Extent of UK snooping revealed

[Tyler Durden]

>Yes, this is a somewhat interesting problem - probably not that difficult
>considering that the goal here is to create plausible deniability in a
>setting like a court of law.  Generating traffic patterns that convince
>other crytpographers (or even sysadmins) is much harder than generating
>traffic patterns that simply create reasonable doubt.

>>Also, unless you have some very odd friends, user activity will
>>vary in statistically likely ways over time, so the ideal system
>>would "randomly" compensate for that.

I've only caugfht the tail end of this, but from what I can understand some 
of this might be overkill.

Let's imagine you're an ISP that "sells" privacy in your customers' surfing. 
So you make your server regularly go get random webpages so that your 
customers have a cloak of privacy, and this is what you tell the court. 
(Provided, of course, they have some way to 'prove' that the traffic into 
and out of your server is fake traffic!) In these kinds of scenarios, 
'realistic' web traffic might be unneccessary. (Or maybe there's some other 
'cover' story such as the need to update weblinks or whatever...)

Or do I misunderstand here?

-TD






>From: John Kozubik <john at kozubik.com>
>To: ken <bbrow07 at students.bbk.ac.uk>
>CC: cypherpunks <cypherpunks at lne.com>
>Subject: Re: Extent of UK snooping revealed
>Date: Wed, 28 May 2003 10:36:23 -0700 (PDT)
>
>On Wed, 28 May 2003, ken wrote:
>
> > John Kozubik wrote:
> >
> > > d) set up an automated script on the server that _constantly_ fetches
> > > random web pages, thus creating a constant stream of http traffic in 
>and
> > > out of the server, again diminishing traffic patterns.  Log the actual
> > > proxy requests in some temporary fashion and randomly hit those web 
>sites
> > > in an automated fashion throughout the day, regardless of whether 
>someone
> > > is requesting them through the proxy or not...and then, script a 
>constant
> > > stream of requests to the proxy as well
> >
> > Fun & difficult part is setting up fetching of "random" web pages
> > that looks like real user activity.
>
>Yes, this is a somewhat interesting problem - probably not that difficult
>considering that the goal here is to create plausible deniability in a
>setting like a court of law.  Generating traffic patterns that convince
>other crytpographers (or even sysadmins) is much harder than generating
>traffic patterns that simply create reasonable doubt.
>
> > Also, unless you have some very odd friends, user activity will
> > vary in statistically likely ways over time, so the ideal system
> > would "randomly" compensate for that.
>
>Exactly.  The ideal system would monitor in and outbound:
>
>- web requests
>- bytes transferred
>- bytes per page
>- pictures per page
>- binary files transferred
>- (all of those) / second
>
>and generate pseudo-random browsing to smooth these variables over time.
>Perhaps a script that chose random word pairs from the dictionary, googled
>them, and browsed the pages that were returned would be a good platform.
>
>-----
>John Kozubik - john at kozubik.com - http://www.kozubik.com

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus