Other Directory Sites: SeekWonder | Directory Owners Forum
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:11:00
Jay Holovacs (holovacs@idt.net)
Sat, 22 Aug 1998 08:43:47 -0400
At 05:07 PM 8/21/98 -0700, Ted Lemon wrote:
>
>It wouldn't be that hard to write a program that takes an arbitrary
>sequence of bits and uniquely encodes them into a series of machine
>instructions that actually execute and don't do anything surprising.
>So you could have a working executable that hides encrypted data. At
>some point Customs is going to start wondering why you have so many
>executables, though, and why they're so big...
>
Sometimes one can pursue a line of thought and find oneself returning right
back to the beginning. This heads right back to conventional .bmp & .gif
steganography. It is still much easier to hide information in an image
file, because the lower bits can be twiddled pretty much undetectably (if
the choice of photograph is good). EXEs don't do that nearly so well (every
bit counts.)
Carrying hundreds of pix of family, friends, products, etc. is not
necessarily suspicious. Someone has even suggested that sometimes safely
legal soft-core (Playboy type) images might make an excellent place to hide
more exotic sensitive information because it looks pretty obvious why
you're carrying that stuff. Password zip your pix, and unzip them on
demand. A wink & nod and you're on your way.
Jay
The following archive was created by hippie-mail 7.98617-22 on Sat Apr 10 1999 - 01:11:00