December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Exploring (RSA (001)
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:39 PM 8/29/96 -0400, Scottauge(a)aol.com wrote: >Exploring Rivest, Shamir, Adelman algorithm, but hoping someone out there is >interested in very large number manipulations. > >... > >Other than using Mathematica or Maple, I would like to use C or perferrably >C++. > >Just some basics such as multiplication, addition, subtraction, division, >mod, etc over the Z set. I have been collecting information about crypto libraries for the Mac Crypto conference next week. Here is what a quick AltaVista search came up with. Since you want C++, I would particularly look at Wei Dai's Crypto++ library. If anyone has other strongly recommended libraries, please let me know. Crypto Libraries http://www.clark.net/pub/cme/ has source for MD5 http://www.homeport.org/~adam/crypto/ for a comparison of crypto libraries http://www.enter.net/~chronos/cryptolog1.html has a collection of links to crypto resources http://www.openmarket.com/techinfo/applied.htm - Internet Locations for Materials on the Disks for Applied Cryptography Crypto++ in C++ by Wei Dai. - Has been tested under Codewarrior 2.0. ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/README - in the USA Cryptolib in C by Jack Lacy - No Mac version, C, Sparc, SGI, i486 assembler To obtain, send email to cryptolib(a)research.att.com with a statement of the following form: "I am a U.S. or Canadian citizen or a legal permanent resident of the U.S. and am aware that some parts of CryptoLib may be restricted under United States Export regulations. I have read and understand the CryptoLib license." Name: Location: E-mail: Are you licensed to use the RSA patent? If yes, give name of licensed organization: RSAref 2.0, by RSA Data Security Inc. - Tested with Mac ftp://ftp.rsa.com:/rsaref/README - In the USA http://www.consensus.com/RSAREF/rsaref_toc.html - in the USA SSLeay in C by Eric Young - C, gcc and system cc for Solaris 2.[34] (sparc and x86), SunOS 4.1.3, DGUX, OSF1 Alpha, HPUX 9, AIX 3.5, IRIX 5.[23], LINUX, NeXT (intel) ftp://ftp.psy.uq.oz.au/pub/Crypto/SSL/ The Systemics Cryptix Cryptography Library in Java or Perl by Gary Howland - Java on Win95, WinNT, Solaris, Linux, Irix. http://www.systemics.com/software/ The Cryptlib free Encryption Library in C by Peter Gutmann - Unix, DOS, windows (16 & 32 bit DLL available), Amiga http://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/cryptlib.html ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Cave ab homine unius libri | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | [Beware the man of one | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | book] - Anonymous Latin | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Encryption
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It appears to me that PGP encryption et al is really 1940's technology, albeit fancied up by 1990's computers. Why use keys and cyphers when all you should have to do is maximize the randomization of bits in a script? Big computers should not be able to de-randomize such encoding, since the permutations/combinations would be astronomical after just a half-dozen or so random number initializations, as well as the fact that the bits are relatively undifferentiated (just ones and zeros) and are not maintained with their original bytes, words, paragraphs, or pages? DALE THORN ON CRYPTOGRAPHY: ABSTRACT 23 August 1996 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Algorithm: Select bit-groups of random length from the file until the file is completely processed. Shuffle the bits in each group randomly and save each group back to the file. Repeat if needed using different key-strings for each successive encryption, for increased security. "If a high-speed computer could perform 'a trillion processor ops per second', and it took just one millionth of a second to 'crack' my test file on such a machine (i.e., a million ops), it would still require 10^36 ops to 'crack' 6 consecutive encodings, which translates to 10^24 seconds, or 3 x 10^16 years." "Due to the nature of compounded bit-shuffling, no algorithm ever developed or proposed could 'crack' multi-pass encoding with a single decryption pass. In plain English, if a file were encoded six times (in six passes, with six different password phrases), you'd have to decode all six passes before you would know whether even the first decryption pass was successful or not." "Since each byte in the encrypted file may contain bits from other 'original' bytes, multi-pass encoding moves you rapidly in the direction of true-random distribution of the source bits (note the 'Intelligent User' comment below)." "My desktop computer (a 90 mhz Pentium) can encrypt a 12 kb file in less than one second (in a single pass) using 'C', and takes less than two seconds with the PDQ version of Basic I use, hence, the six passes that I normally perform on such a file require nine seconds or less total computer time." "One of the difficulties in breaking this type of encryption (other than the numerical time factors) is the fact that you might have to deal with several unknown random number generators from different compiled executable programs. Add to this another factor, the 'Intelligent User' who adds their own tweaks to the source code. The tweak is added, the program is compiled, the file(s) are encrypted, and then the modified source code is destroyed along with the executable file. This type of modification, together with the fact that the individual bits in the encrypted text file are scattered very effectively in normal encoding, yields the ultimate level of security for concerned persons." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ A SIMPLIFIED EXAMPLE FOR ENCRYPTION/DECRYPTION ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ We're going to encrypt the following 25-character text string: when_it_rains_it's_a_bath The unencrypted string (in bit form, least significant bit at left) is: 11101110000101101010011001110110111110101001011000 10111011111010010011101000011010010110011101101100 11101111101010010110001011101110010011001110111110 10100001101111101001000110100001100010111000010110 We now generate 200 random numbers, and sort them in ascending order. The following list represents the original physical positions of the numbers, and we move the bits as shown above from these positions in the 25-byte text string to bit positions 0, 1, 2, etc. (move bit #4 to the first position, move bit #179 to the second position, etc.). 4 179 67 127 46 76 136 74 92 54 88 121 134 192 77 36 47 26 45 144 111 141 150 58 110 12 94 13 161 177 18 155 153 175 91 95 86 195 79 20 23 172 51 96 126 93 64 3 125 81 166 131 71 63 170 78 140 87 107 147 15 35 10 168 33 149 189 118 42 90 6 85 120 68 102 173 103 104 138 83 53 43 182 139 29 60 146 184 176 114 123 44 191 56 70 185 73 137 148 199 196 27 65 62 37 181 28 0 106 158 100 1 190 2 25 194 8 30 174 101 105 135 162 61 75 32 115 142 14 49 186 50 183 21 119 52 69 99 11 89 72 34 98 188 82 17 163 9 167 109 113 171 38 157 84 5 59 178 22 57 151 122 160 130 39 116 133 156 164 66 159 40 124 193 108 180 152 41 97 7 197 145 132 169 55 16 24 165 198 112 19 129 187 31 154 48 80 128 117 143 The text string (in bit form) following the first encryption is now: 10001010010000110111011110111010001011000001110010 10000110110100101101110111010111101110100001100110 01110101111111100111101001111011010110111101001000 00110110110111001010011010101011010100110100001110 At this point, it's obvious (with a sufficient length of text to analyze) that we could restore the original text using an algorithm equivalent to the pseudo- random number generator we used above. However, we're going to encrypt again: Generate another 200 random numbers and sort them in ascending order. The following list represents the original physical positions of the numbers, so move the bits the same way we moved them above (move bit #41 to the first position, move bit #9 to the second position, etc.). 41 9 38 86 67 108 8 99 157 69 91 6 15 150 28 192 56 98 54 72 145 19 48 64 183 147 102 7 138 177 167 29 164 176 97 82 83 168 181 95 185 22 21 30 93 182 109 39 197 14 96 40 84 137 155 143 16 126 58 33 149 144 140 159 88 189 4 190 153 90 68 114 129 45 53 112 119 125 127 124 20 141 142 77 188 115 175 105 60 194 106 80 31 49 51 116 1 113 151 94 2 199 161 146 71 101 62 66 154 166 3 128 5 118 10 61 110 165 43 122 42 47 184 46 133 85 74 173 36 44 111 171 89 35 163 136 162 198 17 23 78 152 121 37 12 186 55 169 103 24 34 26 178 87 81 123 132 195 65 11 174 191 193 172 18 25 196 107 120 187 27 100 180 134 59 135 179 57 148 0 63 13 158 130 70 131 117 139 32 104 92 170 50 76 73 79 75 160 52 156 The text string (in bit form) following the second encryption is now: 01011100010110101100011110101000011101101111101011 00101101100011111010010101111001011001000100000101 00111101010101011011000011101111001111110101001011 11101000001101101110101011000100111111000010111001 Now that we've doubly-encrypted the text string, try to describe an algorithm that will restore the original string in a single decryption step, i.e., move directly from the last-encoded text to the original text without the need for an intermediate decryption step. Text parsers and lexical analyzers won't do you any good in intermediate steps as described above, since all intermediate encodings will be garbage text (not only will the bits in each character be scrambled, but bits will be scrambled across characters, words, and paragraphs as well. Multi-step decryption could be facilitated where text can be analyzed a few characters or words at a time, assuming the analysis engine could determine from where to get the appropriate bits when processing a large text stream. In the above examples of bit-level encryption, the individual bits migrate to various places in the text string rather than remain within each set of eight bits which DOS arbitrarily designates as character bytes. Therefore, the ONLY tenable (but not necessarily viable) methods for decoding such text are: 1. Try rearranging the bits randomly. The disadvantages are: a. You could come up with "Mary had a little lamb...", etc., given that the bits are minimally differentiated (just ones and zeros). b. Decryption would require eons of time (an exponential factor of the number of bits processed, divided by the cycle time of the computer). 2. Decrypt the text one step at a time, in the reverse order of the encryption steps. The disadvantages are: a. You can't be sure you've decrypted any step correctly until decryption is completed (until all steps are performed and the text is readable). b. Passwords/phrases, algorithms, code routines, and even whole programs might change from step to step, thereby invalidating any 'single-pass' decryption scheme that's likely to be proposed.

4 3

Re: Nuke Singapore Back into the Stone Age
by Charley Sparks 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: tcmay(a)got.net, cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Fri Aug 30 05:45:44 1996 We could launch a mail-bomb campaign.. I am looking for the source for a mail bomb program. WinTel would be nice but I could use Linux -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCXAwUBMia4SeJ+JZd/Y4yVAQGlpgQMCuPtwANs1N4JbQDyUsNEpib2rR2CNrsY lRIQ1gVNHNZhptnDaHxu69R0dLhBF/hjbnQwhINGYZcuCVfE7kxRdgwVVmU+G7Bw ods0qCVe2CFddD0cxxQ8mdURnnTQGkN2nz4wA2zx1DHN/pKqzrCYxlLLllzGb+MH 50BM7K2Wj6BShQ== =wB2W -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: see you guys later
by Charley Sparks 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You might want to reconsider the 2x Lithium.... too much really does make you feel like shit ! Actually the lobotimizing effects of stellazine (sp) aren't too bad for a short time

1 0

Ian's Linux Filesystem Patches
by mixmaster＠remail.obscura.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I installed Ian's filesystem patches for Linux 2.0.11, and then patched the kernel up to 2.0.15. Unfortunately I soon realized that the entire system grinds to a halt as the kernel performs cryptographic operations on a block of data. I lack enough crypto expertise to fix this, but I believe it just needs to be made preemptable, however that works. The filesystem patch, while a definite step in the right direction, is all but useless in its present form. For an idea of what I'm talking about, kill your turbo switch, or install on a slow machine so that this is a bit more noticable. Users may want to kill their internal chip cache. Patch the kernel up to 2.0.15, and install the kernel. Setup the loopback device as the README file states. Then make a filesystem on that device. The system will slow to a halt about the time that it actually needs to write some data to the filesystem, probably during the superblock write in mke2fs. Then, mount the filesystem and try to write a large block of data to the device. Again, it dies. This will need to be fixed if everyone wants to install such a patch into their kernel to reduce suspicion, or if it is to be included as standard in the kernel source tree. I would fix this if I knew more about the way the kernel is set up. I do fear making it preemptable may open a large can of worms, at which point it may be more useful to implement this in userspace, maybe by the creation of a seperate entry in the device hierarchy.

1 0

Re: Errors-To: for cypherpunks
by droelke＠rdxsunhost.aud.alcatel.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Hi, > > Whoever is in charge of maintaining this mailnig list, PLEASE > add header > > Errors-To: cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com > > I am flooded by stupid "Mailbox is full" messages from Banyan and > CC-mail gateways. > > - Igor. > While an Errors-To: field can't hurt, it shouldn't be needed. The problem is *broken* gateways. There are plenty of properly set up and running Banyan and CC-mail gateways, we just need to harass the admins into running the broken ones properly. Let me quote from "scripture" (RFC-822) below in a typical message I send to such idiots. This particular person had neither the use Sender: set up correctly, or a postmaster address. <sigh> ----- included message ---- Your SMTP to Banyan gateway is broken and missing a postmaster address. I sent a message to cypherpunks(a)toad.com, to which someone at your site is apparently subscribed. The listserver at toad.com correctly puts a "Sender:" field in the header of all outgoing messages, and according to RFC-822 all SMTP handleing agents must send any bounces to that address. RFC-822 specifically states (starting at line #1430 in rfc-822.txt) 4.4.4. AUTOMATIC USE OF FROM / SENDER / REPLY-TO For systems which automatically generate address lists for replies to messages, the following recommendations are made: o The "Sender" field mailbox should be sent notices of any problems in transport or delivery of the original messages. If there is no "Sender" field, then the "From" field mailbox should be used. Also, RFC-822 states that you must have an address of postmaster that people can send email to (starting at line #2046 in rfc-822.txt) 6.3. RESERVED ADDRESS It often is necessary to send mail to a site, without know- ing any of its valid addresses. For example, there may be mail system dysfunctions, or a user may wish to find out a person's correct address, at that site. This standard specifies a single, reserved mailbox address (local-part) which is to be valid at each site. Mail sent to that address is to be routed to a person responsible for the site's mail system or to a person with responsibility for general site operation. The name of the reserved local-part address is: Postmaster so that "Postmaster@domain" is required to be valid. Note: This reserved local-part must be matched without sensi- tivity to alphabetic case, so that "POSTMASTER", "postmas- ter", and even "poStmASteR" is to be accepted. So, please fix your gateway, or contact Banyan on how to correctly configure it. Thank-you, ----- end included message ---- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Dan Oelke Alcatel Network Systems droelke(a)aud.alcatel.com Richardson, TX

1 0

Reprogramming Beepers?
by William F. Towey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know how to reprogram a beeper to a new number. Please Help Brendan

1 0

Re: Selling your sole to DOJ ...err, devil Zimmermann?
by Marc J. Wohler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:20 AM 8/30/96 GMT, attila(a)primenet.com ranted: > > Zimmermann is a political flake, a warmed over 60s > liberal. > <snip> > I would find it difficult, despite his apparent altruism > and left-over 60s need for redress, to believe that > Zimmermann's coding of PGP was other than a commercial > stepping stone (judging from both his prior and later > actions); and, > I guess that according to the Code of Attila, us left over 60's liberals are prohibited from any commercial commerce. mjw

1 0

Re: Why I Pay Too Much in Taxes
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Better late than never: At 08:43 AM 5/7/96 -0400, Clay Olbon II wrote: >There are a couple of main reasons that the poor spend more than their >reported income. First, many of the elderly are included in the "poorest >20%", since this is based on income alone and not net worth. Many of the >elderly are spending down their retirement savings. Also students living on loans, grants, and gifts. Also members of the retail pharmaceutical trade living on their markup. >Another factor, of >course, is that welfare, food stamps, free/subsidized housing and other >transfer payments are not included in income calculations. I have seen >reports that show that in many states, this is equivalent to a full-time >job paying ~$9/hr. The Cato Institute Study. AFDC+Food Stamps+Housing Assistance+Medicaid+WIC = a fair chunk of change when compared to the taxed earnings from work. Equivalent to the take-home pay from a $16/hour job in NYC (mostly because of health insurance). The commies complained that the study didn't account for the fact that the working poor can also get food stamps and Earned Income Tax Credit. Of course, if you just establish the value of welfare benefits, you are doing a lot. >Not showing these as income helps keep the "official" >poverty rate high. I'm not sure if social security is included in income >calculations for "poverty rate" purposes, anyone know? The poverty rate calculations (how many people below the poverty level?) do not include SS or welfare cash or non-cash benefits. Thus people are not as poor as claimed even ignoring unreported income from legal and illegal employment. Adding everything up, we find that poor households spend twice what they officially report taking in. Hardly surprising since if one has a low income, one unreported job in the household can double that income. It is also likely that a higher proportion of the income and assets of the poor are not recorded (as against the rich) because most of the assets are personalty rather than realty and they are less likely to be audited, etc. So the level of income and asset inequality in America is less than you will have heard. DCF

1 0

Re: Intel to rule the basic crypto engine market?
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:27 PM 8/29/96 -0800, jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> wrote: >The one kind of standardization in the crypto market that we truly need, >NOW, is a standard format/protocol so that crypto telephones from all >manufacturers can talk to each other. The last thing we need is a >tower-of-Babel situation, which would be even worse than the VHS/Beta wars >of 20-10 years ago. I think it'll be a while before we're at that point - there's too much experimenting to do, and too many different options of crypto and voice compression that are useful in different situations. Simple issues like Internet vs. modem vs. frame relay vs. cellphone make a radical difference in performance. A standardized _option_negotiation_ method would be valuable; that would at least let systems figure out if they can talk as well as exchanging keys. You can use PGPtalk if you want a single standard program that will often work - for now the best approach for non-hardware-based systems is probably to have several popular encrypted phone programs, and negotiate by voice which ones to use :-) The non-crypto-internet-phone business has been in a similar bind, but Intel's announcement that H.323 shall be the One True Standard may get enough support to cut through that. Is there some hook in their system that could make it easy to add encryption, or do we need to design Internet-Crypto-Phones that recycle the H.323 from Intel but add several layers of wrapper around them? (ITU standards being what they are, I haven't yet found an on-line source of the document, and the ITU itself has a badly organized web site that lets you order paper copies of the documents by mailing paper Swiss Francs to them, which is annoying. (It could at least do SSL web forms and Visa cards or something.) And Intel's free reference implementation needs Win95, which I'm not running.) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Reassign Authority!

1 0

Re: Encryption (shuffling proposal)
by peter.allan＠aeat.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> DALE THORN ON CRYPTOGRAPHY: (edited for brevity) > It appears to me that PGP encryption et al is really 1940's technology, > albeit fancied up by 1990's computers. Why use keys and cyphers when > all you should have to do is maximize the randomization of bits in a > script? > Algorithm: Select bit-groups of random length from the file until the file is > completely processed. Shuffle the bits in each group randomly and > save each group back to the file. Repeat if needed using different > key-strings for each successive encryption, for increased security. > "Due to the nature of compounded bit-shuffling, no algorithm ever developed > or proposed could 'crack' multi-pass encoding with a single decryption pass. You are producing a permutation table. Repeat passes just get you a new table, no different in principle. > [Time calc for 12kb file....] > "One of the difficulties in breaking this type of encryption (other than the > numerical time factors) is the fact that you might have to deal with several > unknown random number generators from different compiled executable programs. > Add to this another factor, the 'Intelligent User' who adds their own tweaks > to the source code. The tweak is added, the program is compiled, the file(s) > are encrypted, and then the modified source code is destroyed along with the > executable file. But the internet worm of 1988 was captured, decompiled and analysed in days. Self-modifying viruses get analysed (by single stepping). Your programs will go the same way as soon as there is (financial ?) motivation. So the users have to know the algorithms, including "tweaks" in order to communicate ? Not the most convenient key. > EXAMPLE when_it_rains_it's_a_bath (least significant bit at left): > 11101110000101101010011001110110111110101001011000 > 10111011111010010011101000011010010110011101101100 > 11101111101010010110001011101110010011001110111110 > 10100001101111101001000110100001100010111000010110 becomes > 01011100010110101100011110101000011101101111101011 > 00101101100011111010010101111001011001000100000101 > 00111101010101011011000011101111001111110101001011 > 11101000001101101110101011000100111111000010111001 >From this known plaintext-cyphertext pair the enemy can list all the possible sources and destinations of each bit. EG first bit of plaintext (position 0, value 1) can move to 1,3,4,5,....,199 second bit of plaintext (position 1, value 1) can move to 1,3,4,5,....,199 Given a number of pairs of the same length, produced with the same key details each of these lists of possibilities shrinks by around half. Your 12kb file is well on the way to being cracked after 4+10+3=17 pairs are discovered. If the intention is never to reuse keys, then this scheme gets you nothing you couldn't have with a normal stream cipher. And they, don't reveal the number of 1-bits and 0-bits in the message. Different messages will be recognisable different. A chosen plaintext attack (where these are possible) becomes a breeze. > b. Passwords/phrases, algorithms, code routines, and even whole programs > might change from step to step, thereby invalidating any 'single-pass' > decryption scheme that's likely to be proposed. How are the above remarks invalidated ? I don't want to stifle creativity. If you keep thinking you may come up with a good idea. But this isn't it. I encourage you to read about existing systems. There have been bright people before, and things are done (or not done) for a reason. -- Peter Allan peter.allan(a)aeat.co.uk

1 0

Re: Encryption
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:40 PM 8/30/96 +0200, Germano Caronni <caronni(a)tik.ee.ethz.ch> wrote: >Dale Thorn wrote: >> Algorithm: Select bit-groups of random length from the file until the file is >> completely processed. Shuffle the bits in each group randomly and >> save each group back to the file. Repeat if needed using different >> key-strings for each successive encryption, for increased security. >Very nice. There are just two little issues: >a) How do you generate the random bytes? >b) How do you transmit them to the other side, without having a secure channel? I agree. This method can be looked at as two parts: 1) Generate a stream of random numbers 2) Use the stream to transform the plaintext into cyphertext by shuffling. Generating a stream of random numbers can be done by cryptographically strong methods, or by physical methods such as throwing dice or counting gamma rays, or by cryptographically weak methods such as using the RANDOM function provided by your BASIC compiler. If you're using strong crypto, the method is strong if the transform is strong. If you're using physical randomness, that's also true, and you'll definitely need to use agents with briefcases handcuffed to their arms to haul the randoms around, which doesn't gain you much operational security, since the random stream needs to be longer than the plaintext. If you're using weak crypto, we can use those fast computers you're so impressed with to try all 32767 or 2**32 random streams on your input to see what works - brute force isn't that hard when you've got a small keyspace, even if you don't take advantage of the special forms (e.g. there are good methods for reversing linear congruential multiplicative generators.) How long a stream of random numbers do you need to do the transform? And how secure _is_ the transform? For a simple XOR, you know that each bit in the stream will diddle one bit in the plaintext, so you're fine (as long as you only use the random stream once.) But for your shuffling method, you'd have to shuffle much longer to make sure that the "random" selection of bitgroups hits all the bits, and hits them often enough that adjacent bits will be separated. For instance, if your message is a 3000-word set of instructions to your fellow plotters, you need to be sure that the phrases "gunpowder", "Parliament", and "November 5th" get shredded, not merely moved to different places in the document. This takes much longer than deterministic methods, and risks not being as good. There are some advantages with the shuffling method - assuming you've cranked the system long enough to really shred everything, it's hard to take cyphertext and reconstruct plaintext, and brute force is a bit more work than with a deterministic method that uses one pass. But you can get that effect by using stronger methods, such as the des | tran | des | tran | des where "tran" is a simple key-or-input-driven shuffle that doesn't need to be totally strong. (Is Carl Ellison the person who proposed this? I've forgotten.) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Reassign Authority!

1 0

Helsingius shuts down anon.penet.fi server in Finland (fwd)
by Z.B. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This just came over the fight-censorship list. --- Zach Babayco zachb(a)netcom.com <----- finger for PGP public key ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:11:56 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Cc: azeem(a)dial.pipex.com, jseiger(a)cdt.org Subject: Helsingius shuts down anon.penet.fi server in Finland This is a sad day in the history of the Net. Hundreds of thousands of people had accounts on Julf's pseudonmyous server and many netizens relied on it daily to preserve their privacy online. (Unlike cypherpunk remailers, it's not truly anonymous since Julf keeps records of what anon id maps to what email address.) From Azeem's report and the press release below, Julf's move seems to be in response to a Finnish court's preliminary decision that the privacy remailers could be violated by court order -- something the Scientologists have been pushing. Still, I'd be surprised if Julf's decision wasn't prompted in part by the hideous London Observer article that falsely accused him of being a middleman in the distribution of child porn -- check out a scan of the Sunday cover at: http://scallywag.com/ -Declan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 17:11:51 +0100 From: Azeem Azhar <azeem(a)dial.pipex.com> To: azeem(a)ivision.co.uk Subject: [ALERT] Penet is dead Hello all, I just got off the phone with Johann Helsingius who runs the anon.penet.fi anonymous e-mail service. 1. He has decided to close the service. 2. This is not related to the article in The Observer. It is, in fact, due to a decision of a lower Finnish court on petition from the Church of Scientology. Penet went to court last week and made the decision today. The implication of the decision is that e-mail over the Internet is not protect by the usual Finnish privacy laws. 3. The server is currently down while Julf re-writes the software. Once it runs again, it will be phased out for private use, but groups such as the Samaritans and human rights agencies should be able to use it. 4. They are appealing against the decision. 5. Julf expects that revisions in Finnish law to provide a safe legal status for anonymous remailers will be in place at the earliest in Spring next year. 6. Once again: this is unrelated to The Observer's scandalous reporting. Your faithful furry friend, Azeem ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 17:15:41 +0100 From: Azeem Azhar <azeem(a)dial.pipex.com> To: azeem(a)ivision.co.uk Subject: [ALERT} Penet is dead (correction) Sorry . . . a slight error: > 2. This is not related to the article in The Observer. It is, in fact, > due to a decision of a lower Finnish court on petition from the Church > of Scientology. Penet went to court last week and made the decision > today. The implication of the decision is that e-mail over the Internet > is not protect by the usual Finnish privacy laws. The implication of the court's decision (rather than Penet's to shut the server) is that e-mail over the Internet is not protected by the usual Finnish privacy laws. Sorry! -- [Julf's press release. -Declan] PRESS RELEASE 30.8.1996 Johan Helsingius closes his Internet remailer Johan Helsingius from Helsinki has decided to close his Internet remailer. The so-called anonymous remailer is the most popular remailer in the world, with over half a million users. "I will close down the remailer for the time being because the legal issues governing the whole Internet in Finland are yet undefined. The legal protection of the users needs to be clarified. At the moment the privacy of Internet messages is judicially unclear." The idea of an anonymous remailer is to protect the confidentiality of itís usersí identity. The remailer itself does not store messages but serves as a channel for message transmission. The remailer forwards messages without the identity of the original sender. Finland is one of the leading countries in Internet usage. Therefore all decisions and changes made in Finland arouse wide international interest. "I have developed and maintained the remailer in my free time for over three years now. It has taken up a lot of time and energy. Internet has changed a lot in these three years - now there are dozens of remailers in the world, which offer similar services." "I have also personally been a target because of the remailer for three years. Unjustified accusations affect both my job and my private life" says Johan Helsingius. He surmises that the closing of the remailer will raise a lot of discussion among the Internet community. "These remailers have made it possible for people to discuss very sensitive matters, such as domestic violence, school bullying or human rights issues anonymously and confidentially on the Internet. To them the closing of the remailer is a serious problem", says Helsingius. Child porn claims proven false Last Sunday¥s issue of the English newspaper Observer claimed that the remailer has been used for transmitting child pornography pictures. The claims have been investigated by the Finnish police. Observer¥s claims have been found groundless. Police sergeant Kaj Malmberg from the Helsinki Police Crime Squad is specialized in investigating computer crimes. He confirms that already a year ago Johan Helsingius restricted the operations of his remailer so that it cannot transmit pictures. "The true amount of child pornography in Internet is difficult to assess, but one thing is clear: We have not found any cases where child porn pictures were transmitted from Finland", Kaj Malmberg says. Ground rules need to be clarified There are several large network projects going on in Finland at the moment, such as the TIVEKE project run by the Ministry of Communications and the Information Society Forum project run by the Ministry of Finance. Johan Helsingius is participating the work of these projects. Projects assess the political and social issues of networks and the impact of these issues in the long run. These projects also need the support of daily, practical work to help short-term decision-making. Johan Helsingius is now taking an initiative in the development of the daily network rules. He wants to set up a task force to discuss the practical problems related to ethical and civil rights issues in connection with the Internet. "I will try to set up a task force which will include Internet experts together with representatives of civic organizations and authorities. The task force could take a stand on issues such as the network¥s practical operation methods and the misuse of the network. I hope that the results of this task force will support the development of the network", he says. For further information, please contact Johan Helsingius Oy Penetic Ab tel. +358 0400 2605 e-mail: julf(a)penet.fi

2 1

Re: PGP & Default
by apteryx＠super.zippo.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 30 Aug 1996 01:13:23 -0400 (EDT), lcs Remailer Administrator <mix-admin(a)nym.alias.net> wrote: [snip] >to the file $HOME/.pgp/config.txt. (Or wherever the equivalent is >under DOS. Perhaps someone can tell me where the config.txt file >lives under DOS and I will add that to the help file.) It's in the same directory as PGP, which will be the directory referenced by the SET PGPPATH statement in the autoexec.bat file if PGP is installed and configured correctly. At least with version 2.6.2. You can use MyName="any string of characters that is specific enough to identify one and only one key". I have mine set as my name, so that no matter what e-mail address I use, PGP uses the right key. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMicvtN36bir1/qfZAQFnzgMAxTk55pldFWgysbjOj1Tqt/KAfB4Ty2WA EmTLRMziw8QglZSDzRxKcfvU3XjefNM7kA8YYPaKcgOlEhDiKB+Z9WDGMwwSJePk CFgTRPtuZS4kpjGsTZIvQN31ZqB5Ko0f =kSuW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Heaney finger snipe(a)starburst.cbl.cees.edu for public key PGP Fingerprint= BB D8 9B 07 51 87 05 AC 47 7B F2 4F A6 AB 1A CD ----------------------------------------------------------------- You keep using that word, I dunna think it means what you think it means.

1 0

~~ Bankers' Secrets ~~
by ~~ SECRETS ~~ 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

=======> BANKING SECRETS REVEALED!! <======= ====> SAVE $100,000 & EARN 7% to 10% INTEREST <==== Dear Friend, Did you know that you can save up to $100,000 on the biggest investment in your life? For MANY Americans they have a dream to one day own their home. When that dream is reached, they spend the rest of their life paying that dream off. You are being ripped off everyday by Banks, Financing Companies, Mortgage Companies etc. Did you know that by the time you pay off your home you will pay FIVE TIMES what it is worth? Is that fair to you and your dream? We don't think so and we bet you don't either. That's why we are going to show you how to save up to $100,000 and pay off your home up to 7 years faster! Sound too good to be true? Believe us, we will show you step by step how the mortgage game is played with the Banks, Financing Companies and Mortgage Companies and how to beat them at their own game. Everything we show you is 100% LEGAL and anybody can do it. It's just very few people know about it. These are very LOW-KEY SECRETS that you will learn. The reason the Banks never tell you is because if everyone knew the Banks' secrets they would be put out of business. If you ever heard someone say " My Bank is getting rich off my money, " they are absolutely RIGHT! Banks do get rich off your money because they lend it to other people and charge them 9% interest and only pay you up to 3% interest, if you're lucky! So that means Banks are getting 6% interest on YOUR MONEY! Many Mortgage Companies are being and have been sued for OVERCHARGING homeowners. This is your chance to become Financially Independent. Can you imagine if you saved $80 or $50 THOUSAND DOLLARS and made that American Dream come true by paying your house off 7 years faster? What could you do with that extra money? We're sure you could think of something, RIGHT? Maybe a family vacation or a new car? There are other companies charging $250 to $500 DOLLARS to show you everything that we are going to. But, we are not even asking a fraction of that cost. For the COMPLETE 25 page step-by- step manual, we are only asking $24.95. Plus, we are going to give 2 SPECIAL BONUSES to the next 50 people who order our great package and are determined to make a change. Our first SPECIAL BONUS to you is called a " MORTGAGE & LOAN CALCULATOR. " This is a Windows Based program that will keep track of every Loan and Mortgage that you have! You won't ever have to worry about being OVERCHARGED because you will have all your personal information right at your fingertips and you can keep track of all your Loans and Mortgages! Our SECOND SPECIAL BONUS is: "HOW TO EARN 7 TO 10% INTEREST ON YOUR MONEY." This is too good of a deal to just pass by, and we don't think there is anybody in the industry who will ever offer an opportunity like this! You will have everything you need to put your financial life right on track with your dreams. We all have dreams and this is your chance to make yours come true. You owe it to yourself and your family to take FULL advantage of this unique opportunity. Look at it this way, you go to work day in and day out, just to pay off your home. With our program, it will be up to 7 years LESS that you have to work to pay off your home and up to $100,000 MORE into your bank account instead of giving it to the BANK! The BEST part is you don't even have to refinance! You can even use this as a business opportunity. You can easily place ads in your local newspapers offering to save people money using the SECRETS you will know. You can even save your family members THOUSANDS off their mortgage. We look forward to getting you this tremendous package right away. Here's how you can place you order: Program is $21.95 + $3.05 Shipping & Handling a Total of $25.00 Send Check or Money Order made payable to: Creative Financial Alternatives Creative Financial Alternatives Banking Secrets 14837 Detroit Ave. Suite 135 Lakewood, Ohio 44107 ** For Faster Processing you can FAX your check to: 1-216-226-3225 How this works is pretty simple, just tape your check to a piece of paper and fax it. After faxing your check simply void it out and keep it for your own records. Please do not mail it to us if you fax it. Sincerely, Creative Financial Alternatives ( c ) Copyrighted 1996 Under no circumstances may any of this material be reproduced in any form without the author's written permission.

1 0

anon.penet.fi closing down
by Jim Byrd 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This was just posted: --------- Path: szdc-e!imci3!newsfeed.internetmci.com!newsxfer2.itd.umich.edu!agate!news.Sta nford.EDU!not-for-mail From: rcgraves(a)ix.netcom.com (Rich Graves) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.religion.scientology,alt.privacy.anon-server Subject: penet.fi closing down Followup-To: alt.privacy.anon-server Date: 30 Aug 1996 09:49:40 -0700 Organization: Unaffiliated Fans of Nizkor, http://www.nizkor.org/ Lines: 87 Sender: llurch(a)Networking.Stanford.EDU Distribution: inet Message-ID: <507634$kj8(a)Networking.Stanford.EDU> NNTP-Posting-Host: networking.stanford.edu Xref: szdc-e comp.org.eff.talk:16082 alt.religion.scientology:115080 alt.privacy.anon-server:2691 Attributions deleted on request. -rich PRESS RELEASE 30.8.1996 Johan Helsingius closes his Internet remailer Johan Helsingius from Helsinki has decided to close his Internet remailer. The so-called anonymous remailer is the most popular remailer in the world, with over half a million users. "I will close down the remailer for the time being because the legal issues governing the whole Internet in Finland are yet undefined. The legal protection of the users needs to be clarified. At the moment the privacy of Internet messages is judicially unclear." The idea of an anonymous remailer is to protect the confidentiality of its users' identity. The remailer itself does not store messages but serves as a channel for message transmission. The remailer forwards messages without the identity of the original sender. Finland is one of the leading countries in Internet usage. Therefore all decisions and changes made in Finland arouse wide international interest. "I have developed and maintained the remailer in my free time for over three years now. It has taken up a lot of time and energy. Internet has changed a lot in these three years - now there are dozens of remailers in the world, which offer similar services." "I have also personally been a target because of the remailer for three years. Unjustified accusations affect both my job and my private life" says Johan Helsingius. He surmises that the closing of the remailer will raise a lot of discussion among the Internet community. "These remailers have made it possible for people to discuss very sensitive matters, such as domestic violence, school bullying or human rights issues anonymously and confidentially on the Internet. To them the closing of the remailer is a serious problem", says Helsingius. Child porn claims proven false Last SundayŽs issue of the English newspaper Observer claimed that the remailer has been used for transmitting child pornography pictures. The claims have been investigated by the Finnish police. ObserverŽs claims have been found groundless. Police sergeant Kaj Malmberg from the Helsinki Police Crime Squad is specialized in investigating computer crimes. He confirms that already a year ago Johan Helsingius restricted the operations of his remailer so that it cannot transmit pictures. "The true amount of child pornography in Internet is difficult to assess, but one thing is clear: We have not found any cases where child porn pictures were transmitted from Finland", Kaj Malmberg says. Ground rules need to be clarified There are several large network projects going on in Finland at the moment, such as the TIVEKE project run by the Ministry of Communications and the Information Society Forum project run by the Ministry of Finance. Johan Helsingius is participating the work of these projects. Projects assess the political and social issues of networks and the impact of these issues in the long run. These projects also need the support of daily, practical work to help short-term decision-making. Johan Helsingius is now taking an initiative in the development of the daily network rules. He wants to set up a task force to discuss the practical problems related to ethical and civil rights issues in connection with the Internet. "I will try to set up a task force which will include Internet experts together with representatives of civic organizations and authorities. The task force could take a stand on issues such as the networkŽs practical operation methods and the misuse of the network. I hope that the results of this task force will support the development of the network", he says. For further information, please contact Johan Helsingius Oy Penetic Ab tel. +358 0400 2605 e-mail: julf(a)penet.fi

1 0

San Diego CPunk Physical meeting!!!!!
by Christian Claborne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- <<<<< NOTE! I have a new address!!! >>>>>> Change in DATE. sorry ------> Sep 5, Next Thursday!!! San Diego Area CPUNKS symposium Thursday, Sep. 5, 1996. Invitation to all Cypherpunks to join the San Diego crowd at "The Mission Cafe & Coffee Shop". We discuss cryptography and other related subjects, have the special cypherpunk dinner, and unwind after a long day at the grind stone. Don't forget to bring your public key fingerprint. If you can figure out how to get it on the back of a business card, that would be cool. If you want the suspicious crowd there to sign your key, bring two forms of ID. Hopefully Lance Cottrell will give us an update on Mixmaster and what's going on at San Diego's best ISP. You can also get the scoop on why I resigned from NCR. It wouldn't of course be because someone freaked out when I forwarded the cypherpunk e-mail titled "How to become in international Arms trafficker"... Place: The Mission Cafe & Coffee Shop 3795 Mission Bl in Mission Beach. 488-9060 Time:1800 Their Directions: 8 west to Mission Beach Ingram Exit Take west mission bay drive Go right on Mission Blvd. On the corner of San Jose and mission blvd. It is located between roller coaster and garnett. It's kind of 40s looking building... funky looking (their description, not mine) They serve stuff to eat, coffee stuff, and beer. See you there! New guy, bring your fingerprint. Drop me a note if you plan to attend... NOTE: My primary e-mail address has changed to use my own domain. You can reach me at "claborne(a)cyberthought.com". Permanently replace any other address that you may have for me. I am currently not subscribed to the CP list since my current internet connection is slow (I can't afford anything right now :) 2 -- C -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.0 Personal Edition iQEVAgUBMic8AYP1MBWQ+9udAQFSDQf8CXxsoBlLZIpXORcT2pkRYO67eFgVQehU 9Mzc1uVyb9k8JKzID4zMEEuRiUF38GMaVC9PJdmSGObzulhpduNgRwu15bXDPK80 gf4El696ncHqRqPNBZw+6JXWuNbotryZUVVAr+98LgwViP4jm6/U8KCkWd5scjll gfxQi7vxXCAAz1lGf6N+NZhP54m37PbTIkyXu59M2Js85LlVLZ0nY+aSsebjVzXt ojCn6QQKnq4Zns9bxxuhm71AmyVhT09cKzgwR8xrnCPOXLAvtx6m7a0q1rBbqh+Y QiNT95YmJovOIgtUB+xCa706W1X4N1MqPD36n1S5lumhSrCiPBg9jg== =l4SF -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ... __o .. -\<, Claborne(a)CYBERTHOUGHT.com ...(*)/(*)._ Providing thoughts on your computing problems. http://www.CYBERTHOUGHT.com/cyberthought/ PGP Pub Key fingerprint = 7E BF 38 3F 24 A7 D1 B0 54 44 96 AA 10 D0 5D 51 Avail on Pub Key server. PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome! Dreams. They are just a "screen saver" for the brain.

1 0

Penet Bites the Dust
by mpd＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An interesting Net tidbit. Note that the "International Conference on Child Sexual Exploitation" in Stolkholm which served as a platform for these accusations and various coordinated stories in numerous media outlets is simply a circus put on by ECPAT, a well-known pressure group whose propaganda is modeled after the now-defunct National Coalition on Pornography, and whose spurious and laughable claims about child pornography and vast pedophile conspiracies would fill volumes. The only odd thing here is that the mainstream press is presenting this gathering with a perfectly straight face, as if it were some sort of credible event, which of course it is not. ----- HELSINKI (Reuter) - A Finnish Internet specialist said on Friday he was closing his remailer, or anonymous forwarding system, after rejecting allegations it was being used as a conduit for child pornography. Johan Helsingius, whose remailer is one of the largest in the world with over half a million users, said in a statement he was closing down the system because the legal issues governing the Internet in Finland are unclear. ``The legal protection of users needs to be clarified. At the moment the privacy of Internet messages is judicially unclear,'' said Helsingius, who said he set up and ran the remailer in his free time partly as an initiative to help abused children. Internet remailers are computers which receive and forward messages with a pseudonym or anonymous source. There are about five large ones in the world, and they exist to enable anonymous discussion of sensitive subjects -- for instance by victims of child abuse, potential suicides or people in politically repressed societies. Helsingius, supported by Finnish police, earlier this week dismissed claims in Britain's Observer Sunday newspaper that his remailing system handled up to 90 percent of child pornography on the Internet. ``I have also personally been a target because of the remailer for three years,'' he said on Friday. ``Unjustified accusations affect both my job and my private life.'' The newspaper reported the charges, by a U.S. policeman and FBI adviser, as Belgian police were investigating horrific child sex crimes and ahead of an international conference in Stockholm on the commercial sexual exploitation of children. In Helsingius's statement, Helsinki police sergeant Kaj Malmberg was quoted as saying he had found no evidence of child porn being transmitted from Finland. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd(a)netcom.com $ via Finger. $

1 0

Re: MUD anyone?
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:27 PM 8/30/96, Jon Leonard wrote: >Tim May wrote: >> I second many of the comments about the difficulties in coding a reasonably >> plausible game or MUD for exploring list ideas. > >["Crypto Anarchy Game." value and difficulties stuff snipped] > >> Coding nearly any of the core cryptographic concepts for use in an online >> game, even without a real crypto core (e.g., using other trust mechanisms) >> is likely to be almost as big a job as actually coding the concepts for >> real-world use. Could be very educational, and a useful dry run for later >> real-world reification of concepts, but by no means easy. > >I don't think it's quite that hard, so I tried to implement asymetric key >cryptography: > >20 minutes, to write and debug: Well, cryptography (per se) is the most basic, and in some sense simplest, part of the whole thing: the "semantics" of crypto are well-understood (even if not to the snake oil salesmen and repeated inventors of one time pads). Consider that PGP was basically a realization (others existed, natch) of ideas that were almost 20 years old. Some much harder (to me) protocols: fair coin tosses, blinded coins, oblivious transfers, digital cash in all its many forms (and issues), DC-Nets, and so on. Sure, bits and pieces are codable--and have been--but a comprehensive package is tough to write. Wei Dai's and Matt Blaze's libraries are excellent, I hear, but are not targetted at creating these building blocks for crypto anarchy. And the social and organization assumptions coded into software is a major issue to think about. Some Scheme or C code doing part of these things will likely not be real useful. Your code is admirable. I did the same thing in Mathematica, a few years ago when I was still interested in the innards of RSA. (It took me longer than 20 minutes to write, though...but I also got to play around with big primes, the basic number theory stuff, etc. A useful learning experience.) But implementing more recent cryptographic building blocks seems more than an order of magnitude harder. (If you can implement a reasonably robust bank-digicash system in 10 x 20 minutes = 3.5 hours, I'll be impressed. Merely speccing what it should do and how it should behave in various situations would take far, far longer than this. Just my view. Maybe I'm wrong.) >It is a big project, but the big part is writing the MUD, not adding the >crypto-anarchy stuff to it. I'm writing a MUD anyway, and have been off >and on for over a year. Mark Grant's message made me think about what it >would take to add the features I wasn't already planning on. Depends on what you mean by "crypto-anarchy stuff." As I see it, it means building a reasonably robust economic system, a market or agora with various transaction mechanisms built in. Sort of a cross between "SimCity" and Vinge's "True Names." >I'm still interested in ideas as to what primitives I should fake. > >> And as Jim Bell noted, there are all sorts of costs which are not properly >> accounted for. I would not, for example, expect anything interesting to >> emerge out of the simulation of "assassination politics" in such a game, as >> the costs, dangers, moral issues, and whatnot are not properly >> accounted-for in such a MUD-type simulation. (No more so than in a fantasy >> role-playing game, where characters die routinely...) > >After I think about it more, I realize that a MUD simulation can't show >that something like "assassination politics" wouldn't work. At best it >can show that it does or doesn't work in that particular environment, >leaving open the question of what key difference between MUD and reality >might change the result. Still, it would be interesting to see how it >worked, or why it didn't. Even if well-implemented (a _lot_ of effort), I doubt it would say anything more about the real-world aspects of some future crypto-anarchic world than, say, playing "Risk" or "Diplomacy" has meaningful things to say about how nations form alliances and go to war with other nations. Or as much as playing "Monopoly" teaches one about actual business and economic interactions. (Before defenders of these games jump in with comments about how useful and enjoyable these games are, sure, some knowledge is gained. But huge differences are obvious. A conclusion drawn from playing these games will not hold up in the real world. I expect the same is true of "assassination politics.") --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 2

Re: **"OuR" Project press release** (fwd)
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Forwarded message: >> Subject: (Fwd) Re: **"OuR" Project press release** >> Priority: normal >> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.23) >> Pulled this off of the net. The was even better than SkyeDance IV ;-) >> ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- >> Paul Robinson & Ken Mizoi wrote: >> > To All Fellow Rocketeers: [stuff deleted] >> > Unfortunately, the rocket failed to deploy its recovery systems and >> > accelerated to over Mach 1 and impacted into the sand dunes several >> > miles away. There was a loud sonic boom heard by all that literally >> > shook the earth. In fact, instead of the nominal "hole and fin slits" >> > seen in previous impacts, there was a twenty foot diameter area with >> > large chunks of sheared earth as if a high energy charge had been >> > detonated under the ground. The rocket was not recovered, but several >> > pieces of metal, fiberglass, and burnt Nomex were found indicating the >> > ejection charges did in fact fire. >> > Once again, the "OuR" Project members wish to express sincere thanks >> > to all those who listened, donated, and gave their support who were >> > not specifically named. This project would not have flown if were not >> > for the "believers" and the tremendous team spirit. Only they know >> > the sweat and the number of hours it takes to fly such a rocket. >> > Members of the "OuR" Team >> ----------------- >> Stu Barrett >> e-mail: stu(a)zilker.net Recommendation for the next one: Rather than try to brute force an LEO from about sea level, how about lofting the rocket by balloon up to a starting altitude of, say, 100,000 feet, and letting'er'rip from there? (this is probably not a new technique...) Using a hydrogen balloon, a cubic meter of balloon volume would loft 1.2 kilograms at sea level, although only 1/50th of that at 100,000 feet, or 25 grams. A 700-pound (320 kilogram)rocket would require 12,000 cubic meters of envelope volume, discounting the weight of the balloon itself, equivalent to the volume of a cube 25 meters on a side. Obvious advantages: First, you're 20 miles closer to an LEO altitude of about 200 miles or so, a considerable advantage. Even more important, my back-of-the-envelope calculation says that at 100,000 feet, you're above about 98% of the atmosphere. There'd be a minor advantage if you managed to find a 300 mph easterly airstream just before launch. (Derived from the numbers included in the original note, I assume that the average upward speed is 1000 feet per second, and a top speed of about 2000 feet per second reached at an altitude of about 10,000 feet (Mach 2). This peak velocity occurs when the barometric pressure is not greatly different than sea level, which is a huge waste of energy. I'd like to see the real numbers, or at least a simulation. Could they re-run the simulation for a starting altitude of 100,000 feet?) And I don't think they have a prayer of doing an LEO without substantially increasing the proportion of fuel in the rocket from their current 35%, and possibly doing a two-stage rocket. I'd like to hear much more about this. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: Reprogramming Beepers?
by William Knowles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Comrade, > Does anyone know how to reprogram a beeper to a new number. Please > Help Brendan The Cypherpunks wouldn't be the list to ask this unless you are using encryption for your RadioMail pagers <g> The best place I could forward you to would be L0pht at: http://www.l0pht.com and there is some information on pagers last I checked. William Knowles erehwon(a)c2.net -- William Knowles <erehwon(a)c2.net> PGP mail welcome & prefered / KeyID 1024/2C34BCF9 PGP Fingerprint 55 0C 78 3C C9 C4 44 DE 5A 3C B4 60 9C 00 FB BD Finger for public key -- Vote for Harry Browne in November -- http://www.HarryBrowne96.org

1 0

Re: Encryption
by droelke＠rdxsunhost.aud.alcatel.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I don't have a vested interest other than keeping my data safe. A *good* cipher will work, even if someone knows the exact implementation of it. Given complete source code to your cipher, (including the pseudo-random number generator you use) and I could easily crack it with about a week's worth of effort. If you knew anything about cryptography, you'ld know that just giving someone some cyphertext and challenging them to crack is not a valid test of the cipher's strength. Again - go get a copy of Applied Cryptography and don't come back until you have read it. Dan > > Your comments are typical for persons with vested interests. > Attached is a test file so you can have someone try to crack it. In the > meantime, don't assume because I don't use your favorite methods I don't > know what I'm doing. > > Daniel R. Oelke wrote: > > > > Sorry to say this - but your idea stinks. > > > > If you are trying to send something encrypted, your > > receiving party would need the keys, which are the seed > > values of the pseudo-random number generators. > > > > Your adversary could keep trying a whole series of > > different seeds until they found the correct one. > > With a little more work, they could analyze the > > pseudo-random number generator that you used, and > > then work backwards. > > > > Go get a copy of Applied Cryptography Edition II. > > Don't come back until you have read it. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ [ crap deleted ] ------------------------------------------------------------------ Dan Oelke Alcatel Network Systems droelke(a)aud.alcatel.com Richardson, TX

1 0

RE: Encryption
by Benjamin Suto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm probably the last person who could mention something intelligible here, but assuming this encryption algorithm works, and Joe wants to give Jane a file, how would he tell her how to decrypt it? If he found a "secure medium" to give her the passcode under, wouldn't encrypting it be useless since he could just use that secure medium to send the original file? I think that was the whole point of public key encryption, in that there is no need for a secure medium of any sort, since the public key can only be used to encrypt a message.. that only the private key can decode. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. There are probably other flaws inherent in this encryption system mentioned.. I can imagine that you won't even be able to unencrypt the original message. :) ---------- From: Dale Thorn[SMTP:dthorn@gte.net] Sent: Friday, August 30, 1996 5:00 AM To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Encryption It appears to me that PGP encryption et al is really 1940's technology, albeit fancied up by 1990's computers. Why use keys and cyphers when all you should have to do is maximize the randomization of bits in a script? Big computers should not be able to de-randomize such encoding, since the permutations/combinations would be astronomical after just a half-dozen or so random number initializations, as well as the fact that the bits are relatively undifferentiated (just ones and zeros) and are not maintained with their original bytes, words, paragraphs, or pages? <<File: ATT00003.txt>>

1 0

Re: www.anonymizer.com
by nobody＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:12 AM 8/30/96 -1000, NetSurfer wrote: > >I have found and reported to the anonymizer that it does not >always protect you against perl-based cgi scripts. I did this by >accessing a form-based email page (based on Matt's script) which includes >environment variable values in the msg to the recipient. I didn't >receive any response back from them after I emailed them the info. Am I missing something here because isn't the easiest way around all of this is simply not to enter your personal info when setting up Netscape? Granted the page can pick up your ISP and what port you used, but so what? It can't get your name and email address. Use a newsreader such as Free Agent so there's no reason to enter your personal info. If there is a reason to respond to someone who's email is in on a particular page, then copy it and paste to your emailer...

2 1

Re: Reprogramming Beepers?
by bf578＠scn.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >Does anyone know how to reprogram a beeper to a new number. Please >Help Brendan Are you talking about the beeper's ESN or CAP code? changing it to another that is active? Or reconfiguring the beeper company's system? -- ------------------------------------------ There are no facts, only interpretations. I always wanted to be somebody,

1 0