Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
You don't securely hide anything. You send it using any public channel that happens to be convenient and pre-agreed - YouTube, Vimeo, some squirty porn site, or whatever.

The one thing you don't do is try to hide it.

What makes it invisible is the fact that it looks just like the rest of the content it's hiding in, and doesn't come with a tag that says 'SUPER SEKRIT HIDDEN CONTENT - PLS TO NOT DECRYPT THX'

Which is the obvious problem with Tor and PGP email.

Obviously this doesn't work for simple emails. But there's no reason in principle content piggy-backing couldn't be added to any publicly accessible content distribution system, and the packaging and unpackaging couldn't be automated.

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Sat Aug 17th, 2013 at 10:31:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
hmm how can you automate piggybacking without leaving a crackable trail to the content?

It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
by eurogreen on Sun Aug 18th, 2013 at 11:43:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If you encrypt the data (to make it look random) and use a low bit rate you're just adding random looking noise to the stream. It's not possible to find the data. Really not traceable, done right, even if the NSA are running a statistical analysis over their giant stash of data - which I would be if I were them. Assume you're using a truly random one time pad to generate the stenography and I'm pretty sure they'd be screwed. Just remember to generate your content on your secure, air gapped work station, preferable enforcing things like MAC and BLP.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Sun Aug 18th, 2013 at 01:33:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series