mdlbear: (chernobyl bunny)
raw notes )

It's been pretty miserable, actually. My itchy eye was diagnosed (over the phone) as conjunctivitis, and I left work at noon yesterday to get lunch on my way to picking up the prescribed eyedrops. In passing I asked the pharmacist whether there was anything I could take for my nasal congestion that I hadn't already tried. There isn't. She said that sudafed was OK as long as my blood pressure is under control, so I started that. Not in time to keep from passing a thoroughly miserable night breathing through my mouth, and with little demons stabbing my eyelids whenever I turned over too far. :P

The eye was noticably worse this morning, but seems marginally better now. It still hurts. And itches.

I managed to work through Tuesday, and Wednesday morning. The latter was probably a mistake, though I did get to a couple of essential meetings. Good intentions or not, it's hard to work from home on one eye, half a nose, and not a whole lot of sleep.

I was feeling rather guilty about that until Naomi pointed out this afternoon that getting well is my job right now. And I was able to get a little done. And some decluttering at home, an activity that doesn't demand much more brain power than I can muster right now.

Most of today's collection of links are, not surprisingly, about the TSA and their new screening procedures.

mdlbear: blue fractal bear with text "since 2002" (Default)

There's a really great post on tips for airplane travel over on [livejournal.com profile] sweetmusic_2 that I've been meaning to point to for a long time. Go read it, especially if you haven't traveled by air much.

This post isn't very closely related at all; it just seemed like a convenient excuse for a link. This post is more directly related to this post on Techdirt.com and related matters, which point out that customs agents on both sides of the US/Canadian border are searching and in some cases seizing laptops and cell phones.

OK, we all know that keeping sensitive data on your laptop is a bad idea. And we all know that you can encrypt your home directory -- at least on Linux and Mac. And you can use something like TrueCrypt to make a complete virtual encrypted disk. Both will protect your privacy pretty well, but if your laptop gets stolen or seized, you still lose the use of your data. Similarly, you can set a master password in Firefox, but it's probably not going to protect your login cookies, it might be breakable, and customs might be able to force you to reveal it in any case.

So here's a better idea: don't have secrets anywhere on your computer when you cross the border. This is the software equivalent of taking all the metal out of your pockets and using a piece of rope for a belt as you go through the security checkpoint.

This relies on having all of your private data accessible via the web. It has to be either encrypted, or on your home server and accessible through an encrypted tunnel like ssh. Because your connections may be slow, it also helps to minimize what you really need: basically your keychain file(s) and your ssh and gpg private keys.

The private keys will all be protected by long passphrases anyway, if you're doing it right. You can encrypt your browser password file with a master password as well. Your IM client probably keeps your account passwords around; find that file too. If you keep a separate file of website passwords, as I do, you should encrypt that. Now put them all in a directory, zip it up, and encrypt the zip file. Note: do not use your gpg private key for this: it's not going to be on your machine when you need to decrypt the secrets! Use AES and a long passphrase.

Mail the resulting zip file, as an attachment, to yourself on any convenient webmail account. Or put it on a website that you control. If you want to be really safe, use steganography to put it inside an image.

Now delete all your secrets, using a secure deletion program that overwrites all the files with random bits before actually deleting them. Clear your browser cache, history, and cookies, again with a secure deletion program. Go.

When you get to your destination, retrieve the secrets file, decrypt and unzip it, and put everything back in the directories where they belong.

I'll be doing some international traveling in a couple of weeks; by that time I'll have some scripts I can post for you.

Security?

2008-01-16 03:42 pm
mdlbear: (distress)
Techdirt: TSA Staffer Hires Buddies To Build Insecure Website For Folks Falsely On Watch List
We've had so many stories of government computer systems or websites that have terrible security or are just useless (but expensive!) that it shouldn't surprise us to hear of another one. Yet, there's always someone who can go a step further. Witness the news that the TSA's website for individuals who find themselves incorrectly on the security watchlist has been found to be insecure, with hundreds of falsely accused travelers exposing personal details by using the site. Even better, it turns out that the company that was hired to build the site got the job in a no-bid contract (meaning there wasn't any competition -- it was just chosen) and the guy responsible for figuring out who to hire just so happened to have been a former employee at that company. So, basically, what happened was that a guy who had taken a job at the TSA hired his former coworkers, with no competition for the job and apparently little oversight, to just build a website that turned out to be insecure. And, of course, without any oversight, it took months before anyone even noticed the site was insecure. And, remember, that this is the TSA we're talking about here -- an organization who's main concern is supposed to be security. I feel safer already.
Why am I not surprised by this? The original article is on InformationWeek.

Do you feel safer?
mdlbear: (grrr)

From this post in BoingBoing we get a link to a column by Patrick Smith in today's New York Times titled "The Airport Security Follies". Well worth a read, but it will make you angry. If enough people read it, maybe...

To understand what makes these measures so absurd, we first need to revisit the morning of September 11th, and grasp exactly what it was the 19 hijackers so easily took advantage of. Conventional wisdom says the terrorists exploited a weakness in airport security by smuggling aboard box-cutters. What they actually exploited was a weakness in our mindset -- a set of presumptions based on the decades-long track record of hijackings.

In years past, a takeover meant hostage negotiations and standoffs; crews were trained in the concept of "passive resistance." All of that changed forever the instant American Airlines Flight 11 collided with the north tower. What weapons the 19 men possessed mattered little; the success of their plan relied fundamentally on the element of surprise. And in this respect, their scheme was all but guaranteed not to fail.

For several reasons -- particularly the awareness of passengers and crew -- just the opposite is true today. Any hijacker would face a planeload of angry and frightened people ready to fight back. Say what you want of terrorists, they cannot afford to waste time and resources on schemes with a high probability of failure. And thus the September 11th template is all but useless to potential hijackers.

No matter that a deadly sharp can be fashioned from virtually anything found on a plane, be it a broken wine bottle or a snapped-off length of plastic, we are content wasting billions of taxpayer dollars and untold hours of labor in a delusional attempt to thwart an attack that has already happened, asked to queue for absurd lengths of time, subject to embarrassing pat-downs and loss of our belongings.

The comments are worthwhile, too.

mdlbear: blue fractal bear with text "since 2002" (Default)

Now the TSA is afraid that spare lithium batteries will spontaneously combust. Or that somebody will try to light them instead of their shoe, but if so why are thay banned from checked baggage and not from carry-ons?

Never mind that they're just as likely to combust inside a laptop. Maybe more, since an external short might develop. (Added 08:55 [livejournal.com profile] sbisson points out that there's a real reason for the apparent anomaly: cabin fire extinguishers can cope with lithium fires, while the automatic ones in the baggage hold can't. But you can still check a laptop through, and those have been known to burst into flames.)

(From BoingBoing.) Note that most batteries installed in devices are permitted, and even a lot of add-on batteries. Forget about checking through a big pile of camcorder batteries, though.

mdlbear: "Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than to curse the darkness" - Terry Pratchett (flamethrower)
MIT student arrested for entering Boston airport with "fake bomb" light-up T-shirt - Boing Boing
Short version: it wasn't a "fake bomb" at all, it was a wearable tech jacket on the body of a friendly young technologist who would have been *way* better off wearing something else to the airport today. Authorities in Massachussetts who've been accused of overreacting to tech art misunderstandings before -- remember the Mooninite Menace? -- are throwing the book at her.
... She wasn't even getting on a plane -- just picking up a friend.

Most Popular Tags

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Style Credit

Page generated 2025-12-30 06:41 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios