[ cyb / tech / λ / layer ] [ zzz / drg / lit / diy / art ] [ w / rpg / r ] [ q ] [ / ] [ popular / ???? / rules / radio / $$ / news ] [ volafile / uboa / sushi / LainTV / lewd ]

tech - God bless the AMD

2nd chances
Name
Email
Subject
Comment
File
Password (For file deletion.)

BUY LAINCHAN STICKERS HERE

STREAM » LainTV « STREAM

[Return][Go to bottom]

File: 1448585833134.jpg (230.58 KB, 900x800, fgfdg.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

 No.14367

Are these a good idea?

Personally I'm looking for my Win 7 setup - but lets also talk all OS’s.

I can only find a few for windows... and nothing FOSS. (there seems to be an old one but <XP only)

Currently running Key Scrambler, but it just started private firewall warnings about requesting to screen cap... wtf?

I think I’m leaning towards Zemana... but can you have crypto security from non FOSS? I guess they will help in most cases, but is it broken security or real security?

Any FOSS suggestions for Win?

So far:
Key Scrambler
https://www.qfxsoftware.com/download.htm

Zemana AntiLogger Free
https://www.zemana.com/AntiLoggerFree

SpyShelter
https://www.spyshelter.com/

Also this Firefox plugin is a key cipher.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/keylogger-beater/
>>

 No.14368

>>14367
Get a keyboard that allows you to program its keys.

Then you could conceivably switch between the layouts you have stored after setting your computer to treat them differently.

>>

 No.14370

This seems pretty useless as it's only as secure as the OS anyway. I see no way these programs could guarantee they'd get the keystroke before the keylogger. A more interesting idea might be a special keyboard with a microcontroller in it that could encrypt in a way the OS wouldn't even be aware of.

>>

 No.14371

File: 1448587013880.png (7.5 KB, 504x223, kjjkjk.png) ImgOps iqdb

>>14368
nice idea and would be a good layer... but somthing more solid and keyboard independent would be nice.

>>

 No.14372

File: 1448587620448.jpg (18.45 KB, 300x182, asasasas.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>14370
Some review say kernal level encryption - does that mean anything good? or is busted, busted!

No defence from a keylogger then?

>special keyboard with a microcontroller in it that could encrypt in a way the OS wouldn't even be aware of.

How would the OS know what key has been pressed if its sending out crypt?

>>

 No.14373

>>14372
DMA might help.

>>

 No.14375

File: 1448588034056.jpg (199.63 KB, 800x962, adwad.jpg) ImgOps Exif iqdb

>>14373
USB works like that? Hu.. yeh I guess maybe, its kinda scsi init?

Dunno its all a bit maximum wizard

>>

 No.14437

File: 1448802753212.jpeg (133.67 KB, 500x500, iuuuu.jpeg) ImgOps iqdb

Found this:
When you type on your keyboard, it looks like the keystrokes are directly sent to the application you're working on. In reality, they have to go through quite a long path to get there.

The keystrokes first arrive at a hardware controller on the computer's motherboard, which forwards them to the Windows kernel's keyboard input stack. They are then processed by the windowing system's input manager, which sends them to a queue belonging to the application window that currently has input focus.

The application then retrieves the keystrokes from the queue and interprets them according to its own context, and finally the user sees the result of the keys that are pressed. This is a simplified view of what happens, without considering such complex issues as inputting non-English languages.

Many places along this path, there are ways to intercept the keystroke data. Any of these points can be used to perform keylogging, which is why it's such a thorny problem.

What KeyScrambler does is to try to get to the keystrokes as early as possible in the Windows kernel using our encryption module. That way, as they get passed along the different layers of the OS, it won't matter if they get logged, because the keystrokes are completely indecipherable.

When these encrypted keystrokes finally arrive at the intended application, the decryption component of KeyScrambler goes to work and turns them back into the keys the user originally typed.

If you are familiar with how SSL/TLS work to encrypt network traffic, this is basically the same principal applied to your keystrokes.

>Anyone with knowledge, how safe does this sound? - why can't key loggers grab from the same low level place?

>>

 No.14438

>>14372
>Some review say kernal level encryption - does that mean anything good?
Well assuming it's done correctly that could protect you from userland keylogger, but if the keylogger is implemented in a kernel module/driver then there's no reason to think this would protect you.
>How would the OS know what key has been pressed if its sending out crypt?
It wouldn't, and that's the point. Obviously you'd need a second keyboard or a switch to toggle encryption on and off in order to use the computer normally. You could even put a one of those little character displays on the keyboard that would show the last few lines of text unencrypted so you could proofread it. I should start a kickstarter instead of posting these ideas for somebody else to use.



Delete Post [ ]
[ cyb / tech / λ / layer ] [ zzz / drg / lit / diy / art ] [ w / rpg / r ] [ q ] [ / ] [ popular / ???? / rules / radio / $$ / news ] [ volafile / uboa / sushi / LainTV / lewd ]