Why Bush's NSA Wire tapping is defeated by VoIP Networks (VIDEO)

[file83]

Ran across this interesting argument supporting the belief that the wiretapping program by Bush is really just a domestic surveillance program which has no intentions of intercepting phone calls of actual terrorists.

Basically, he demonstrates that by using off the shelf software/hardware, anyone can legally set up their own "voice over IP" phone network. These networks are encrypted, mobile. Terrorists have no reason to rely on the regular phone networks that Bush is tapping.

From Google Video: Why Bush's NSA Wire tapping is defeated by VoIP Networks



It's also kind of a cool idea - setting up your own phone network. Of course, I'm a nerd.

[Holly_Hobby]

1. Posted here....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2454815&mesg_id=2454815

[MADem]

2. HA!! That guy is wearing a TIA tee shirt!!! See the logo???

[rman]

3. Interesting, but i'm not so sure the NSA can't crack the encryption

[bleever]

4. Very interesting. More evidence that the NSA surveillance

is much more likely to be used to suppress and track dissent, and to spy on the opposition party's attempts to win elections.

[Poll_Blind]

5. Ha! GREAT post. Thank you! n/t

PB

[NoodleyAppendage]

6. Why does he hate Amerika? Great stuff.

All valid points and a good system, but the weak link is the necessity for a static IP for the VoIP server.

J

[lumberjack_jeff]

15. I read somewhere that you can use a service like dyndns

to emulate a static address.

Using DynDns, Tor, VPN, encryption AND using asterisk (which enables the traffic on your local network to not go through vonage's systems) would seem to me to be for all practical purposes, untraceable.

The basic point is that the people who are supposed to be caught by wiretaps are the people most motivated to avoid it. Wiretaps are good for listening to democrats, not so good at listening for terrorists.

[ContraBass Black]

7. Vonage and some other VoIP providers have added tapping functionality

To their networks voluntarily for law enforcement's use.

[hootinholler]

8. Yes, but this technology bypasses all that...

Effectively establishing a VPN telephone network. This is actually very doable.

-Hoot

[pnorman]

9. That is an utter MINDBLOWER!!!

Let's all see that this is as widely promulgated as possible. (Let's also give this enough votes for it to get a "GREATEST" rating)

pnorman

[redacted]

10. BRILLIANT!

[Festivito]

11. It does have some tappable qualities.

I'd be certain the government is tapping the Internet. After all, the Internet taps the Internet just to make reports on usage. Regardless of the encryption used for the actual voice, the header data describes where the voice is going and where it came from unencrypted for all the world to see.

The individual network might encrypt the few user numbers inside the network.

However, if you know one of the endpoints you can easily read is somewhere in Pakistan, it would pique interest. Public Internet. No warrant needed. Both endpoints go on a watchlist. Collect a series of endpoints that go through the VoIP endpoint, and back and forth through the domestic endpoints. Figure how they determine a static address, e.g. buying one somewhere, getting it from a constant website, installing it on a hacked website,... You can begin to identify the enpoint users.

The de-encryption takes too long, but if really wanted such is just a matter of money and time.

Then, where is the program installed? (At one of the endpoints of course) Who bought the space? ..investigative footwork..

It's probably why he's on a watchlist. After all, we know Republicans are smart, they just are not bright enough to run a country well.

[file83]

12. But if your "Phone Network Server" is communicating over the TOR

protocol, they'll never be able to locate either the source or the destination in the headers.

[pnorman]

13. TOR protocol --- that's well outside of my area of knowledge.

But here's what came up: http://idtrail.org/files/Dingledine%20-%20Tor.pdf

"Intuitively", it may seem that anything we can do, Big Brother can do bigger, better, and faster. But that may be no more than Orwellian mind-fuck. Bit by bit, we're starting to learn that Big Brother (The Mighty Oz") is NOT Infallible, or All-Seeing.

pnorman
On edit: Here's another Google hit: http://petworkshop.org/2006/preproc/preproc_18.pdf Looks promising.

[IronLionZion]

14. Only stupid people think people are stupid.

I assure you, Law Enforcement is not stupid. They aggressively crack the encryption as if lives depend on it because they do. I just wish they needed warrants to do it.

[BurningDog]

16. Stupid has nothing to do with it.

Any sufficiently advanced encryption that is implemented securely is practically unbreakable. Its true that any encryption except a one-time pad is breakable by brute forcing the key, however the computational time required would make it impractical to try to break it because the information would either be 1)out of date because it took so long to break or 2)completely worthless anyway.

If more and more people start using encrypted links even for normal mundane conversations it would increase the amount of white noise going out encrypted over the internet, and make it even further impractical to try to break.

Its much more worrying that they're trying to mandate back doors in VOIP software by legislation and any software that doesn't have one would be illegal.