July 2002 - cypherpunks-legacy

AIR TRAVELER ID REQUIREMENT CHALLENGED
by Duncan Frissell 19 Jul '02

19 Jul '02

<http://cryptome.org/freetotravel.htm>Gilmore v. Ashcroft -- FAA ID Challenge AIR TRAVELER ID REQUIREMENT CHALLENGED Secret rule demanding 'Your Papers Please' claimed unconstitutional San Francisco - Civil libertarian John Gilmore today challenged as unconstitutional a secret federal rule that requires domestic US travelers to identify themselves. Smooth move. Attempt to board a flight to DC on July 4th "to petition the government for redress of grievances". Even if not successful, it will be annoying and will be worthwhile if it manages to crack out copies of the secret security directives (like FAA SD 96-05)establishing the system. Keep in mind that until the end of the first Clinton administration, it was perfectly legal to fly domestically without ID. -- Posted by Duncan Frissell to <http://technoptimist.blogspot.com>The Technoptimist at 7/18/2002 11:12:20 AM Powered by <http://pro2.blogger.com>Blogger Pro

1 0

Never miss a phone call or fax while online
by Ebargains 19 Jul '02

19 Jul '02

1 0

Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
by Duncan Frissell 19 Jul '02

19 Jul '02

Enron followed Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) in accounting for the activities of its Special Purpose Entities (SPEs) and concealed its true financial status. Worldcom didn't follow (GAAP) in accounting for expenses and concealed its true financial status. Federal and state governments and their Special Purpose Entities (like Social Security) have never followed (GAAP) and regularly conceal their true financial status. If private execs should do time for their lies and concealment so should our political leaders for their much more significant lies and concealment. -- Posted by Duncan Frissell to <http://technoptimist.blogspot.com>The Technoptimist at 7/8/2002 9:44:15 AM Powered by <http://pro2.blogger.com>Blogger Pro

1 0

QM, randomness, ignornace (Re:Atmospheric noise & fair coin flipping) x-post
by Major Variola (ret) 19 Jul '02

19 Jul '02

This just showed up on _cryptography_ and illuminates the point various nyms were making here about QM, randomness, and ignorance. Reproduced without permission. Hannes said, > What we have here is a theory which is almost as old as the > special theory of relativity and has not yet prooven wrong. > This theory tells us that there is no way whatever, that a > possible eavesdropper can listen to the key exchange. I appreciate your statement and I am sure you have the experise in the area. However, to rely on a security/crypto mechanism, I must see a proof I understand, and I _never_ rely on `proof by intimidation`. In this case, I'll like a proof showing reduction from a specific theorem which is backed by many years of concentrated effort to break it. I am not cynical, really. I will really appreciate if you provide me/us with (reference) to (a) historical evidence of a precise theorem/conjecture which withstood many years of substantial scurtiny, and (b) precise proof, with sufficient details for someone (like me) whose physics is rusty (many years since my engineering school days...), showing the reduction from the specific claims to the long-lived theorem. > It also > tells us that if we > use either a Quantum random number generator or an entangled > photon QKD system, that > we get absolutly random numbers. Can you generate truly random numbers? Cool! Indeed, this is something which in a sense is to be expected, based on the uncertainty principle. Of course, for a complete QKD system this may be a small part; but this part could be useful for many crypto systems, if it is really secure - and practical (cost, size, etc.). Can you provide details on this? As an aside note, the uncertainty principle may be an example of physical theory which have withstood many years, but I doubt that it was really tested using crypto principles. I mean, couldn't it just turn out that all of the randomization in physics will some day turn out to be pseudo-random??? After all, detecting the difference could be fairly difficult, even if and when we learn the details of this supposed pseudo-random generator, assuming it is a non-trivial one (after all even the congruential generator was only fairly recently shown insecure!). Regards, Amir Herzberg See http://amir.herzberg.name/book.html for lectures and draft-chapters from book-in-progress, `Introduction to Cryptography, Secure Communication and Commerce`; feedback appreciated! --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo(a)wasabisystems.com

1 0

Quick Cash!
by mings1012002＠yahoo.com 19 Jul '02

19 Jul '02

Sell your Timeshare! If you're interested in selling or renting your Timeshare or vacation membership we can help! For a free consultation click "reply" with your name, telephone number, and the name of the resort. We will contact you shortly! Removal Instructions: To be removed from this list, please reply with "remove" in the subject line.

1 0

**Natural Viagra is Finally Here!!** - rlyt
by Penis Growth 19 Jul '02

19 Jul '02

1 0

With Arles Image Web Page Creator
by George 19 Jul '02

19 Jul '02

1 0

Act FAST! Getting a CREDIT CARD is as easy as 1,2,3!
by Ebargains 19 Jul '02

19 Jul '02

1 0

How much will they claim CSS is worth?
by Declan McCullagh 19 Jul '02

19 Jul '02

[TRADE SECRETS] California Court Says Trade Secrets Theft Can Get Jail Time The California Supreme Court ruled unanimously that the theft of trade secrets worth more than $50,000 can trigger a state statute requiring a minimum county jail sentence as a condition of probation. The ruling arose in a matter involving an electrical engineer charged with the theft of confidential design specifications for computer chips. Read the article: law.com @ http://www.law.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=OpenMarket/Xcelerate/View…

1 0

BiLiYORUZ REKLAMA iHTiYACINIZ VAR! BUNUN iCiN BURADAYIZ.. 19.07.2002 15:43:53
by TR Posta NetWorks 19 Jul '02

19 Jul '02

1 0