Bruce Schneier | |||||||||||
Schneier on SecurityA blog covering security and security technology. « Hacking Citation Counts | Main | Fixing Soccer Matches » February 19, 201319th-Century Traffic AnalysisThere's a nice example of traffic analysis in the book No Name, by Wilkie Collins (1862). The attacker, Captain Wragge, needs to know whether a letter has been placed in the mail. He knows who it will have been addressed to if it has been mailed, and with that information, is able to convince the postmaster to tell him that it has, in fact, been mailed: If she had gone to the admiral's, no choice would be left him but to follow the coach, to catch the train by which she traveled, and to outstrip her afterward on the drive from the station in Essex to St. Crux. If, on the contrary, she had been contented with writing to her master, it would only be necessary to devise measures for intercepting the letter. The captain decided on going to the post-office, in the first place. Assuming that the housekeeper had written, she would not have left the letter at the mercy of the servant—she would have seen it safely in the letter-box before leaving Aldborough. Posted on February 19, 2013 at 12:52 PM • 14 Comments To receive these entries once a month by e-mail, sign up for the Crypto-Gram Newsletter. Carlo Graziani • February 19, 2013 1:21 PM This would seem to fall more in the "Social Engineering" category of hack than in "Traffic Analysis". Ian S. • February 19, 2013 1:53 PM Rather, it is using social engineering to conduct traffic analysis. Natanael L • February 19, 2013 2:23 PM Using social engineering to conduct traffic analysis via a side channel (I assume that this postmaster normally wouldn't personally handle every letter, or even close to a majority of them, but now he was led to look at this one). :) Natanael L • February 19, 2013 2:27 PM Oh, and for something entirely different which is a bit off topic - the blog service my URL:s have pointed to is shutting down (bye bye Posterous), so I'm switching the link now. Mike V. • February 19, 2013 5:01 PM I can't help but be reminded of Homer Simpson trying to retrieve an angry letter he wrote to Mr Burns before it is delivered: Watching The, Watching Us • February 19, 2013 9:04 PM The Count of Monte Cristo, by Alexander Dumas published 1844-1845 (as a serial) , Chapter 61 http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1184/1184-h/... has the the Count of Monte Cristo bribing a semaphore telegraph operator to inject a false report of political turmoil in Spain, which manipulates the price of Spanish bonds on the Paris stock exchange, as part of his revenge against the banker Danglers. Tim#3 • February 20, 2013 3:55 AM Interesting. Also reminds me of reading Sherlock Holmes and being impressed by how many post deliveries they used to get every day back then. Dom De Vitto • February 20, 2013 7:18 AM Dumb droids are easy to manipulate. Want to get rid of a litre of dangerous material, which would cost thousands to dispose of according to regulations ? Just hand it to the TSA and say "oops, way more than 100ml." paul • February 20, 2013 10:09 AM The Three Musketeers books are full of this too: all you need to know is who is talking to whom; what they're saying is very nearly irrelevant. Jason • February 20, 2013 11:03 AM Like a lot of fictional cons, this one looks really suspicious if the result is not what the author had planned. Suppose Mrs. Lecount had *not* written a letter. Then Captain Wragge comes in with an address correction for a letter that does not exist, and alarm bells go off in the postman's head. MarkH • February 20, 2013 2:02 PM @Tim: I've read that at the height of the Victorian age, the Royal Mail made twelve (!) deliveries per day. This made it possible to conduct more than one complete exchange of correspondence within a single business day. paul • February 20, 2013 3:06 PM Jason: Maybe. But usually there's a backup story or three to tell the mark, e.g. must have posted it somewhere else, must have gone out already, oh heavens was it lost on the way. And the mark, having already bought in, is quite possibly going to avoid looking to carefully. Hmm. Bruce would probably know this: what are the techniques institutions use to get people who have been partly or entirely conned to violate a security rule to report that when they realize they've been had, rather than covering it up to avoid embarrassment or punishment? SJ • February 21, 2013 9:44 AM @paul, I seem to recall that the narrator in The Three Musketeers tries to give an explanation of how to set a "Mouse-trap". Basically, D'Artagnan sets up an apartment with a spy-hole so that he can watch the visitors to a certain lady. He's trying to identify some spy/agent-provocateur/person-of-interest. In that case, traffic-analysis is also more important than eavesdropping. Jon • February 21, 2013 3:54 PM Interesting, except ... the Royal Mail was *fully* into the business of intercepting mail, opening it, duplicating it, decrypting it as necessary, and passing teh resulting intelligence along to various interested parties, before re-inserting the flawlessly re-sealed mail back into the main stream. See, for example, Steven E. Maffeo ‘The British National Intelligence Effort’ (Chapter 1) in "Most Secret and Confidential" Naval Institute Press 2000, pp. 19-33.
Post a comment
Powered by Movable Type. Photo at top by Geoffrey Stone.
Schneier.com is a personal website. Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of BT. |
|
Comments