How the NSA Got So Smart So Fast

http://on.wsj.com/11HXT5w

by julienchastang • 13 years ago

30 46 13 years ago

on.wsj.com

joeguilmette• 13 years ago

I wonder if the NSA will open source their server architecture?

mindcrime6• 13 years ago

Believe it or not, they do open source some of their stuff, sometimes. See, for example, Accumulo.[1][2]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Accumulo

[2] http://accumulo.apache.org/

sliverstorm• 13 years ago

Another classic example, SELinux.[1]

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Security-Enhanced_Linux#Overvie...

snowwrestler2• 13 years ago

I believe NSA has a dual mandate. We are hearing a lot lately about their efforts to discover and use intelligence via electronic means, but I believe they are also responsible for providing guidance on how the U.S. can secure its own electronic communications--this is where efforts like SELinux and the guide to securing OS X come from.

mindcrime6• 13 years ago

The question(s) I have about the NSA aren't "Do they use Hadoop, Spark, S4, MPI, OpenMP, etc." but rather things like:

1. Do they already have a functional quantum computer, capable of rendering most modern encryption useless?

2. Do they have a mathematical breakthrough that allows them to factor products of large prime numbers multiplied together, far faster than anyone suspects - which would render most / all modern encryption useless?

3. Have they planted backdoors and vulnerabilities in popular, widely distributed hardware / software platforms?

etc.

Zigurd• 13 years ago

Number 3 is the most likely, along with pushbutton tools that automate attacking and extracting information from endpoint devices. The market among state actors for zero-day exploits is documented, while the other possibilities are out there with other "secret weapon" theories that are predicated on fundamental scientific breakthroughs.

dmix• 13 years ago

Yeah, I'm not buying that the NSA has some crazy advanced technology that is kept secret.

There are highly skilled and better financed tech companies with huge R&D teams. Why would the NSA be able to outperform them?

It's more likely their power is their access to the latest zero-day exploits via sourcing information - something they are extremely good at.

fab13n• 13 years ago

Re: #3; can you seriously imagine that they can't take control of an MS-Windows PC, with or without MS's knowledge?

And you forgot a point: can they get an SSL root certificate signed for them, in order to perform MitM attacks on seemingly secured connections? Here again it's a foregone conclusion, several less technically-savvy countries have been caught doing that.

mindcrime6• 13 years ago

And you forgot a point: can they get an SSL root certificate signed for them, in order to perform MitM attacks on seemingly secured connections?

Yes, that is a good point that I forgot. I tend to assume the answer is "yes".

6d0debc0712• 13 years ago

Re: #3; can you seriously imagine that they can't take control of an MS-Windows PC, with or without MS's knowledge?

Can they take control of an MS-Windows PC without the cooperation of my router maker and my firewall maker? And what does it cost them to do so for the different makers?

You know? I'm fairly sure they can, after all if some kiddy off the internet can what are the chances they can't. But what's the cost to cover the different profiles? Is there a single point of failure?

fnordfnordfnord7• 13 years ago

What could we do about it if 1. were true? Not much.

For 2. I think it's safe to assume that they know a few tricks that we don't. Probably enough to hasten breaking encryption, but probably not enough to make encryption useless.

For 3. Yes, isn't that obvious?

Here's a recent discovery regarding FPGA's, maybe not the NSA, but it didn't get there by accident. http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sps32/sec_news.html

I suspect that some bugs like this one in Intel networking chips may not be bugs http://blog.krisk.org/2013/02/packets-of-death.html

If it is technically feasible, then it is almost certainly being done.

DuskStar• 13 years ago

Well, there are some things we could do for 1. - switch to an algorithm not vulnerable to quantum computing, for example. I think NTRU would be an example of this.

derekp7• 13 years ago

I'm sure they can handle number 2 quite easily. The factors of any large prime number are the number itself and 1. What I think you meant, though, is can they factor the product of two large prime numbers (where the original primes are unknown to them). If that can be solved (without quantum computers), then I believe that actually opens up a whole range of solutions to other problems not related to cryptography.

mindcrime6• 13 years ago

What I think you meant, though, is can they factor the product of two large prime numbers (where the original primes are unknown to them)

D'oh... yes, of course, that's what I meant to say. Sorry, too much on my mind right now!

chiph• 13 years ago

#3 - recall that the NSA was the contributor of Security Enhanced Linux, which is part of nearly every distro now.

I think the chance of it containing a backdoor is low, though. It's been reviewed by any number of top kernel developers since it was published.

vsviridov2• 13 years ago

Paywall for me... :(

adamtj2• 13 years ago

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=How+the+NSA+Could+Get+So+Smart+So+Fast#

fnordfnordfnord7• 13 years ago

Most of the top links are just teasers which link to the paywalled story.

Here is a complete (I assume) version. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/nsa-could-smart-fast-235100722...

caycep• 13 years ago

welp if the PLA has a backdoor on my Shenzhen-made electronic goodies, I need an NSA backdoor in order to keep em honest. Also any conversation with "backdoor" could get dirty fast...

omonra• 13 years ago

Article behind paywall. Here is link that works: http://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-headlines/SS-2-63399/SS-2...

How the NSA Got So Smart So Fast

Related Stories