Cloud Hosting

In the a year after the heated battle between Apple and the FBI over the iPhone of a dead alleged terrorist, the US government war on encryption has been lying somewhat dormant. But that's not because the FBI has given up on trying to change the status quo.

On Wednesday, FBI Director James Comey left the door open for a law that would require tech manufacturers like Apple or Google to come up with a way to decrypt data for the feds.

Read more: How the Government Is Waging Crypto War 2.0

"I could imagine a world that ends up with legislation saying if you are going to make devices in the United States you figure out how to comply with court orders," Comey said during a Senate hearing. "Or maybe we don't go there."

Comey's comment came after Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) asked whether the FBI director still believed that it wasn't necessary to push for a law to solve the so-called "Going Dark" probleman FBI expression that refers to the rise of unbreakable encryption and how that is stumping legitimate investigations.

"It may require a legislative solution at some point."

During his prepared statements, Comey complained that the FBI has been unable to unlock and access data on more than 3,000, or 46 percent, of all the cellphones or mobile devices they had lawful authority to search during the first half of this year.

"The shadow created by the problem called going dark continues to fall across more and more of our work," Comey said, blaming the "ubiquitous default full disk encryption on devices," while at the same time saying he doesn't want backdoors.

Full disk encryption is a technology that makes it theoretically impossible to access data stored inside cellphones like newer Android phones or iPhones unless one has the decryption key or passcode. Sometimes, like in the case of the iPhone used by the alleged terrorist who killed 14 people in San Bernardino, it's possible to get around this by hacking into the phone.

"I could imagine a world that ends up with legislation saying if you are going to make devices in the United States you figure out how to comply with court orders."

In 2014, Apple made full disk encryption on iPhones a default setting, making it virtually impossible for anyone, including the company itself, to unlock or decrypt the user's data.

So is the FBI going to push for a law to solve this "big problem" as Comey put it? Maybe.

"I don't know the answer yet. I think I saidI hope I saidlast time we talked about this, it may require a legislative solution at some point," Comey said. "The Obama administration was not in a position where they were seeking legislation. I don't know yet how President Trump intends to approach this. I know he spoke about it during the campaign, I know he cares about it, but it's premature for me to say."

Some legislators didn't seem too keen on going down that road. After Comey's remarks, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) said he was convinced there was no need for a "one-size-fits-all" legislative fix, and that it'd be better for the FBI to figure things out directly with tech companies.

While Comey's remarks areas usualsomewhat vague, they once again show that the FBI considers encryption a serious problem that's preventing agents to get access to more and more devices every day. For Comey, that needs to change somehow.

Subscribe to Science Solved It , Motherboard's new show about the greatest mysteries that were solved by science.

More here:
The FBI Director Thinks a Law Against Encryption Is Possible Under Trump - Motherboard

As media leaders gather at World Press Freedom Day (WPFD), in Jakarta, Indonesia, they embark on the difficult journey of safeguarding journalists mission in an era where their freedom is increasingly at risk.

The surveillance of journalists, in particular, has profound implications for democratic institutions, including freedom of the press; it threatens their ability to confidently and confidentially collect information and opinions about important societal issues such as politics, the environment, governmental decisions, etc. Today, more than ever, journalists need to be able to research and report the news without fear of interference or surveillance.

Encryption offers a vital defense for such intrusions. All journalists, from professionals uncovering the latest national security stories to citizen reporters documenting a protest with their mobile phone, need to be aware of the risk of unencrypted communications.

Based on input by the Internet Society, the WPFD Declaration to be adopted this week should encourage the deployment of encryption to ensure trust online and to support the safety of online journalists and the confidentiality of their sources. This is an important and positive signal to the international community.

The free press is under pressure

According to Reporters Without Boarders, the overall level of media freedom constraints and violations worldwide has risen 14% in the span of five years. Just in the past year, nearly two-thirds (62.2%) of the countries measured have registered a deterioration in their situation (including in democracies), while the number of countries where the media freedom situation was good or fairly good fell by 2.3%.

This happens in a context where reporters can be victims of government orders to shut down media websites or blogs in the name of national security or public order. But the pressure on journalists can be even higher. In some countries, using encryption is a risk in itself. For example, in 2015, three journalists from Vice Magazine were imprisoned for the reported use of encryption software.

Surveillance and violations of the confidentiality of sources have contributed to the decline of media freedom worldwide. The consequences are profound, including selfcensorship in democratic societies. In the United States, a study by Pen America showed that 16 per cent of writers avoided talking about certain topics as a result of government surveillance.

Encryption is the solution

Reporters often have multiple assignments and little time. When faced with choice, they may choose convenience over investing time in technical skills to secure their communications.

Yet, the consequences for a journalist to be under surveillance or hacked can be disastrous: losing years of research; sources whose online identity got compromised; and reporters who were physically attacked because an adversary intercepted their communications and discovered the subject of their investigations.

Tech-savvy, investigative reporters or those who focus on national security stories routinely use end-to-end encryption to protect the confidentiality of their communications so that not even the company that delivers the messages can read them. Many use tools like Signal on their smart phones and/or encrypt their email. They are careful about restricting app access to geolocation data, ensuring their devices are encrypted, and deploying a whole host of tools and techniques for better security and privacy in both their professional and personal lives.

But the need for better security doesnt just apply to investigative reporters. All journalists have a responsibility to protect themselves and their sources. Even run-of-the-mill reporting could make journalists a target.

There is support out there

Organisations like the Committee for the Protection of Journalists, Reporters Without Borders and the Electronic Frontier Foundation offer security toolkits and guidance on how to encrypt devices and communications.

Furthermore, following the Snowden revelations, some major Internet companies stepped up and offered encrypted services. As a result today, more than half the web is now encrypted over HTTPS, many suppliers offer device encryption, and some messaging services such as Whatsapp have adopted end-to-end encryption.

The Internet technical community is also playing an essential role in supporting encryption on the Internet for everyone. The World Wide Web Consortium (WC3) and the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) are working hard to make encryption the norm for web communications and for the protocols that enable information to flow on the Internet.

Some recent developments include:

Governments have a role too. We invite them to adopt the SecureTheInternet principles and to support strong encryption, not only to ensure the safety of journalists, but also as a technology that already allows us to do our banking, conduct local and global business, run our power grids, operate communications networks, and do almost everything else.

As we celebrate World Press Freedom Day, we must remember that journalists and their sources are taking enormous risks right now in making sure crucial stories get told.

In today's environment, where trust in online information is at an all-time low, we need free, safe and independent journalists more than ever. We all have a role to play, and encryption is one step to take us there.

Visit link:
The future of the free press is at risk: encryption is part of the solution - Huffington Post

Signal Magazine

Doing The Math For Better Encryption Signal Magazine Scientists at the University of Texas at Austin have delivered a mathematical revelation that could bring a number of benefits, but improved encryption tops the list. Cybersecurity, of course, depends on encryption, which relies on random data ...

Here is the original post:
Doing The Math For Better Encryption - Signal Magazine

Whatever your preference of candidates might have been, one thing was clear from the 2016 U.S. presidential election: the Russian government targeted American political organizations of both parties with an aggressive wave of cyber intrusions. Bothprivate sector analystsand theU.S. Intelligence Communityagree on this point.

Furthermore, FBI Director James Comey recently told a congressional committee that theyll be back in 2020they may be back in 2018. The head of the NSA, Admiral Mike Rogers, concurred, saying that he fully expect[s] they will maintain this level of activity.

Faced with a potential onslaught from persistent and technically advanced adversaries, political organizations should use end-to-end encrypted email and file-sharing applications that are easy to use. These applications must have three characteristics:

First, they must encrypt every message and file end-to-end. This means that even if an adversary successfully breaches an organizations server, as in the case of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), doing so will not reveal any information.

Second, these applications should not allow privileged super-users. By exploiting the vulnerability of super-user accounts in the DNC network, hackers were able to steal and leak thousands of internal communications.

Third, these applications must not use passwords, which are themselves major security vulnerabilities. People often create passwords that are easy to guess, and they divulge them too readily.

How end-to-end encryption protects user data even if a server is hacked

When messages areencrypted end-to-end, the information stored on the server is secure even if the server is hacked. Each message should beautomaticallyencrypted with auniquekey before it leaves the users deviceand onlydecrypted when it reaches its recipient.

If attackers breach the walls protecting the server such as traditional password portals and firewalls all they will find is encrypted, useless gibberish. This was not the case at the DNC,nor is it standard practicefor most major communications providers, which store their customers information on their servers unencrypted.

The DNC Breach and The Risk of Super Users

In lead up to the 2016 elections, two independent and advanced cyber actors targeted the DNCs computer servers. The first one to strike, known asAdvanced Persistent Threat (APT) 29orCOZY BEAR, was an unidentified Russian grouppossibly affiliatedwith the countrys internal security service.

The second one, known asFANCY BEARorAPT 28in cybersecurity circles, was probably a component of Russias military. The former groupsent a stringofspear phishingemails to people working at American government and nonprofit organizations in the summer of 2015, likely including someone with legitimate access to the DNC network.

The latter one waged a massive campaign in parallel; from October 2015 to May 2016, itsent almost 9,000spear phishing emails with malicious links to nearly 4,000 similar targets. As the two attackers didnot appear to be working together, one or more people at the DNC clicked on embedded links from each group, giving the Russiansaccessto the network.

One of the attackers eventually gained control of aprivileged administrator account, and was able to steal tens of thousands of sensitive emails. Instead of giving administrators super-user privileges to access vast amounts of information, new encrypted email applications use the concept of Approval Groups. With this paradigm, only a predetermined combination of trusted individuals can retrieve the decryption keys for messages on the server.Instead of giving administrators super user privileges to view vast amounts of information one of the reasons the DNC attackers were able to steal so much material a model that allows only a predetermined combination of trusted individuals to recreate the decryption keys of other users should be used.

This restriction, which gives cryptographic shards of keys to certain individuals, prevents a single hijacked administrator from wreaking havoc on an organizations information technology systems. It would also require attackers to gain control of the individual devices of approval group members, which is far more difficult.

Furthermore, messages that areencrypted end-to-endare secure even if the server they are sitting on is hacked. If attackers breach the walls protecting the server such as traditional password portals and firewalls all they will find is encrypted, useless gibberish. This is because with end-to-end encryption, you are the sole owner of the keys needed to decrypt the information.

This was not the case at the DNC,nor is it standard practicefor most major communications providers, which store their customers information on their servers unencrypted.

Finally, in the DNC hack, FANCY BEAR/APT 28 tookadvanced counter-forensic measuressuch as corrupting and deleting internal server logs to obscure its presence. Logs of all communications should be encrypted to prevent exactly this from happening.

Whether Democrat, Republican, or Independent, everyone should understand that systems that leave sensitive data unencrypted while at rest, as well as those that allow for super users, are vulnerable to advanced cyber intrusions like the one the DNC suffered.

Why passwords make systems vulnerable

While they were attacking the DNCs servers, members of FANCY BEAR/APT 28 were also busy at work attempting to breach other systems, namely the personal email accounts of Democratic Party officials and staff members.

Perhaps the most attractive target was then-candidate Hillary ClintonHillary Rodham ClintonOvernight Cybersecurity: Comey testifies on Clinton probe, surveillance | Officials grilled over financial aid breach | Massive phishing attack hits Gmail users Budowsky: A fascist-friendly POTUS When will Hillary Clinton grow up and take responsibility? MOREs campaign manager John Podesta. Like many busy and important people, he did not have time to remember a slew of different passwords for every web site he used. He occasionally asked his aides toremind himof his passwords via email and probablyre-used themamong multiple different applications.

Passwords can be a security liability as well as a hassle for users, which is why politicians, candidates and their political aids should use strong cryptographic keys instead. These keys, which are dozens of digits long, can be automatically created and stored on users computers and phones. The keys are so complex that it would take all the supercomputers on earth billions of years to guess.

Unfortunately, Podestas Gmail account used passwords to decrypt his emails instead of cryptographic keys stored locally.Receiving anemail alert probably from the Russians warning him that an unauthorized user was trying to access his Gmail account, he or one of his staff members reached out to the campaigns information technology support team. After getting someconfusing advice, either Podesta or one of his assistantsclicked on an embedded malicious linkto a fake password reset portal. He fell for the ruse and entered his credentials, giving them to the attackers.

The FANCY BEAR/APT 28 actors were then able to access and download nearlyten years worth of private communications. The Russians later used the stolen materials to create another October Surprise for the campaign by againproviding the information to WikiLeaks.

It is unfortunate that, in retrospect, using end-to-end encryption with strong cryptographic keys could have prevented all of this. By keeping encryption keys only on a users device, there is no need for passwords to access ones communications. Not having to remember and type them in all the time makes it impossible toaccidentally give them to hackerstoo.

Get ready for 2018 by securing your systems today

Although the 2016 election is in the books, the cybersecurity lessons we can learn from it are critical for future cycles. We know that at least one foreign country will take active measures, like hacking political organizations and campaigns, to support itspreferred candidate. Regardless of whom you support, every American should be able to agree that sensitive internal communications like campaign emails must remain private and secure. With an end-to-end encrypted messaging protocol, political organizations of every stripe can do just that.

Walter Haydock works forPreVeil, a Boston based cybersecurity companywhere he interfaces with political campaigns, think tanks, and other government-facing clients.Previously, he served as a staff member for the House of Representatives as well as an officer in the Marine Corps. The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the United States government.

The views expressed by contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.

See original here:
End-to-end encryption could be key to securing future elections - The Hill (blog)