December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Warrantless searches -- A sign of things to come?
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> BUT NO WARRANT WAS SERVED! Does that mean I can get the ACLU up the school's > ass? If the school says they can do that because I pay to live on their > property, then why can't the CHA do what they want? Ah, but you see, you moved into the dorm (and signed a paper) saying you would follow the school's rules. These rules included uncool search and seizure and are allowed since you are not in a home... it's similar to a hotel's right to do room service when you're out at the pool. <- What your talking about is the difference between a lease and a license. Dorm "agreements" generally avoid the terms of art that make an agreement a lease. This is one of the reasons that they are called "Housing agreements." The fact that you do not have a leasehold on the property is one of the legal catches to allow your constitutional rights against search and seizure to be avoided. In fact many of the protections that are afforded leaseholders are denied those who merely have a "license." Such is NOT the case with the majority of government based housing. You cannot SIGN AWAY your rights in most cases. The exceptions are numerous, but a clause in a lease that says "the owner may search and seize whatever he likes" is hardly one of them. -uni- (Dark)

1 0

Re: Dirty Laundry...
by Peter Wayner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm perfectly willing to do a "live" demonstration of money laundering using the futures markets. In your last private letter, you suggested that we use real money. I see no reason to do for two reasons: 1) Commission costs and other fees are prohibitive for the small amount of money that I have. Plus, why would I want to spend all that money just to prove a point to you? 2) I see no reason to go out and borrow money for what is essentially an academic exercise. This is a game for the rich. If you've only got to move $10,000 then cash and Fed Ex is fine. So you are welcome to add all of the margin requirements and stuff and we'll work it out on paper. (I'll even sweat a bit for real, if you want.) Make out a list of the transaction costs and margin requirements and I'll come up with a target sum to transfer. Then we can figure out the risk strategy to pursue. The only problems I can see in doing this well is finding a source of futures prices. I don't have a live feed and I don't have the time in my day to sit on a terminal waiting for the right moment.(I've wasted enough on this argument.) Closing prices are okay, but they are not as efficient as using all of the noise in the market during the day. Oh, I wanted to point out one other fact about swapping tickets: It's illegal. But it is not clear that it is illegal to just place bets on both sides of the market.

4 3

Re: Dirty Laundry...
by juola＠bruno.cs.colorado.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Peter Wayner says: > In 15 out 16 times, the progressive doubling system will work. No, it will not. I invite Mr. Wayner to produce a single demonstration of this system working. A suitable test should be easy to set up. Should be no trouble at all; I would do it myself except that I'm trying to write a dissertation. In the interest of "fairness," I suggest the following (without looking at the numbers). Most major newspapers, including the WSJ, list the prices of various sorts of futures. I suggest someone simply check the closing prices of a half dozen futures (gold, silver, oil, wheat, corn, and pick two at your convenience) on the 1st of January, 1993. Flip a coin for whether person A or person B does the buying of $10,000 worth of futures, then recheck the price on 1 Feb. If B makes $500 or more, assume the laundering has worked -- if not, double the investment and recheck on 1 Mar. If the Martingale scheme works, at least 5 out of the 6 should have successfully transferred the money by 1 Dec.... - kitten

1 0

Roulette
by rees＠cs.bu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Eudaemonic Pie by Thomas A. Bass (Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1985), in chapter 6, discusses the various systems used in beating roulette. It gives the names and dates of people who have beaten the system through the use of martingales, biased wheels, and computers. An interesting book, highly recommended that you check it out. -Dave

1 0

Re: warrantless searches
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The idea of sweeps will never work, they'd have to do it a couple of times a day. I don't even need to go into the unconstitutionality of the whole process. The whole thing boils down to trying to use a simple solution to solve a complex problem, which works for politicians, but no one else. Besides, Handguns are illegal in Chicago, and have been for more than a decade....... <- Well not exactly. It is illegal to possess an unlicensed handgun in Chicago, and Chicago has not issued any new licenses in a decade. An account from a friend of mine went something like this. He had a workshop on the near west side and kept a .32 inside with him. The .32 was obviously unlicensed. Long and short, he ended up at "Gun Court." The process went something like this: If the defendant's skin color was lighter than the tan wall, a small fine ($100) was imposed. Other defendants were given hefty fines and some jail time. Note that the first category was never asked about past records, the second were always asked about past records. The point is this: Even if sweeps work, they won't "Work." Even the judges don't seem to think that getting gun holders off the street is a cure. Or they don't care one way or the other. I do agree that this is just Bayer for cancer. I grow tired of bearing the burden of some flunkies ideas of social engineering. Like I said before. If it's an emergency, declare one and suspend the constitution. Otherwise, come up with a real solution. It's amazing to me that administrations can lop all the low income housing into large poorly built high rises and then complain that crime is too excessive. -uni- (Dark)

1 0

Re: warrantless searches
by tim werner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From: sdw(a)meaddata.com (Stephen Williams) >Date: Tue, 19 Apr 1994 10:59:22 -0400 (EDT) > >I know that in OH there are some interesting laws: I had a lawyer >friend who wore a gun even when he went out drinking in bars because >of the types of clients he represented. Supposedly the local police >had cleared it or something based on some legal exception. (In Ohio, >there are signs posted in bars that having a handgun in a licensed >liquor establishment has such and such mandatory sentence.) That must be southern Ohio. I never saw any signs like that in Cleveland, although I gotta admit it's been a few years since I've been in a bar. :) tw

1 0

Science frauds
by Gary Jeffers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Gun control is people control. The war on drugs is the war on citizens. Kill the Clipper (anti-privacy) chip. The following article appeared in the April 18, 1994 edition of THE SPOTLIGHT newspaper. The article is by Paul V. Sheridan. (Paul Sheridan is president of Dr. Detroit Motorsports in Detroit, Michigan. His articles have appeared in numerous periodicals.) The SPOTLIGHT is a weekly mail order newspaper. Their subscription address: THE SPOTLIGHT 300 Independence Ave. SE Washington, D.C. 20003 current (4/17/94) trial subscription $19.94 for 30 weeks. Since I have just sort or grabbed one of their whole articles, I should be "nice" & do a free advertisement for them. ******* BEGIN ************ DANGER FROM SPRAY CANS & AIR CONDITIONERS A HOAX? "Nature is full of the unknown. In the United States a remarkable discovery was made. Waterside mud contains bacteria that breaks down CFC's; products not found in nature. Such discoveries should humble us. But yet there are people so sure of their knowledge of nature, they make all sorts of predictions. They're like high priests of arrogance; only concerned with money, fame and power." Prologue to the European film: Fair Skin - Stay In If a contest were held to award the most scientifically baseless, politically oppressive, morally bankrupt, economically destructive environmental farce, the hands-down winner would be the banning of chloroflurocarbons (CFCs, such as freon). Whenever a major action is being dictated, especially at the national level, you should ask yourself, "Who benefits?" If your answer includes arrogant "scientists," trendy politicians & faceless corporate bureau- crats, you can safely assume that scandal is not far behind. Obviously these do-gooders will proclaim that you are going to benefit because they are doing you a big favor; one you don't remember requesting. If you're starting to feel queasy, good. INCREDIBLE When I began studying the theory that CFCs were affecting the ozone layer, I found less & less, not more, credibility. What I did find how- ever is that people who will make money on this scandal support it, & choose to deny or ignore the facts. This trend continues at an accel- erating pace. We have already been programmed to assume that the so-called replace- ments will cost 10 times as much as CFCs. We have seen CFC costs jump from 50 cents per pound to $10 per pound or more as supplies are pur- posely diminished. We are about to scrap billions of dollars in un- amortized CFC-based equipment, & spend billions more on equipment dedicated to the new refrigerants since they are not compatible. Auto- motive customers have experienced their "repair" bill jump from $25 to $1,000 as retrofits become the only way to retain air conditioning. A similar scenario will begin to emerge for home & office air-condit- ioning systems. A review by SPOTLIGHT readers should include the following questions: * The Rowland/Molina theory seeks to convince you that chlorine from CFCs is responsible for "destruction of the ozone layer." If this is true, why did Mother Nature evolve oceans that emit an average of 600 million tons per year: 80,000 times the chlorine theoretically supplied by CFCs? What about volcanoes such as Mount Erebus, which emits an average of 1,000 tons of chlorine each day? When Mount Pinatubo re- cently erupted, 10 million tons of chlorine were ejected. Chlorine from this planet's 6,500 volcanoes has been deposited directly into the strat osphere for billions of years. Why weren't natural sources even men- tioned in the theory? Do natural sources of chlorine deplete Nobel Prizes? * Why are the major chemical companies pushing for a ban of CFCs? What is the status of the international patent rights to CFC pro- duction? Is it merely a coincidence that the scheduled ban of CFCs coincides with the expiration of the patents? Is it coincidence that the companies that are shoving this ban down your throat are the very same companies that hold the "approved" patents? Is there any correlation between the business plans of selected chemical companies, & the sub- sequent emergence & widespread media promotion of this theory? * Gordon Dobson, the father of atmospheric science, discovered seasonal fluctuation of the Antarctic ozone layer in 1956 (long before the more recent alarms raised by the supposed discovery of this phenom- enon in the 1980's). Why is this natural phenomenon never discussed? Why is the implication given that CFCs were not widely used when Dobson made his historic observations? What is the significance of the Scandinavian claim that their research on ozone layer fluctuations dates back to 1925, when CFCs had not yet been invented? * If the ozone layer is being "depleted," why has the ultraviolet ra- diation reaching the Earth's surface been declining for the last 50 years? * Why the Tazieff Resolution? Why would hundreds of respected scient- tists sign a document that states that the CFC/ozone layer issue is a fraud? Why is this resolution avoided like the plague by the American news media & the EPA? Why is the Tazieff resolution hidden from the American public? * Why did Vice President Al Gore fire William Happer? Dr. Happer, of the Department of Energy, was pursuing a scientific review of avail- able data. He was also proposing more accurate instrumentation to ensure credible conclusions. Did Happer mistakenly assume that his job was science as opposed to trendy politics? What does this incident indicate about the ethical stature of the present administration? Has Gore decided that the scientific method should be replaced by political correctness? * Dr. Sherwood Rowland, the co-inventor of this global warming theory, has been openly accused of scientific fraud by members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). Why has the AAAS concealed these accusations & the resultant petition to review his part- icipation in Ozonegate? INVESTIGATION NEEDED * Why was H.R. 291 introduced? This legislation calls for a complete investigation of Ozonegate & will probably result in criminal proceed- ings. Why haven't our friends in the news media told you about H.R. 291? * The original design criteria for refrigerant chemicals was that it be durable, non-flammable, non-corrosive & non-toxic. After 20 years of development & testing, & more than 40 years of use, CFCs have completely proven themselves. By stark contrast, R-134, the replacement material, is flimsy, explosive, corrosive & downright poisonous. Recognizing that they themselves will not be routinely exposed to this unproven chemical, what criteria did the EPA use to pronounce from their ivory towers that R-134 was "acceptable?" If this new family of chemicals is "acceptable" why did Germany recently ban R-123 due to its toxicity? I called the EPA (202-233-9155) & requested their human toxicity studies on R-134. Under the Toxic Substance Control Act, the EPA is required to release these findings. They flatly refused my requests. The important issue for SPOTLIGHT readers is the health risk imposed on our automotive technicians who will unknowingly be exposed to a substance that is at least 100 times more carcinogenic than the CFCs they replace. The general public will also be exposed to these dangerous chemicals in their cars, home air conditioners & refrigerators. The EPA desper- ately does not want you to know the details contained in the toxicity studies. The 15th century Europeans were told of sea monsters at the edge of a flat earth. In truth, the market share of silks & spices enjoyed by the major traders were being threatened by the smaller mariners. Similar to the lies told when the earth was flat, Americans are being told that "The ship has sailed...it's too late." That money-making ploy did not work for the greedy merchant houses of the 15th century, & SPOTLIGHT readers need to ensure that Ozonegate doesn't work today. An excellent start is to write to your congress- person & demand that they support H.R. 291. ****** END *************** Well fellow Cypherpunks, what do we make of this? Many of us had thought that we had gone plenty far by being anarchists or minarchists. Apparently that is not far enough in order to oppose those that push us around & lie to us. This article implies that we must also be anti mass media & largely anti large corporation as well. In the matter of corporations we must at least be dubious of their intentions & truth- fulness. This article also serves as a model of big corporate, mass media, & state collusion in the victimization of their people. If the article is true, then how can the mass media be anything but corrupt? Another possibility arises: Do we have a science & technology that in a number of crucial areas is controlled as well? Are large cor- porations withholding science & tech from us? There have been rumors for years that the oil corporations buy up patents & small innovative companies to keep competing technologies off the market. I find a number of clues that this is true: ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. The internal combustion engine. This type engine has been with us for more than 50 years - much elaborated on & refined but basically the same turkey. I believe that it is still approx. 25% efficient. Correct me if I'm wrong. Its deficiencies are legendary. This is 1994, why do we still have this primitive? There is talk that we now have cheap, efficient hydrogen generating processes. And if I'm correct, we can now safely store hydrogen as an iron titanium hydride. That could enable the use of engines with virtually nothing but water & energy as its products. 2. Electrical storage. Our storage technology for electricity seems to be primitive. 3. The Sun gives us an astronomical amount of free energy but we are still mostly inept at capturing it. 4.Fifteen years or so ago, there was a high budget program funded by the Federal govt. for large corporations to find a cheap way to get petroleum products without petroleum. This was at the time of the Arab oil embargo & was considered of great importance. Hadn't anyone ever heard of the FISCHER-TROPSCH reaction. We have lots of coal! Excerpt follows: from the book, ORGANIC CHEMISTRY, by K. Peter C. Vollhardt University of California, Berkeley. Published by W. H. Freeman & Company. "Another catalytic reaction of synthesis gas that furnishes alcohols, but only as by-products, is the cobalt- or iron-mediated formation of hydrocarbons usable as fuels & oils. This reaction was discovered at about the turn of the century & developed in Germany beginning in the 1920s. Its application enabled that country to supply its energy (part- icularly gasoline) needs from coal during the 2nd World War, when its supply of petroleum was virtually shut off. The process is known as the FISCHER-TROPSCH reaction: Co or Fe,pressure, 200-350C n CO + (2n +1) H2 _____________________________> CnH2n+2 + n H2O At the height of production, in 1943, more than 500,000 tons of hydro- carbon & other products (gasoline, diesel fuel, oils, waxes, & deter- gents) were made in Germany by this process. Currently(1987), South Africa is the only country that satisfies a substantial amount of its fuel needs by use of the Fischer-Tropsch reaction." Synthesis gas (a mixture of CO & H2) is produced by a cheap, simple industrial process from the gasification of coal in the presence of water. 5. The medical industry. Cancer rates are going up in spite of gigantic amounts of money spent on research. We run into one health calamity after another. The FDA is busy trying to outlaw alternative health methods & currently have laws against free speech on health claims even when backed up by research. The FDA only wants health speech that it has certified. Incidentally, remember Tryptophan - a naturally occurring amino acid that was was good for many things including insomina & jangeled nerves. After the Tryptophan scare, Trytophan was outlawed by the FDA. This in spite of the fact that it was proved that ONE Japanese company had produced ONE bad batch of Tryptophan & that was THE SINGLE CULPRIT in the "tryptophan sickness". The reason that tryto- phan was pulled off the market was that it was TOO GOOD at doing what wa claimed for it & too safe. It was cutting into the pharmaceutical companies sales of dangerous drugs that competed with it. Serious alternative health enthusiasts are aware of many other state atrocities involving non-medical health methods. Nothing succeeds like failure! - At least for a government protected monopoly. The medical/pharmaceutical industry continues to receive a higher percentage of the U.S. national product. My diagnosis: the condition of the medical/pharmaceutical industry improves; the patients are failing. ----------------------------------------------------------------- We who oppose the oppressive state must be alert for attacks from other quarters. The state is aided & abetted by a corrupt & lying mass media. At times the people are duped by large corporations acting in concert with the state & the mass media. Caution & independence must be used against several quarters simultaneously. This is an outrage! It reminds me of the old Soviet Union in which only a few percentage points of the people were in the Communist Party & therefore most of the population did not expect decent treatment or the truth. It is also remindful of the Feudal system in which a small minority ruled & took while the majority were exploited. Of course, there were explanations why this cruel structure was right. In the U.S., the population is proud of its freedom & its knowledge while being terribly politically ignorant. Are we that far removed from the old Soviet Union & the Feudal rule? Are the American masses both lied to & exploited systematically as the masses have been for thousands of years. It seems to me that in the U.S., the masses have gotten a much easier life due to some technological innovations & that the RULE BY LIE has gotten so much more sophisticated. In justice to the American political founders, I concede that for approximately the first 120 years the American masses enjoyed remarkable freedom. However, for the last 90 years the control thugs have been slowly re-capturing us. We have given away our lost power by giving away our responsibility. We have believed that the big dogs have gotten to where they are by being better than we, by being smarter, & by working harder. We also have a weakness with gullibility. We have a difficult time believing that a high status person could consistly & often lie to us. Possibly, that is a kind of genetic weakness of the masses: inability to disbelieve high status people. I do not wish to leave us without hope. We now have the INTERNET! - A people's mass media where everything does not pass though a crooked chokepoint. We now may easily & quickly exchange news with people all over the world. We also have public key cryptography! This guarantees our ability to conduct conversations all over the world & be as private as we wanna be! Records & private writings may be kept in effectively unbreakable strong cryptography. With these tools we may be able to break the yoke of the state & its collaborating establishment. Cypherpunk, Gary Jeffers PUSH EM BACK! PUSH EM BACK! WWWAAAYYY BBBAAACCCKKK! BBBEEEAAATTTT STATE! Interested in getting strong cryptography packages for free? Interested in putting your math, cryptography, or computer programming skills to use in writing a technology to free the world from its oppressors? Contact Cypherpunks(a)toad.com.

1 0

Re: Science frauds
by Phil G. Fraering 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Uh, Gary, the reason noone's started more research into getting oil from coal is that it's cheaper to get oil from oil. While we are too dependent on foreign sources right now, the price of oil has never been cheaper than now and could go up probably a lot and not raise the price of gas much compared to how much taxes and inflation have raised it since 1972. Look, I'm tired, and this is cypherpunks. I'm willing to discuss energy policy, etc., over on extropians(a)extropy.org anytime you're willing to fork over the money to access it (if I have time; I often don't). But anyway, you might want to check out that recent NOVA episode, "The World Is Full Of Oil." Phil

1 0

15 out of 16 times...
by collins＠newton.apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It has been known since before I was born (see the very readable "Lady Luck, the theory of probability" by Warren Weaver, 1963, Doubleday/Anchor LoC CC# 63-8759) that the value (i.e., here 'cost') of this game is infinite. This is described by a correlary of the law of large numbers wherein (quoting from Weaver, emphasis his): By making the number _N_ of trials large enough, you can make as near unity (certainty) as you desire the probability that the actual number _m_ of successes will _deviate from_ the ex- pected number _np_ _by as much as you please_. Note that, effectively, this law applies _before_ the one that lets you win an expected number of trials. This is why the person with the greater bankroll can win even in the face of sub-optimal 'odds'; why Las Vegas still exists; why gamblers still go broke; and why they go broke quicker with the doubling system. If it is not a question of probability, i.e., both parties _know_ the commodity will perform in a particular way... then this does not apply. However, to the extent that they are uncertain --- it does (in spades). Scott Collins | "That's not fair!" -- Sarah | "You say that so often. I wonder what your basis 408.862.0540 | for comparison is." -- Goblin King ................|.................................................... BUSINESS. fax:974.6094 R254(IL5-2N) collins(a)newton.apple.com Apple Computer, Inc. 5 Infinite Loop, MS 305-2D Cupertino, CA 95014 ..................................................................... PERSONAL. 408.257.1746 1024:669687 catalyst(a)netcom.com

2 1

Cypherpunks/extropians list political ideology discussion...
by Phil G. Fraering 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just thought I'd interject that the discussion here on laundering money on the futures market might be a lot more appropriate over on the extropians mailing list than here on cypherpunks. I don't mean to be a "stick to topic" fascist or anything, and I realize a lot of the participants in this discussion currently have problems with the extropians list at present, but come to think of it, these people (and there are, as far as I can tell, more than just two or three) probably have between them the time or means to set up their own "extropians list for people tired of ExI's list" mailing list and this might be an appropriate means for getting off-topic discussions off of cypherpunks. Comments? Phil

1 0

Empower:
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Could someone give me a brief summary of Empower's cryptography strength? Is there a password cracker? -uni- (Dark)

1 0

RE: Cypherpunks/extropians list political ideology discussion...
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: "Phil G. Fraering" I just thought I'd interject that the discussion here on laundering money on the futures market might be a lot more appropriate over on the extropians mailing list than here on cypherpunks. ................................... No, don't do that - I'm having fun watching these guys go back & forth. And I want to see who wins. Mr. Right, winner of the Dirty Laundry contest. Besides, no one's mentioned any missing random numbers or anything. . . . Blanc

1 0

my remailer taking some (mild) heat [LONG]
by collins＠newton.apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

For your edification: I run a remailer. Someone used it to post copyrighted material. I was contacted to help resolve the issue. The person who contacted me, Brad Templeton, was neither abusive nor unreasonable, but he did express some interesting attitudes. I am reposting the dialogue here. My added comments begin with '#'. I must emphasize that I sympathize with Mr. Templeton and bear him no ill will. I am interested in his views---and your reaction to his views---of remailers, their legality, and future. ##### Brad Templeton wrote: ##### Somebody posted an AP Wire story to comp.org.eff.talk using your remailer. We'll need to know who it was or have you contact them so we can get them to make amends for the copyright violation. Thanks. ##### I responded:: ##### Brad, # I included his initial message here This is distressing to me. I don't run a remailer to abet infringers of copy (or other) rights. I certainly do not condone this action. Unfortunately, there is little I can do after the fact. My remailer is not the sort that requires a priori relationships. If a message has the right sort of header, the remailer sends it on its way ... no questions asked. I never see any mail that passes through my remailer. I keep no logs, the efficacy of which would be compromised in any case by remailer chaining or encryption. I can block remailing to or from any particular address, but my remailer is incapable of taking action based on content. I am sorry that I can neither tell you who it was, nor contact them ... not because I don't wish to, but because I am unable to. I will happily assist you in any way that I am able. What follows is my public policy with respect to the remailer. It details my capabilities and attitude. # I included my remailer policy here, which most of you have seen. # E-mail me privately for copies. I hope this is of some assistance to you. ##### Brad Templeton wrote:: ##### I understand your policy, and I suspect that down the road that while anon remailers will continue to exist and serve a purpose, those that allow people to break laws behind them (defamation and copyright, and possibly kiddie-porn in particular) will have to shut down. The law is clear on this. If a newspaper publishes libel, the newspaper is liable with the writer, and fully liable if they hide the writer's name. You'll be in that boat, and shutting down or logging after the fact won't do you much good. I think the right answer is a remailer that logs, allows replies (like the finet one) and which opens up in the case of illegal postings, or any other postings that don't follow its rules. It might say that it demands a warrant, for example. What you're doing is of little value. Anybody can post anon to USENET anyway, if they don't care about replies. I am surprised you would take the risk to add no functionality. ##### I responded: ##### Brad, My immediate advice to you is to send mail to the same distribution that the illegal material followed, requesting contact from the sender. This would have the same enforcability of reply as Julf's remailer. People rarely mail things to lists they don't themselves read, so it is likely to be read by the intended. As I said before, I will help you in any way that I can. I understand that, lacking a perpetrator, I am the next visible target for your ire ... so I am taking your comments as predictions about society (as I'm sure you intended) rather than personal comments (as so many people are wont to read into e-mail these days). # I included his first two paragraphs here. My remailer is not a newspaper; rather it resembles the post-office, a phone switch, or the hole in the tree trunk in "To Kill a Mockingbird". All of these allow communication with some amount of anonymity selected by the sender (up to and including `no return address`). Newspapers have editors. There is a presumption of knowledge over their content. _Of course_ one sues such a publication for libel or error---they have advertised their control over their publication so that readers may trust in its verity and appropriateness. One _must_ sue when such a trusted publication causes damages. Angry people can 'cement over the hole', but it won't be because my remailer broke either faith or law. >I think the right answer is a remailer that logs, Any phrase that starts with 'the right answer is' is questionable. If there were a 'right answer' for communication we would only need one of: newspapers, phones, tv's, postcards, conversations in the hall, pounding a broom handle on the ceiling, short-wave radio, ad infinitum. The right media depends on the situation and the people involved. >allows replies (like the finet one) My remailer allows replies; the sender need only include a return address (possibly encrypted) exactly like the US Post Office. My service is completely different from the finet one. Julf's system requires its own machine and huge space resources for mapping tables. Such a system is beyond my resources. >and which opens up in the case of illegal postings, or >any other postings that don't follow its rules. My service conforms to this statement. I was---and am now---happy to help you resolve this issue to the best of my ability. I won't support, condone, or abet illegal activity; however, I can't and won't spy on law abiding users on the slim chance that I could detect illegal activity a priori. I will enact restrictions that prevent illegal activity whenever I can do so without impacting citizens (e.g., I can block addresses, etc.). >What you're doing is of little value. It is unfortunate that your only contact with my remailer was of little (in fact negative) value to you. In in another situation you---as other people certainly do---might value it highly. >Anybody can post anon to USENET anyway, if they don't care about replies. My remailer makes no provisions for posting to usenet. It is simply a remailer; it can do nothing that sendmail cannot do. >I am surprised you would take the risk to add no functionality. One if by land; two if by the information super-highway. We're all together in this, ##### Brad Templeton wrote: ##### I thought it was for netnews, that is what I saw. Actually, anybody can do anon E-mail as well, but fewer know how. You are not a newspaper, but I truly believe you are taking on all the liability for bad things in the material remailed. ##### The End? ##### Scott Collins | "That's not fair!" -- Sarah | "You say that so often. I wonder what your basis 408.862.0540 | for comparison is." -- Goblin King ................|.................................................... BUSINESS. fax:974.6094 R254(IL5-2N) collins(a)newton.apple.com Apple Computer, Inc. 5 Infinite Loop, MS 305-2D Cupertino, CA 95014 ..................................................................... PERSONAL. 408.257.1746 1024:669687 catalyst(a)netcom.com

3 4

Thank You Anonymous Source
by Jeff Davis 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I recieved your white # 10 envelope with the Oakland post mark 15 April. Thank you for its contents, "another urgent activist," whom ever you are. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLbMrjl/ScHuGXWgVAQEmxwQAyXh4sn3CZryVtf1gc1YD7BU/aTFF88v7 yABLaqxzSGRIHt3L6AFRG0+zVe47P2jDgfNQh2YFrWhsJ+jteZ9JSN3klRS/E4/O eCPI7SLt3+mZSZTjQvykI66Ux0kS77zamFNlu6pTxkljYS0ZvLuyGehFC4ClOjyr u5BH8rNnhVQ= =VcIV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- PGP PUBLIC KEY via finger! JAFEFFM Speaking & Thinking For Myself! * eagle(a)deeptht.armory.com email info(a)eff.org * *** O U T L A W S On The E L E C T R O N I C F R O N T I E R **** ***** Committed to Free Public Internet Access for World Peace *****

1 0

More mail-to-usenet gateways
by Matthew J Ghio 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

group.name(a)paris.ics.uci.edu group.name(a)cs.dal.ca group.name(a)ug.cs.dal.ca I'm sure there must be many, many more such gateways out there, if you know of any, send them my way so I can put them in the listing. If you think you have one, but aren't sure, try this: post a message to alt.test via your mail software (configured to your local machine) and CC: it to me, so I can see the name to the mail-to-news gate. Thanks!

1 0

Science fraud
by Gary Jeffers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Phil Fraering writes >Uh, Gary, the reason noone's started more research into getting >oil from coal is that it's cheaper to get oil from oil. While we >are too dependent on foreign sources right now, the price of oil >has never been cheaper than now and could go up probably a lot and >not raise the price of gas much compared to how much taxes and >inflation have raised it since 1972. Phil, currently a barrel of oil is a little under $17. That would make a gallon of gas less than 40 cents if it could be refined, distributed, & retailed at no cost. I realize that is just about "dirt cheap". Still, the Fischer-Tropsch reaction is over 90 years old & Germany fueled its part in World War II with it. By now, you would think that we could squeeze oil out of coal "dirt cheap". Its been more that 50 years ago that Germany ran its war effort on this process. I agree with you that it would be very hard to beat the price of oil. Still, the world handles its war machine as though oil were quite precious. You should cure the world of this illusion! Ok - admittedly, an oil embargo that was differentially placed on some nations & not on others would raise the manufacturing & shipping costs of the embargoed nations & put them in a bad trade position. >Look, I'm tired Phil, if I had known my article would just tire & annoy you, I never would have writ it! > and this is cypherpunks. Agreed. My article is not well coupled with the official topic of cypherpunks & it would not be a good thing to tie up too much of cypherpunks bandwith with it. I had hoped to do a quick hit & run with it with cypherpunks & post it on other lists as well. I must give you credit, Phil. It was a damd cagey move on your part to do a bad review on a part of my post & say nothing good about my post at all. As we all know, nothing kills a thread faster than that! And then to give me shit about wasting Cypherpunk bandwith - the ICING ON THE CAKE! Phil is on top of things. I am admonished! Unless someone says something to provoke or encourage this thread, I'm dropping it from Cypherpunks. > I'm willing to discuss >energy policy, etc., over on extropians(a)extropy.org anytime you're >willing to fork over the money to access it (if I have time; I >often don't). I've dropped out of the Extropian's list. Its all I can do to keep up with just this list. Also, I don't want to pay the money & I don't approve of the way the fools hounded Tim May. Phil, I must also disagree with the way you handled your criticism of my post. You panned part of it & then seemed imply that you had fully reviewed it with that. >But anyway, you might want to check out that recent NOVA episode, >"The World Is Full Of Oil." Thanks for the tip. You & NOVA are probably right. The world is probably up to its ass in oil. There is some speculation that oil was not derived from fossilized plant life. On a more serious note, I value the time & bandwith of the Cypher- punks. I posted the post here because I believe that it has rare & valuable information that Cypherpunks would be interested in. Hopefully, I have not wasted much of many Cypherpunks time. Yours Truly, Gary Jeffers

1 0

NARA e-mail standards (fwd)
by Jeff Davis 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message:

1 0

Laundering money through commodity futures
by Hal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sorry for adding to this arguably non-cp thread: There is some ambiguity in the discussion of martingales and double-your-bet schemes in general. Most people think in terms of doubling when they *LOSE* their bet. This puts them in the ludicrous position Tim Werner described of having to bet $320 to win $5. How could this strategy break a bank? Your bets will average far larger than your winnings. If the table had a bank limit of $10,000, you'd have to have many times this in your suitcase. A more efficient strategy would probably be just to bet $10,000 at the beginning. If you really want to "break the bank", a more likely strategy would be to double your bets when you *WIN*. Most of the time you will eventually lose, and so you will see a steady loss. But eventually you will exceed the table "bank" limit, and the casino will not be able to pay off your bet - you will have broken the bank. Of course, this was stupid of you, since statistically this will only happen as often as your total losings add up to what your total winnings would have been. If there is some "bank" limit on how large the bets are that the casino will pay off, then you will actually get less than you should have. Hal

1 0

Re: moving money laundering to Extropians list
by greg＠ideath.goldenbear.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Phil Fraering writes: > I just thought I'd interject that the discussion here on laundering > money on the futures market might be a lot more appropriate over on > the extropians mailing list than here on cypherpunks. I'm finding the thread interesting and educational, apart from my suspicion it's about to turn into a flamewar about who [doesn't] want to bet $10K to back a particular position. I seem to remember the list being about "technological defenses for privacy", or some such - money laundering (e.g., anonymized transactions) seems close enough for me. If the Extropians' list is dry these days, perhaps some commerce-oriented Cypherpunks ought to sell them a copy of this thread. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLbM3k33YhjZY3fMNAQFrvwQAgLMkQOj6Z6zQDzj+duiBonu1md5RGeuq VjJzNCIRI45HMiY0qzjptJm/mK5it9OAXTTrsQGjxLrPmT6fmyiH/N4g/NGXhNJV 620fbmTOKDvQXTcy8IPcP+yxlTUtdvKIztQvs5yyDtTmRkcL5RSkeRSYpZp/6HNC Dt+8DntfHzM= =/wHA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Sudaplatov book, McNeil-Lehrer TONIGHT (Monday)
by tcmay＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It may be too late for the East Coasters, but tonight's McNeil-Lehrer Newshour devotes 30 minutes to the just-released book, "Special Tasks," by Sudaplatov. Sudaplatov was effectively head of SMERSH, which many people think was Ian Fleming's fabrication...it was real, meaining "Death to Spies." Soviet MVD Counterintelligence. His actual title was head of Special Tasks, responsible for spy rings in the U.S. and Germany, assassination of people, etc. Important stuff! Revelations about Oppeheimer, Fermi, Bohr, and Gamov giving assistance to the Soviets, about the death of Trotsky, and about the sabotage of U.S. military bases. I happened to be reading the book today in a local bookshop, and when I got hope Harry Bartholomew, of our list, had left a message alerting me to the McNeil-Lehrer report. Check it out tonight, if you can. Consult your local listings. Many stations air it at 10, others at 11 (the late airings, that is). --Tim May -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

biometrics
by hughes＠ah.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Another authentication problem to ponder. Eric ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- WEIRDNUZ.320 (News of the Weird, March 25, 1994) by Chuck Shepherd Lead Story * In February, the Royal Bank of Scotland announced that it would begin to issue extra check-cashing ID cards to its transvestite customers who request them -- so that they might have separate cards depicting themselves dressed as male and female in order to "avoid embarrassment or difficulties," according to a Bank spokesman. [Globe and Mail-Reuter, 2-25-94] Oops!

1 0

No Subject
by anonymous＠extropia.wimsey.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subject: Any cypherpunks building encrypted phone? >I am working on that exact problem. It is not really that trivial. The >encryption has to handle a lot of data real time. I have a license >agreement for IDEA and am working on RSA. I am thinking of using triple >DES rather than IDEA because of the cost of the IDEA license. That seems reasonable to me. While there is some controversy in the community, I haven't heard anyone I respect say that 3DES is not reasonably secure (i.e, comparable to IDEA). But perhaps I've missed those comments! I think that even a straight DES phone would provide Pretty Good security, provided that it generated a new DES key for every call and swapped that key with the other phone via some type of public key encryption. Whether you use DES or 3DES, I suggest putting a button on the phone that force immediate generation and exchange of a new key. The truly paranoid can then press the button as often as they like. >How much would you pay for a good encrypted phone? At $100, I would probably buy one for myself and several more as gifts for friends I'd like to talk to who would be unlikely to buy them themselves. Above $100, I'd still be willing to buy my own, but there would have to be a significant user community for me to talk to. I suspect it will be difficult to persuade the average non-cypherpunk to pay >>$100 for an encrypted phone that hardly anyone has compatible equipment for. You know, we should really spend some time deciding what kind of exchange protocols would be appropriate here on the list. Wouldn't it be nice if all the various groups out there building hardware and software phones could talk to each other? If we can agree on a spec, this can happen. One other thought--the *TRULY* paranoid will want to build their own phones from a schematic, and they may not want to use custom chips that **might** have a backdoor in them. The ideal phone might be based on CPU's, RAM, and DSP's, with no DES chips or anything like that. Lady Ada

1 0

No Subject
by anonymous＠extropia.wimsey.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subject: Any cypherpunks building encrypted phone? >I am working on that exact problem. It is not really that trivial. The >encryption has to handle a lot of data real time. I have a license >agreement for IDEA and am working on RSA. I am thinking of using triple >DES rather than IDEA because of the cost of the IDEA license. That seems reasonable to me. While there is some controversy in the community, I haven't heard anyone I respect say that 3DES is not reasonably secure (i.e, comparable to IDEA). But perhaps I've missed those comments! I think that even a straight DES phone would provide Pretty Good security, provided that it generated a new DES key for every call and swapped that key with the other phone via some type of public key encryption. Whether you use DES or 3DES, I suggest putting a button on the phone that force immediate generation and exchange of a new key. The truly paranoid can then press the button as often as they like. >How much would you pay for a good encrypted phone? At $100, I would probably buy one for myself and several more as gifts for friends I'd like to talk to who would be unlikely to buy them themselves. Above $100, I'd still be willing to buy my own, but there would have to be a significant user community for me to talk to. I suspect it will be difficult to persuade the average non-cypherpunk to pay >>$100 for an encrypted phone that hardly anyone has compatible equipment for. You know, we should really spend some time deciding what kind of exchange protocols would be appropriate here on the list. Wouldn't it be nice if all the various groups out there building hardware and software phones could talk to each other? If we can agree on a spec, this can happen. One other thought--the *TRULY* paranoid will want to build their own phones from a schematic, and they may not want to use custom chips that **might** have a backdoor in them. The ideal phone might be based on CPU's, RAM, and DSP's, with no DES chips or anything like that. Lady Ada

1 0

Money Laundering through Options market.
by Alexander Chislenko 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I sent the following to the messages' author rather than the list by mistake; hope it is [still] of some value to the list; If nobody minds (I'm not sure about the forwarding rules here), I'll forward the $laundry thread to the extropian list. -------- --------- ------------- I would recommend transactions in *options*, not in futures. If the option is far out of the money, you can easily get >>95% assurance that the money will go the way you wanted. If you execute several simultaneous transactions in different options (including spreads on opposite sides of the price range, unrelated markets, stop-orders, etc.), the results may be practically guaranteed on the first try. Of course, transactions in related areas, shifted contract positions, etc. will be harder to track than directly balanced transactions, but somehow I doubt that existing schemes, if any, are that obscure. Also, there are not that many commodities/currencies/... with markets large enough to execute $1M+ contracts like that at a time. I'd expect people to use major markets in several transactions not large enough to attract attention of market analysts. With access to the transactions database, one could more or less easily compile a list of traders engaged in such activities and amounts of money transferred. I believe that this way of money laundering is well within understanding of at least some people. The ways of catching them are, probably, too hard for the corresponding agencies, at least organizationally. So the list of suspected offenders may be of pretty high value... which can probably be realized... with some caution. An article claiming that such a list is being compiled may well stop almost all such laundering [ which may kill both futures and options markets ;-) ] I personally would rather wait for more secure anonymous transactions to launder *my* millions though. sasha(a)cs.umb.edu P.S. I read Hillary Clinton turned $1K into $100K in cattle futures market. Isn't that amazing? P.P.S. I'll bet $10K against $1 that you can't donate *me* $50K like this. Any takers? -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclaimer: The above text is pure speculation. I would never do anything mentioned there.

2 1

Secure HTTP, Mosaic
by VACCINIA＠UNCVX1.OIT.UNC.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Below is the information NCSA/EIT sent me about S-HTTP, you can skip the press release at the end if you have already read it. It was posted to the list a short while ago. Vaccinia(a)UNCVX1.oit.unc.edu Thank you for your inquiry regarding Secure HTTP. This message provides some details on the protocol and the status of its implementation. The April 12th joint EIT/NCSA/RSA press release regarding Secure Mosaic is included at the end of the message. OVERVIEW OF S-HTTP We have developed a new protocol for dealing with a wide range of cryptographic modes and algorithms in the context of the World-Wide Web, based on the Web's existing HyperText Transfer Protocol (HTTP). We call this protocol "Secure HTTP" or "S-HTTP". This protocol has been designed to enable incorporation of various cryptographic message format standards into Web clients and servers, including, but not limited to PKCS-7, PEM, and PGP. S-HTTP supports interoperation among a variety of implementations, and is backwards compatible with HTTP. S-HTTP aware clients can talk to S-HTTP oblivious servers and vice-versa, although such transactions obviously would not use S-HTTP security features. IMPLEMENTATIONS AND LICENSING EIT will make available freely usable source code for implementing S-HTTP in both clients and servers. These reference implementations of "Secure NCSA Mosaic" and "Secure NCSA HTTPD" will support two crypto engine implementations: via an integrated TIPEM library (offering PKCS-7 support) and via an "outboard" RIPEM application. RSA has agreed to permit the distribution of their TIPEM library, in binary form, without charge in conjunction with the non-commercial distribution of NCSA Mosaic. Implementors of non-commercial clients or servers may wish to use the already available RIPEM system (which is itself based on RSA's RSAREF library). Commercial implementors or distributors of WWW clients and servers are encouraged to pursue licencing arrangements with RSA or their licencees. FEATURES OF S-HTTP S-HTTP does not require client-side public key certificates (or public keys), supporting a symmetric session key operation mode. This is significant because it means that secure, spontaneous transactions can occur without requiring individual users to have an established public key. While S-HTTP will be able to take advantage of a ubiquitious certification infrastructure, its deployment does not require it. S-HTTP supports end-to-end secure transactions, in contrast with current usage of the existing HTTP authorization protocol which requires the client to attempt access and be denied before the security mechanism is employed. Clients may be "primed" to initiate a secure transaction (typically using information supplied in an HTML anchor); this is used to support encryption of fill-out forms, for example. In S-HTTP, no sensitive data need ever be sent over the network in the clear. S-HTTP provides full flexibility of cryptographic algorithms, modes and parameters. Option negotiation is used to allow clients and servers to agree on transaction modes (should the the request be signed? encrypted? both? what about the reply?); cryptographic algorithms (RSA vs. DSA for signing, DES vs. RC4 for encrypting, etc.); and certificate selection (please sign with your "Mastercard certificate"). ABOUT PKCS-7 PKCS-7 is a cryptographic message syntax standard developed by a consortium of companies lead by RSA. PKCS-7 is compatible with the Internet standards for Privacy Enhanced Mail (PEM) in that signed-data and signed-and-enveloped-data content, constructed in a PEM-compatible mode, can be converted into PEM messages without any cryptographic operations. PEM messages can similarly be converted into the PKCS-7 signed-data and signed-and-enveloped-data content types. In other words, PKCS-7 and PEM implementations can interoperate. PKCS-7 has the following advantages: a) PKCS-7 permits transport of 8-bit data (contrast with PEM, which requires Base-64 encoding). b) PKCS-7 can have a signature-less mode of operation. This permits secure messages to be sent from senders who do not have RSA key pairs. Signature is mandatory under PEM. c) PKCS-7 permits more flexibility in certificate format and trust models. d) PKCS-7 is explicitly designed for algorithmic flexibility. New cryptosystems, message digest algorithms and signature schemes can be added just by defining new types. SCHEDULE An "alpha quality" implementation of Secure Mosaic and HTTPD was demonstrated in public on April 12th. The protocol document is to be sent for external review (to RSA, NCSA and TIS) at the end of April. After revision, we plan to submit it as an "experimental protocol" RFC -- by late May, we expect. The reference implementation will be supplied to beta testers (to the protocol reviewers, and selected CommerceNet sponsors). Public release (to CommerceNet participants) is scheduled for September. CommerceNet will operate a certification authority, suitable for operators of S-HTTP servers (open to CommerceNet participants), beginning at that time. We expect that NCSA will make the reference implementation available to the Internet community soon after. Periodic progress reports will be reported to Internet mailing lists (such as PEM-DEV), and available on the EIT and CommerceNet Web servers (URL's http://www.commerce.net/ and http://www.eit.com/) ORIGINAL PRESS RELEASE Secure NCSA Mosaic Establishes Necessary Framework for Electronic Commerce on the Internet PALO ALTO, Calif., April 12, 1994 -- Enterprise Integration Technologies (EIT), the National Center for Supercomputing Applications (NCSA) at the University of Illinois and RSA Data Security today announced agreements to jointly develop and distribute a secure version of NCSA Mosaic, the popular point-and-click interface that enables easy access to thousands of multimedia information services on the Internet. The announcement was made in conjunction with the launch of CommerceNet, a large-scale market trial of electronic commerce on the Internet. Under the agreements, EIT will integrate its Secure-HTTP software with public key cryptography from RSA into NCSA Mosaic Clients and World Wide Web (WWW) servers. WWW is a general-purpose architecture for information retrieval comprised of thousands of computers and servers that is available to anyone on Internet. The enhancements will then be made available to NCSA for widespread public distribution and commercial licensing. Jay M. Tenenbaum, chief executive officer of EIT, believes secure NCSA Mosaic will help unleash the commercial potential of the Internet by enabling buyers and sellers to meet spontaneously and transact business. "While NCSA Mosaic makes it possible to browse multimedia catalogs, view product videos, and fill out order forms, there is currently no commercially safe way to consummate a sale," said Tenenbaum. "With public key cryptography, however, one can authenticate the identity of trading partners so that access to sensitive information can be properly accounted for." This secure version of NCSA Mosaic allows users to affix digital signatures which cannot be repudiated and time stamps to contracts so that they become legally binding and auditable. In addition, sensitive information such as credit card numbers and bid amounts can be securely exchanged under encryption. Together, these capabilities provide the foundation for a broad range of financial services, including the network equivalents of credit and debit cards, letters of credit and checks. In short, such secure WWW software enables all users to safely transact day-to-day business involving even their most valuable information on the Internet. According to Joseph Hardin, director of the NCSA group that developed NCSA Mosaic, over 50,000 copies of the interface software are being downloaded monthly from NCSA's public server -- with over 300,000 copies to date. Moreover, five companies have signed license agreements with NCSA and announced plans to release commercial products based on NCSA Mosaic. "This large and rapidly growing installed base represents a vast, untapped marketplace," says Hardin. The availability of a secure version of NCSA Mosaic establishes a valid framework for companies to immediately begin large-scale commerce on the Internet." Jim Bidzos, president of RSA, sees the agreement as the beginning of a new era in electronic commerce, where companies routinely transact business over public networks. "RSA is proud to provide the enabling public key software technology and will make it available on a royalty-free basis for inclusion in NCSA's public distribution of NCSA Mosaic," said Bidzos. RSA and EIT will work together to develop attractive licensing programs for commercial use of public key technology in WWW servers." At the CommerceNet launch, Allan M. Schiffman, chief technical officer of EIT, demonstrated a working prototype of secure NCSA Mosaic, along with a companion product that provides for a secure WWW server. The prototype was implemented using RSA's TIPEM toolkit. "In integrating public key cryptography into NCSA Mosaic, we took great pains to hide the intricacies and preserve the simplicity and intuitive nature of NCSA Mosaic," explained Schiffman. Any user that is familiar with NCSA Mosaic should be able to understand and use the software's new security features. Immediately to the left of NCSA's familiar spinning globe icon, a second icon has been inserted that is designed to resemble a piece of yellow paper. When a document is signed, a red seal appears at the bottom of the paper, which the user can click on to see the public key certificates of the signer and issuing agencies. When an arriving document is encrypted, the paper folds into a closed envelope, signifying that its information is hidden from prying eyes. When the user fills out a form containing sensitive information, there is a 'secure send' button that will encrypt it prior to transmission. Distribution of Public Keys To effectively employ public-key cryptography, an infrastructure must be created to certify and standardize the usage of public key certificates. CommerceNet will certify public keys on behalf of member companies, and will also authorize third parties such as banks, public agencies, industry consortia to issue keys. Such keys will often serve as credentials, for example, identifying someone as a customer of a bank, with a guaranteed credit line. Significantly, all of the transactions involved in doing routine purchases from a catalog can be accomplished without requiring buyers to obtain public keys. Using only the server's public key, the buyer can authenticate the identity of the seller, and transmit credit card information securely by encrypting it under the seller's public key. Because there are far fewer servers than clients, public key administration issues are greatly simplified. Easy Access to Strong Security To successfully combine simplicity of operation and key administration functions with a high level of security that can be accessible to even non-sophisticated users, significant changes were necessary for existing WWW security protocols. EIT developed a new protocol called Secure-HTTP for dealing with a full range of modern cryptographic algorithms and systems in the Web. Secure-HTTP enables incorporation of a variety of cryptographic standards, including, but not limited to, RSA's PKCS-7, and Internet Privacy Enhanced Mail (PEM), and supports maximal interoperation between clients and servers using different cryptographic algorithms. Cryptosystem and signature system interoperation is particularly useful between U.S. residents and non-U.S. residents, where the non-U.S. residents may have to use weaker 40-bit keys in conjunction with RSA's RC2 (TM) and RC4 (TM) variable keysize ciphers. EIT intends to publish Secure-HTTP as an Internet standard, and work with others in the WWW community to create a standard that will encourage using the Web for a wide variety of commercial transactions. Availability EIT will make Secure NCSA Mosaic software available at no charge to CommerceNet members in September and NCSA will incorporate these secure features in future NCSA Mosaic releases. Enterprise Integration Technologies Corp., of Palo Alto, Calif., (EIT) is an R&D and consulting organization, developing software and services that help companies do business on the Internet. EIT is also project manager of CommerceNet. The National Center for Supercomputer Applications (NCSA), developer of the Mosaic hypermedia browser based at the University of Illinois in Champaign, Ill., is pursuing a wide variety of software projects aimed at making the Internet more useful and easier to use. RSA Data Security, Inc., Redwood City, Calif., invented Public Key Cryptography and performs basic research and development in the cryptographic sciences. RSA markets software that facilitates the integration of their technology into applications. Information on Secure NCSA Mosaic can be obtained by sending e-mail to shttp-info(a)eit.com. Press Contact: Nancy Teater Hamilton Communications Phone: (415) 321-0252 Fax: (415) 327-4660 Internet: nrt(a)hamilton.com

1 0