William was raided for running a Tor exit node. Please help if you can.
mysidia at gmail.com
Tue Dec 18 02:45:04 UTC 2012
On 12/17/12, Mark Andrews <marka at isc.org> wrote:
> In message <34925.1355780734 at turing-police.cc.vt.edu>,
>> On Mon, 17 Dec 2012 16:28:28 -0500, Peter Kristolaitis said:
Yeah... degaussing rings consume a lot of energy you shouldn't need
to consume. If you _must_ be able to protect data from extreme
physical threats: keep it encrypted end to end at all times, and
concentrate on Information assurance for the key itself, and
making the equipment tamper resistant, to prevent eavesdropping, for
example: by incorporating computer chassis into the support structure
of the building, with, EM shielding, plate steel vault doors and
relocking mechanisms; just as you'd want to safeguard other
Encryption keys are short, and easy to store on small tamper-resistant
smartcards, which can be burned up or erased in a second by a low
voltage circuit; possibly one triggered automatically if the
incorrect PIN is entered, or the correct 3rd or 4th (easily
accidentally lost, or left at some other place) SIM Card/Micro-sim
shapped parts containing enough other shares of the encryption key
aren't inserted in a partner module shortly after powerup.
As long as the crypto algorithm was sound, reliable destruction of
the key should make the data as hard (or harder) to be recovered,
than if media had been degaussed.
>> And of course, there's this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vxEimC3HME
> I suspect you would fine that such a ring would illegal as it is a
> potential "man trap". There are reasons hospitals have big warning
> signs around similar equipment used for medical imaging.
More information about the NANOG