Quote from: MarcelKetman on April 22, 2013, 03:11 pmOK. Let me outline what I think has to happen for LE to be able to use Skype as a key logger to build a case against SR users.1. a) LE have to become aware that the Skype account holder is using SR - There's is no way Skype/LE monitor people's calls without good reason. That's conspiracy theory talk if you ask me. So I can't see how 1. a) is possible.  b) LE have to link a Skype account with a user they have identified on SR - If someone is using TBB correctly, how??2. If they somehow do find out either of the above, they have to gain permission to key-log ever stroke from any computer the Skype-holder is logged in to? Even when permission is given to listen to phones, the permission is extremely limited. So in this sense, yes there is a massive difference between tapping (whatever the technology) and key-logging and I don't see it being granted very readily.(But the main point is, if they already know the user is using SR, why would they bother going to all of that effort?? They know they're using SR so they can simply conduct real life surveillance. If you're suggesting that LE would only become aware of someone's use of SR by using Skype as a key-logger I think you're getting into seriously fantastical stuff. Key-logging strokes mightn't take up much memory but the man hours involved monitoring every Skype user that types the words Silk Road on their computer is beyond colossal.)3. If the IP address of the user and the Skype server are in a different jurisdiction there also has be severe limitations to the listening they can do that would be of use to them in a prosecution - You can't use surveillance by US police to prosecute somebody in a French court for example. 4. Let's say, that in the unlikely event this happens and they find evidence of using Silk Road, this is still useless to them for a prosecution. LE have to conduct surveillance and a raid, AND have to find stuff on the computer and more to the point, have to find drugs. Once again, if the suspect is in another country, this requires massive collusion and resources. This isn't going to happen unless you're a Mexican cartel boss. Is key-logging technologically possible? Of course it is. Is it used by government agencies? Probably, when it's investigating terrorism or gathering other intelligence. They will never have to use the evidence gleaned from key-logging in court. For prosecuting people selling drugs online, they do. If key-logging were to keep me up at night, it would be because I would be revealing my passwords hackers. If I worry about LE, I worry about them sitting outside my house with a telephoto lens and following me around, not logging my key strokes needlessly when they already suspect me. But yes, by not using Skype, you have nothing to lose. So by all means... :)Conspiracy talk? We must be on completely separate wavelengths, or perhaps in two different centuries.Marcel, the greater availability of technology is making LE adopt more and more precrime strategies, known as premptive policing. It includes various profiling techniques, such as the ones you see used at airports by the TSA. This is a general trend that is increasing, there is nothing especially outrageous about it, I'm not passing on messages from Alex Jones here. Right now there are LE agents using special equipment to detect high emotional states in people entering zones such as airports. If you are feeling particularly stressed, there are visual cues, odors that can be detected by sensors.http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/12/02/airport.security/index.htmlThe Stazi pioneered the use of odor collection and detection, especially in connection with dogs, and now it appears that the TSA & co are taking up that baton, especially with the 'seats'.Back on the specific subject of Skype, there is every way LE can detect what is in your instant messages with a simple keyword search. I strongly emphasize to you that there is no technological difficulty in using Skype for mass surveillance. Any difficulties would be legal, and I'm convinced that a judge is going to give the DEA and FBI a whole lot of leeway when it comes to sophisticated operations like SR.Most people assume Skype is a pure P2P application. This is not completely true. There are special computers called supernodes which Skype employes to enhance the organization of the Skype network. Many of us believe that these supernodes are serving a dual purpose to allow the possibility of a wiretap. Microsoft applied for a patent (which was given) to wiretap VOIP, the patent explains how what we think is a supernode is being used to conduct eavesdropping for VOIP or instant messaging. The only other possibility is that random Skype users have their machines commandeered for a wiretap, which seems highly unlikely for pragmatic reasons.QuoteLegal Intercept PatentAbstractAspects of the subject matter described herein relate to silently recording communications. In aspects, data associated with a request to establish a communication is modified to cause the communication to be established via a path that includes a recording agent. Modification may include, for example, adding, changing, and/or deleting data within the data. The data as modified is then passed to a protocol entity that uses the data to establish a communication session. Because of the way in which the data has been modified, the protocol entity selects a path that includes the recording agent. The recording agent is then able to silently record the communication. More:http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO2&Sect2=HITOFF&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsearch-adv.html&r=1&f=G&l=50&d=PG01&p=1&S1=20110153809&OS=20110153809&RS=20110153809Pine believes something slightly different, which is the above (Legal Intercept) is used for regular policing (Skype's main source of LE income), but that the FBI and DEA have *realtime access* (used for terrorism, drug smuggling) to a different system which involves a program called a RAT or Remote Access Tool that when deployed to your Skype's backdoor allows all manner of extra goodies to be had, including your keystrokes. It is unnecessary to involve a supernode because they have your plaintext (which is why "logging" is the right word vs "intercept"), although they have access to your session keys too if need be, and basically all manner of data is vacuumed out of your machine and into theirs.Quote If I worry about LE, I worry about them sitting outside my house with a telephoto lens and following me around, not logging my key strokes needlessly when they already suspect me. This in particular makes no sense. Let me turn that around for you. Why on earth would they be sitting outside your house with a telephoto lens, when they can take photos of you every day with your own webcam, record every conversation in the room, record all your keystrokes and take screenshots of your desktop?Like I have already said, I cannot know whether they are using Skype for mass surveillance, although this is to me a far from unlikely possibility. I do know they are using Skype as a resource to gather information on individuals. Given everything I have posted, I believe it would be a good move for SR users not to be using Skype to talk about the Silk Road, nor to have the program running in the background.I have the strange vibe Marcel, that you think the Law is on your side at some level. That if you are apprehended that somebody, somewhere, is going to kick up a fuss about your privacy being violated. This is cognitive dissonance, these people will throw you to the wolves if they can. It really is a Us vs Them thing, many LE agents don't even believe you're human. Every piece of information obtained from LE HQs confirms this general worldview. If anybody from SR is arrested, they are going to be presented to the jury or judge as a leet haxxor with special talents, and hence this validates any unusual intrusiveness of the LE techniques. A piece of paper isn't going to protect you. The police break the law all the time to catch criminals and they are nearly always retroactively forgiven for this behind closed doors with the right judge, or if they have an awkward case they will just call their source of information a "confidential informant".It's amazing how many "confidential informants" that mysteriously turn up when there is a case that is tough to crack.You get the point. The system is beyond corrupt, don't depend on it for any mercies. In general, the honest cops get the grunt jobs and the scum that makes up the numbers by whatever means rises to the top. Convictions almost never occur, except in highly unusual situations like NY when practically the entire department was fired. For a good detective to rise to a decent position, they either have to be almost supernaturally gifted or have family connections. If you want a fair shake in today's environment, you want your local cop shop to be dominated by one or two families with a strong sense of fairness and duty (as you probably know, like being a solider, some jobs tend to be done traditionally by a small set of families). Unfortunately that LE agents are rotated out of areas on a continual basis to prevent corruption, although it sounds logical, actually leads to more corruption of a far, far more vile kind in the end. Quote from: tree on April 20, 2013, 10:15 pmYour articles don't say anything about Skype being able to record your every keystroke when not using Skype.Just to let you know, I found a link which explains some of what I was getting at, in that there is no magic isolation between GUI programs on your desktop, most people, including computer people appear to assume there is, but there is not.QuoteThere certainly is one thing that most Linux users don't realize about their Linux systems... this is the lack of GUI-level isolation, and how it essentially nullifies all the desktop security. I wrote about it a few times, I spoke about it a few times, yet I still come across people who don't realize it all the time.So, let me stress this one more time: if you have two GUI applications, e.g. an OpenOffice Word Processor, and a stupid Tetris game, both of which granted access to your screen (your X server), then there is no isolation between those two apps. Even if they run as different user accounts! Even if they are somehow sandboxed by SELinux or whatever! None, zero, null, nil!The X server architecture, designed long time ago by some happy hippies who just thought all the people apps are good and non-malicious, simply allows any GUI application to control any other one. No bugs, no exploits, no tricks, are required. This is all by design. One application can sniff or inject keystrokes to another one, can take snapshots of the screen occupied by windows belonging to another one, etc.If you don't believe me, I suggest you do a simple experiment. Open a terminal window, as normal user, and run xinput list, which is a standard diagnostic program for Xorg (on Fedora you will likely need to install it first: yum install xorg-x11-apps):$ xinput listIt will show you all the pointer and keyboard devices that your Xorg knows about. Note the ID of the device listed as AT keyboard and then run (as normal user!):$ xinput test idIt should now start displaying the scancodes for all the keys you press on the keyboard. If it doesn't, it means you used a wrong device ID.Now, for the best, start another terminal window, and switch to root (e.g. using su, or sudo). Notice how the xinput running as user is able to sniff all your keystrokes, including root password (for su), and then all the keystrokes you enter in your root session. Start some GUI app as root, or as different user, again notice how your xinput can sniff all the keystrokes you enter to this other app!http://theinvisiblethings.blogspot.se/2011/04/linux-security-circus-on-gui-isolation.html