<div dir="ltr">
<p style="font-family:"Segoe UI"">I think of another way to make things harder for a hacker.</p>
<ul><li>Use "data diode isolated" secure servers : one "incoming data diode" for
requests reception and one "outgoing data diode" for document emissions. Make
sure that each secure server is only connected to the exterior world by these two
data diodes.</li><li>Introduce randomness in the "data diode isolated" secure servers : make it
hard for a "malicious man in the middle" to "reverse engineer" your black box by the analysis of data collected from the observation of your "black box".</li><li>Design a distributed system : make your "data diode isolated" secure server
exchange data with "dumb nodes." The "dumb nodes" do nothing except relay the
responses (they act as proxies). When the secure server sends a response, it
sends messages to many "dumb nodes" chosen randomly. Among all these messages,
there is only one "real" message. Other messages are fake ones, but are
indiscernible from the point of view of a "malicious man in the middle"). Thus,
in order to "spy" your system (to collect data), you have to "spy" the entire "galaxy" of "dumb
nodes"- and not only one server. This makes things much more difficult for "a
malicious man in the middle," especially if your "dumb nodes" are located in
different countries which intelligence agencies are not known to collaborate
easily (because cracking such a system would require a lot of resources). "dumb nodes" do not need to be particularly secured. An attacker could
disrupt your system (by hacking the "dumb nodes"), but it cannot alter the
signed document - unless it has a way to crack RSA - or whatever algorithm you use (but, in this case, just forget your project...).<br></li></ul><p style="font-family:"Segoe UI"">
</p><p style="font-family:"Segoe UI"">Tell me what you think.</p><p style="font-family:"Segoe UI"">Regards.<br></p><p style="font-family:"Segoe UI""><br></p></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Le mar. 28 juil. 2020 à 12:19, Ayoub Misherghi via Gnupg-users <<a href="mailto:gnupg-users@gnupg.org">gnupg-users@gnupg.org</a>> a écrit :<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div style="direction:ltr">
<pre>I am going to have a server machine doing encryption. How do you protect against server operator or admin tampering. This is a scenario where internal threat or hostility is high; you cannot trust your own guys. (Real situation; not paranoid.)
Thanks,
Ayoub
</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Gnupg-users mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Gnupg-users@gnupg.org" target="_blank">Gnupg-users@gnupg.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.gnupg.org/mailman/listinfo/gnupg-users</a></blockquote></div>