0.9.2. Building encrypted communication channels for coordinating operations

2025.10.06.
AI Security Blog

For any covert organization, secure and deniable communication is the central nervous system. Traditional end-to-end encryption (E2EE) applications are a starting point, but their use creates a detectable pattern. Malicious actors, particularly sophisticated ones, are now exploring AI to move beyond simply encrypting data to creating communication channels that are functionally invisible, blending seamlessly into the noise of the internet.

The Communications Trilemma: Security, Anonymity, and Usability

Effective covert communication constantly balances three competing factors:

Kapcsolati űrlap - EN

Do you have a question about AI Security? Reach out to us here:

  • Security: The message content must be unreadable to unauthorized parties (confidentiality) and its integrity verifiable (authenticity).
  • Anonymity: The identities and locations of the communicating parties must be concealed. It’s not enough to hide what is said; you must also hide who is talking.
  • Usability: The system must be practical for operators to use under real-world conditions, often with limited resources or technical skill.

Conventional tools often force a trade-off. For example, using PGP for email offers strong security but can be cumbersome (low usability) and does little to hide the metadata of who is emailing whom (low anonymity). Tor provides strong anonymity but can be slow and is itself a flag for monitoring. The strategic goal for an advanced adversary is to use AI to optimize all three points simultaneously, creating channels that are secure, anonymous, *and* easy to operate.

AI-Driven Steganography and Protocol Mimicry

The core innovation AI brings is the ability to hide communications in plain sight. Instead of creating an obviously encrypted channel that screams “secret,” the goal is to create one that looks like something entirely mundane.

Generative Models for Covert Data Embedding

Steganography—the practice of hiding a message within another message or object—is an old technique. AI revolutionizes it. A Generative Adversarial Network (GAN) can be trained not just to create realistic images or audio but to embed encrypted data within them in a way that is statistically indistinguishable from a “clean” file.

The key advantage is that the carrier medium (the image, video, or audio file) is unique and generated on the fly. This defeats signature-based detection and makes it impossible for analysts to compare the file against a database of known, unaltered files.

# Pseudocode for a GAN-based steganographic encoder
function embed_message(message, carrier_noise):
    # Encrypt the message first for layered security
    encrypted_payload = AES_encrypt(message, shared_key)

    # Generator network tries to create an image with the payload
    # while fooling the discriminator.
    stego_image = generator.train(
        input_noise=carrier_noise, 
        payload=encrypted_payload
    )

    # Discriminator network tries to tell if an image contains data.
    # The generator gets better by learning from the discriminator's failures.
    is_detected = discriminator.evaluate(stego_image)

    return stego_image

Mimicking Benign Application Traffic

The most significant risk in covert communications is not necessarily decryption, but detection of the channel itself. AI can be used to model and generate network traffic that perfectly mimics legitimate applications. An adversary could develop a system where encrypted messages are broken into tiny fragments and hidden within the data packets of what appears to be:

  • Online gaming sessions
  • Video streaming services
  • Social media API calls
  • Software updates or DNS requests

An AI controller ensures the timing, size, and frequency of these packets align perfectly with the expected patterns of the mimicked application, making the covert channel a needle in a haystack of legitimate data.

Benign Traffic Stream (e.g., Video Streaming) Covert Data Packet (Hidden inside benign flow) AI models ensure the covert packets do not disrupt the statistical properties of the benign stream.
Figure 1: Conceptual diagram of a covert channel hidden within a stream of benign-looking traffic.

A Layered, AI-Managed Architecture

A truly resilient system layers multiple AI-driven techniques. This “defense in depth” approach ensures that the failure of one layer does not compromise the entire channel. An advanced actor might construct a system as follows:

Layered AI Communication Channel Layer 4: Network Anonymization Base layer using Tor, VPNs, or custom mesh networks. Layer 3: AI Traffic Mimicry Generates benign traffic (e.g., social media). Layer 2: AI Steganography Hides data in generated media. Layer 1: Core Encryption The raw message data. Each layer adds complexity and makes detection harder.
Figure 2: A defense-in-depth model for an AI-powered covert communication channel.
  1. The Core Message: The raw operational command is first encrypted using a strong, standard algorithm like AES-256.
  2. AI-Steganography: This encrypted payload is then fed into a generative model, which embeds it within a newly created image or audio clip.
  3. AI Traffic Mimicry: The steganographic file is then transmitted as part of a larger stream of traffic generated by an AI to look like a normal user’s activity on a platform like YouTube or Twitch.
  4. Anonymization Network: This entire stream of mimicked traffic is routed through an anonymizing network like Tor to obscure its origin and destination.

Furthermore, an AI controller can make this system *adaptive*. If it detects signs of network analysis, it can dynamically change the mimicked application, the steganographic method, or the encryption protocol on the fly to evade capture.

Red Team and Defensive Implications

Understanding these techniques is critical for both red teaming and defense.

  • For Red Teams: Your objective shifts from simply breaking encryption to proving a covert channel exists at all. This involves sophisticated traffic analysis to find statistical anomalies that even an AI might create. Can you differentiate between a real user’s chaotic browsing and an AI’s perfectly mimicked chaos?
  • For Defenders: Signature-based and rule-based detection systems are insufficient. Defense requires AI-powered network monitoring that establishes deep, long-term baselines of normal behavior for every user and device. The goal is to detect subtle deviations from these baselines. This reinforces the need for zero-trust architectures, where no traffic is implicitly trusted, regardless of how benign it appears.