2
1
Inspired by my answer to this question: How to take down the internet?.
Lets say that a small ideological country has recently broken one of the most common HTTPS encryption schemes for public-private key style encryption (I don't care which specifically). They can easily decrypt any message encrypted with this scheme so long as they have the public key used for the encryption. No one is aware that the scheme has been broken at this time.
The country wants to do two things.
Improve its standing in the larger community, gaining both more wealth and more political power without angering anyone enough to trigger an invasion, sanctions, or any other political suicide.
Terrorize, damage the economy of, or destroy one other technically capable country that it passionately hates for ideological reasons. Assume the country it hates is first world economically. The hated country is larger then the country that broke the encryption, but still small compared to say the USA. However, the hated countries military is still a significant threat and thus our small country does not want to risk triggering an overt war.
I know those two goals may seem counter to each other, and rationally they may well be. However, rationality is not always humanities strong suit. Thus assume that their hatred for the other country is significant enough for them to act against them, even if not acting would be smarter; and they are not willing to wait 20-30 years of planning before trying to destroy the economy of the other nation. However, they need to be careful not to do anything that will trigger a direct invasion, by the country they hate or by any larger nations. In addition, if people realize that the encryption algorithm is broken they can switch to an alternate algorithm in the future, negating the countries advantage.
Generally I'm more interested in the terrorism and other evil that the nation can do by breaking HTTPS then I am in how they would build their own nation, but the two issues seem closely enough related that I wanted to mention both goals and stress that terrorism goal need not result in foolish actions or prevent them from attempting to profit as well.
As a small nation they have little infrastructure in place for supporting their exploitation of the encryption algorithm. For instance they don't already have dozens of computers in place for man-in-the-middle attacks just waiting to be tapped. They are not above growing this capability, just don't assume it already exists. However, if necessary to make them able to do anything interesting, you may assume that the nation is physically located between two large first world nations or the hated nation and the rest of the world; thus making it possible that data will often be routed through them.
What strategies do they have available to exploit their ability to see through HTTPS in order to better themselves and destroy their hated country?
ps. I really should name these countries to make it clear the distinction, but the only names I can come up with are Foo and Bar. Any naming suggestions?
1Better get your technical details right. Public keys aren't used to encrypt messages, they're used to encrypt symmetric keys that are used to encrypt messages. And AES isn't a public key encryption protocol, it's a symmetric protocol. – Mike Scott – 2015-12-18T17:07:41.030
you are correct about AES, my fault, I wasn't thinking. However, I think that my phrasing is accurate for public key encryption. Yes usually public keys encrypt symemetric keys, but it doesn't have to be that way. Someone could send a short message using only public key encryption in theory, or just refuse to every switch to symmetric. The idea is that the public-private key encryption is broken only, which likely breaks the symmetric indirectly since you can read symmetric keys sent this way. – dsollen – 2015-12-18T18:11:03.193
I haven't read the question in detail, but to provide a bit of context: "breaking" HTTPS means breaking TLS, in a context where strict certificate checking is commonplace and certificate pinning is far from unheard of. If you are able to do that, you can pretty much break TLS for everyone. And TLS is used for tons more than just web browsing. Smaller countries also are often (far from always) less reliant on technological infrastructure than larger countries, giving the smaller country the upper hand in another way as well. – a CVn – 2015-12-18T18:11:56.517
@MichaelKjörling I agree with everything you said about HTTPS, but I'm not certain I understand what sort of change you are recommending to the question itself. I thought the specifics were clear enough, is there something you felt was to ambiguous? I don't require limiting to HTTPS of course. Perhaps your suggesting I simply update the question to better match the question description? I choose to simply say HTTPS to allow a short question, if you can suggest a better question to express the idea of the detail better I'm happy to update the question :) – dsollen – 2015-12-18T18:19:11.737
It's not really as much about how to change the question, as it is about the implications of a country being able to do what you ask about. – a CVn – 2015-12-18T18:30:54.253
@MichaelKjörling sorry, I must just be slow today (and you know, the other 364 days of the year), but I'm not sure I follow you still. Your first comment seemed to be implying, if anything, that the country would be more able to cause harm then I may believe due to their breaking more then web browsing (though I wasn't meaning to limit myself to just web browsing), your second comment seems to be implying they would be less able to? I'm not sure all TLS is broken anyways, since they only actually broke one encryption method. – dsollen – 2015-12-18T18:38:32.127
Is this an online break, like a Man in the Middle, where you can only intercept the communication while it is occurring, or is it an offline break that permits you to read any recorded HTTPS session? – Cort Ammon – 2015-12-18T18:47:33.480
@CortAmmon It is a break that allows decoding an encrypted string using only it's public key. If you can get hold of encrypted string and public key it's broken. Obviously that's most easily done with Man in the Middle style attacks, but if you get hold of the recorded message and public key in some other manner you could still break it. – dsollen – 2015-12-18T18:54:27.480