Private I: Encrypting email with public keys

In recent weeks, Ive written about protecting data stored locally on a hard drive, against both people with physical access and potential remote attacks. But your data is much more vulnerable in transit, as it passes between end points or via servers.

This problem is effectively solved for instant messages with iMessage, which uses strong end-to-end encryption designed in such a way thatApple saysnot even they can decrypt your messages. This is accomplished by creating local encryption keys through a process that cant be reverse-engineered on their side. Even though iMessages pass through intermediate points on the Internet, theres no opportunity for others to grab the plain text, images, and audio within. (The same is true with FaceTime audio and video.)

But its still a mess for email, whether Mail in iOS or OS X, or third-party email software. The problem arises from email protocols working too well. Yes, I know how that sounds, as Apples Mail app frustrates on both its platforms. But the diversity of what you can choose among native and Web apps has to do with no company or organization controlling how email works. iMessage is entirely Apples ecosystem, which is the case for most messaging systems, including Facebooks WhatsApp and the messaging component of Microsofts Skype. In contrast, there are thousands of native email programs across all platforms and all time, and hundreds remain in wide use.

The email protocols comprise POP3 (ancient and still in use) and IMAP for email retrieval and synchronization, while SMTP handles sending. Because they emerged from the dawn of Internet, they have evolved in fits and starts with weird vestigial pieces. Email continues to function because of compromises and a tacit agreement that nobody can break or refuse to support major componentspartly because no one controls a big enough piece to force change.

One of the biggest problems past and present in Apples Mail.app is, in fact, because Google has an odd setup for its IMAP service, and Apple dances around fully embracing it. Google cant break IMAP entirely, because then millions of users who pull in Gmail messages through Outlook or other software would be out in the cold, and potentially switch away. (Android has three separate email apps, in fact: two that work with Gmail in different ways, and third for regular email accounts.) Likewise, Apple cant invent a new, superior way to send email because every mail server in the world would need to be updated to receive it.

In the last few years, enough standardization and upgrading have taken place that one aspect is well secured: the connection between an email client and an email server. Email flows from a client to a server run by your ISP or company or email host, and from there typically directly to the recipients corresponding email server. By default, Apples mail clients and those of other companies try to set up a new account to use SSL/TLS, the same session-based encryption technology used for secure Web interactions.

But SSL/TLS protects just the link between an email client and an email server. The data is encrypted in transit for that session, and then decrypted at the server, before being packaged and sent on to the next server. Now, in practice, even thats becoming more secure. Most email serversall of those run by major companiesare in data centers. And after the Edward Snowden disclosure, Google and other companies have stepped up the security of links among their own data centers.

The weak points still remain when email is decrypted, whether its for microseconds on a server before being wrapped up to send to another server over an encrypted link, or for much longer, when a server communicates insecurelywhich is typicalwith another email server. At those weak points, a criminal or government agent could gain access.

iMessage suffers from none of these weaknesses because of its strong end-to-end encryption. So how can we achieve the same in email? Through the use of public-key (PK) cryptography, something thats been available for encrypting documents and email messages since 1991 in one form or another. A decade ago, I reviewed an updated and well-designed commercial version of PGP (originally standing for Pretty Good Privacy) in Macworld, and hoped it would usher in a new age of encrypted email. I guess Im a pretty optimistic fellow.

Still, hope springs eternal, and I think were ripe for another pass at PK becoming something that could be used readily and safely, rather than by those with command-line facility. Let me first explain public-key cryptography briefly. In the next column, Ill explain how to use it practicallyon a Mac at least.

See the original post:
Private I: Encrypting email with public keys

Cryptography to prevent satellite collisions

Chuck Bednar for redOrbit.com Your Universe Online

Cryptography, the practice and study of techniques for secure communication in the presence of third parties, could help prevent collisions among the thousands of commercial and spy satellites currently in orbit around the Earth. It would also maintain privacy, according to experts.

In an article written last month for Scientific American, Brett Hemenway, a research assistant professor with the University of Pennsylvania who focuses on cryptography, and William Welser IV, a space policy expert, explain how it can help avoid potential satellite collisions.

One such collision took place in February 2009, the authors explained, when the US Iridium 33 satellite and the Russian Cosmos 2251 collided and were both destroyed. Telescopes tracking the two probes from the ground indicated that they should have missed one another, but data from instruments on board either of them would have revealed that they were on a collision course.

That information was not used, however, because it was deemed to be top-secret.

Satellite owners view the locations and trajectories of their on-orbit assets as private, Welser and Hemenway wrote. Companies fear that sharing the exact positions of their satellites could help the competition determine the full extent of their capabilities, while governments are afraid that revealing such information could compromise their national security, they explained.

Yet even minor collisions could cause millions of dollars worth of damage. Debris can be knocked into the path of other satellites, spacecraft carrying a human crew, or even the International Space Station (ISS), the authors wrote. The 2009 incident served as a warning to officials to find a way to fix the problem, but without revealing too much information.

Adding a third party

In the current working solution, the worlds four largest satellite communications providers have teamed up with a trusted third party: Analytical Graphics. The company aggregates their orbital data and alerts participants when satellites are at risk, wrote Hemenway and Welser, adding that the arrangement requires that all participants maintain mutual trust of the third party.

Analytical Graphics, also known as AGI, makes commercial modeling and analysis software for the aerospace, defense, and intelligence communities. The company was founded in 1989 and is headquartered in Exton, Pennsylvania, though it also has offices located in Colorado, California, Washington DC, the UK, and Singapore. Its current CEO is Paul Graziani.

Read the original post:
Cryptography to prevent satellite collisions

Turing And The Increasingly Important Case For Theory

Editors note:Zavain Dar is an early-stage VC at Lux Capital and Lecturer at Stanford University. He invests and supports deep technology companies leveraging advancements in Artificial Intelligence, Infrastructure, and emerging data and has taught courses on cryptocurrency and the intersections of AI, philosophy and venture.

Like many in Silicon Valley, I recently saw Morten Tyldums The Imitation Game. I have a soft spot for underdog academic narratives and actually teared up. However, I couldnt shake the feeling the film pigeonholed the breadth and depth of Turings work to early cryptography and its mechanized instantiation duringWWII.

Cryptography aside, Turings work, theory and models still underline undergraduate curriculums in computer science, mathematics and philosophy. His models for computation form the basis for how mathematicians and computer scientists structure both what is solvable and the efficiency with which we can algorithmically solve answerable questions. His Church-Turing Thesis coupled with Godels Incompleteness Theorems still has philosophers debating the existence of universal constraints around human knowledge.

Finally, and perhaps most pressing given the ongoing renaissance in machine learning, the Turing Test remains the de facto yardstick against which we measure progress and traction in artificial intelligence.

Whereas The Imitation Game focuseson cryptography and wartime technology, there is no doubt that Turings work also includesAI, theoretical computer science, mathematics and even epistemology.

The realization that Turings work still has high relevance in both academia and industry got me thinking about how and why this is the case. What lessons can todays technology entrepreneurs and investors pull from Turings intellectual longevity?

I start with a few very basic and generalized broad-stroke assumptions. (The focus on high level Big-O approximations only seems fitting for this piece).

How does Turings work relate to this pseudo-anthropologic and economic postulating? Well, etched in Turings work was his ability to cut through the engineering limitations of his time and grapple with the underlying theory. By decoupling the current state of the art from the theoretical ground truth, Turing produced work that hasnt lost applicability and has shown a near infinite shelf life.

His work today carries just as much, if not more (given the just-now relevant engineering possibilities), applicability as it did duringhis own time. This isnt wholly dissimilar from how theoretical physicists working on chalk boards view their work in juxtaposition to applied physicists in cutting-edge linear accelerators.

Continue reading here:
Turing And The Increasingly Important Case For Theory