December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

True meaning of CDA
by Kevin S. Van Horn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- cjs(a)netcom.com (cjs) wrote: >I think that we should make an example of those responsible for the >CDA. And while you're at it, make sure you point out what the acronym CDA really means: Communications Disempowerment Act. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Kevin S. Van Horn | The really nasty criminals don't break laws -- vanhorn(a)atext.com | they make them. - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBMRppPyoZzwIn1bdtAQHwVQF/d7/FiPBRhSUEpBkreF/dvGGQSGOFAluE OGSOYtZiAWxLBZBh0pcF3O54lgjaGq9w =Sj4I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Tell me whats wrong with this
by avatar＠mindspring.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tell me whats wrong with this section of the telecom bill. I have a six year old boy I am trying to raise and it is hard enough to teach him respect and values without explaining why Ned Beatty is being bungholed in the woods by Billy Bob or why the Terminator splattered this guys brains all over the wall. Tell me why parents should not be able to censor their OWN television so that they may raise their children the way THEY see fit...................Did your dad give you his old playboys?.........NOOOOO............ Did he take you down to your grandmothers autopsy before her funeral?...................I Don't Think So..... Honestly, don't you believe that what a child is exposed to effects his judgement, perception, attitude,and character?? All I'm saying is it's tough to raise a child these days without the added distortion of modern programing and parents need not be denied any tool that can help them achieve success. SEC. 551. PARENTAL CHOICE IN TELEVISION PROGRAMMING. (a) FINDINGS- The Congress makes the following findings: (1) Television influences children's perception of the values and behavior that are common and acceptable in society. (2) Television station operators, cable television system operators, and video programmers should follow practices in connection with video programming that take into consideration that television broadcast and cable programming has established a uniquely pervasive presence in the lives of American children. (3) The average American child is exposed to 25 hours of television each week and some children are exposed to as much as 11 hours of television a day. (4) Studies have shown that children exposed to violent video programming at a young age have a higher tendency for violent and aggressive behavior later in life than children not so exposed, and that children exposed to violent video programming are prone to assume that acts of violence are acceptable behavior. (5) Children in the United States are, on average, exposed to an estimated 8,000 murders and 100,000 acts of violence on television by the time the child completes elementary school. (6) Studies indicate that children are affected by the pervasiveness and casual treatment of sexual material on television, eroding the ability of parents to develop responsible attitudes and behavior in their children. (7) Parents express grave concern over violent and sexual video programming and strongly support technology that would give them greater control to block video programming in the home that they consider harmful to their children. (8) There is a compelling governmental interest in empowering parents to limit the negative influences of video programming that is harmful to children. (9) Providing parents with timely information about the nature of upcoming video programming and with the technological tools that allow them easily to block violent, sexual, or other programming that they believe harmful to their children is a nonintrusive and narrowly tailored means of achieving that compelling governmental interest. Charles Donald Smith Jr. ||The government is my shepherd I need not work. It alloweth me to lie down on a good job. It leadeth me beside stilled factories. It destroyeth my initiative. It leadeth me in the path of a parasite for politics sake. YEA, though I walk through the valley of laziness and deficet spending I shall fear no evil, for the government is with me. It prepareth an economic utopia for me by appropriating the earnings of my grandchildren. It filleth my head with false security. My inefficiency runeth over. Surely, the government should care for me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in a fools paradise forever.................AMEN! || nuke'm if ya got'em||

3 2

Re: Report available: "Minimal Key Lengths for Symmetric Ciphers"
by um＠c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Anyone who listens to crypto advice from people who's purpose in life >is to listen to *YOU* gets what they deserve. I'll stay with PGP which >has a 2048 bit key. ROTFL. Last time I checked, it was 128 bits. BTW, do you know what "minimal" means? -- Ulf Mvller * E-Mail: <um(a)c2.org> * WWW: http://www.c2.org/~um/

1 0

Re: Nuke em if ya got em "TCMay"
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Feb 05, 1996 06:49:57, 'attila <attila(a)primenet.com>' wrote: > >attila sez: > > It is not whether paralax does not know shit from beans, but that >he proves to all that he would prefer to censor TCMay and James A. >Donald than listen to their opinions, despite the fact he posted his >own rather trivial and absurd point. > >political correctness and the liberal news intrepretations of "all >men are created equal" with reverse discrimination, destruction of >the work ethic for the dole, and the New World Order whose need is >more and more cheaper labor, even to the point of disenfranchising >whole element of America society to achieve a worker's underclass is >the shit part of beans and shit. > > with this, I suppose I have been entered upon your "list" of >enemies of the 'statist' nation along with TCMay and James A. Donald, >and that my prejudged conviction and sentence requires me to write >30,000 lines of debugged C source code before the end of this year. > > how about 30,000 lines of debugged Ada source for you? --while >I add you to procmailrc: > > :0: > * ^[FRST].*paralax > assholes > It seems that the lib'ers on the list continue to behave in their increasingly demagogic style. Instead of dealing with substantive criticism they charge those who disagree with them are "censors". First Atilla charges one critic "paralax" with "not wanting to listen" when it seems obvious that paralax is not only listening but responding. Then Atilla concludes by giving us the code for his mail software whereby he will not listen, thus doing the very thing he accuses others of. Second, instead of discussing the substantive issues he goes off to denounce the various lib'ber horsemen of the "liberal media," "political correctness," "reverse discrimination," "the dole," and "the New World Order." I sense that both groups of lib'bers share the same methodology. The first group (Rush's "lib'bers") around people like Dworkin and other professional "anti-rape feminists" have their Politically Correct Agenda and Politically Correct terminology. If you disagree with it they proceed with a stream of demagogic and vitupertive abuse, followed by another stream of off-the-wall political attacks using words like "stalking," "sexual harassment," "rape," and "male patriarchal [whatever]" followed by statements of their personal sense of "indignation" and "outrage." Then they announce they are no longer going to listen to the very discussion they started. Until they start another. The second group (the lib'bertarians) have their Politically Correct Agenda and Politically Correct Language. If you disagree with them to also get a stream of off-the-wall political attacks featuring terms like those Atilla used. Then they, very much like the radical feminist lib'bers put their electronic fingers in their electronic ears so they do not have to listen. These are the people who have the political agenda, the personal maturity, and the political strategy to make the net and the world a better place? Not from what I've seen. --tallpaul

1 0

Re: Tell me whats wrong with this
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:06 PM 2/8/96, avatar(a)mindspring.com wrote: >Tell me whats wrong with this section of the telecom bill. I have a six >year old boy I am trying to raise >and it is hard enough to teach him respect and values without explaining why >Ned Beatty is being >bungholed in the woods by Billy Bob or why the Terminator splattered this >guys brains all over the >wall. > Tell me why parents should not be able to censor their OWN >television so that they may raise their children the way THEY see >fit...................Did your dad give you his old >playboys?.........NOOOOO............ >Did he take you down to your grandmothers autopsy before her >funeral?...................I Don't Think So..... > Honestly, don't you believe that what a child is exposed to effects >his judgement, perception, > attitude,and character?? I think Avatar is having some kind of fit here, but I will attempt to answer his questions. First, most televisions and VCRs are currently equipped with the "O-Switch," which parents have long been using to turn content on and off. Second, assuming you have televisions and VCRs at this time, you surely must realize that these will not be affected by the V-Chip? There is no retrofit plan (thankfully) and so it will take well over a decade at current replacement rates for most households to have only V-chipped sets. (Perhaps Avatar is different from most of us, and plans to dump his existing televisions and VCRs and replace them with V-Chipped machines.) Third, the main objection most of us have is to the _coercive_ aspect. I have no objection to you and your 6-year-old son buying a V-chip type of gadget, but I don't want to be told in a free society that this is the only choice *I* will have. (Amongst other things, I don't believe the $2 per machine estimate, and neither do the set makers.) Fourth, there are major ambiguities in ratings. Will "Schindler's List" be rated as more violent and sexually explicit than "The Terminator"? Probably, by objective standards (my objective standards, that is). Imagine the uproar. Fifth, there is the general notion that government must screen material and/or act as babysitter. This leads to all sorts of problems. >All I'm saying is it's tough to raise a child these days without the added >distortion of modern >programing and parents need not be denied any tool that can help them >achieve success. "Need not be denied" = "Put this chip in your machines and adopt a ratings service or we will shut your factory down and close your network." Some opinion for a Cypherpunk to have. And quite a contrast with your own sig. In any case, your 6-year-old son will be 8 before the first V-Chip-equipped sets appear on the market, at the earliest (no technical standards have even been proposed, no ratings services proposed, etc., so I doubt V-chips will appear before 1999). However, unless you dump all your existing sets and VCRs (remember that all VCRs act as tuners...that's how I watch t.v., through my VCR tuner), little Johnny will still be able to tune in to Bad Thoughts. And even if you get all V-chipped equipment, by, say, 2002, when Johnny is 12, he'll undoubtedly be able to find some of his buddies who have their own VCRs, DirectTV dishes, etc. They'll have a blast watching "Debbie Does Fort Meade." > >||The government is my shepherd I need not work. It alloweth me to lie > down on a good job. It leadeth me beside stilled factories. It destroyeth > my initiative. It leadeth me in the path of a parasite for politics sake. YEA, > though I walk through the valley of laziness and deficet spending I shall > fear no evil, for the government is with me. It prepareth an economic utopia > for me by appropriating the earnings of my grandchildren. It filleth my head > with false security. My inefficiency runeth over. Surely, the government >should care for me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in a fools >paradise >forever.................AMEN! || nuke'm if ya got'em|| You believe this about the government, and yet you want the government to mandate a chip in receivers to stop Bad Thoughts? Jeesh. --Tim May [This Bible excerpt awaiting review under the Communications Decency Act] And then Lot said, "I have some mighty fine young virgin daughters. Why don't you boys just come on in and do em right here in my house - I'll just watch!"....Later, up in the mountains, the younger daughter said. "Dad's getting old. I say we should do him." So the two daughters got him drunk and did him all that night. Sure enough, Dad got em pregnant....Onan really hated the idea of doing his brother's wife and getting her pregnant while his brother got all the credit, so he whacked off first....Remember, it's not a good idea to have sex with your sister, your brother, your parents, your pet dog, or the farm animals. [excerpts from the Old Testament, Modern Vernacular Translation, TCM, 1996]

1 0

Re: Tell me whats wrong with this
by Bruce Baugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:49 PM 2/8/96 -0600, Avatar wrote: >You probably had no problem with seat belts being manditory eqiupment , >because they >protected YOU and the people YOU cared about. >You probably had no problem with manditory airbags, public building smoke >alarms, unleaded >fuel, restaurant health codes,etc....Because they protected you and or >people you care about, >even though they cost YOU more money. Gee, there's nothing like false speculations as a basis for attack. I, for instance, have a friend who's been in two serious car accidents in recent years. In one she was belted in, and survived a nasty tumble that otherwise almost certaily would have killed her. In the other, she was in a truck from the pre-mandated-belts era, and was thrown free before the car collided with a pole that pierced all the way through the driver's seat. The mandate could have killed her. Sure, that's rare. I always belt up, or virtually always. Do I approve the mandate? No. ditto with all of the others. I want _information_, not _behavior control_. So. For those of us who do not generally approve of pushing responsibility for our morals (or health needs, for those of us with severe immune problems) onto others, how do you justify compelling us to spend money to make your life easier? >It's obvious that you watch a lot television your an excellent sensationalist. >Besides, we both no that the cost of the chip is insignificant. This device >hurts no one! In the first place, we don't know anything of the sort. Show the chip implemented in a mass-market TV or VCR, and back up your claims. Second, by putting more rating power into the hands of the State, it does emphatically threaten freedom of expression. And remember: anyone with your sig file, assuming you believe its sentiments, has no great ground for confidence that his views, rather than those of the worst and best-organized busybodies around, will prevail. Bruce Baugh bruce(a)aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~bruce

1 0

Re: Mailing list
by JOHN MARTIN LEWARS 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

When I wrote: > Please make me apart of your mailing list. I meant: Please take me apart on your mailing list. Thanks, Jack.

1 0

Re: Tell me whats wrong with this
by droelke＠rdxsunhost.aud.alcatel.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Two things are wrong with the law. 1) Parents still can turn the TV off. They don't need any V-chip or bills from congress to do that. (This obvious fact seems to escape every bug-eyed person) 2) The v-chip would have already been deployed as an option if congress hadn't stepped into the ring. The marketplace saw the demand and had already developed the technology. Congress got it's finger in the pie and it will probably be 2 years now before its actually deployed. Gee thanks Newt. Dan > From owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Thu Feb 8 17:05:13 1996 > X-Sender: avatar(a)mindspring.com > X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type> : > text/plain> ; > charset="us-ascii"> > Date: Thu, 08 Feb 1996 17:06:22 -0600 > To: tcmay(a)mail.got.net > From: avatar(a)mindspring.com > Subject: Tell me whats wrong with this > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Content-Length: 4330 > > Tell me whats wrong with this section of the telecom bill. I have a six > year old boy I am trying to raise > and it is hard enough to teach him respect and values without explaining why > Ned Beatty is being > bungholed in the woods by Billy Bob or why the Terminator splattered this > guys brains all over the > wall. > Tell me why parents should not be able to censor their OWN > television so that they may raise their children the way THEY see > fit...................Did your dad give you his old > playboys?.........NOOOOO............ > Did he take you down to your grandmothers autopsy before her > funeral?...................I Don't Think So..... > Honestly, don't you believe that what a child is exposed to effects > his judgement, perception, > attitude,and character?? > > All I'm saying is it's tough to raise a child these days without the added > distortion of modern > programing and parents need not be denied any tool that can help them > achieve success. > > SEC. 551. PARENTAL CHOICE IN TELEVISION PROGRAMMING. > (a) FINDINGS- The Congress makes the following findings: > (1) Television influences children's perception of the values > and behavior that are common and acceptable in society. > (2) Television station operators, cable television system > operators, and video programmers should follow practices in > connection with video programming that take into consideration > that television broadcast and cable programming has established > a uniquely pervasive presence in the lives of American children. > (3) The average American child is exposed to 25 hours of > television each week and some children are exposed to as much > as 11 hours of television a day. > (4) Studies have shown that children exposed to violent video > programming at a young age have a higher tendency for violent > and aggressive behavior later in life than children not so > exposed, and that children exposed to violent video programming > are prone to assume that acts of violence are acceptable > behavior. > (5) Children in the United States are, on average, exposed to > an estimated 8,000 murders and 100,000 acts of violence on > television by the time the child completes elementary school. > (6) Studies indicate that children are affected by the > pervasiveness and casual treatment of sexual material on > television, eroding the ability of parents to develop > responsible attitudes and behavior in their children. > (7) Parents express grave concern over violent and sexual > video programming and strongly support technology that would > give them greater control to block video programming in the > home that they consider harmful to their children. > (8) There is a compelling governmental interest in empowering > parents to limit the negative influences of video programming > that is harmful to children. > (9) Providing parents with timely information about the > nature of upcoming video programming and with the technological > tools that allow them easily to block violent, sexual, or other > programming that they believe harmful to their children is a > nonintrusive and narrowly tailored means of achieving that > compelling governmental interest. > Charles Donald Smith Jr. > > ||The government is my shepherd I need not work. It alloweth me to lie > down on a good job. It leadeth me beside stilled factories. It destroyeth > my initiative. It leadeth me in the path of a parasite for politics sake. YEA, > though I walk through the valley of laziness and deficet spending I shall > fear no evil, for the government is with me. It prepareth an economic utopia > for me by appropriating the earnings of my grandchildren. It filleth my head > with false security. My inefficiency runeth over. Surely, the government > should care for me all the days of my life, and I will dwell in a fools paradise > forever.................AMEN! || nuke'm if ya got'em|| > ------------------------------------------------------------------ Dan Oelke Alcatel Network Systems droelke(a)aud.alcatel.com Richardson, TX

1 0

Re: Mailing list
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:38 PM 2/8/96, JOHN MARTIN LEWARS wrote: >When I wrote: >> Please make me apart of your mailing list. >I meant: > Please take me apart on your mailing list. >Thanks, Jack. I think Futplex _did_ take you apart on the list. --Tim P.S. To have mercy on you, if you want to subscribe to the Cypherpunks list, send a message to: majordomo(a)toad.com with this in the body: subscribe cypherpunks [This Bible excerpt awaiting review under the Communications Decency Act] And then Lot said, "I have some mighty fine young virgin daughters. Why don't you boys just come on in and do em right here in my house - I'll just watch!"....Later, up in the mountains, the younger daughter said. "Dad's getting old. I say we should do him." So the two daughters got him drunk and did him all that night. Sure enough, Dad got em pregnant....Onan really hated the idea of doing his brother's wife and getting her pregnant while his brother got all the credit, so he whacked off first....Remember, it's not a good idea to have sex with your sister, your brother, your parents, your pet dog, or the farm animals. [excerpts from the Old Testament, Modern Vernacular Translation, TCM, 1996]

1 0

Re: [SILLY] Mailing list
by lmccarth＠cs.umass.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I knew this was too good to be true: Forwarded message: > From owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Thu Feb 8 18:42:54 1996 > Date: Fri, 9 Feb 1996 07:38:08 +0800 > Message-Id: <199602082338.HAA03879(a)infolink2.infolink.net> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > From: JOHN MARTIN LEWARS <jml216(a)psu.edu> > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Reply-To: jml216(a)psu.edu > Subject: Re: Mailing list > Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Precedence: bulk > > When I wrote: > > Please make me apart of your mailing list. > I meant: > Please take me apart on your mailing list. > Thanks, Jack.

1 0

[Speaking of mail headers] the Zundel 'Censorship' fraud
by Richard Charles Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

As recently posted by my close friend rich(a)c2.org. Ingrid could have fired up a mirror site at cts.com any time she pleased. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- wrightd(a)merlin.magic.mb.ca writes: >In group can.politics, article <31152afc.732040(a)news.snafu.de>, >tilman(a)berlin.snafu.de (Tilman Hausherr) wrote: > >... > >>This info as a reponse to the guy who said that Zündel hasn't access to >>the net himself. > >Tilman, if Zundel has his own web server, he doesn't *need* access to the >internet to get his own web page. He just has to be on a LAN (local area >network). He can fake any part of the internet by having his own server on >his own network, but that doesn't *prove* that he has access to anything - >it just shows that he has a good computer system. N:~> host ezundel.cts.com ezundel.cts.com has address 204.212.157.52 This is not a troll or a masquerade. You will see that genuine authenticated email messages and posts from Zundel's official spokesperson "Ingrid" come from this IP address. The contents of this message were lies too, but hey, I'm not into posting private email. Received: from mailhub.cts.com (mailhub.cts.com [192.188.72.25]) by Networking.Stanford.EDU (8.6.11/8.6.6) with SMTP id EAA29094 for <llurch(a)networking.stanford.edu>; Wed, 31 Jan 1996 04:15:15 -0800 Received: from [204.212.157.52] by mailhub.cts.com with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #20) id m0thbRP-000V34C; Wed, 31 Jan 96 04:15 PST Date: Wed, 31 Jan 96 04:15 PST X-Sender: ezundel(a)mail.cts.com Message-Id: <v01530504ad34a8781ca2(a)[204.212.157.52]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Rich Graves <llurch(a)networking.stanford.edu> From: ezundel(a)cts.com (E. Zundel) Subject: Re: I believe we've been conned. Cc: declan+(a)CMU.EDU - -rich Institute for Ernst Zundel Revisionism http://36.190.0.210/~llurch/Not_By_Me_Not_My_Views/ "First, bring down Zundel's suffering in terms of numbers and events, both real and imagined, to what it really was, not what they say it was, what they exploit for their own political, financial, and geopolitical purposes." AltaVista/DejaNews fodder: Zundel Zundel Zundel Zundel Zundel Zundel Zundel Zundel Zundel Zundel Zundel Deutsche Telekom Deutsche Telekom Deutsche Telekom Deutsche Telekom Deutsche Nazi Propaganda Nazi Propaganda Nazi Propaganda Nazi Propaganda Nazi Propaganda Censorship Censorship Censorship Censorship Censorship Censorship Censorship Simon Wiesenthal Center Simon Wiesenthal Center Simon Wiesenthal Center -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMRqUJo3DXUbM57SdAQEJ2wP6AvMiAveRWoWJFqcvTO4Q3qFUY1a9iVKN Aw7NkoJJiH21WmRuATODxi9OtQQ9okVrNxJMMIaXPaF5SAm5Lk4Of+1IG1ULhKcx QamSe/NN9z4vZLyaM4j1UVJ09On/0TdyzMdRx6S5yDgpCqzLc+2coDcoINtxCRsr pqmBcsDtAMM= =qUEe -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

References for multi-plaintext encryption
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"lmccarth(a)cs.umass.edu" 8-FEB-1996 02:53:06.68 >You said you'd deleted this.... [...] > http://www.hks.net/cpunks/cpunks-12/1451.html, in particular > http://www.hks.net/cpunks/cpunks-12/1558.html --------- Thank you. -Allen

1 0

cypher-list for telcom legislation
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Since the telcom legislation has been passed, I thought it might be prudent to remind everyone that there is a PGP encrypted mailing list called cypher-list. It can be subscribed to by sending email to cypher-list-request(a)vishnu.alias.net. All messages and transactions are encrypted. The code is a little buggy but it works for the most part. It seems that cypher-list would make an excellent platform for discussion on the telcom legislation and maybe even ways to thwart it. If you have trouble subscribing, perry(a)vishnu.alias.net has been very helpful. (he got me on!) Lazarus

1 0

Applied Cryptography, 2nd Edition -- Errata version 1.2
by Bruce Schneier 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

APPLIED CRYPTOGRAPHY, Second Edition ERRATA Version 1.2 - 1 February 1996 This errata includes all errors I have found in the book, including minor spelling and grammatical errors. Please distribute this errata sheet to anyone else who owns a copy of the book. Page 7: In line 31, delete the word "source". Page 10: The second sentence would be clearer as "Replace the least significant bit of each byte of the image with the bits of the message." Page 11: Line 18, the reference should be "[703]" and not "[699]". Page 13: Fifth paragraph, first sentence, should read: "The original German Enigma had three rotors, chosen from a set of five,...." This increased to three rotors chosen from eight during the war, and the Navy started using four rotors chosen from eight. Page 14: The last sentence should read: "The smallest displacement that indicates a multiple of the key length is the length of the key." Page 16: Third line from the bottom, "1.44" makes more sense as "1.544". Page 18: Table 1.1, second item. 1 in 4,000,000 is 2^22. This makes the third item equal to 2^55. Page 53: Second to last sentence about SKEY should read: "Similarly, the database is not useful to an attacker." Page 55: William Price's first name is Wyn. Page 60: In Step (4) of the Kerberos protocol, change "Bob sends" to "Bob creates". Page 61: Step (3), the second message should contain A instead of B. Page 62: In the third line, there's a comma missing. Page 63: Second protocol, step (2), the second message should be "S_T(C,K_C)". Page 70: In the first step (4), the equation should be "R XOR S = M". In the second step (2), it should be "to generate U". Page 77: In step (2), the message is signed with Trent's private key. And T_n is mistakenly both the time and the timestamp. Page 80: In line 7, "step (3)" should be "step (5)". Page 82: Fourth line from the bottom, the correct expression is "up and died." Page 99: Tenth line from the bottom, delete the second word: "will". Page 104: Graph isomorphism has never been proven to be an NP-Complete problem. It does seem to be hard, and is probably useful for cryptography. Page 105: In Step (2), Peggy gives Victor a copy of H'. Page 106: In the first line, "step (3)" should be "step (4)". Page 112: Step (1) should read "Alice takes the document and multiplies it by a random value." Page 116: The protocol could be worded better. Step (3) should begin: "Alice decrypts Bob's key twice, once with each of her private keys." Step (4) should begin: "Alice encrypts both of her messages, each with a different one of the DES keys...." Page 126: The "Voting with Blind Signatures" protocol is a little more complicated. The voter does not send all the blinding factors in step (2). The CTF requests 9 of 10 blinding factors in step (3), and the voter sends only those blinding factors to the CTF. Additionally, in step three only the one messages (containing a set of votes) that has not been unblinded will effectively be signed by the CTF. Page 134: Another problem with this protocol is that there are numerous ways that various participants can cheat and collude to find out the salary of another participant. These cheaters can misrepresent their own salaries during their attack. Page 135: Lines 13-14; technically Alice and Bob get no additional information about the other's numbers. Page 136: Lines 14-15; technically Alice and Bob get no additional information about the other's numbers. Page 144: Line 27, the odds should be "1 in n". Line 29, "step (2) should be "step (1)". Page 146: Fourth line from the bottom, delete the word "that". Page 161: In the eleventh line from the bottom, "harnesses" should be "harnessed". Page 175: Line 8, it's really triple-DES encryption. Page 181: Line 8 should read "he does not know it" instead of "he does know it". Page 195: In line 13, the reference number should be [402]. Page 201: Error Propagation, lines 5-6. The sentence should read: "In 8- bit CFB mode, 9 bytes of decrypted plaintext are garbled by a single-bit error in the ciphertext." Page 202: Third to last line, toggling individual bits does not affect subsequent bits in a synchronous stream cipher. Page 203: Section 9.8, both equations should be "S_i = E_K(S_(i-1))". Page 209: Table 9.1. CFB, Security: Bits of the last block can be changed, not the first. CFB, Efficiency: The speed is the same as the block cipher only in 64-bit CFB. CFB and OFB, Efficiency: "Ciphertext is the same size as the plaintext" should be a plus. Page 213: In the last line of the third paragraph, "cryptanalyze" is misspelled. Page 217: The Table 10.1 headers got garbled. They should be: "Algorithm", "Confidentiality", "Authentication", "Integrity", and "Key Management". Page 246: The last line should be: "#define isEven(x) ((x & 0x01) == 0)". Page 249: Line 9, "Euclid's generalization" should be "Euler's generalization". Page 251: Lines 20-21. The sentence should read: "For example, there are 11 quadratic residues mod 35: 1, 4, 9, 11, 14, 15, 16, 21, 25, 29, and 30." See page 505 for more details. Page 258: In line 27, his name is spelled "Chandrasekhar". Page 259: Lehmann reference "[903]" should be [945]". Page 275: Figure 12.4; "46-Bit Input" should be "48-Bit Input". Page 287: In line 13, "first and third" should be "second and third". Page 287: In Figure 12.6, there should be no period in X or Y. Page 288: In figure 12.7, the final output on the right side should be DELTA=0. Page 292: Second line, "b_24" should be "b_26". In line 10, "1/2 - .0061" should be "1/2 + .0061". Page 295: Fourth line from the bottom, 2^(120/n) should be (2^120)/n. Page 300: In the first line, "56" should be "48". Page 306: The first sentence is wrong. The key is rotated to the right; the key and data move in opposite directions to minimize redundant key bit operations. Also, the XOR happens after the rotation. The third paragraph should be modified to be the opposite of this. In any case, Madryga is vulnerable to differential cryptanalysis with about 5000 chosen plaintexts. Don't use it. Page 307: Last line, "complementation" is misspelled as "complemention". Page 311: Second paragraph, second line should be: "it more quickly than by brute force..." Page 316: In Table 13.2, P_2 should be "379", not "279". Page 319: In line 11, Section "25.13" should be "25.14". Page 322: Last line, the chip is 107.8 square mm. Page 325: Last line, "mod 3" should be "mod 4". Page 338: In Figure 14.3 and in the first line, "f" should be "F". Page 340: Second equation should be "mod 256". Page 341: The current variants of SAFER are SAFER SK-40, SAFER SK-64, and SAFER SK-128, all with a modified key schedule, in response to a theoretical attack by Lars Knudsen presented at Crypto '95. Page 342: In the description of 3-Way, "K^(n+1)" should be "K_n". Page 345: Lines 10 and 11; the + should be a -. Page 346: The reference number for BaseKing should be [402]. Page 352: In line 8, that second "l" should be an "r". Page 358: In the decryption equation of Davies-Price mode, the final D should be an E. Page 362: In the first equation, P is used to indicate both padding and plaintext. If P is plaintext and p is padding, then the equation should be: C = E_K3(p(E_K2(p(E_K1(P))))). Page 362: Figure 15.2 is wrong. The middle and top rows of "Encrypt," and the plaintext feeding them, are shifted right by 1/2 block from where they should be. Page 363: The parenthetical remark would be clearer as: "encryption with one of n different keys, used cyclically". Page 363: Second to last line, the equation should have an I_2 in place of the I_1. Page 367: Second equation, "P XOR K_3" should be "C XOR K_3". Page 369: A maximal period linear congruential generator as a period of m, not m-1. Page 375: Third paragraph should read: "It is easy to turn this into a maximal period LFSR. The highest exponent is the size of the register, n. Number the bits from n-1 to 0. The exponents, including the 0, specify the tap sequence, counting from the right of the register. The x^n term of the polynomial stands for the input being fed into the left end." The next paragraph is wrong, as is the code and the figure. Page 379: Second line of code has an extra close parentheses. Page 380: The fourth line should begin: "On the other hand, an astonishingly...." Page 382: In paragraph 4, "LFSR" would be more clear if it were labeled "LFSR-2". Similarly, in the first sentence of paragraph 5 "LFSR" would be more clear if it were labeled "LFSR-3". Page 384: Bilateral Stop-and-Go Generator: To agree with Figure 16.11, reverse "LFSR-1" and "LFSR-2". Page 389: Some more details on the GSM algorithms. A3 is the authentication algorithm in the smart card. A8 is just a bit shuffling process that takes part of the output of A3 and turns it into a session key for A5. A5 is the privacy algorithm. There are two algorithms used in GSM: A5/1 and A5/2. A5/1 can be used by only certain countries; A5/2 can be used by all countries. Page 391: In the 11th line under Fish, it should be "D_j" instead of "D_i". Page 393: In Figure 16.17, there should be an arrow from the fourth byte to the Output Function. Page 393: Second sentence should be: "It's a method for combining multiple pseudo-random streams that increases their security." Page 398: In the third line of the section on SEAL, "kilobytes" is misspelled as "kiloytes". Page 411: Another option for an alternating stop-and-go generator would be to use a LFSR in Register-2, a FCSR in Register-3, and either in Register- 1. This may have advantages over either of the three constructions listed. Page 420: Table 17.3, the speed should be in kilobytes/second. Page 429: The second sentence should be: "It returns a fixed-length hash value, h." Page 431: In step (2), "prepend" instead of "append". Page 440: In item 3, there is an "AND" missing in the equation. Page 441: The compression function of MD2 is confusing without the indentations. The two for-loops are nested; the inner loop includes the next two statements; and the other loop the statement after that. Page 443: Last paragraph, the operation number runs from 0 to 79. Page 444: In figure 18.7, the a, b, c, d, and e variables are backwards. Page 445: Line 14, SHA should be compared to MD4. Page 447: Lines 3-4 should read: "...CFB in [1145], CBC in [55,56,54]...." Page 449: Figure 18.9, M_i and H_i-1 in the upper-left diagram should be reversed. Page 454: Seventh and sixth lines from the bottom, Z is the sum of the message blocks as if they were 256-bit integers. Page 456: Table 18.2. It's "Hash Speeds", not "Encryption Speeds", and it is measured in "kilobytes/second". "SNEERU" should be "SNEFRU". Page 465: In the third line of text, the number should be n^-1. Page 469: Table 19.3, the "Clock Cycles" entry for the Siemens chip should be ".3M". Page 470: Sixth line from the bottom, the n' should be an m'. Page 470: The second to last line is missing an "is". Page 471: In the sixth line from the bottom, "n'^d mod n" should be "m'^d mod n"

2 1

Re: Encryption and Backups
by pgut001＠cs.auckland.ac.nz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Death rays from Mars made jpp(a)software.net (John Pettitt) write: >CP Backup (part of PC Tools for Central Point aka Symantec) has DES. As to >how good the implementation is: I have no idea. It's slightly more secure than the widespread double rot-13 encryption. PC Tools uses 2-round DES (or at least it did the last time I looked). There's some criticism of this in the SFS docs somewhere. Peter.

1 0

Nando Times and the "decency" act
by stevenw＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The NandO Times is an online newspapaer (www.nando.com) that has George Carlin's seven dirty words and lots more as their lead story today: see http://152.52.2.152/nt/nando.cgi ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steven Weller | "The Internet, of course, is more | than just a place to find pictures | of people having sex with dogs." stevenw(a)best.com | -- Time Magazine, 3 July 1995

1 0

Re: Applied Cryptography, 2nd Edition -- Errata version 1.2
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:49 AM 2/9/96, Bruce Schneier wrote: > APPLIED CRYPTOGRAPHY, Second Edition > > ERRATA > Version 1.2 - 1 February 1996 > ... Wow. Does this mean the Third Edition will be coming out soon? (Not to sound harsh, but that's a *lot* of errors still in the book...I thought a lot of reviewers were going to squish out these sorts of things?) --Tim [This Bible excerpt awaiting review under the Communications Decency Act] And then Lot said, "I have some mighty fine young virgin daughters. Why don't you boys just come on in and do em right here in my house - I'll just watch!"....Later, up in the mountains, the younger daughter said. "Dad's getting old. I say we should do him." So the two daughters got him drunk and did him all that night. Sure enough, Dad got em pregnant....Onan really hated the idea of doing his brother's wife and getting her pregnant while his brother got all the credit, so he whacked off first....Remember, it's not a good idea to have sex with your sister, your brother, your parents, your pet dog, or the farm animals. [excerpts from the Old Testament, Modern Vernacular Translation, TCM, 1996]

1 0

Money & CreditCard URLs
by norm＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here is a fragment of html that points to several online money or payment systems. The first two, SEPP & STT, are the two credit card protocols from the previously competing camps and out of which the new standard, SET, is supposed to emerge. STT and SEPP are vague in different ways. Perhaps their offspring will be more completely specified. They both hide the credit card number from the merchant. I would be pleased to receive further such URLs. <H3>Money Protocols</H3> SEPP; STT; NetBill Cybercash, and Ecash. Mondex First Virtual, <a href="http://www.w3.org/pub/Conferences/WWW4/Papers/246/">The Millicent Protocol for Inexpensive Electronic Commerce</a>; <A HREF="http://netmarket.com/nm/pages/account/sid=kcBEtk230F">NetMarket</A> Mark Twain Bank <P>

2 1

Blue Ribbons
by David K. Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- For as long as my 10-yard spool of blue ribbon and box of paperclips hold out, I'm sending a ribbon/paperclip to any snailmail address in the U.S. Note that each one is an individually hand-crafted work of art :-) Dave Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMRnw4cVrTvyYOzAZAQGXUQP/fu7/K7dkjSkbcDAgrOmVNH0OaUn6t5SP E6DKfyfz3Wlu2VIhxCAS0KGHaLdCSH1teGFfIuhwOWikq+FdidJjXjep04/MAuAe +KXI0QoaFYY4dVVi9qX8Uzz1igOHs2MXDXG/6eZ1AlSux+HG1DHPz44PyUY7flWP sVizJ7plH2w= =qrdr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------- "It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." Robert H. Jackson (1892-1954), U.S. Judge <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> My web page: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1148

1 0

Perry's whining
by Ed Carp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Why doesn't Perry just shut the hell up? I've got more important things to worry about than Perry's ignorant, fetid whining. Such as that CDA thing in the Telecommunications Bill. Anyone for suing Bill? -- Ed Carp, N7EKG Ed.Carp(a)linux.org, ecarp(a)netcom.com 214/993-3935 voicemail/digital pager 800/558-3408 SkyPager Finger ecarp(a)netcom.com for PGP 2.5 public key an88744(a)anon.penet.fi "Past the wounds of childhood, past the fallen dreams and the broken families, through the hurt and the loss and the agony only the night ever hears, is a waiting soul. Patient, permanent, abundant, it opens its infinite heart and asks only one thing of you ... 'Remember who it is you really are.'" -- "Losing Your Mind", Karen Alexander and Rick Boyes The mark of a good conspiracy theory is its untestability. -- Andrew Spring ---------------------------------------------------------------------- According to the Communications Decency Act, these are the words you may no longer use in your Internet correspondence: Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cock-sucker, mother-fucker and tits. The use of shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cock-sucker, mother-fucker and tits, may now earn you a substantial fine as well as possible jail time, should President Clinton sign this Bill into law. Please refrain from using shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cock-sucker, mother-fucker and tits, to protect your children as well as others, from their evil influence, thus keeping America "ideologically pure".

2 1

Re: Need a "warning" graphic of some kind for CDA
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[This email rated FZ] >Now that we all have web pages that are naughty and might be seen by >little children, I'd like to hve some kind of a graphic that can >universally be seen as a "Warning: The following material is unsuitable >for children and close-minded twits". (or words to that effect). A Frank Zappa icon would be highly appropriate for that - I don't know how his record publishers would feel about someone scanning it off an album cover and retouching for the web, but you could probably work out something. A Zappa IMG button with HREF to a copy of his album language rating label would seem very fitting. Before Bill Clinton signed the Exon Internet Censorship Bill, Tipper Gore brought you Music Censorship. Uncle Frank says "<quote here>" I suppose it's a bit beyond Fair Use? #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com / billstewart(a)attmail.com +1-415-442-2215 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

4 3

Re: Fair Credit Reporting Act and Privacy Act
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Mon, 5 Feb 1996, Duncan Frissell wrote: >> Unfortunately, [a privacy act] would also: >> >> * Require government registration of computers and databases containing >> information about people (whether these computers are used by business or >> individuals). This eases regulation of computers and future confiscation. At 07:04 PM 2/5/96 -0500, Tim Philp wrote: >I don't believe that this follows at all. All that would be required >would be a statutory obligation to comply with the legislation. And how can you enforce this statutory obligation? Privacy laws against private citizens run into the same problem as drug laws: You need intrusive means to enforce them. A law "protecting" privacy would require government supervision of what is on my computer and your computer. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

3 2

Re: RSA-China Crypto
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- BTW, there's an article about it on RSA's home page now. - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBMRr/eyoZzwIn1bdtAQHRBAF+PNYhhytVCUQ5LDn9vM5sSFNJ9l0zKm8T mfzCvhN/eE/qLpl8fDi1gvLJDnrWte/Z =t5nc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Reasons in support of crypto-anarchy WAS Re: Why am I (fwd)
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:45 PM 2/8/96 -0500, Perry wrote: >You are annoying me. How much do people want to bet someone kills >Jim Bell in the next six months? 6 cypherbucks, if I can get the ecash software to work again. 12, if you'll accept killfiling as well... #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com / billstewart(a)attmail.com +1-415-442-2215 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

1 0

Re: DSN
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:47 AM 2/1/96 -0500, you wrote: >Anyone heard of DSN? I think thats the right order of the initials... >... its supposedly the only crypto-hardware solution for protecting an >entire network on the Internet. You put one of these $5,000 units at one >end of a lan, and another one somewhere else on the Internet, and the >company gaurantees secure, encrypted transmissions. The TCP/IP headers >and data are mangled, encrypted, etc. Anybody who supposedly makes the "only [whatever-category] hardware solution" for a problem has either not done their literature searching, is going for a really obscure market niche, doesn't understand the problem, or (very rarely) is the first product out on the bleeding edge, or has had their competitors go out of business on them. VSLAN (I forget the manufacturer) used to make an encrypting Ethernet board for PCs, Suns, etc., and did the software work behind it to get a B2 Red Book rating from the NSA. Boeing had a secure FDDI ring about the same time (~5 years ago.) Motorola has made several products for encrypting Ethernets, X.25s, and other networks, which the military buys and likes. Don't know which of these are still on the market, and what new toys have appeared. Meanwhile, the swIPe encrypted/authenticated IP protocol is available, and the similar IPng security protocols are emerging (i.e. the RFCs are written and folks are working on reference implementations.) They'll cost you $0 for software plus a 386-box for Linux, or a used Sun. >It uses 512bit keys and I was just wondering how the authentication is >done. Does anyone have any specs on these units? Supposedly it does not >require a 3rd party entity to verify that the two units are both valid, >when determining the initial public/key pairs. Perhaps there is hardcoded >data in the units that is used to verify this? The company supposedly has >some proprierty method ... how can we be sure this expensive unit can do >its job if information on the encryption has not been released. If you can't get the company to show you the protocols, at least under non-disclosure, ask them if it's NSA-certified and see what the NSA has to say about it. 512-bit keys seem a bit short for either RSA or Diffie-Hellman these days... >[RSA in 5 lines of Scheme, deleted.] Got any short prime-number generators? #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com / billstewart(a)attmail.com +1-415-442-2215 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

1 0