Exclusive: Secret contract tied NSA and security industry pioneer

When leaked documents claimed to have caught the NSA inserting bad protocols into the national standards board NIST, it raised more questions than answers. Why would the NSA go to the trouble of inserting a inferior standard into NIST's set of four, when most cryptographers would simply ignore the bad algorithm in favor of the others? Even if foul play had occurred, what was the agency getting out of the deal?

"The NSA could subvert the encryption whenever they needed to"

Now, a Reuters exclusive report is showing the other side of the story. The report details a secret deal between the NSA and respected encryption company RSA, in which the agency paid $10 million for RSA to incorporate the weaker algorithm into an encryption product ..

Exclusive: Secret contract tied NSA and security industry pioneer

It looks like the NSA is closely involved with RSA security This would have given the NSA unprecedented access to our web browsers "encrypted" transfers of information as well as e-mails. All this for a paltry 10 million. I guess money does talk. If you were in a position like this would you take the bribe?

It would take some mighty moral convictions, especially if you were just getting by.

reply to post by FarmerGeneral

There's virtually nothing the NSA can't decipher. Some for the reasons you posted.

Encryption draws more attention than it's worth.

reply to post by FarmerGeneral

Star and Flag FarmerGeneral good find.

RSA BSAFE Encryption Toolkits Offered as Free Download
RSA, the security division of EMC, is offering its BSAFE technology for free as part of a new initiative aimed at independent software developers and project leaders. In addition, RSA has also launched an online community to provide support, answers and strategies from security experts.

www.eweek.com...

RSA, now a subsidiary of computer storage giant EMC Corp, urged customers to stop using the NSA formula after the Snowden disclosures revealed its weakness.

Ref. The OP's link

Only after the secret is out?

RSA said in a statement: "RSA always acts in the best interest of its customers and under no circumstances does RSA design or enable any back doors in our products. Decisions about the features and functionality of RSA products are our own."

Ref. The OP's link

Yup, the best interest of its customers, in this case the NSA.

several (former RSA employees) said that RSA also was misled by government officials, who portrayed the formula as a secure technological advance.

Ref. The OP's link

I call Bullpucky on this, these are supposed to be cryptography experts. The only reason, in my humble opinion, that they came clean and recomended customers stop using the NSA formula was because they were busted by Snowden.

reply to post by FarmerGeneral


While I agree with RedMoon's thoughts, I am curious about this element in the OP's link:

The earlier disclosures of RSA's entanglement with the NSA already had shocked some in the close-knit world of computer security experts. The company had a long history of championing privacy and security, and it played a leading role in blocking a 1990s effort by the NSA to require a special chip to enable spying on a wide range of computer and communications products.

So if that is true, what happened to change their seemingly pro-privacy attitudes? Is it not RSA, but rather EMC Corp (the corporate giant that bought them out) that is responsible?

I am on a handheld so researching this is very difficult - but if anyone else can find more details about these players I at least would highly appreciate it.

Thanks OP very interesting stuff.

this is a big wow for me, i am sure this is more to follow. i guess, we will see;

reply to post by FarmerGeneral


It is really hard to imagine Ronald Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Len Adleman pawning off a compromised algorithm. With that much brainpower I have no doubt they were able to figure out it was weak. However it is hard to imagine they knew in advance the entire thing was compromised. It would unequivocally destroy their standing in academia and the security community. That is not worth a paltry 10 million. Somehow they got duped.

reply to post by FarmerGeneral


I would take the bribe, and promptly use it to pay someone to whack the head of the agency responsible, while simultaneously broadcasting the truth about them from several different locations all over the planet. Corruption is intolerable.

Snarl
reply to post by FarmerGeneral

 

There's virtually nothing the NSA can't decipher. Some for the reasons you posted.

Encryption draws more attention than it's worth.

Dead on.

And for every front door there are multiple back doors.

And side doors.

And technology that many people would consider to be "magic" for those few times that there are no easy to access doors and one must create their own entrance.

This wasn't much of a worry for John Q. Public when the NSA and other intelligence apparatuses were still relatively small and uninterested in the general populace.

Neither of the above statements is still true today.

The only thing that remains to be seen is how much "truth" may come to light as a direct or indirect result of Snowden. This one still has a long way to play out...

Snarl
reply to post by FarmerGeneral

 

There's virtually nothing the NSA can't decipher. Some for the reasons you posted.

Encryption draws more attention than it's worth.

I agree with you there. If something in encrypted then it must be important and/or valuable.
Following this line of reasoning, it is like telling a kid not to look inside a box because what it contains is very important and valuable. Saying no makes people turn into rebels. Which is what is happening along many fronts. ie. no smoking, no hacking, no drugs, no or little government transparency, no pornography...etc No generally means no free will, or one is not trusted to make a proper decision for one's self which would be moral, ethical and would not harm other people's free will and ability to decide for themselves.

RedmoonMWC
reply to post by FarmerGeneral

 

I call Bullpucky on this, these are supposed to be cryptography experts. The only reason, in my humble opinion, that they came clean and recomended customers stop using the NSA formula was because they were busted by Snowden.

What do they term this? A white wash? They have to paint over all the lies and fallacies with half truths in order to save their reputation with the public. If they don't the public will loose confidence.

The sad part is that many will buy into this white wash.

Mishmashum
reply to post by FarmerGeneral

 

It is really hard to imagine Ronald Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Len Adleman pawning off a compromised algorithm. With that much brainpower I have no doubt they were able to figure out it was weak. However it is hard to imagine they knew in advance the entire thing was compromised. It would unequivocally destroy their standing in academia and the security community. That is not worth a paltry 10 million. Somehow they got duped.

Are you saying that their only fault was trusting the algorithm given to them by the government along with the 10million dollars?

I also question if the 10 million dollars was all that exchanged hands. Perhaps that was a yearly event for as long as they could pull off the charade. No proof for this idea yet, but it makes more sense.

TrueBrit
reply to post by FarmerGeneral

 

I would take the bribe, and promptly use it to pay someone to whack the head of the agency responsible, while simultaneously broadcasting the truth about them from several different locations all over the planet. Corruption is intolerable.

I starred you. You got some of my kind of thinking running around in your consciousness. We need more people with integrity, honor, ethics, and morality in these positions of power. I would lay my life down to protect not just my people but all people. If we can go out of this world supporting the good fight, we would make such a splash in the ocean of human consciousness that it would effect near everyone.

People want heaven on earth but fail to realize that to bring it about requires a great effort starting with the self. Hold your self to the highest ideal you can imagine, live it, and we just might make a tsunami in the ocean of human consciousness which would wash away all that is evil replacing it with higher ideals.

Riffrafter

Snarl
reply to post by FarmerGeneral

 

There's virtually nothing the NSA can't decipher. Some for the reasons you posted.

Encryption draws more attention than it's worth.

The only thing that remains to be seen is how much "truth" may come to light as a direct or indirect result of Snowden. This one still has a long way to play out...

I have a funny feeling that in 2014 most of this will be released and will be a year that will go down in the anal of history.

People better dust off there camo gear, bug out bags and oil up their guns for 2015. The consolidation of power is almost here.

RSA press release was enlightening to say the least...

www.theregister.co.uk...

blogs.rsa.com...

but we also categorically state that we have never entered into any contract or engaged in any project with the intention of weakening RSA’s products, or introducing potential ‘backdoors’ into our products for anyone’s use.

Emphasis added.

Maybe not intended to do it, but ended up doing so either accidentally, or by coercion. Maybe the money was a sweetener for the bitter reality RSA found itself in?

reply to post by mirageofdeceit


It's funny how over the past 14 years government and commercial enterprises have been anything but honest with the people. We have read about collusion between all the big computer, software, banking and large corporate entities and the NSA or other spy organizations. It's all about the lie.

Now companies, after deceiving for so long expect the people to believe, "This time we are not lying."

Sweetener or no sweetener it all boils down to the same thing. Trust. Trust is not gained by lying and in my mind I trust none of these organizations.

I'm sorry but I don't believe their cries of innocence. Nor should anyone else.

Here is a quote for all these nasty organizations to ponder.

"Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it." John 8:44

"And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not." John 1:5

Trust these organizations? I think not.