Comments on: Who is reading your email?

By: Channel 9

Channel 9 — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 21:55:46 +0000

Re: The BBC’s Dave Thompson shows his stupidity again….

It’s somewhat funny that he moderates all comments on his …

By: VIMI

VIMI — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 11:41:50 +0000

Not to mention how easy to trace an email. Tracing Email Though the idea of Lennie Briscoe of designating domains rather than trying to control or censor the whole network (an idea of a lazy mind and quite counter productive if not achievable)is the right way. Its some sort of zoning. Any adult sites outside that zone should be arbitrarily shut down in combination of parents awareness and self education.

By: Security and Privacy News Info

Security and Privacy News Info — Wed, 19 Jul 2006 11:21:53 +0000

Who Is Reading Your Email?…

An article of Bill Thompson from BBC World touches on the unsecured nature of email.
And that reminds me of how its easy to trace an email message.
Tracing Email 101
from Bill Thompsong article

Every time you send an email it passes through a se…

By: Lennie Briscoe

Lennie Briscoe — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 14:02:27 +0000

The popularity of the internet has been fueled by its unrestricted freedom. I believe that regardless of any restrictions we put inplace, (bad) people will always circumvent our technological barriers. Therefore scanning mail for known images or textual phrases will only work for a limited time before as you say everything is encrypted. As we know encryption of messages brings with it its own problems for the state (proposed 90 day detention limit).

An independant body to keep tags on illegal sites is a good step. Forcing ISPs in our country to adhere to making them unavailable is probably also a good step. Protecting our children is very important. We put dirty mags on the top shelf in newsagents. Doing the same on the internet should also be a priority i.e. via a .xxx domain which can be restricted by responsible parents via software.

By: Secret Admirer

Secret Admirer — Tue, 04 Jul 2006 14:29:47 +0000

You are a big idiot who doesn’t know shit from a tree. I have been developing all of my young adult life and truly your comment about MD5 hashing is completely taken out of context.

Therefor, you are a complete and utter idiot.

By: barryd

barryd — Tue, 04 Jul 2006 10:29:43 +0000

Oh what utter tosh. I must object to

“since with millions of images of all types being sent over the net every day, the chances of some false positives, when an entirely innocent drawing of a tree happens to generate the same code as an image of abuse, must be quite high”

For someone who purports to being an expert you are very found of hyperbole.

Admittedly MD5 has collisions, even SHA1 has collisions however when comparing actual files, as opposed to the brute force conditions used to produce the breaks the actual chance of a naturally occurring collision is extremely minimal. Then of course there’s SHA-128,-256 and 512, reducing the chance further. And these are common fingerprinting techniques.

Simply by changing a single bit in the image the fingerprint would change, lo, it’s all useless. But I guess that’s not as emotive as the nonsense about a picture of a tree.