January 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: EU Privacy Authorities Seek Changes in Microsoft 'Passport'
by Rich Salz 28 Jan '03

28 Jan '03

> The Liberty Alliance was stillborn to begin with. Not that it made any > practical difference, but the Liberty Alliance received an additional > bullet through the head the day that RSA Security, a key participant in > the Liberty Alliance, announced that they would also support Microsoft > Passport. {I'm not on DBS so they won't see this.} I wasn't discussing the politics, just the architecture. But anyway: if Liberty does manage to field something run by the CCard companies, then it will survive, and probably win. MSFT will have to acceede to what Visa and MC deploy. /r$ --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo(a)wasabisystems.com

1 0

When you try to pronounce "NGSCB"...
by R. A. Hettinga 28 Jan '03

28 Jan '03

...it sounds like some place-name in Mordor: "Naagscab" I suppose it should name a sulfurous cave, or some other, um, foul hole... Thanks to Charles Evans for the pronunciation hint. > Microsoft has dropped the code name of its controversial > security technology, Palladium, in favor of this buzzword- > bloated tongue twister: "next-generation secure computing > base". Cheers, RAH Who liked "Palladiated", too... -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo(a)wasabisystems.com

1 0

Re: Secure voice app: FEATURE REQUEST: RECORD IPs
by Major Variola (ret) 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

At 11:25 AM 1/27/03 -0600, Harmon Seaver wrote: >On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 08:23:15AM -0800, Major Variola (ret) wrote: >> The versions of all the secure phones I've evaluated needed this >> feature: >> a minimal answering machine. With just the ability to record IPs of > Pretty hard to do if people are using dialup. Or even dsl, unless they run a >linux box they don't ever reboot -- although I've found my dsl ip changing >sometimes on it's own, and with no rhyme or reason. Merely notifying me that someone called is useful. It wouldn't require rocket science to recognize an entire class C address as a friend. And remember this proposal is fully back compatible with earlier versions of a sec phone. If you wanted to mess with the protocol, you could obviously add an identifier exchange component. I am not familiar with SpeakFreely's protocol so I don't know if it can be extended without breaking compatability.

1 0

Re: Secure voice app: FEATURE REQUEST: RECORD IPs
by Thomas Shaddack 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

> I used to run a crontabbed script that queried a cgi-bin giving back the > remote address I use a very similar system (in PHP), activated by a wget request from /etc/ppp/ip-up.local (Linux). Another tactics I use occassionally when having to improvise is a remote syslog and a crontab entry that each 5 minutes spits a heartbeat message into the log (so each 5 minutes I get an UDP packet telling me the address on which the machine currently is; brute force, reliable, small overhead, abuse-resistant). > built-in this is now much more painless (no need to hack ddclient to parse > your router's status page). More interesting, current wireless routers > seem to support VPN tunnelling (IPsec, specifically). Given the > capabilities, it would be a piece of cake to slip a VoIP package such as > Speak Freely into it. With a headset/USB connection and a web interface to > control the app it would certainly provide some added value and be immune > to firewalling woes. Works, proven experimentally. One fateful day my ISP cut off all UDP traffic above and including port 1024 (they reinstated it two days later, so I suppose it was a hasty defense against a DDoS attack). I had a VPN connection to my office LAN, so I opened the two UDP ports on the firewall and set up portforwarding in iptables, and after some wrestling caused by my relative inexperience I got it working. Was surprisingly reliable. By the way - thought a bit about the ringing and authentication. Why we have to unite the call request system with the rest of the IP phone application? Couldn't we use it as an entirely separate process, maybe something simple based on eg. SSL or HTTPS, employing client certificates? This way we reduce the modifications of the VoIP component itself to bare minimum or perhaps none at all. Maybe it could be as simple as a perl or PHP script on the listening side, and a script calling curl on the other side.

1 0

Re: Secure voice app: FEATURE REQUEST: RECORD IPs
by Michael Motyka 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

Harmon Seaver <hseaver(a)cybershamanix.com> > On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 07:06:24PM +0100, Thomas Shaddack wrote: > > DSL lease timeout. A feature of DHCP-based dynamic IP addresses over > > permanent connections. Similar for cable, though the differences yo > > observed seem to be rather implementation-dependent than principial. > > No, not really. It's far too irregular for that, sometimes goes for over a > month, then sometimes 2-3 times in a week. More like them doing work on the > system. > That's about what I've seen. > Not really dhcp anyway, it's Eoppp. Cable is usally dhcp, and is better > because it authenticates on the mac address of the cable modem. And dhcp can be > set up to always give the same ip to a certain mac address, but I don't think > the eoppp can, or at least they don't -- it always has to negotiate a > challange/passwd response which can be quite problematic -- sometimes the only > way to get it to work again is to unplug the modem for 30 seconds or so, which, > of course, frustrates any script you have to automagically reset dns for your > domainname, or even just keep you online. > >Harmon Seaver > There's probably an X10 module that would let your Linux box cycle the power on your modem/router/switch. try $50 : http://www.x10.com/automation/x10_ck11a.htm If you're not using a domain name then your script could publish your IP address on your home page ( in the clear or not as you choose ). Mike

1 0

Re: Secure voice app: FEATURE REQUEST: RECORD IPs
by Thomas Shaddack 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

> Pretty hard to do if people are using dialup. Or even dsl, unless they run a > linux box they don't ever reboot -- although I've found my dsl ip changing > sometimes on it's own, and with no rhyme or reason. DSL lease timeout. A feature of DHCP-based dynamic IP addresses over permanent connections. Similar for cable, though the differences yo observed seem to be rather implementation-dependent than principial. > Cable is a little more stable, when I had a cable modem it didn't > change ip unless I shut off the modem for awhile, and not even always > then. Idea: What about a caller ID system, based on eg. SSL certificates or PGP signed challenge-response?

2 1

Re: ATTN: John Walker - RE: [speak-freely] Speak Freely for Windows and Speak Freely mailing lists (fwd)
by Eugen Leitl 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

Apart from bugfixes (like a tunable parameter to get rid of UDP buildup in system buffer due to sample rate skew) there has been some intersting discussion on tunnelling through NAT. I just noticed that speak-freely@ doesn't have a web archive. I'll be happy to forward relevant posts to anyone interested (privately, or dump them to cpunx-news to you can read them up from web archives). On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Steve Schear wrote: > I'd love to use SpeakFreely but one of its quirks is that it uses two > different ports to initiate and respond to connections and > communicate. Like many others I uses a firewall appliance. And like many > firewall users we find features lacking for configuring our firewalls so > that incoming traffic on one port can be associated with outgoing traffic > from another. About two years ago I thought a programmer I knew was going > to fix this, but it never happened. Hint: who ever takes up improving > SpeakFreely, please add this to the change list.

1 0

Secure voice app: FEATURE REQUEST: RECORD IPs
by Major Variola (ret) 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

>I am elated that the development of Speak Freely is continuing. I think it The versions of all the secure phones I've evaluated needed this feature: a minimal answering machine. With just the ability to record IPs of hosts that tried to call. (A local table can map these to your friends or their faces. Of course, this table should be encrypted when not in use.) Heck, you could even have an option to send email --or I suppose use that instant-messaging stuff that teenagers are fond of-- from the secure IP phone to you, when that phone rings but is not answered.

1 0

Semi-Deniable Thumbdrive...
by Tyler Durden 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

>I think the best way to think about any biometric is as a very cheap, > >moderately hard to copy identification token. Think of it like a good > >ID card that just happens to be very hard to misplace or lend to your > >friends. Well, if I was smuggling capacitors into Iraq I certainly wouldn't use a thumbdrive! But the above is pretty much the way I see it: 'reglar' folks can't 'figure out' my thumbprint, and couldn't use binoculars or whatever to see my password. More importantly, I don't have a lot of time to try to come up with some soft/hard gadget on my own these days. I pretty much need to be able to BUY something and come up to speed pretty quickly on how to use it. I need it like sex: cheap/dirty/fast. I can't really spend a lot of time worrying about some hyper-evil, hyper-powerful fed (just yet). Aside from the deniability aspect, another "upgrade" would be for me to be able to use my thumbprint as a PGP password. Then this thumbdrive wouldn't be readable via some off-the-shelf pin reader that any helpdesk knucklehead could buy. SO both of these upgrades might be available by fairly simple hacks, or by pestering Trek for them. I wouldn't have to spend a few weeks down in Dexter's laboratory coming up with a completely new, God-proof device. And then as further easy upgrades become available, I'll grab 'em. And who knows? With enough little hacks, some gadgets may eventually morph into inexpensive but quite fierce little black boxes. (As guitarist Robert Fripp has said: "Incremental changes are transformative.") -TD Cheap, fast, easy, and MASSIVELY scalability: that's the real end-run. >From: John Kelsey <kelsey.j(a)ix.netcom.com> >To: Eugen Leitl <eugen(a)leitl.org>, Thomas Shaddack ><shaddack(a)ns.arachne.cz> >CC: Ben Laurie <ben(a)algroup.co.uk>, Tyler Durden ><camera_lumina(a)hotmail.com>, <cypherpunks(a)minder.net> >Subject: Re: Deniable Thumbdrive? >Date: Sun, 26 Jan 2003 22:16:52 -0500 > >At 10:06 PM 1/24/03 +0100, Eugen Leitl wrote: >... >>Frankly, the fingerprint is a lousy secret: you leak it all over the >>place. You can't help it, unless you're wearing gloves all the time. Ditto >>DNA. > >That's generally true of biometrics. Unless taking the measurement is so >intrusive it's obvious when it's taken (e.g., maybe the geometry of your >sinus cavities or some such thing that requires a CAT scan to measure >properly), there's no secret. People constantly seem to get themselves in >trouble trying to use biometrics in a system as though they were secret. > >The best you can usually do is to make it moderately expensive and >difficult to actually copy the biometric in a way that will fool the >reader. But this is really hard. In fact, making special-purpose devices >that are hard to copy or imitate is pretty difficult. It seems enormously >harder to find a hard-to-copy, easy-to-use "token" that just happens to >come free with a normal human body. > >I think the best way to think about any biometric is as a very cheap, >moderately hard to copy identification token. Think of it like a good ID >card that just happens to be very hard to misplace or lend to your friends. > >--John Kelsey, kelsey.j(a)ix.netcom.com _________________________________________________________________ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

1 0

Norton AntiVirus detected and quarantined a virus in a message yo u sent.
by NAVMSE-A1SERV＠a1autotransport.com 27 Jan '03

27 Jan '03

Recipient of the infected attachment: Quotes\Inbox Subject of the message: Little Salesman One or more attachments were quarantined. Attachment href.bat was Quarantined for the following reasons: Virus W32.Klez.H@mm was found.

1 0