The Experts below are selected from a list of 150 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Franziska Roesner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
EuroS&P - Confidante: Usable Encrypted Email: A Case Study with Lawyers and Journalists
2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), 2017Co-Authors: Ada Lerner, Eric Zeng, Franziska RoesnerAbstract:Email Encryption Tools remain underused, even by people who frequently conduct sensitive business over email, such as lawyers and journalists. Usable encrypted email has remained out of reach largely because key management and verification remain difficult. However, key management has evolved in the age of social media: Keybase is a service that allows users to cryptographically link public keys to their social media accounts (e.g., Twitter), enabling key trust without out-of-band communication. We design and prototype Confidante, an encrypted email client that uses Keybase for automatic key management. We conduct a user study with 15 people (8 U. S. lawyers and 7 U. S. journalists) to evaluate Confidante's design decisions. We find that users complete an encrypted email task more quickly and with fewer errors using Confidante than with an existing email Encryption Tool, and that many users report finding Confidante comparable to using ordinary email. However, we also find that lawyers and journalists have diverse operational constraints and threat models, and thus that there may not be a one-size-fits-all solution to usable encrypted email. We reflect on our findings — both specifically about Confidante and more generally about the needs and constraints of lawyers and journalists—to identify lessons and remaining security and usability challenges for encrypted email.
-
EuroS&P - Confidante: Usable Encrypted Email: A Case Study with Lawyers and Journalists
2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), 2017Co-Authors: Ada Lerner, Eric Zeng, Franziska RoesnerAbstract:Email Encryption Tools remain underused, even by people who frequently conduct sensitive business over email, such as lawyers and journalists. Usable encrypted email has remained out of reach largely because key management and verification remain difficult. However, key management has evolved in the age of social media: Keybase is a service that allows users to cryptographically link public keys to their social media accounts (e.g., Twitter), enabling key trust without out-of-band communication. We design and prototype Confidante, an encrypted email client that uses Keybase for automatic key management. We conduct a user study with 15 people (8 U. S. lawyers and 7 U. S. journalists) to evaluate Confidante's design decisions. We find that users complete an encrypted email task more quickly and with fewer errors using Confidante than with an existing email Encryption Tool, and that many users report finding Confidante comparable to using ordinary email. However, we also find that lawyers and journalists have diverse operational constraints and threat models, and thus that there may not be a one-size-fits-all solution to usable encrypted email. We reflect on our findings — both specifically about Confidante and more generally about the needs and constraints of lawyers and journalists—to identify lessons and remaining security and usability challenges for encrypted email.
Ada Lerner - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
EuroS&P - Confidante: Usable Encrypted Email: A Case Study with Lawyers and Journalists
2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), 2017Co-Authors: Ada Lerner, Eric Zeng, Franziska RoesnerAbstract:Email Encryption Tools remain underused, even by people who frequently conduct sensitive business over email, such as lawyers and journalists. Usable encrypted email has remained out of reach largely because key management and verification remain difficult. However, key management has evolved in the age of social media: Keybase is a service that allows users to cryptographically link public keys to their social media accounts (e.g., Twitter), enabling key trust without out-of-band communication. We design and prototype Confidante, an encrypted email client that uses Keybase for automatic key management. We conduct a user study with 15 people (8 U. S. lawyers and 7 U. S. journalists) to evaluate Confidante's design decisions. We find that users complete an encrypted email task more quickly and with fewer errors using Confidante than with an existing email Encryption Tool, and that many users report finding Confidante comparable to using ordinary email. However, we also find that lawyers and journalists have diverse operational constraints and threat models, and thus that there may not be a one-size-fits-all solution to usable encrypted email. We reflect on our findings — both specifically about Confidante and more generally about the needs and constraints of lawyers and journalists—to identify lessons and remaining security and usability challenges for encrypted email.
-
EuroS&P - Confidante: Usable Encrypted Email: A Case Study with Lawyers and Journalists
2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), 2017Co-Authors: Ada Lerner, Eric Zeng, Franziska RoesnerAbstract:Email Encryption Tools remain underused, even by people who frequently conduct sensitive business over email, such as lawyers and journalists. Usable encrypted email has remained out of reach largely because key management and verification remain difficult. However, key management has evolved in the age of social media: Keybase is a service that allows users to cryptographically link public keys to their social media accounts (e.g., Twitter), enabling key trust without out-of-band communication. We design and prototype Confidante, an encrypted email client that uses Keybase for automatic key management. We conduct a user study with 15 people (8 U. S. lawyers and 7 U. S. journalists) to evaluate Confidante's design decisions. We find that users complete an encrypted email task more quickly and with fewer errors using Confidante than with an existing email Encryption Tool, and that many users report finding Confidante comparable to using ordinary email. However, we also find that lawyers and journalists have diverse operational constraints and threat models, and thus that there may not be a one-size-fits-all solution to usable encrypted email. We reflect on our findings — both specifically about Confidante and more generally about the needs and constraints of lawyers and journalists—to identify lessons and remaining security and usability challenges for encrypted email.
Eric Zeng - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
EuroS&P - Confidante: Usable Encrypted Email: A Case Study with Lawyers and Journalists
2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), 2017Co-Authors: Ada Lerner, Eric Zeng, Franziska RoesnerAbstract:Email Encryption Tools remain underused, even by people who frequently conduct sensitive business over email, such as lawyers and journalists. Usable encrypted email has remained out of reach largely because key management and verification remain difficult. However, key management has evolved in the age of social media: Keybase is a service that allows users to cryptographically link public keys to their social media accounts (e.g., Twitter), enabling key trust without out-of-band communication. We design and prototype Confidante, an encrypted email client that uses Keybase for automatic key management. We conduct a user study with 15 people (8 U. S. lawyers and 7 U. S. journalists) to evaluate Confidante's design decisions. We find that users complete an encrypted email task more quickly and with fewer errors using Confidante than with an existing email Encryption Tool, and that many users report finding Confidante comparable to using ordinary email. However, we also find that lawyers and journalists have diverse operational constraints and threat models, and thus that there may not be a one-size-fits-all solution to usable encrypted email. We reflect on our findings — both specifically about Confidante and more generally about the needs and constraints of lawyers and journalists—to identify lessons and remaining security and usability challenges for encrypted email.
-
EuroS&P - Confidante: Usable Encrypted Email: A Case Study with Lawyers and Journalists
2017 IEEE European Symposium on Security and Privacy (EuroS&P), 2017Co-Authors: Ada Lerner, Eric Zeng, Franziska RoesnerAbstract:Email Encryption Tools remain underused, even by people who frequently conduct sensitive business over email, such as lawyers and journalists. Usable encrypted email has remained out of reach largely because key management and verification remain difficult. However, key management has evolved in the age of social media: Keybase is a service that allows users to cryptographically link public keys to their social media accounts (e.g., Twitter), enabling key trust without out-of-band communication. We design and prototype Confidante, an encrypted email client that uses Keybase for automatic key management. We conduct a user study with 15 people (8 U. S. lawyers and 7 U. S. journalists) to evaluate Confidante's design decisions. We find that users complete an encrypted email task more quickly and with fewer errors using Confidante than with an existing email Encryption Tool, and that many users report finding Confidante comparable to using ordinary email. However, we also find that lawyers and journalists have diverse operational constraints and threat models, and thus that there may not be a one-size-fits-all solution to usable encrypted email. We reflect on our findings — both specifically about Confidante and more generally about the needs and constraints of lawyers and journalists—to identify lessons and remaining security and usability challenges for encrypted email.
Mohammad Mannan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
challenges and implications of verifiable builds for security critical open source software
Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, 2014Co-Authors: Xavier De Carne De Carnavalet, Mohammad MannanAbstract:The majority of computer users download compiled software and run it directly on their machine. Apparently, this is also true for open-sourced software -- most users would not compile the available source, and implicitly trust that the available binaries have been compiled from the published source code (i.e., no backdoor has been inserted in the binary). To verify that the official binaries indeed correspond to the released source, one can compile the source of a given application, and then compare the locally generated binaries with the developer-provided official ones. However, such simple verification is non-trivial to achieve in practice, as modern compilers, and more generally, Toolchains used in software packaging, have not been designed with verifiability in mind. Rather, the output of compilers is often dependent on parameters that can be strongly tied to the building environment. In this paper, we analyze a widely-used Encryption Tool, TrueCrypt, to verify its official binary with the corresponding source. We first manually replicate a close match to the official binaries of sixteen most recent versions of TrueCrypt for Windows up to v7.1a, and then explain the remaining differences that can solely be attributed to non-determinism in the build process. Our analysis provides the missing guarantee on official binaries that they are indeed backdoor-free, and makes audits on TrueCrypt's source code more meaningful. Also, we uncover several sources of non-determinism in TrueCrypt's compilation process; these findings may help create future verifiable build processes.
-
ACSAC - Challenges and implications of verifiable builds for security-critical open-source software
Proceedings of the 30th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference on - ACSAC '14, 2014Co-Authors: Xavier De Carne De Carnavalet, Mohammad MannanAbstract:The majority of computer users download compiled software and run it directly on their machine. Apparently, this is also true for open-sourced software -- most users would not compile the available source, and implicitly trust that the available binaries have been compiled from the published source code (i.e., no backdoor has been inserted in the binary). To verify that the official binaries indeed correspond to the released source, one can compile the source of a given application, and then compare the locally generated binaries with the developer-provided official ones. However, such simple verification is non-trivial to achieve in practice, as modern compilers, and more generally, Toolchains used in software packaging, have not been designed with verifiability in mind. Rather, the output of compilers is often dependent on parameters that can be strongly tied to the building environment. In this paper, we analyze a widely-used Encryption Tool, TrueCrypt, to verify its official binary with the corresponding source. We first manually replicate a close match to the official binaries of sixteen most recent versions of TrueCrypt for Windows up to v7.1a, and then explain the remaining differences that can solely be attributed to non-determinism in the build process. Our analysis provides the missing guarantee on official binaries that they are indeed backdoor-free, and makes audits on TrueCrypt's source code more meaningful. Also, we uncover several sources of non-determinism in TrueCrypt's compilation process; these findings may help create future verifiable build processes.
Xavier De Carne De Carnavalet - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
challenges and implications of verifiable builds for security critical open source software
Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, 2014Co-Authors: Xavier De Carne De Carnavalet, Mohammad MannanAbstract:The majority of computer users download compiled software and run it directly on their machine. Apparently, this is also true for open-sourced software -- most users would not compile the available source, and implicitly trust that the available binaries have been compiled from the published source code (i.e., no backdoor has been inserted in the binary). To verify that the official binaries indeed correspond to the released source, one can compile the source of a given application, and then compare the locally generated binaries with the developer-provided official ones. However, such simple verification is non-trivial to achieve in practice, as modern compilers, and more generally, Toolchains used in software packaging, have not been designed with verifiability in mind. Rather, the output of compilers is often dependent on parameters that can be strongly tied to the building environment. In this paper, we analyze a widely-used Encryption Tool, TrueCrypt, to verify its official binary with the corresponding source. We first manually replicate a close match to the official binaries of sixteen most recent versions of TrueCrypt for Windows up to v7.1a, and then explain the remaining differences that can solely be attributed to non-determinism in the build process. Our analysis provides the missing guarantee on official binaries that they are indeed backdoor-free, and makes audits on TrueCrypt's source code more meaningful. Also, we uncover several sources of non-determinism in TrueCrypt's compilation process; these findings may help create future verifiable build processes.
-
ACSAC - Challenges and implications of verifiable builds for security-critical open-source software
Proceedings of the 30th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference on - ACSAC '14, 2014Co-Authors: Xavier De Carne De Carnavalet, Mohammad MannanAbstract:The majority of computer users download compiled software and run it directly on their machine. Apparently, this is also true for open-sourced software -- most users would not compile the available source, and implicitly trust that the available binaries have been compiled from the published source code (i.e., no backdoor has been inserted in the binary). To verify that the official binaries indeed correspond to the released source, one can compile the source of a given application, and then compare the locally generated binaries with the developer-provided official ones. However, such simple verification is non-trivial to achieve in practice, as modern compilers, and more generally, Toolchains used in software packaging, have not been designed with verifiability in mind. Rather, the output of compilers is often dependent on parameters that can be strongly tied to the building environment. In this paper, we analyze a widely-used Encryption Tool, TrueCrypt, to verify its official binary with the corresponding source. We first manually replicate a close match to the official binaries of sixteen most recent versions of TrueCrypt for Windows up to v7.1a, and then explain the remaining differences that can solely be attributed to non-determinism in the build process. Our analysis provides the missing guarantee on official binaries that they are indeed backdoor-free, and makes audits on TrueCrypt's source code more meaningful. Also, we uncover several sources of non-determinism in TrueCrypt's compilation process; these findings may help create future verifiable build processes.