traffic to a Tor hidden service first, which then connects to the I2P network to retrieve the real website. The ransom note also instructs users to download the Tor browser and access a Tor hidden service directly if the Tor gateway URLs no longer work.

CryptoWall is not the first malware program to use I2P. In November 2013, security researchers reported that an online banking Trojan called i2Ninja was being advertised on cybercriminal forums. The program communicated with a command-and-control server hosted on the I2P network, instead of Tor.

Like Tor, the I2P network allows users to run hidden services such as websites that are only accessible from within the network itself. With Tor such websites use the .onion pseudo-top-level domain, while with I2P they use .i2p.

A new version of Silk Road, an online marketplace for illegal goods and services, was recently launched on I2P. The site was previously hosted on Tor and was shut down two times by the FBI.

Cybercriminals started distributing CryptoWall 3.0 Monday, after around two months of inactivity that made researchers wonder whether the threat was gone.

Read more from the original source:

CryptoWall ransomware is back with new version after two months of silence

Bitcoin price plunge sparks new crash fears

Bitcoin had a stand at the CES exhibition in Las Vegas last week. Photograph: Ethan Miller/Getty Images

The price of one bitcoin has plunged by more than a quarter in just two days, prompting fears that the currency is in the midst of its fourth major crash.

On Tuesday morning, the currency was being traded at $267 a coin on Bitstamp, the largest individual exchange. However, by late Wednesday afternoon that had collapsed to just $195 - a fall of 27%.

The slide means that the currency has fallen by more than 80% from its record high of $1,150 reached in November 2013.

Unlike that crash, and the two before it in the summer of 2011 and spring of 2013, this time the cryptocurrency has not been the victim of a speculative bubble that then popped. Rather, the price of bitcoin has been declining fairly consistently since June 2014, when it started falling after months of temporary stability at about $600 a coin.

Greg Schvey, a partner at cryptocurrency data firm TradeBlock, told the New York Times that the new precipitous decline showed signs of a squeeze on bitcoin. People have these very real fiat-based liabilities that they have to pony up for, and to do that, theyre going to have to sell Bitcoins, he said.

The bitcoin network runs on the processing power of miners - computers put to work solving algorithmic puzzles in exchange for rewards in the currency. Companies that have invested millions of dollars into building specialised server farms have come to dominate the mining process, and received their share of the rewards.

But Schvey suggests that the real money those companies borrowed to start operating were beginning to be called in, forcing them to sell some of their proceeds that they may otherwise have held on to in the hope of a recovery in the price of bitcoin.

Further, the cryptocurrency has been shaken by yet another attack on the infrastructure that enables it to function as a working economy. Bitstamp reported a successful hacking attack in early January, which forced it to close its doors temporarily after $5.6m of bitcoin were stolen. While the attack was nowhere near as severe as that which took down the once-leading exchange, MtGox, last year, it still alarmed many.

In the face of the slump, many bitcoin proponents are turning their attention to a more fundamental technology called the blockchain. Sitting at the core of the bitcoin currency, the blockchain is the concept that allows money to be traded on a truly decentralised basis, but some argue that its capability goes far beyond that. The comparison most often drawn is that if bitcoin is an application, such as email, the blockchain is more like the whole internet.

Follow this link:

Bitcoin price plunge sparks new crash fears

Bitcoin in freefall as virtual currency plunges below $US250

Confidence in the virtual economy appears to be waning. Photo: Getty

The price of Bitcoin has plunged below $US250 and appears to be in freefall, as sell orders dominate global exchanges and investors flee the cryptocurrency.

Bitcoin's entrance into 2015 has been appalling, in the last 10 days alone the price has lost 26 per cent in value. Its rapid decline in recent weeks suggests confidence in the virtual currency is evaporating.

On Wednesday, CoinDesk recorded the price dropping to about $224 from $267, below where it began in April 2013. Large sell orders were triggered as Bitcoin sank through the $US250 mark, which traders have flagged as an imporant psychological barrier.

Bitcoin price plummets. Photo: CoinDesk

"We are seeing some huge orders sitting waiting at the $US200 mark and a lot of volume," an IG analyst told Fairfax Media. "That could be the next resistance point but we don't really know where Bitcoin is heading at the moment.

Advertisement

"I think it might hover around where it is for a while."

Some analysts pointed to the $US5 million hack of major exchange Bitstamp at the beginning of January as a potential spook for traders. The exchange suspended activity after the theft of 19,000 Bitcoins, however trading began again at the end of last week.

While some traders may be scurrying to pile on the short swaps or top-up their margin accounts, the plummeting price of Bitcoin has been felt throughout the cryptocurrency economy. Miners have found the sharp drop in price has directly affected their ability to stay in business.

Continue reading here:

Bitcoin in freefall as virtual currency plunges below $US250

Bitcoin keeps falling Wednesday

The exchange ultimately resumed services after admitting that about $5 million worth of bitcoins had been stolen. O'Connor said the development may have spooked some cryptocurrency speculators, as Bitstamp had a reputation as one of the more professional outfits in the bitcoin community.

"I would imagine they were inundated with requests for withdrawal on Friday," he said.

Read MoreBitcoin breaks another key level

Another factor weighing on the cryptocurrency is that Russia is beginning to ban bitcoin-related websites, "Fast Money" trader Brian Kelly pointed out in a blog post.

Still, the selling that continued into Wednesday may also be part of a vicious cycle, as some have theorized on the influential Reddit bitcoin forum. In other words, the low prices may be forcing volunteers who "mine" new bitcoins to cut their losses. If the price falls below the electricity and hardware costs of "mining" bitcoinsa process that involves solving highly complex mathematical algorithmsthen the enterprise becomes unprofitable, and some miners will be forced to sell their holdings and give up.

That said, bitcoin's death has been predicted many times (one site has counted 29 obituaries), and some predict that the technology behind the system could live well beyond the currency it now supports.

View original post here:

Bitcoin keeps falling Wednesday

The Price of Bitcoin Doesnt Matter Right Now

The price of Bitcoin has taken bit of a dive over the last couple of days, shedding over 20 percent of its value in the last 24 hours. The sell-off, like other sell-offs and rallies before it, draws a lot of attention and questions about what it means for the future of the technology. Heres why I dont focus on price much.

Bitcoin is best thought of as a 5- to 10-year project, and were at the very early stages. An (admittedly imperfect) analogy is the early Web.

Like the early Web, Bitcoin is an open platform that no one owns, and on top of which anyone can build without having to get anyone elses permission. And just like the early Web, success requires investors, entrepreneurs, and developers to build out the infrastructure and applications that will make it useful to average users.

The World Wide Web was conceived by Tim Berners-Lee; he published a paper proposing it in March of 1989. The following year he worked to implement the idea in code, making the first website in December of 1990. The first popular Web browser didnt come until 1993 when Marc Andreessen and the team at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications released Mosaic. The following year Andreessen started Netscape and released the Netscape Navigator browser in 1994.

Those of us old enough to remember using Navigator to browse the Web over a Winsock connection on a 56k baud modem can attest that it was not the amazing experience we take for granted today. In fact, if you couldnt see that the technology would evolve, you would have concluded that it was practically useless. For one thing, there was no easy way to find things on the Web. Well, we didnt get Google until 1998.

Google is now the most visited website on the planet. Second to it is Facebook, and for many people the Web is virtually synonymous with social networking. Yet Facebook was not founded until 2004a full 14 years after the Web was first conceived.

So heres the parallel: Bitcoin was conceived by Satoshi Nakamoto and proposed in a paper published in 2008. He worked on implementing the idea into code, mining the first block of the blockchain in January of 2009. So, if we take the Web as a parallel, were at the stage in Bitcoin were we would hope to see a Mosaic level development, not a Facebook.

In other words, its early days. The Googles and Facebooks of Bitcointhe killer apps that will make the technology indispensable for ordinary usersmay not come for another 5 years.

Unlike the early Web, though, Bitcoin has a price ticker people look at daily, and so they wring their hands. Every dip and spike in the price gets a lot of attention and spells either doom or irrational exuberance. But as Marc Andreessen has pointed out, the price of domain names didnt determine the usefulness of the Internet.

With a longer time horizon in mind, you can put the short-term drops and rallies in price of Bitcoin in perspective. So dont worry so much.

The rest is here:

The Price of Bitcoin Doesnt Matter Right Now

Bill Haley and the Comets – See You Later Alligator /Rock Around The Clock (live in Belgium 1958) – Video


Bill Haley and the Comets - See You Later Alligator /Rock Around The Clock (live in Belgium 1958)
Brussels - Belgium - European tour - 1958 ( T.V Vido ) "See You Later Alligator Rock Around The Clock" in Concert .

By: benbop1965

More:

Bill Haley and the Comets - See You Later Alligator /Rock Around The Clock (live in Belgium 1958) - Video

Canucks farm team continues its torrid pace as Comets down Griffins 4-2

In their first ever meeting the Utica Comets defeated the Grand Rapids Griffins 4-2 Wednesday evening The Utica Memorial Auditorium to improve their overall season record to 24-8-5-0.

Dustin Jeffrey (2-1-3) led the way for the Comets with three points. Alexandre Grenier (1-1-2) and Carter Bancks (1-0-1) registered the other two goals for the Comets to help finalize the Comets four-goal night. Jacob Markstrom started in his second game in a row and put on another stellar performance for the fans at The AUD by saving 26 on the 28 shots he faced from the Griffins.

After an entertaining, yet scoreless first period, the Comets found the back of the net at 1:04 after the start of the second stanza. In a play that can only be credited to Brendan Gaunce for the successful set-up, Jeffrey received the puck just as Gaunce had slipped it over the blue line past a Griffins defenseman. Once Jeffrey was in all alone with Griffins goaltender Jared Coreau, he unleashed a quick deke on an attempt to bury one on the backhand. Coreau was able to deflect the shot with his pad but Jeffrey quickly picked up the rebound to the right of the net. With a little patience, Jeffrey noticed Coreau was out of position and took the opportunity to bury it from an awkward angle, which ended up going far-side top-shelf for the 1-0 lead.

Exactly two minutes and five seconds later, Jeffrey scored his second goal of the night on a power-play opportunity. It began with a shot from Grenier from the point who got it inside of the blue paint for Brandon DeFazio. After some puck fumbling in front, Jeffrey retrieved the puck to the right of Coreau and without any hesitation, Jeffrey snapped it into the mesh to make it 2-0.

Later on in the period at 12:31, the Griffins decided to answer back on a power play of their own just 15 seconds after Andrey Pedan went to the box for a tripping call. Alexey Marchenko banged one in from the point directly past Markstrom to keep the score within one. Scott Czarnowczan and Marek Tvrdon were both credited with assists.

Luckily for the Comets, Brennan Evans took a slashing penalty on Gaunce just prior to the ending of the second period. The power-play opportunity carried into the third period of play, which is exactly where the Comets found their next goal.

At 1:01 into the third period, Jeffrey led the attack at the point and fed the puck over to Sanguinetti on the right side. Sanguinetti took one hard blast and the puck met Greniers stick in front of Coreaus net. The puck ended up deflecting and snuck past Coreau for the Comets second power-play goal of the night to make it 3-1.

Just 38 seconds later, the Griffins found their second goal of the night while setting up on the attack in the Comets zone. After receiving a pass from Mitch Callahan, Ryan Sproul took a slapshot from the point towards the Comets net. Andy Miele met with the puck halfway to its destination and deflected the shot past Markstrom to make the score 3-2.

The Comets finally put an end to the madness at 19:02 just after the Griffins had pulled Coreau for the extra-attacker. Carter Bancks guided the unassisted puck to the empty net for his fourth goal of the season for a final decision of 4-2.

Its Pink the Rink night this Friday in what will be the Comets third and final game of their three-game home stand. The breastcancer awareness and fundraising event will host the Milwaukee Admirals at The AUD for a 7 p.m. matchup in what will be the first meeting this season between the two clubs. Immediately following the game, there will be a live auction for the Comets pink-accented jerseys at center ice. All money raised will be donated to the Breast Care Center of the Regional Cancer Center at Faxton St. Lukes Healthcare.

See the original post here:

Canucks farm team continues its torrid pace as Comets down Griffins 4-2