| Author |
Topic |
|
cokewoman
Starting Member
4 Posts |
 Posted - 27 May 2002 : 03:03:13
a nice way to store and transfer files is via morse code. MultiMode and MorseDec (amongst others) when properly run, actually do work. Sure, they are much slower than modems and ethernets and rot like that, but morse code isn't fussy about protocols. Also, MultiMode does have some kind of primitive full duplex error-correction morse codec. That's cool. In the meantime, I'm considering storing backups of small programs within compressed archives that are hidden in online jpeg, gif, wave, and mp3 files. I could dice them up, compress them, then flood the net using a list of html guestbook web pages. I haven't tried it totally yet, but I'm sure some lonely hacker somewhere has done something like this. The advantage would be the ability to store odd kinds of information in a cross-platform, global sense. I just noticed today that a few sites are logging the entire web! They've got terabytes and then some! This is great insurance for my kind of data archiving project. I'm just telling you all, in case some Jedi master here can do it better. I hope so. It's nice to push the wheels of fate. don't bother trying to find me. |
oldmacman
Full Member
USA
713 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2002 : 05:50:27
quote:
full duplex error-correction morse codec
What's that? I've always just sent code with a straight key and received it by LISTENING! Call me a Luddite, but I find it appalling to do it any other way. KC0BIB Macs Liberated:
SE (with SuperDrive), IIsi, Quadra 700, 6100, PB 5300, PowerMac 5400 PCs liberated from Windows: 3 |
Trash80toG-4
NIGHT STALKER
USA
2899 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2002 : 10:15:38
quote:
a nice way to store and transfer files is via morse code. MultiMode and MorseDec (amongst others) when properly run, actually do work. Sure, they are much slower than modems and ethernets and rot like that, but morse code isn't fussy about protocols. Also, MultiMode does have some kind of primitive full duplex error-correction morse codec. That's cool. In the meantime, I'm considering storing backups of small programs within compressed archives that are hidden in online jpeg, gif, wave, and mp3 files. I could dice them up, compress them, then flood the net using a list of html guestbook web pages. I haven't tried it totally yet, but I'm sure some lonely hacker somewhere has done something like this. The advantage would be the ability to store odd kinds of information in a cross-platform, global sense. I just noticed today that a few sites are logging the entire web! They've got terabytes and then some! This is great insurance for my kind of data archiving project. I'm just telling you all, in case some Jedi master here can do it better. I hope so. It's nice to push the wheels of fate. don't bother trying to find me.
ha! keep it up and the FBI and NSA will be onto your tail!  when i first heard about the online big brother projects i wondered when somebody would come up with a jpeg embedded encoding scheme! the only twist you haven't come up with so far is the one time pad twist to add to it that i came up with back in the day! nice work, kid! ever read clancy? jt  ™. .
|
AnubisTTP
Junior Member
USA
308 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2002 : 14:15:16
I know there are a few Mac steganography programs floating around (programs to enbed data into the pixels of an image file). The only one I have actually used is Stego,which only works on PICT files, but I am sure there are other ones. If you really want to protect your data, encrypt the data with PGP first before enbedding it in a image. Stego does not do any encryption before it enbeds the data. I tried to find a download link for Stego, but it appears the site I downloaded it from has dissapeared.AnubisTTP
68k Macintosh Liberation Army
Macs Liberated:21 |
Trash80toG-4
NIGHT STALKER
USA
2899 Posts |
Posted - 27 May 2002 : 16:17:53
quote:
If you really want to protect your data, encrypt the data with PGP first before enbedding it in a image.
PGP is dynamite, but one time pads are unbreakable, i don't know how long PGP will be unbreakable, but capturing keys can be done too. in the SETI@home thread there's a link to a distributed processing brute force test contest for a 56 digit single key system that's fascinating reading.jt ™. .
|
AnubisTTP
Junior Member
USA
308 Posts |
Posted - 28 May 2002 : 06:24:23
I am not too worried about PGP being broken anytime in the near future. Those RC5 people spend months cracking 56 bit keys and PGP does 4096 bit keys. Hopefully the "bad guys" do not get that kind of computing power anytime in the near future.AnubisTTP
68k Macintosh Liberation Army
Macs Liberated:21 |
Trash80toG-4
NIGHT STALKER
USA
2899 Posts |
Posted - 28 May 2002 : 06:48:02
quote:
I am not too worried about PGP being broken anytime in the near future. Those RC5 people spend months cracking 56 bit keys and PGP does 4096 bit keys. Hopefully the "bad guys" do not get that kind of computing power anytime in the near future.
i hear you, but you gotta remember that current systems ship with a lot more VRAM capacity now than the mass storage capacity in the Quadra era! time sensitive data is one thing, but something like healthcare or psychiatric records have a whole lot longer sensitive data shelflife and don't even get Pretty Poor Privacy Protection!i guess i just like the idea of using something like Macaddict's the Disk #X or the AOL rev 3.x release y CD for a one time pad encoding scheme, put some data thru a couple of pads like that and nobody will ever be able to crack it within the span of a human lifetime. PGP might be good, but from my perspective brute force computing is a juggernaught. then again, i've been around this stuff since the slide rule days. jt ™. .
|
|
alternative storage formats
68k of the Week: kastegir's PowerBook 180.