Using Technology to Protect Anonymous Sources? 450
A not-so Anonymous Anonymous Coward asks: "The New York Times has a story describing how newspapers are looking for new ways to hide the identities of anonymous sources from prosecutors. This seems like a something the Slashdot crowd might know something about. How can a newspaper setup an IT system that completely hides every trace (including emails, phone calls notes, logs and so forth) of an anonymous source's identity?"
Regarding Portable HDs (Score:2)
If portable HDs are used, it might not be a bad idea to encrypt them with something like TrueCrypt [truecrypt.org]. A reported could even include a Hidden volume and tell the government/who
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Regarding Portable HDs (Score:2)
Umm, because the idea is to keep their identity safe?
If you use a code name and then DON'T secure your notes, it is still pretty trivial to determine who a person is, especially if you kept detailed notes.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Regarding Portable HDs (Score:3, Interesting)
That one seems to be beyond our reach...
Re:Regarding Portable HDs (Score:2)
It's not called a Hidden Volume because it can be found with a Statistical Attack. It's called a hidden volume because it's HIDDEN
buy everyone an iPod (Score:3, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2, Insightful)
Ever heard of Watergate?
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2, Insightful)
If you read the history of Deep Throat, he didnt so much tell them things, as point them in directions. Without Deep-throat, there would have been no public hearings andit all would have gone away.
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
And the next-best thing is to ditch the technology.
"The more they over think the plumbing, the easier it is to stop up the drain."
- Chief Engineer Montgomery Scott, Star Trek III
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
Furthermore, I'd wonder about someone whose "pure motives" caused them to leak info to the press about the evil organization they work for only to keep working for said evil organiza
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
I understand that, but I don't trust the news media. They have political biases (left or right or other leaning), they lie to protect their jobs (that guy for the New York Times who made up 1 or 2 years of stories), they're primary objective is to write fantastic stories that sell advertisements. I want to know what the source of the
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
If you believe that whistle-blower laws are effective, you may be interested in purchasing this fine structure [greatbuildings.com] as an investment for your future.
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
I agree with you, but it works both ways.
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
See the link in my sig - it's a transcript, where Joe Wilson admits that Plame was not covert when the story broke. Therefore, no crime was committed, therefore, jailed reporter is just being an idiot by not coughing up the source.
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
She's covering up _something else_, we just don't know what yet.
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
That is a total fabrication. Joe Wilson admits that Plame was not covert AFTER the story was broke.. AFTER, as in leaking her name guaranteed that she was no longer covert. Wilson is not a liberty to discuss her covert status before the article broke..
You are being intellectualy
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
WILSON: My wife was not a clandestine officer the day that Bob Novak blew her identity.
Therefore, this is not a total fabrication, it's a failure on your part to accept the truth.
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
Re:The Best Thing (Score:2)
Newsweek Apologizes [washingtonpost.com]
Inaccurate Report on Koran Led to Riots
Spokesman Bryan Whitman called Newsweek's report "irresponsible" and "demonstrably false," saying the magazine "hid behind anonymous sources which by their own admission do not withstand scrutiny.
If they want totally anonymous sources, then the publications should take complete responsibility for misinformation published. That includes being liable and sueable.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. (Plus an article link) (Score:2)
On 19 June, 2005, Oregon's Mail Tribune reported that in a recent survey of 419 media outlets, nearly one-fourth of editors said they have banned the use of anonymous sources entirely -- a good start. Yet most members of the press still claim they cannot manage their self-appointed duty as the "watchdog of government" without using anonymous sources.
One must ask, then, how the scientific community manages so well using only verifiable sources? No scientific journal editor would even consi
Re:Exactly. (Plus an article link) (Score:2)
Give it a few more years and you just might
"An anonymous source reports he has verifiable proof of evolution in a population of ants in the Amazon rainforest.......FBI is investigating".
Re:Exactly. (Plus an article link) (Score:2)
"An anonymous researcher reports he has used stem cells to cure cancer, diabeties, and parkensons.......President Bush has vowed to hunt the terrorist down and bring him to justice!".
Re:Exactly. (Plus an article link) (Score:2)
Meanwhile you can order the cure in a single simple pill and get Fr33 V14gr4!!!! Order NOW!!!
Good idea, let's trust anonymous sources w/ unverifiable claims.
Re:Exactly. (Plus an article link) (Score:2)
Re:Exactly. (Plus an article link) (Score:2)
Re:Exactly. (Plus an article link) (Score:2)
[...]
In World Wa
Math != Science (Score:2)
The same isn't true for science (or indeed journalism), where the biases of a source can affect the information presented, and should be investigated.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Exactly. (Plus an article link) (Score:2)
Re:Exactly. (Plus an article link) (Score:2)
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0786 71378X/qid=1123017832/sr=8-1/ref=pd_bbs_1/104-0709 785-0426367?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 [amazon.com]
Don't weaken the strength of your democracy! (Score:3, Interesting)
My personal belief is that USA works as a democracy because of the quality of their digging press. I believe my country, Sweden, would be a better place if our media were half as independent and competent.
NY Times and Washington Post seems to find more scandals in the US president administration than the rest of the world's media find in the rest of the world's governments.
(-: They seem to be as good at news as the English press is at digging into the
A few options. (Score:2, Insightful)
Personally I don't see how this is possible (Score:3, Insightful)
The bigger problem is not defeating a technological threat. It is a problem with defeating a court order. If anyone has access to the information (including the original reporter) then this information can be dubject to subpoena (IANAL). To my knowledge court orders don't tend to be defeated by some brand new technological system used. Even the reporter's recollection and testamony coul
Easy...set up nym accounts.. (Score:3, Interesting)
That would pretty much set things up virtually untraceable.
If they really wanted to get paranoid about it...the end leg could go through a mail2news server, and post responses anonymously, PGP encrypted to USENET groups set up just for this.
Re:Easy...set up nym accounts.. (Score:2)
Actually, I think your thoughts on the USENET groups are the best so far.
Re:Easy...set up nym accounts.. (Score:2)
Where did you get talking rats out of my post?
Here's a definition of sorts [absoluteastronomy.com] , and from the wikipedia about Anonymous Remailers ('nym servers') [wikipedia.org]
Hope this helps....neat stuff, tho I've not played with it in a long while...
Re:Easy...set up nym accounts.. (Score:2)
Thanks for the link though, I'll go check it out.
Ironic... (Score:3, Funny)
Onion Routing & Hidden Pages (Score:2)
The newspaper itself could even host the wiki/blog and provide the public with the Tor Rendevous address. The government could force the paper to open it's page but there would be no logs available and the paper itself would never know who the in
anonymous remailers? (Score:2)
I remember there was a great big anonymous email system in Finland.
address was anon4782344@remailer.something.fi
For some reason I also remember reading that the Church of Scientology had something to do with the demise of this remailer.
But - it was good for what it was - and it kept people anonymous.
Do any anon remailers still exist?
Re:anonymous remailers? (Score:2)
Re:anonymous remailers? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:anonymous remailers? (Score:2)
For example, you could create the nym "johnsmith@nym.example.com". Whenever you send a specially-structured email to nym.example.net (signed with johnsmith's private key), the remailer will send it back out with the From: address changed to johnsmith@nym.example.com. Then, whenever someone replies to that email address, the remailer can redirect their reply (encrypted by t
My two ideas (Score:3, Insightful)
The first two things that come to mind:
Even then, it is not possible to be completely anonymous. It is always possible to match things like print head patterns, fingerprints, typewriter head impressions, and so on. Like anything else security-related, there are only varying degrees.
How ironic (Score:2)
Coming from the NYT that requires the identities of online readers, that's ironic...
How to be Anonymous (Score:2)
Email - You could then grab a gmail or yahoo account (giving a ficticious name.)
Instant Messaging and File Sharing - You can use WASTE (RSA secured). More info can be found at: http://waste.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net] Hope that helps.
Just hit Archive (Score:2)
Oh, sorry, I thought this was some freedom of speech thing.
Nevermind.
Simple (Score:2)
You're completely missing the point (Score:2)
That's what blogs are for.
You have to kill the reporters involved too... (Score:2)
Okay, isn't that a bad idea? (Score:2)
This seems to be more of a problem that has a solution in the courts than one that can realisticly be enforced using technology because if you want to go this route, then yo
tor or i2p (Score:2)
http://www.i2p.net [i2p.net]
Set up a server in tor or i2p, log nothing.
The information paradox... (Score:2)
Big difference between CIA leak and DeepThroat (Score:3, Insightful)
In the case of deep throat - he was reporting on a crime that someone else committed. At no point did deep throat cross a legal line in reporting what he did to the Washington Post
In the case of the CIA leak - lets just say that who ever their source was COMMITTED a crime by leaking the name to the reporter. By committing a crime, he should be reported and punished to the full extent of the law.
Back to your regularly scheduled First Ammendment ramblings
Yes, But (Score:2)
It's easy to provide anonymity to potential sources if reporters widely distribute their public keys.
It's a little harder to provide a distribution mechanism which resists backtracing by determined, well-funded and ruthless power.
It's harder still - and this is a long-standing problem for reporters - to verify material provided by anonymous sources. Even more so if revealing the information effectively endangers the source.
not a technology problem (Score:2)
You might create a technology solution so that the only place the identity of the source exists is in the reporters mind, but even then the reporter needs to 'sell' the story to the editorial committee.
Instead, this problem must be solved judicially by making the freedom of the press tangible in a
Completely hide every trace? (Score:2)
This is a social problem, not a technological one.
You need to fanatically develop a culture where secrecy surrounding a source's identity is sacrosanct. Reporters don't keep real names in notes. Nothing about real names of sources is written down. Communications involving sources is done verbally and face to face... etc...
I have the perfect solution.. and it's an OLD ONE! (Score:2)
Keep it in your head (Score:2)
And never ever talk about it or write it down.
Consider using a numbered source system. Find a book that has the picture of the source and refer to that picture as something like RG7952 for Salizar's Homoculus Directory (R=S,G=H), page 89 (79=89), column 5, row 2 - which is a picture of that person. And then whenever you refer to it in internal articles, always use t
the authenticity of anonymous sources (Score:2)
Think of the /. feature of posting AC. In general, AC posts aren't worth as much as a post associated with a known user. I certainly give more interest to someone who bothered to register than I do to an AC posting.
T
Call Panama, they know...it's HUSHMAIL (Score:2)
These crazy Panamanian lawyers recommend Hushmail. Used by 4 out 5 international criminals who chew gum. Let's just put it this way... if you wanted to contact a journalist with a blow the roof off the government
Dude! (Score:2)
Tell The Truth (Score:2)
Now, if these corporate media were looking for a way to require that any anonymous source be corrobo
Re:Tell The Truth (Score:2)
All media that cite anonymous sources should
It goes to the heart of news *cough* ethics... (Score:2, Insightful)
I can't say that with straight face and without choking.
Anyhow, if sources are so anonymous that they cannot be verified as to identity by the news people, and when has this ever stopped them, then how do we ever know it isn't some geek with a crude sense of humor who has managed to master nym and mixmaster remailers?
If they are known by the reporters, then the court order comes into play and they can testify or go to jail. That simple. We're not talking lawyer-client or doctor-patient or married
Trust is the issue more than technology (Score:2)
Simple Solution...not really (Score:2)
But this is where the solution doesn't work: Reporters have to be able to verify their sources. To make sure it isn't a quack. If it is completely anonymous - what is to stop me from sending a note saying I am a top White-House aid and I got the inside scoop?
IMHO if the data given involves national security (i.e. the name of an
Using technology to protect anonymous sources (Score:2)
(a) Make the whole frigging website accessible by HTTPS. That way, someone looks like they're reading the news, so far as a network sniffer is concerned.
(b) Stop requiring people to register their full name, age, occupation, and list of health problems before reading your website. Somehow, I think the New York Times missed this lesson.
(c) Stop
Ask Bob Woodward (Score:2)
Get your sourct to post as AC on slashdot. (Score:2)
Who Cares? (Score:2)
Trust (Score:2)
If the journalist knows nothing about the source, how can it be trusted?
Complicated (Score:2)
And the next question is... (Score:2)
The source could take care of this by telling you a code word that would appear in the next communication. The reporter could also tell the source what code word to use next (unless the source was using a one-way communication channel such as a letter or an e-mail with a forged header).
Other than such a mechanism
Re:And the next question is... (Score:2)
One solution:
Let the source supply a public key in the first message, and sign each subsequent message.
pgp / gpg can be used for this purpose.
Whistleblower laws? (Score:2)
adopt academic research strategies (Score:2)
so things like double coding of names where two or more people change the names so that there is no way to know how subject X is.
Another is to just not know their names in the first place.
Destroying the evidence is another common tactic which means destroying all the personally identifiable data as soon as the rese
Mixmaster (Score:2)
Anonymous But Real? (Score:2)
anonymity vs. credibility (Score:2)
Thats easy... (Score:2)
Just make up the sources and stories as you go along? Oh, wait...
Anonymous remailers (Score:2)
Then again, a typewritten letter stuffed in an envelope with no return address and correct postage is probably just as secure.
Reporter cellphone + source payphone (Score:2)
Make award payment for the story lead payable to CASH.
Total anonymity not good (Score:2, Interesting)
Use Maxtor HDs (Score:2, Funny)
Simple, don't use it. (Score:3, Interesting)
But a pen and paper is untracable. Just like pay phones and small bills instead of cell phones and credit cards.
Re:Simple... (Score:2)
Re:Simple... (Score:2)
How does a journalist know a source is trustworthy (Score:2)
Does it matter if the source is idenfied as Anonymous#104928 rather than their name - so long as the journalist can depend that Anonymous#104928 is the same person each time then the same relationship can be established.
Re:They have you, what more do they need? (Score:2)