Re: OT: "enhanced interrogation" (was: Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable)

On Fri, 1 May 2009, Joe wrote: > I made the file, I didn't overwrite an existing one. Yes, it's possible > to find the file, but it's hard to figure out what it is (since > TrueCrypt leaves no headers although the topic the thread WAS > detection). > > The idea, more than anything, is that I c

Re: OT: "enhanced interrogation" (was: Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable)

I made the file, I didn't overwrite an existing one. Yes, it's possible to find the file, but it's hard to figure out what it is (since TrueCrypt leaves no headers although the topic the thread WAS detection). The idea, more than anything, is that I can say I have no idea what the extra file i

Re: OT: "enhanced interrogation" (was: Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable)

Wouldn't one problem with your plan be is that the file size would be different? Of course that would only matter if the person looking knew the typical size, or the software checking the drive wasn't doing file size checks on known files. Gotta wonder what Anti-virus software would make of the fil

Re: OT: "enhanced interrogation" (was: Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable)

Yeah, that's why TrueCrypt's ability to "hide" the volume on a device is so awesome. The idea is, people don't realize anything is even there to BE encrypted. One thing I was reading about with regard to plausible deniability is to hide your volumes inside of other files. For example, I have a jum

Re: OT: "enhanced interrogation" (was: Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable)

On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Mike Schwartz wrote: > Oh, so *** that's *** what the phrase "rubber hose decryption" means; > in some previous post (probably recently - in the parent thread?) that > phrase was used but I thought maybe it was some FOSS tool that I was not > familiar with. Heh. Y

OT: "enhanced interrogation" (was: Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable)

Oh, so *** that's *** what the phrase "rubber hose decryption" means; in some previous post (probably recently - in the parent thread?) that phrase was used but I thought maybe it was some FOSS tool that I was not familiar with. ...sorta timely, since there is all kinds of ruckus going on in the m

Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable

On Fri, May 1, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Ryan Rix wrote: > detection != decryption Except they can then beat the password out of you, aka "rubber hose decryption". Jim --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsub

Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable

detection != decryption. I'm filing this one in the FUD/misinformation department. On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Lisa Kachold wrote: > Ah, you guys? > > This is about the ability to determine if: > > 1) a header has been encrypted > 2) a drive has an encrypted partition > > etc... > > It's a

Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable

Lisa Kachold wrote: > TrueCrypt is now Detectable > > "Sorry Charley!" not quite so fast. I have checked the tool as detailed on the site above and even tried a few tests. the results were inconclusive at best. the tool (as described) could not re

Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 5:49 PM, Lisa Kachold wrote: > Ah, you guys? > > This is about the ability to determine if: > > 1) a header has been encrypted > 2) a drive has an encrypted partition > > etc... > > It's a security issue. > > Not so much of a political one.  That's OT, I believe? Like hell

Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable

you remember the whole 'Cypherpunks' episode right? one of the very early Wired magazines had an excellent article on them. -jmz On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 5:10 PM, Jim March <1.jim.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: > In the US you generally don't need to hide encryption.  The 5th > Amendment usually p

Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable

Ah, you guys? This is about the ability to determine if: 1) a header has been encrypted 2) a drive has an encrypted partition etc... It's a security issue. Not so much of a political one. That's OT, I believe? On 4/30/09, Jim March <1.jim.ma...@gmail.com> wrote: > In the US you generally don

Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable

Jim March wrote: > In the US you generally don't need to hide encryption. The 5th > Amendment usually protects any key stashed in your head. In these days of the Patriot Act and such, I'm not certain how well that would work. I'm sure they would at least charge you with "obstruction of justice"

Re: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable

In the US you generally don't need to hide encryption. The 5th Amendment usually protects any key stashed in your head. There's been an exception so far in a case where a guy allowed police browsing, they found kiddie porn or so they say, the system got shut off, and he wouldn't let them back in

RE: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable

: HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable TrueCrypt is now Detectable <http://www.forensicinnovations.com/blog/?p=7> -- www.obnosis.com (503)754-4452 "Contradictions do not exist." A. Rand --- PLUG-discuss mailing lis

HackFest Series: TrueCrypt is Now Detectable

TrueCrypt is now Detectable -- www.obnosis.com (503)754-4452 "Contradictions do not exist." A. Rand --- PLUG-discuss mailing list - PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to