|
|
|
|
|
by zipfle
4715 days ago
|
|
without transmitting suspicious data except: 1) ars technica post with encoded public key
2) ars technica post with shared secret of some kind
3) ars technica post with hidden url
4) flickr photos of size (visible_resolution + resolution_of_hidden_images + any_salt)--way larger than they should be This is without mentioning that in order to use this system, he has to have either already contacted wl to set it up (just moving that risk to some other time) or wl has to have indicated that messages of those kinds will be read (ensuring that the nsa knows too, and is paying attention). |
|
Sure, with TrueCrypt on your laptop's drive you have lots of data and you can just say "I'm just securing my hard disk against loss, there's no hidden partition" and that'd be one thing. That's fine. But if you work for the TLA and they're reverse-engineering the latest leak and they find out that you've been posting lots of JPEGs and there statistically more entropy in the low bits of the pixels than would be anticipated given traditional JPEG encoding libraries ... then you might have some serious 'splainin to do.
A USB drive does not suffer that flaw. It can only leak the existence of a transmission to people who can physically see it. Isn't the goal of steganography hiding messages? Now you can physically hide the message...
You can even send it in the mail for at most a couple dollars' worth of stamps, without any direct way to trace it back to you. And then they have one chance to intercept it (which you can surely render tamper-evident in some manner.)