Could FReepmail be used by terrorist

eastforker ^ | 1/18/04 | Eastforker

[eastforker]

This is a question for those that know. Do the security agencies have a way to monitor private replys on this and other forums on the internet? If not, we may have a security breach that has not been addressed.

[MEG33]

If only.God rest their souls.

[auntdot]

Okay, B9, O64, G78, I27, N56,...........

Now we have either leveled Area 51 or we have

BINGO.

[eastforker]

???????????????

[Deb]

Blah, blah, blah. If you have your decoder ring and know the secret word of the day...no problemo.

Would you be safer in a farm house with 5 members of the Religion of Peace, or in your own house being monitored by John Ashcroft? Ask Daniel Pearl.

Oh, and give us a call when your rights are violated. We'll be waiting by the phone.

[eastforker]

You don't want to talk to me about UFO's!

[risk]

No? How about crop circles then?

[Commie Basher]

Oh no, we may yet have a shred of privacy! Quick, somebody notify our All-Wise & Benevolent Police State Security Officers!

[Johnny_Cipher]

Ringo.

Stutter.

Henhouse.

John has a long moustache.

52.

[eastforker]

do a google on :huffman and cash, after that come and talk.

[baltodog]

Seriously speaking, one should always assume that whatever is sent or rec'd through a public broadcasting medium such as the i'net, a phone call, walkie-talkie, etc, can be monitored.

We adjust our behavior knowing that.

Is there secure public communication that does not require encryption available for our use? Yes there is....you start with two soup cans and some string....

[Gerasimov]

It could be done anywhere ... why they would choose here is beyond me. If yer worried about web sites that endanger national security, check out www.islamonline.com and http://drafthillary.homestead.com/

That's where the danger comes from.

Seriously, though. There are so many other, better, more efficient ways for the badguys to talk than to try to use freepmail ... you don't know if your private replies here can be monitored, which means neither do they. This isn't where they'd come.

[risk]

I'm not so sure. Consider this paragraph from the README file from http://lcamtuf.coredump.cx/snowdrop.tgz

Snowdrop is intended to bring (relatively) invisible and modification-proof watermarking to a new realm of "source material" - written word and computer source codes. The information is not being embedded in the least significant portions of some binary output, as it would be with a traditional low-level steganography, but into the source itself. The idea, at least for English, isn't new - there was some serious work done by Mikhail Atallah from Purdue University. Snowdrop is merely an attempt to provide a reliable, useful tool to implement those source-level watermarking / steganography capabilities. Because of some tricks, such as using specially crafted MD5 shortcuts, it gives certain additional advantages to its potential users, such as integrity and privacy of embedded information, or an ability to demonstrate the origin of a document to the public (see section 2 for more details). Separate logical channels are used to carry highly redundant watermark to ensure it is extremely difficult to remove this information by accident, simple reformatting, etc.

[Gerasimov]

But again, why would they come here? Snowdrop could be done on virtually any web site, public or private. When I can register a domain name, create a page with some obscure name, and post data as I please (encrypted or not) within an hour, why would I use a Freepmail type of service? I just think it's unlikely. Not a matter of "could they" in my mind as much as "would they?"

[risk]

Stop it, you're taking this thread too seriously and it's tarnishing the charm :)

[DainBramage]

CLASSYGREENEYEDAL- QUIDA

[MountainPete]

Never say anything on the phone that you wouldn't tell a cop.

Old Hippie Saying

[MaryFromMichigan]

Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you....

[Iris7]

I don't disagree with either of you. My post pretty much says the same thing. I personally do not see how internet traffic with rudimentary tradecraft applied, even the simple using of aphorisms for some nouns, can be algorithmicly detected. "Aunt Nora wants to visit" can mean most anything!

(I had a large paragraph here that is deleted.)

I do not want to get any more specific here.

[Lazamataz]

Never, and I mean never post anything or send anything or read or view anything on the internet that will embarrass you or get you thrown in the slammer or make your wife or the IRS hate you.

NOWWWWWW you tell me. Wife divorced, IRS thinks I suck, I'm facing a 12 year stretch for Evil Unbecoming A Freeper in the Fourth Degree, and everyone knows I'm not wearing any pants.

[dakine]

Laz...You seem to be awake, earlier and earlier....