December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: The future will be easy to use
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:03 PM 11/28/95 EST, Carl Ellison wrote: >That's true. What the user would have to see is some icon (or, for >text-bound folks, a temporary unique string) until the user chooses and >assigns the appropriate alias. That icon would have no meaning by itself. >It would acquire a meaning by being associated with some message or set of >messages: Better method: Creator of the key names it: Usually after himself or his role: The recipients key database detects and resolves cases where two different keys have identical names in accordance with certification rules. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

2 1

Re: The future will be easy to use
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:30 PM 11/28/95 EST, Carl Ellison wrote: > Of course. This isn't the base case. We would have some keys which I sign > based on my own personal knowledge; things handed to me by people I know; > some possibly published in the paper where the real key owner would see the > claim and be able to contest it. You are making the same erroneous assumption that Phil made when he designed the Web of trust: You assume that it is important and interesting to link key ID's to physical bodies. This is usually not the case: Linking key ID's to home web pages etc is not only easier -- it is also usually more interesting and important. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

3 2

Re: Untitled
by cactus＠hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <199511282257.RAA00774(a)jekyll.piermont.com>, Perry E. Metzger <perry(a)piermont.com> wrote: > >Anonymous writes: >> Is this list archived so that I can try to look stuff up before asking >> stupid questions? > >Yes. Check www.hks.net (I think -- maybe its hks.com) http://www.hks.net/cpunks/index.html It's (still!) in flux, though and hasn't quite gotten those useful search functions yet. I'd flame the maintainer, but... - -- Todd Masco | "life without caution/ the only worth living / love for a man/ cactus(a)hks.net | love for a woman/ love for the facts/ protectless" - A Rich Cactus' Homepage - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBMLwesCoZzwIn1bdtAQHStAF+I0PlsickMkTsVFcbLPMMRPsvap+yD2gR etQjdnAivni4EzlDH+++XfxX+VpkmX8o =DhdR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

PKP patent hearing
by rschlafly＠attmail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hearing on the validity of the public key patents ================================================= On Wed., Dec. 6, 1995, 10:00 am, San Jose Federal Bldg, there will be a hearing on the validity of the Diffie-Hellman, Hellman-Merkle, RSA, and Schnorr patents. There are also some annoying procedural technicalities that are also scheduled to be heard, so we may not get to the patents right away. (antitrust standing, sufficiency of pleadings, admissibility of evidence, etc.) Details: Schlafly v. Public Key Partners & RSA Data Security Case C-94-20512 SW PVT Hon. Spencer Williams At the San Jose federal building, 280 S First St. Ask the US Marshals where Williams' courtroom is while you go thru the airport-style security. Court Clerk: 408/535-5364 The Federal Bldg is in downtown San Jose, between 101, 880, and 280. I will take 280 to SJ, go north on 87, right on the first exit, and park in the first convenient lot or garage. There is some street parking, but the SJ meter maids are very efficient. If you come from the north, you may want to take 87 or the Almaden Expwy. (I get those mixed up.) The judge is used to lawyers wearing suits, so try to wear something that won't appear disrespectful. Roger Schlafly phone: 408-476-3550 CompuServe: 76646,323 US Mail: PO Box 1680, Soquel, CA 95073 USA Internet: rschlafly(a)attmail.com

1 0

Re: The future will be easy to use
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>At 01:03 PM 11/28/95 EST, Carl Ellison wrote: >>>That's true. What the user would have to see is some icon (or, for >>>text-bound folks, a temporary unique string) until the user chooses and >>>assigns the appropriate alias. That icon would have no meaning by itself. >>>It would acquire a meaning by being associated with some message or set of >>>messages: James A. Donald" <jamesd(a)echeque.com> >>Better method: Creator of the key names it At 10:55 AM 11/29/95 EST, Carl Ellison wrote: > it > might also be non-unique, making it worthless as an identifier. Then your database should detect this non uniqueness, and qualify the displayed name with additional information, preferably additional information that helps you address the question of "Is this the same identity who has changed his key, or is it an accidental collision, or is it a malevolent spoof?" --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re:(fwd) Like FV with Crypto ... 'Cept Different ...
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Robert forwarded some propaganda on yet another Internet payment system: > WebTrader can be used as a stand-alone Internet application or in >conjunction with SBT's Pro Series 3.0i accounting software. WebTrader has a >suggested retail price of $1,295. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ They can't be serious. Why would you want to pay $1,300 for a payment system, when you can get an Ecash merchant account for a fraction of what Checkfree is charging? <Insert disclaimer.h> -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

No Privacy Right in US ?
by James M. Cobb 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Friend, Edupage, 28 November 1995, reports: ONLINE ANONYMITY IS ALL RELATIVE America Online has revealed the real name of a subscriber who called herself "Jenny TRR" to a Caribbean resort owner and dive instructor who claim they were defamed in remarks she posted on an AOL bulletin board. AOL gave the subscriber a chance to object to the action, but says she didn't attempt to fight the subpoena. AOL's assis- tant general counsel says the service doesn't disclose infor- mation about electronic mail, which is protected by the Elec- tronic Communications Privacy Act, unless it [ electronic mail ] is part of a criminal investigation. The item cites: Wall Street Journal 24 Nov 95 B1. There's two types of criminal investigations: those of crimes and those that are crimes. Cordially, Jim NOTE: To subscribe to Edupage send a message to: listproc(a)educom.unc.edu and in the body of the message type: subscribe edupage Joe Louis (assuming that your name is Joe Louis; if it's not, substitute your own name).

1 0

Re: The future will be easy to use
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>There is more to this problem than how it is that I trust the key. There >is also what I trust it for. ... >It is hard to see how to record the information about how much I trust the >receipent's systems security. Bingo! This is one of the hard parts of certificate authorities; just what are you attesting to? The American Bar Association has a big document for public review that addresses what this might mean; there are a couple of RFC's that specify CA policies (one from COST in Sweden, I think), and RSA and/or Verisign will give you their policy in hardcopy. In x.509v3 certificates, there is an extensible field where the key-signer can put arbitrary data. The intent is apparently that you put the ISO object-ID (you know, those funny 1.3.2.11.... numbers) of the policy document. There is, of course, no way to interpret the semantics of this electronically. It will be interesting to see how various companies address this issue, for example as they start to support arbitrary CA's in browsers or servers while doing commerce over the web. /r$

2 1

Re: Diskless "Eunuchs" Machines Likely to Fail
by amp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-- [ From: amp * EMC.Ver #2.3 ] -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- From: Timothy C. May \ Internet: (tcmay(a)got.net) TM> I'm skeptical of the "Diskless Internet Box = Telephone" analogy. TM> Folks I know who are not computer-savvy, or who have other things TM> they'd rather be doing, are not likely, as I see it, to buy boxes TM> that still require them to type messages to other people but that TM> don't allow them to download and save the interesting stuff they TM> find. TM> The telephone appealed to those who truly wanted to "just keep TM> talking"...that was the beauty of it. Most people don't know how to TM> touch-type, and typing by hunting-and-pecking is painful and unnatural TM> for most people. i guess it kinda depends upon the epoch in which you grow up. when telephones were first introduced, it didn't seem as natural to people as it does for us today. i've got a copy of the encyclopedia britanica published in 1903 that has some _facinating_ stuff on telecommunications. (i'm in the process of scanning it in. anyone who is interested in it can email me an i'll send it to you when i'm done. 1903=no copyright) i've seen people's typing skills improve remarkedly just through sheer repetition. i think that hunt-and-peck falls to look-and-peck if you find yourself typing to any serious degree rather quickly. TM> A couple of years ago "the computer for the rest of us" was said to be TM> a pen-based Newton-type machine, now it is said to be a diskless, TM> memory-limited "Eunuchs" machine. unless memory becomes _real cheap_ real fast, diskless workstations won't do. i don't see why it would be so hard for those pushing these machines to add enough disk to make it usable and still stay cheap. otoh, i don't think the internet is enough of a pull for people to want machines like this even if they did have local storage. i figure most people want computers to do something more for them than send e-mail. hell, i can send e-mail with a modem and dumb terminal. (been there-done that). i think the thing that will kill this idea will be the simple fact that people expect a computer to do more than what those pushing this 'technology' think they do. TM> I see a greater chance that home game machines, such as the 3DO and Sony TM> PlayStation machines will get Web browsers done for them than I do that TM> people will buy machines that are so limited. good call. i think people will soon be expecting more out of those game machinges than they currently do. i know i sure as hell would given the price. why can't current came machines support telecommunications? the modem i'm using to send this message is running on a dsp chip. i remember playing falcon-at via modem several years ago. it was a hoot even at the bauds available then. at 14.4 or better it would be a real hoot. TM> The only relevance of this whole topic to Cypherpunks TM> is....is....minimal. same here. however, what is happening in the computer business does have _some_ relevance to crypto as we have to see where the market is heading. amp <0003701548(a)mcimail.com> (since 10/31/88) <alan.pugh(a)internetmci.com> PGP Key = 57957C9D PGP FP = FA 02 84 7D 82 57 78 E4 E2 1C 7B 88 62 A6 F9 F7 November 29, 1995 18:18 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMLzqZ4dTfgZXlXydAQFxQgf9HY6aE53ZURtH10XrHlRggYrwK88WXtxf GmF1Vq8Gs7kwf3E71e8hDKCMJ6BDMTded2oYZjx1gmBMImxSczTX721IzbXttAKx H5Nm/hMAV85DdJhxexENY5Do9naf68YAklcloVr3UdTHI+KMeIbTKQdWp//s89Rx E02ohxyHIS/ckDRo89AMzVZWYv9dpP1Ua9VKAWM0uARtCITTDfM3ZvxRE7P7FYky xpnSHP2dobWWNIOl/4CUFmbYoOgi0nkWrEslisKJ67H/oL+8rkdts3qaKqIa/feV gqplKYmDB97diEjjuQCbqYUqGuwnSudrcpUnV4E9DkVOFALgdRC/aA== =9xHp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: The future will be easy to use
by amp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-- [ From: amp * EMC.Ver #2.3 ] -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- From: Jack P. Starrantino \ Internet: (jps(a)monad.semcor.com) JS> I bring nothing cypher-wise. I would be willing to help walk the JS> s/w-engineering dog and to write Motif/X/socket if the chosen platform JS> is UN*X, however. JS> So, from an engineering standpoint, what should the "future" look JS> like? unfortunately, it appears to me that if you _really_ want encryption to be universal, it's gotta be done on windoze, it's gotta be point-n-click and seamless to the mail application. i would prefer it if the masses would use a real operating system, (no o/s wars please. i started in a mini/mainframe environment and simply don't think dos/windoze qualify your mileage may vary), but that just ain't the way it is. would netscape be selling at $130+ if they only wrote for unix? my 2 cents amp <0003701548(a)mcimail.com> (since 10/31/88) <alan.pugh(a)internetmci.com> PGP Key = 57957C9D PGP FP = FA 02 84 7D 82 57 78 E4 E2 1C 7B 88 62 A6 F9 F7 November 29, 1995 17:40 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMLzhU4dTfgZXlXydAQEC1gf+ImAvGk2ceQqCt8E0EC9rlFwrMgEmgkZk E+mBd88dB8TazZn1n7oXasjc0GIjMZZCQYft9gqzuQDLQ6ceK5MpIZuREFWJq6+U nyvq/ivkiGwB4ubZ48xG4EJS8094C+Xj4fG/zgtNVsQr0O6ln/6Q/+bt/ciqP9PZ 4gjP4VYpmiFEQ3OGW/oYevmAxdvYYRoWEfjUwmG8tHKORWo9yfDs9yJHHYo3StmX SqM47v2F3D1r5JBgdrrIdOElwJHchU31kwk7trDs0/Ne7HWDdgIsX2MoDCW/Dwdt SaTC3B5TVpz6G/+FvxUSRWgY5vU1sqnCT5WogqTfJRP5ohz5rt6nqQ== =IB4/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Microsoft weak encryption
by Joel McNamara 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Peter Gutmann has an interesting article in sci.crypt, demonstrating how weak Microsoft's encryption is with basic access control in Windows for Workgroups (I'm assuming Win95 uses the same algorithm). Essentially, he shows how a 32-bit key is created to be passed to RC4 for encrypting .PWL files. I think a t-shirt is definitely in order for this. Anyone up for writing some bruting code? Joel

4 3

Re: Encrypted Email
by James M. Cobb 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Connie, On 11 27 95 you asked Can anybody briefly summarize for me some options for encrypting email that are secure? I know about PGP but I need something for (my environment) with an easy to use interface (PC-Windows) - for use by people who really aren't very computer literate. The following item from 11 27 95 Computerworld 58 may be helpful: CommTouch Software, Inc. in San Mateo, Calif., announced a secure Internet E-mail package called Pronto Secure. It allows connected and disconnected users to send and encrypt Internet mail. It supports many Internet security protocols, such as Power One-Time Pad, Pretty Good Privacy, Privacy Enhanced Mail, Secure Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (S / MIME) and MIME Object Security Services. Pronto Secure, which will ship in March, will require users to replace their existing Internet mail systems.... Comm- Touch plans to ship by mid-1996 a security module that is Messaging Application Programming Interface-compliant and works with a user's existing mail [system]. At p 66 of the same issue, there's a listing of "Recent in- formation security product announcements." CommTouch is listed there; its Internet address is micheleb(a)ipri.com and a single copy of Pronto Secure is US $299 list. ipri.com = InterActive Public Relations, Inc in 'Frisco. Cordially, Jim

1 0

WAY_lad
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

11-29-95. FiTi: "Information highway needs rules of the road, says report." Pointing out the possibility of technical incompatibilities and trade friction if companies are treated differently in different markets, the report outlines the case for a "global regulator" within the structure of the new World Trade Organisation. It points out that issues such as intellectual property rights, encryption and government control on cross-ownership have global rather than national aspects. "Encryption, for example, raises tricky and emotive issues connected with organised crime and national security and cannot be treated simply as a business problem." No revolution for software [Editorial] Today's software market is the way it is not because of some evil conspiracy in Seattle, Microsoft's home town, but because it meets most consumers' interests most of the time. The power to set standards follows from that success. Changing technology widens the range of possible market structures, but does not affect customers' underlying needs and preferences. In the battle between the technologically possible and the economically attractive, economics always wins. WAY_lad (7 kb) FiTi on-line at <www.ft.com> for waylaying top article.

1 0

NOH_ide
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

11-29-95. Washrag: "Postal Service Awards Contracts to Develop Computer Kiosks." The Postal Service predicted "more than 10,000" kiosks could be installed in post offices, libraries and shopping malls "within the next few years." The Postal Service is the lead government agency on the project, one of several administration initiatives designed to provide the public with computer access to government information. "CIA, Pentagon Back NIMA 'Concept' Combining Spy Satellite Photo Units." The Pentagon and the CIA announced an agreement yesterday endorsing the "concept" of consolidating eight defense and intelligence agencies -- those responsible for managing spy satellite photos and related tasks -- into a new National Imagery and Mapping Agency. NOH_ide (10 kb)

1 0

Re: key for Alice as promised (not)
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > >Can you imagine?? I'm simply not willing to fool myself into thinking > > >that I ahve security by posting a key and using PGP. > > > > Unless you can post some proof that PGP is insecure, stop insisting it is. > > PGP is really not the issue. The issue is more my security and the > environment that I use PGP in. I don't have a trusted machine to run PGP > on. Anyone who wants to can come up to machine and copy my secret keyring > or they can even watch me typing my password in. Threat, please?? Do people often stand over your shoulder as you type? Enter your office, point guns at you, and take a backup of your entire computer? Have you considered putting the secret keyring on a floppy and locking it in your desk/safe when you're not actually in the office? (Or home..) > So, I don't fool myself, and I don't use PGP, except for things like > exchanging a one-time pad with someone when I've already sent the message > out across another delivery mechanism, like on a floppy delivered my > courier. I don't follow. You're claiming that PGP is good enough to transfer OTPads, but not good enough to sign pseudononymous messages? Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Re: GOST for sale
by fluffy＠shout.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What I wonder about is why anyone would use the Algorithm that the NSA is probably best at breaking. Breaking GOST was probably their number one project for years, and I would suspect that they have done it. chris

2 1

Re: SKIP Source Release is out!
by smithmi＠dev.prodigy.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perry Metzger writes: >Anyone who'd like to help me put the sources to the NRL IPsec + IPv6 >implementation up for FTP is invited to get in touch. It will runs on >4.4BSD machines (i.e. BSDI, NetBSD, FreeBSD, etc) and should be >pretty portable to other similar Berkeley based machines. What licensing requirements exist for people who might want to use this code in their products? In particular, does one need to obtain any licensing from RSA or Cylink? --Michael Smith smithmi(a)dev.prodigy.com

2 1

Re: The future will be easy to use (fwd)
by Rev. Mark Grant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 28 Nov 1995, Patiwat Panurach wrote: > I feel sad when they say that the market for <1000 $ machines is nill, I > had so much fun and learned so much from my old machines. Personally, I just bought a 486/66 laptop, which would have cost almost $1000 with 170 MB hard disk, 4 MB of RAM and Linux (I paid a couple of hundred extra for a 500 MB disk)... I could have got a Pentium desktop for the same price if I'd wanted one. So I don't see that there's really a great advantage to a $ 500 diskless computer (and having worked on Sun 3/50s in the past, I know about all the disadvantages). ObCrypto/Security: My landlord bought himself a computer a couple of weeks ago after he'd lived without them for over forty years, and has been enthusing about how easy it makes it for him to do his accounts. He just read about these diskless machines in a magazine, and his first reaction was that there was no way he'd keep his accounts information on a remote server. Obviously people *are* more privacy-aware than they're often given credit for. Mark

1 0

ecash casino
by sameer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Any enterprising cypherpunks in gambling-friendly jurisdictions interested? I figure it would make ecash take off.. and you'd get rich. -- sameer Voice: 510-601-9777 Community ConneXion FAX: 510-601-9734 The Internet Privacy Provider Dialin: 510-658-6376 http://www.c2.org/ (or login as "guest") sameer(a)c2.org

6 6

Re: Elliptic curves, patent status?
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:16 PM 11/28/95 -0400, Michael Smith wrote: > > > I'm unclear about the patent status of elliptic curve > > > systems. Are they covered by the Diffie-Hellman patent? > > > That is, is the lnguage of this patent broad enough to > > > cover _all_ public-key systems, regardless of their > > > mathematical basis? On Mon, 27 Nov 1995 23:16:10 -0800 jamesd(a)echeque.com wrote: > > No, but RSA will litigate you with the objective of > > inflicting extravagant legal costs regardless. At 08:13 AM 11/29/95 EST, Dan Bailey wrote: > Does the patent create any headaches for elliptic curve research or > publishing elliptic curve papers, or just for new products? Patents do not prohibit research -- Yet. Patent law continues to be extravagantly re interpreted from time to time, in a way that continually increases the power of the patent office and the power of the courts, but this creativity has not yet collided drastically with freedom of speech. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: The future will be easy to use
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>James A. Donald writes >> Specs, anyone? > > I suggest a few requirements: > > Store the >keys, and information about the keys in a *real* database > ... At 09:31 AM 11/29/95 -0500, Jack P. Starrantino wrote: > Is this worth the complexity/cost? I'd have thought that the amount of > data involved would be small enough that index hashing would be > overkill, and I can't think of any operations that would require a full > up db engine. I think you envisage communicating with a few other revolutionaries, drug trafficers, etc, whereas I envisage a future where every man is his own bank and his own credit rating agency. More immediately, any extension to the web of trust to enable it to function for anything more interesting and important than logical-to-physical identity (and who gives a tinkers damn about logical-to-physical identity) will require a real database, or will be painful without a real database. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: The future will be easy to use
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:20 AM 11/30/95 -0500, amp wrote: >unfortunately, it appears to me that if you _really_ want encryption >to be universal, it's gotta be done on windoze, it's gotta be >point-n-click and seamless to the mail application. Which, at present, means it's gotta be done on Pegasus. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: (cpx) Re:(fwd) Like FV with Crypto ... 'Cept Different ...
by Andrew Barrett/CheckFree Corporation 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Lucky writes (quoting propaganda forwarded to Punks by Robert): >> WebTrader can be used as a stand-alone Internet application or in >>conjunction with SBT's Pro Series 3.0i accounting software. WebTrader has a >>suggested retail price of $1,295. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >They can't be serious. Why would you want to pay $1,300 for a payment >system, when you can get an Ecash merchant account for a fraction of what >Checkfree is charging? Not all merchants wishing to transact on the Web are as knowledgeable or sophisticated as the Punks on the different options. The offering includes a Web presence and payment processing, hassle free. No energy expenditure required. No need to develop an instant competency in electronic commerce. If a prospective web merchant has neither in place, I imagine the cost might be attractive. I also imagine that, like any other business in the world, SBT charges what they think the market will bear. Please note that CheckFree did not price the offering - they do the CC processing for SBT at some agreed upon cost to SBT. SBT sets the price for the offering in order to recover that cost, as well as their own, and establish some sort of margin. And by the way, I had nothing to do with project, so I beg you not to direct flames thisaway, should any decide flames are called for. Hey man, I just work here.... :) AJ.

1 0

NRL IPsec/IPv6 code
by Perry E. Metzger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An early version of NRL's 4.4BSDlite based IPsec/IPv6 implementation is up on ftp.c2.org in an appropriately export controlled directory. This isn't an official distribution -- I'm just putting up the code I got because there has been some interest in it. I've been hacking it in to NetBSD of late. Perry

1 0

Re: Who has the right to read your e-mail? Old hash, but I need to ask.
by John A. Limpert 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:58 AM 11/28/95 -0600, (Bill) wrote: >Who has the right to read your personal e-mail. >E-mail created at work? >E-mail downdloaded at work? >E-mail stored on a PC at work? The December 1995 issue of Communications of the ACM (CACM) has several articles on e-mail privacy. Managing User Perceptions of Email Privacy Suzanne P. Weisband and Bruce A. Reinig The Ethical and Legal Quandary of Email Privacy Janice C. Sipior and Burke T. Ward -- John A. Limpert johnl(a)Radix.Net

1 0