Linked by runjorel on Thu 13th Jan 2011 19:35 UTC
Linux "At the end of 2010, the 'open-source' software movement, whose activists tend to be fringe academics and ponytailed computer geeks, found an unusual ally: the Russian government. Vladimir Putin signed a 20-page executive order requiring all public institutions in Russia to replace proprietary software, developed by companies like Microsoft and Adobe, with free open-source alternatives by 2015."
Thread beginning with comment 458120
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[5]: Comment by robojerk
by Nth_Man on Sat 15th Jan 2011 11:35 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by robojerk"
Nth_Man
Member since:
2010-05-16

You said

But then how are you going to e-mail that without building a micro-mail server?

like if we were talking only about "steganography in emails done by machines automatically".

Let's see if it's understood again: you said
Because anything on a non-standard port or even (and depending on the port) using a non-standard protocol on a standardised port would be firewalled. "

and I said that
it's clear that you cand send encrypted data through standard ports, through standard protocols.

And put "Steganography" as an example of sending encrypted data through standard ports, through standard protocols, going not firewalled. Of course there are more ways.

The key in the discussion is that you can send hidden data, even through firewalls.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[6]: Comment by robojerk
by Laurence on Sat 15th Jan 2011 13:47 in reply to "RE[5]: Comment by robojerk"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26

You miss my point.

What I'm saying is businesses and governments wouldn't have e-mail traffic going from workstations to the internet. They'd have that traffic going to and from the exchange server.

So the firewall would still block your example as only the exchange server would be whitelisted for sending e-mails.


Now I'm not saying that it's impossible to hide data, just that it's unlikely to be happening because of the difficulty in doing so successfully and the backlash when it inevitably gets found out.

Edited 2011-01-15 13:50 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[7]: Comment by robojerk
by Nth_Man on Sat 15th Jan 2011 17:44 in reply to "RE[6]: Comment by robojerk"
Nth_Man Member since:
2010-05-16

What I'm saying is businesses and governments wouldn't have e-mail traffic going from workstations to the internet. They'd have that traffic going to and from the exchange server.

I repeat again, the example of "steganography" in emails was to show that you can send encrypted data through standard ports, through standard protocols. So that quote in the prior discussion
Because anything on a non-standard port or even (and depending on the port) using a non-standard protocol on a standardised port would be firewalled. "

does not apply.

Reply Parent Score: 1