Home
| Calendar
| Mail Lists
| List Archives
| Desktop SIG
| Hardware Hacking SIG
Wiki | Flickr | PicasaWeb | Video | Maps & Directions | Installfests | Keysignings Linux Cafe | Meeting Notes | Blog | Linux Links | Bling | About BLU |
Ben Holland wrote: > If someone gets hold of a disk and it's AES encrypted, they won't be > able to break it any time soon. Assuming a good key, yes. > Why would refusing to open the encrypted file be any different then > refusing to vpn in? ~Ben It is a legal and political difference. Customs thinks they can look at whatever passes physically before them. They think they can ask you to unlock your suitcase. They think they can ask you to decrypt your files. If you say "no", they can make your life difficult. But, even in this strange day-and-age, where search warrants aren't needed and torture is acceptable, there seems to be a reluctance to force one to cyber-burglarize ones own employer as a condition to returning to the country. Major corporation IT departments are doing the VPN route over the encrypted route. They see a difference. Now, admittedly I am messing with the boundaries here. One might consider the "key" to be every 16th byte. But if one treated a whole 120GB drive this way the "key" would still be a 7.5 GB file. I imagine that as a practical matter the mangling of data could be less than 1-in-16. Maybe 1-in-32 or 1-in-64?, but the missing data would still be substantial (4 or 2 GB). -kb -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean. _______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.blu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
BLU is a member of BostonUserGroups | |
We also thank MIT for the use of their facilities. |