Bin Laden's Sneakernet Email System 240
Hugh Pickens writes "Osama bin Laden was a prolific writer who put together a painstaking email system that thwarted the US government's best eavesdroppers despite having no Internet access in his hideout. Holed up in his walled compound in northeast Pakistan with no phone or Internet capabilities, bin Laden would type a message on his computer, save it using a thumb-sized flash drive that he passed to a trusted courier, who would head for a distant Internet cafe. At that location, the courier would plug the drive into a computer, copy bin Laden's message into an email and send it. Intelligence officials are wading through thousands of the email exchanges after around 100 flash drives were seized from the compound by US Navy Seals."
Re:Painstaking? (Score:4, Interesting)
Or, no more complicated than the tradecraft of cold-war era spies.
This sounds like nothing more than well-established stuff that likely goes back to WWII if not before, and that you can read about in any Tom Clancy novel.
Who knew ... the easiest way to avoid getting detected by a massive, international signals intelligence network, is to not use methods that give them anything to listen to.
I'm completely shocked ... next thing they'll tell us about one-time-pads.
More info from New Scientist (Score:5, Interesting)
I was about to submit this from New Scientist [newscientist.com]:
Not the first, won't be the last (Score:4, Interesting)
Back in '98, I worked on a network where it was against Government regulations to connect it in any way to the Internet, and an 'air gap' was required between the two. I was one of a very small team that wrote a system (using Zip disks for storage) that pulled data from a mail server on our secure network and pushed it to a mail server on the Internet, and vice versa. It had very high latency - people were assigned to do the mail drop only twice a day - but it worked well.
Re:More info from New Scientist (Score:5, Interesting)
That's pretty clever.
I've often wondered if some gibberish spam contains convert messages of nefarious intent. If you're a known bad guy and want to send email without identifying your cohorts to anyone watching, why not send the same message to thousands (or millions) of addresses? (Assuming your message is adequately coded/encrypted. You don't want to broadcast your plans in plain text.)
Even if the good guys know one of the recipients is a bad guy, they don't know which recipient, and burn a lot of resources eliminating the red herring.
Yes, I know supposedly those gibberish emails are for poisoning spam filters. At least, that's what they want you to believe.
I've thought the same about those spams that were sections of text from famous literature. Again, supposedly targeted to spam filters. Could be a signal for a terrorist in a sleeper cell to go to the local library, go to a certain book, open to a certain page, where the secret plans have been hidden.
Yes, I am convinced all spammers are terrorists.
Re:The Onion Router (Score:5, Interesting)
10,000 tor nodes with hundreds going up and down every day in different locations would be as difficult to track through as physically going door-to-door searching the entire populace. that's part of why tor was built: to enable communication of persecuted minorities. when we built tor we were thinking post-tienanmen democracy advocates in china. our noble intentions in building tor don't keep the technology from being useful to other persecuted minorities that we don't like.
Re:All this OBL bullshit (Score:2, Interesting)
What is the purpose of the Satellite Dish?
http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Photo/_new/pb-110502-osama-compound-5.photoblog900.jpg [msn.com]
Yeah. No Internet. No Phone. No TV.
No truth in the official story.
Re:Not the first, won't be the last (Score:5, Interesting)
Although people seem amazed about this, it's not the first time that this has happened.
Back in '98, I worked on a network where it was against Government regulations to connect it in any way to the Internet, and an 'air gap' was required between the two. I was one of a very small team that wrote a system (using Zip disks for storage) that pulled data from a mail server on our secure network and pushed it to a mail server on the Internet, and vice versa. It had very high latency - people were assigned to do the mail drop only twice a day - but it worked well.
My understanding is that in Victorian England, the Royal Mail made hourly deliveries daily to The City (the central-most part of London), and it was entirely possible to carry on a conversation through the day via post, rather like we do today via email. The point here is that nominally the latency in a conversation is not always dominated by the delivery method, but rather the delays associated with being away from one's desk for meetings, coffee, lunch, events, seminars, errands, flirting with the cute receptionist downstairs, etc., performing work unrelated to reading email, in addition to the time it takes to compose replies to received messages. How often do you manage to get 3 or more back-and-forth cycles on an email thread with someone in one day? Yes, it happens, but probably not that often for most correspondence. It was readily possible in London over 100 years ago!