nanog mailing list archives

Re: latest Snowden docs show NSA intercepts all Google and Yahoo DC-to-DC traffic


From: Randy <randy_94108 () yahoo com>
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2013 20:29:22 -0700 (PDT)

Big Brother is always watching and Big Brother has way more resources than network-operators in this list!
(good discussion all the same)

a) politics is the last-resort for scoundrels
b) power corrupts and absolute-power(FBI, CIA, NSA, DHS..etc,) corrupts-absolutely.

I speak from this-side-of-the-pond and I have no doubt that this thread is being monitored as well by (b) and no; I 
don't have my tinfoil-hat on.

To answer your question:

Not Much.
./Randy







----- Original Message -----
From: Harry Hoffman <hhoffman () ip-solutions net>
To: Mike Lyon <mike.lyon () gmail com>
Cc: Niels Bakker <niels=nanog () bakker net>; nanog () nanog org
Sent: Friday, November 1, 2013 7:32 PM
Subject: Re: latest Snowden docs show NSA intercepts all Google and Yahoo DC-to-DC traffic

So, I'm not sure if I'm being too simple-minded in my response. Please 
let me know if I am.
The purpose of encrypting data is so others can't read your secrets.
If you use a simple substitution cipher it's pretty easy to derive the set 
of substitution rules used.
Stronger encryption algorithms employ more "difficult" math. Figuring 
out how to get from the ciphertext to the plaintext becomes a, computationally, 
difficult task.
If your encryption algorithms are "good" *and* your source of random 
data is really random then the amount of time it takes to decrypt the data is so 
far out that it makes the data useless.

Cheers,
Harry

Mike Lyon <mike.lyon () gmail com> wrote:

So even if Goog or Yahoo encrypt their data between DCs, what stops
the NSA from decrypting that data? Or would it be done simply to make
their lives a bit more of a PiTA to get the data they want?

-Mike



 On Nov 1, 2013, at 19:08, Harry Hoffman 
<hhoffman () ip-solutions net> wrote:

 That's with a recommendation of using RC4.
 Head on over to the Wikipedia page for SSL/TLS and then decide if you 
want rc4 to be your preference when trying to defend against a adversary with 
the resources of a nation-state.

 Cheers,
 Harry

 Niels Bakker <niels=nanog () bakker net> wrote:

 * mikal () stillhq com (Michael Still) [Fri 01 Nov 2013, 05:27 CET]:
 Its about the CPU cost of the crypto. I was once told the 
number of
 CPUs required to do SSL on web search (which I have now 
forgotten)
 and it was a bigger number than you'd expect -- certainly 
hundreds.

 False: 
https://www.imperialviolet.org/2010/06/25/overclocking-ssl.html

 "On our production frontend machines, SSL/TLS accounts for 
less than
 1% of the CPU load, less than 10KB of memory per connection and 
less
 than 2% of network overhead. Many people believe that SSL takes a 
lot
 of CPU time and we hope the above numbers (public for the first 
time)
 will help to dispel that."


    -- Niels.




Current thread: