December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Know Your Net.Enemies Project
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Apr 10, 1996 23:47:54, '"Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+(a)CMU.EDU>' wrote: >Would anyone be interested in collaborating on a "Know Your Net Enemies" >project? Feel free to use my writings on the CyberAngels. --tallpaul

1 0

Mystery of the unsuvscrives: SOLVED?
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On replying to one of the many recent unsubscrivers I got this in return: A creative spam attack? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 12 Apr 1996 11:34:53 +0100 From: Batman <batman(a)infomaniak.ch> To: Black Unicorn <unicorn(a)schloss.li> Subject: Re: your mail On Thu, 11 Apr 1996, Black Unicorn wrote: > On Thu, 11 Apr 1996, Batman wrote: > > > Please PUT me OUT of YOUR cypherpunks AND other MAIL-LISTS > > > > Thankx > > Please LEARN to UNSUBSCRIBE from MAILING lists and OTHER THINGS. > > --- > My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li > "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est > Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti > 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information > > I don't think you're the mail-list admin, so, don't send me your advices. I've been flooded and put in that shit mail-list without my permission. GET OUT

1 0

Re: GPS-based authentication
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:33 AM 4/11/96 -6, Peter Trei wrote: >Ms Denning, Mr. MacDoran > >I've read with interest your proposed GPS-based authentication >mechanism (it was posted to the cypherpunks mailing list). Can you >confirm that you wrote this? Some people on the list think it may be >a forgery. > >The participants of the list have noted some apparent vulnerabilities >in the system, and I am curious as to how you address them. If you >respond to me and give permission, I'll forward your response to the >list. > >The problems are two-fold: > >1. The system is easily spoofed. >2. It leaks sensitive location data. It should occur to all of us that what you (and we) call "problems" are, to government sympathizers, actually FEATURES. Identifying people's locations is probably going to be considered enormously important to the government (if it lasts that long). And since the government runs all the GPS transmitters, and can presumably modulate the S/A function any way it wishes, it has a leg up on all of us who have to depend on the integrity of the system. There is also the possibility of them jamming the system locally to either deny the user the ability to make the identification system work and thus deny access, or detect the location of the user by subtly modulating the local signal in such a way as to leak through the otherwise-secure system. (If we trust it that far, which I don't.)

1 0

Australia cracking down on the internet?!?!
by an366601＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

X-Anonymously-To: an366601 Reply-To: an578849(a)anon.penet.fi Thank you CRAM for your informative and interesting peices aznd snippets from the American Press. Out here in the land of Oz, the state governements are whipping up a frenzy of legislation, including laws prohibiting the uploading or downloading of any material that may be offensive to minors. Penalty: $25000 and/or 1 year in jail. The push is on to make ISPs the defacto publishers and censors of all material that passes through them. And as always its the child pronography thing that predominates the discussion. It is unfortunate that at the same time the internet is booming, there is a huge peadophile hunt going on here in Sydney (turns out the peodophiles have powerfull allies amongst the policians and judges, no surprises there). People open their newspapers and see "Peadophiles use internet" and their minds shut like steel doors. Keep up the good work. --****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--***ATTENTION*** Your e-mail reply to this message WILL be *automatically* ANONYMIZED. Please, report inappropriate use to abuse(a)anon.penet.fi For information (incl. non-anon reply) write to help(a)anon.penet.fi If you have any problems, address them to admin(a)anon.penet.fi

1 0

Re: questions about bits and bytes [NOISE]
by Mark J. Reed 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

JonWienke(a)aol.com writes: \ In a message dated 96-04-11 20:26:44 EDT, jeffb(a)sware.com writes: \ Citing sources from 1978 in the computing field is a little like using \ dictionaries from the 1800's to dictate modern English usage. My desktop \ machine has as much computing power as some colleges had during that era. \ We've come a long way, baby! Yes, in the past, the term "byte" applied to \ entities other than 8 bits, but "8 bits" IS the commonly accepted, standard \ meaning of "byte" now, in the present. The fact that the meaning and usage \ of words can change over time is not relevant to current meaning and usage. \ Anyone who wishes to dispute this should study the etymology of the word \ "gay." \ \ Jonathan Wienke \ No, no. What started this whole discussion was someone claiming that bytes have ALWAYS been 8 bits. That was the argument. NO-ONE is claiming that byte doesn't mean 8 bits NOW. I think we have now established that, yes, 'byte' is synonymous with 'octet' in the modern computer era, and no, this was not always the case. Now can we move on to other matters? -- Mark J. Reed Email: mark_reed(a)sware.com - Voice: +1 404 315 6296 x158 - Fax: +1 404 315 6407 Hewlett-Packard Co. / 2957 Clairmont Rd Suite 220 / Atlanta GA 30329-1647 E-Mail Privacy by SecureMail. Visit URL:http://www.secureware.com/ for details. -- Mark J. Reed Email: mark_reed(a)sware.com - Voice: +1 404 315 6296 x158 - Fax: +1 404 315 6407 Hewlett-Packard Co. / 2957 Clairmont Rd Suite 220 / Atlanta GA 30329-1647 E-Mail Privacy by SecureMail. Visit URL:http://www.secureware.com/ for details.

1 0

Re: Protocols at the Point of a Gun
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

For information on the "Internet Philosophy" there is a IETF draft that might be of interest at: ftp://ds.internic.net/internet-drafts/draft-iab-principles-02.txt ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Private Idaho 2.6b3 release
by Joel McNamara 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Private Idaho 2.6b3 (a freeware Windows front-end to PGP, anonymous remailers, and nym servers) is now available at: http://www.eskimo.com/~joelm New features include: licensed IPPort - no more "nag" screen on start-up support for multiple nym servers and nyms support for multiple PGP keys for signing support for printing messages support for transfer to multiple applications Questions, comments to joelm(a)eskimo.com

1 0

Re: No matter where you go, there they are. (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > GPS works by measuring the differing distances to a number of satellites. Actualy, it measures doppler shift as well. > It might be possible to seperately record the signals from several > different satellites, delay them each just the right amount of time, and > then recombine them to simulate being at another nearby location (within > several hundred miles). However, this might not be possible. Examine the > following quote from Denning's paper: Seems to me that standard satellite tracking software would work just fine for this once the correct orbital parameters were included. To get the necessary orbital parameters look on sci.space.news and they are announced regularly. > :The location signature is virtually impossible to forge at the > :required accuracy. If you can measure the accuracy you can spoof it. It is only a question of cost at that point. > :orbit perturbations, which are unknowable in real-time, and intentional > :signal instabilities (dithering) imposed by the U.S. Department of Defense > :selective availability (SA) security policy. Which are going to be turned off. I have to draw exception to the 'dithering' in regard to the lsb's of the data. They are actualy encrypted. It is not random which is what 'signal instability' implies. Were it random then a 'flying capacitor' type filter or a digital filter could get the bits out. I have two years of experience using such 'flying capacitor' type filters in LORAN-C equipment I calibrated and repaired for Austron. The signal on LORAN is a damped sinusoid, very precisely damped. The timing sequence of sites are drawn on maps as well as published in book and electronic form. You set the filter for the same repeat rate as the signal you wish to detect. As the signal is fed over and over into the bank of capacitors the random noise cancels out and you are left with a remarkably clean signal. You then feed this to a 2055 microstepper (nS/S) and compare it to a time reference standard (1210 Time reference standard, my specialty). When the signals cancel you can get a very accurate reading and change that to lat/long quite easily. I would regularly sync the 1210's to USNO and the NIST to measure the oven heated crystal oscillators drift in frequency over time. By applying a voltage to the circuit you can compensate for this drift using a 2055 microstepper (a time delay unit). At that time we were making both the 2000 and 5000 series receivers. The 68000 based machine was due out when I left for a job at UT Austin. The neatest part of the job was flying cesium beams around the world and measuring their drift to accurately measure the rotation rate of the Earth. You can defeat even the encryption if you take a long enough time to interpolate. The reason it isn't done is that by the time you get the fix the target you were going to shoot your missile at is gone. If it is so large (a city) or slow (grunts) that it won't move significantly in that time you don't need that accuracy in the first place. I base this on a years worth of technical support I did for CompuAdd for Desert Shield/Storm. I handled several problems related to MLRS and Naval systems related to target selection and tracking & GPS in regards our computers. > It's possible that the orbit perturbations may be enough to screw up an > attempt to forge a signal Which would be enough to scramble the signal as well. As a matter of fact this might create another means of attack. Namely that the orbit varies is a given. That the orbit can be predicted to quite good accuracy in less than real-time is a given. By comparing these to the actual orbit it might be possible to creat a situation where a fake signal was more accurate than the real signal making the receiver filter the real signal as noise. The one drawback here is that it would require considerable power to effectively impliment the masking. ; the variations in signal timings won't provide > enough information to an attacker to be able to accurately replicate what > the signal would look like at another location. The doppler shift directly corresponds to altitude. If you have the normal orbital parameters it is a relatively simple matter to use a computer to predict where it will be in the near future (5 minutes). NASA and United States Space Command (USSC) regularly track over 8,000 items in orbit. Some as small as bolts. Tracking accuracy is a well understood problem. > It remains to be seen > whether it is reliably possible for the secure host, at its location, to > distinguish between an accurate signature and an inaccurate but plausible > forged signature. Anybody got a GPS receiver in Austin? I believe I can arrange the necessary equipment and support to attempt it. I know several EE's as well as somebody with commercial radio service equipment I am shure some of the other local cpunks might want to help as well. I propose that what be attempted is making a GPS receiver believe it is 100 miles from where it actually is. I will forward a copy of this to the Experimental Science Instrumentation mailing list (tesla(a)ssz.com) to see if anyone on there might be interested. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com Tivoli - IBM jchoate(a)tivoli.com

1 0

Re: LACC: CDA Court Challenge: Update #6
by Julian Assange 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> This would ONLY impact packets that carry pornographic material, and all > other packets would remain unchanged. Naturally, you would not be able > to have Classified Pornographic material under this scheme, but I think > that's probably an acceptable tradeoff. Oh, I don't know. The remote satalite imaging lab in reston has been known for sometime now to have enough resolution to look down a good clean cleavege, and certainly their perspective is vertical enough. > Furthermore, any parent that wanted to allow a child to attach to the > Internet and wanted pornographic protection would be responsible for > setting their own filter up to limit these packets. Thus the provider > of pornographic material and the parent of the child using the net are > the only two groups affected by this change. The rest of the net can > continue unhindered. ISPs don't have to identify users. After all, it > is the parent and the bookstore owner who are responsible for keeping > children out of the dirty book section, not the bus driver who brings > the child to the neighborhood or the company that paves the street. I've thought about this as well. You could also use the IP TOS minimise-cost bit, which is defunct, doesn't require IP options, is included in every packet and in most modern unix's and rfc1122 complient TCP/IP protocol interface stacks can be set at user level with a simple setsockopt() call. That said, it has a granularity of one. To my mind, it is value judgement, and a difficult one at that to decide when information is appropriate or otherwise for a given age group. A given community may feel the age of maturity is something other than 18, and physiologically the age of maturity is different for differing racial groups. It is a strange world where it is permissible to get married at 16 -- and all that implies, but not permissible to think freely until 18, or 21 in certain states. More appropriate would be content flags. Using the security option there is a resonable number that could be assigned. OPT_R_UPPER_NUDITY, OPT_R_LOWER_NUDITY, OPT_R_FULL_NUDITY, OPT_R_FEMALE, OPT_R_MALE, OPT_R_BIZARRE, OPT_R_HOMOSEXUAL, OPT_R_BESTIALITY, OPT_R_DISECTION, OPT_R_INTERCOURSE, OPT_R_VIOLENCE and OPT_R_ADVERTISING come to mind. Unlike TOS however, many IP stacks have no real support for the security option. The value of re-using it then for this purpose it dubious. There is no reason another IP option couldn't be added. Perhaps the spare TOS bit could be used as a catch-all until a content option is implimented. Most french wouldn't be concerned about OPT_R_FULL_NUDITY provided OPT_R_HOMOSEXUAL wasn't set. -- "I mean, after all; you have to consider we're only made out of dust. That's admittedly not much to go on and we shouldn't forget that. But even considering, I mean it's sort of a bad beginning, we're not doing too bad. So I personally have faith that even in this lousy situation we're faced with we can make it. You get me?" - Leo Bulero/PKD +---------------------+--------------------+----------------------------------+ |Julian Assange RSO | PO Box 2031 BARKER | Secret Analytic Guy Union | |proff(a)suburbia.net | VIC 3122 AUSTRALIA | finger for PGP key hash ID = | |proff(a)gnu.ai.mit.edu | FAX +61-3-98199066 | 0619737CCC143F6DEA73E27378933690 | +---------------------+--------------------+----------------------------------+

1 0

Entropy Estimator
by JonWienke＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just added a feature to my entropy graphing program that estimates the number of bits of entropy in the file, in addition to making the graph. I tested it on some ZIP files, comparing the sum of the results obtained from each file individually to the results from the ZIP file containing all of them. So far, the results have been consistent within 20%. EXE's show 3-4 entropy bits/byte, ZIP files show 6-7, and DLL's and text files show 1-2. Source code (Visual Basic) available to anyone who wants it, but I think I will hold off on the EXE and VBX's until I find someone who will put it on their FTP/WEB site. Suggestions via email regarding this would be appreciated. Jonathan Wienke

1 0

Re: (Fwd) British Study Claims That Photo Credit Cards Don't Work
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:42 AM 4/11/96 -0400, Clay Olbon II wrote: >At 11:10 AM 4/9/96, jim bell wrote: >>At 07:57 AM 4/9/96 -0500, Mike McNally wrote: >>>There are supposedly some new techniques that look at the infrared >>>signature of your face (like, I guess, distribution & position of >>>hot & cold spots), and that's less likely to be fooled by facial >>>hair and other superficial disguises. It's probably a fairly simple >>>technology, and could be applied to the credit card ID problem. >> >>I think this is based on looking at your face with near-infrared, not the >>medium and far (thermal) infrared. Near infrared is supposed to penetrate >>flesh far better, so your blood vessels are visible and form a pattern >>which can be recognized. >> >>Jim Bell >>jimbell(a)pacifier.com > >Jim, > >Where did you get your info? Near IR is around 1-1.5 microns, at these >wavelengths, the body radiates very little energy. I think most of the >systems you are discussing use mid (3-5) or long-wave (8-12) IR, where >objects that are room to body temp radiate most of their energy. I get most of my information in this area from Photonics Spectra magazine, and Laser Focus World magazine. No, Clay, I did not say that the flesh RADIATED near IR. (it does, but only a very tiny amount.) The identification system I describe would probably use 940 nm IRLEDs to illuminate the face, and a silicon CCD detector to pick up the images. Or it would use ambient near-IR, perhaps from the sun or a tungsten filament or fluorescent lighting, along with an IR filter to ensure that the CCD camera picked up only the IR bands of interest. It would be easy to check out the results: Put such an IR-passing filter in front of a CCD-based camcorder, and take a picture of somebody. Incidentally, this simplicity shows the flaw in using this kind of system as an identifier: Since people's faces are usually visible, and can be photographed in the near-IR surreptitiously, it isn't clear how to prevent faking a face which appears to have the same IR signature and pattern. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: No matter where you go, there they are.
by David Loysen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[CHOMPED] > Close, but not quite: >S/A is an ADJUSTABLE variable, not on/off. it can reduce accuracy to >10 meters or 100 meters or whatever. It's a DoD term, not NWO term. > The "this is where you really are" percision location (forgot >the designation off hand) is ENCRYPTED (yes, there is crypto >revelance here...) in the data stream from the satellites. The >difference S/A makes is on the order of magnitude, therefore not >"useless." It should be pointed out that different regions of the >earth can have different degrees of accuracy based on the S/A system. > I doubt S/A will ever be turned off, but this is my opinion. I >know Jim's opinion. Discussion of this point is pointless. > DGPS transmission are made from a multiple single points, which >(to the best of my knowledge) are not networked. > glenn Does anyone else get a little upset at the thought of one Government agency (DoD) spending money to install the GPS system, then making it less accurate than it should be, and then a second Government agency (US Coast Guard) spending money to improve the system by installing DGPS stations. Plus, in order to get the real accuracy of GPS right now I have to spend more money on a much more expensive DGPS unit. Pisses me right the F### off.

1 0

Demonizing the Opposition: Bruce "The Toolman" Taylor
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At CFP96, Bruce Taylor, Brock Meek's "lawyer with brass balls", and Declan McCullagh's "architect of the CDA" (who seems like a Pretty Stand-Up Guy, except he wants to tell us how to think), sat on the dias and made repetitive inflamatory references to a picture of "female genitalia nailed to a board", and others to a picture of "a penis with a blister on it", citing them as examples of the Rampant Filth and Corruption We Find on the Internet Today, Brothers and Sisters, Say Haleluja. Unfortunately, as hard as I tried to remain true to the Spirit of CFP, and not Demonize the Opposition, I couldn't help but come up with a spiffy new moniker for Mr. Taylor, which I will try to remember to use from time to time, viz., Bruce "Penis with a Blister" Taylor abbreviated PWAB, or "Blister" I suppose Of course, the CDA-able version of this proposed new handle would be, Bruce "The Toolman" Taylor shortened to "Toolie"? "The Tool"? "Toolboy"? ;-). Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell The e$ Home Page: http://thumper.vmeng.com/pub/rah/

1 0

Mardi Gra Cash Card
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

WSJ 4-12-06 reports that England's "Mardi Gra" bomber is demanding of Barclays "access to the bank's cash reserves through the use of a special cash card, although details could not be confirmed." Police are communicating with the bomber through cryptic notices in personal columns of newspapers, the latest stating: "MARDI GRA We are ready to help and give value. Contact us on the verification number." Barclays says 25 bombs have been sent to its branches. The bomber -- who has been compared to America's Unabomber -- may be a former employee among those 18,500 laid off during the past 5 years, or a small businessman with a grudge. [Or ...]

1 0

Re: questions about bits and bytes
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:17 PM 4/11/96 -0500, Sten Drescher wrote: >>>>>> jim bell writes: > >jb> At 06:29 PM 4/10/96 -0700, Simon Spero wrote: >>> No, bytes are no always 8 bits - some machines use(d) 9-bit bytes. > >jb> I notice you gave no examples. Why is that? > > As I recall, the Honeywell H6000 used 6-bit bytes and 36-bit >(6 byte) words. Here's the problem with this kind of counter-example: You do not explain whether or not these data structures were actually called "bytes" by the manufacturer, or whether the term "byte" was inflicted later on by people who didn't know better. Remember, in the absence of any name for a "6-bit data object" I'm sure the temptation was probably very strong to misuse a term, especially in hindsight. See, I do not challenge the fact that there were plenty of data objects of length other than 8-bits. The issue is whether or not the people back then actually believed that a correct, official usage of the term "byte" included lengths other than 8. Dmitri Vulis at least acknowledged that when he looked back into the documentation, he discovered that the term used for his counter-example was "character", not byte. How many other of these counter-examples would show this kind of thing?

4 4

Re: On computer face recognition:
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:14 PM 4/11/96, David Loysen wrote: >Take a peak at http://www.neci.nj.nec.com/homepages/lawrence/papers. One of >Lawences papers is on using Neural networks to recognize faces. Methinks >that the state of the art is advancing rapidly and such problems as not >looking at the camera or changing your expression are rapidly being overcome. One system I read up on a few years ago relied heavily on ear shape....it seems that the profile of ears varies tremendously and ear profiles are fairly easy to get a kind of hash of, assuming the ear profile is not obstructed by hair. "Get a haircut" may once again return to favor. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

Re: No matter where you go, there they are.
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: Roger Williams <roger(a)coelacanth.com> > >>>>> Hal <hfinney(a)shell.portal.com> writes: > > > Note however that Denning did not mention the Internet in her > > spiel. > > Well, assuming that she wrote *any* of the spiel, she does: > > "Where it works > > ... Location-based > authentication could facilitate telecommuting by countering the > vulnerabilities associated with remote access over dial-in lines and > Internet connections..." She wrote it. The original of the paper may be found at http://all.net/journal/csi/csi-96-01.html Peter Trei trei(a)process.com

1 0

Re: On computer face recognition:
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:48 PM 4/11/96, Alan Horowitz wrote: >How do _people_ recognize faces? Still an open question, last I heard. It may be unknowable, at least in a formal sense. That is, we know that babies can recognize the faces of their mothers in fractions of a second (no, I don't have a reference for this, but I remember the number from my days as an AI person at Intel). There may be no simple description that is used, such as angles between eye line and mouth, convexity of chin, whatever. What is important is that face recognition happens in about 30-100 "cycles" of the brain, implying massive parallelism (hardly surprising). There are, of course, very few recognition algorithms that run on conventional computer architecures in so few cycles. By "unknowable" I don't mean "supernatural," merely not practically describable as an algorithm runnable on conventional von Neumann-type machines. "Neural net" is the buzzword usually associated with this. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

Re: why compression doesn't perfectly even out entropy
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:36 AM 4/11/96, jamesd(a)echeque.com wrote: >At 10:36 PM 4/9/96 -0400, JonWienke(a)aol.com wrote: >> Would anyone like to propose a means of measuring entropy that we can all >> agree on? I haven't seen anything yet that everyone likes. > >Nor will you: To measure entropy is a deep unsolved philosophical >and physical problem. Indeed. That there can be no simple definition of entropy, or randomness, for an arbitrary set of things, is essentially equivalent to Godel's Theorem. (To forestall charges that I am relying on an all-too-common form of bullshitting, by referring to Godel, what I mean is that "randomness" is best defined in terms of algorithmic information theory, a la Kolmogorov and Chaitin, and explored in Li and Vitanyi's excellent textbook, "Algorithmic Information Theory and its Applications.") Think of it this way: when can a set of things, a string, etc., be _compressed_. Answer: whenever a compression is found. Most things have no real compressions, that is, they have no shorter description than themselves. But they _might_ have a shorter description, a compression, and we can never say for sure that they do not. Thus, even a set which we think is of "high entropy" (roughly, "high randomness" or "no order" or "not compressible") may actually have some hidden order, or compressibility, not apparent at first glance. That we can never know when we have achieved maximum compression is a profound result of modern mathematics and information theory. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

[NOISE] Why there are so many cluless people
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Today, I heard a commercial on the radio. Some company wants to help you make $1k+ per day as an Internet expert. Simply listen to their one week audio tape course and you know everything you need to work as an Internet consultant. Sigh, -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

3 2

Re: No matter where you go, there they are.
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[ Dorothy - there's been substantial discussion on cypherpunks about your position escrow proposal; the paper that's on your web page was posted here.] At 03:01 PM 4/11/96 -0400, perry(a)piermont.com wrote: >Paul_Koning/US/3Com%3COM(a)smtp1.isd.3com.com writes: >> Suppose I want to pretend that I am 1000 feet closer to satellite 4 than >> I really am. Simple, I take the signals from all the other satellites >> and delay them by 1 microsecond. That looks like a 1 microsecond >> local timebase error together with a 1 microsecond delay reduction >> to satellite 4. >Aren't things even worse? Since the satelite signals are not >authenticated with anything like public key methods, couldn't I just >synthesize a signal appropriate to any spot on the planet, knowing the >positions of the satelites relative to that spot? No, you can't. One problem is that the Selective Availability coding isn't predictable, since it uses some kind of secret military code - so you don't know what its values are until you hear them. So as long as you share any satellites with the recipient, you need to be sure to output the correct codes for that satellite, which means you need to either be in range or have access to some internet "position remailer" site that's making them available. As far as predicting relative timing between satellites to fake your position, if that's sufficiently unpredictable that you can't fake it, as Denning and MacDoran say, then it should also be equally unpredictable to the verifier who wants to know if you're telling the truth or faking it. And if you require systems to respond to requests for "Where are you now?" or especially "Where were you on the night of April 13th at 8:37pm?", the spoofer can request that information just as easily as the verifier. One method that could be used to prevent faking is GPS receivers with "tamperproof" digital signature capability, which would not only receive the location information but sign it; that's not much more secure than just having a "tamperproof" token in the first place. As far as the multipath issues that some people have brought up, I searched for "MacDoran" on altavista, and found several papers on GPS multipath, so they're aware of the issue, though I don't know how they're planning to address it. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215

1 0

Re: questions about bits and bytes
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:05 AM 4/11/96 -0800, jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> wrote: >>- From a really quick web search, we find that the SGI Impact jams 9-bit >>bytes [that's what it says] across the Rambus internally. I'm not sure >>if the memory itself is 9-bit. > >Are you sure they're not referring to 8 bits of data and a parity bit? In >any case, please give the address to the list so that it can be checked out. www.altavista.digital.com, which is the address of almost everything :-) If you don't count the parity bit as part of the byte here, you probably shouldn't count it in a typical 7-bit-ASCII-plus-parity situation either. As far as jamming 9-bit-bytes across a bus, that almost certainly _is_ 8 bits of data and one parity bit; people have been agitating for and debating parity on memory busses for a long time. AT&T's Datakit switch (an ancestor of ATM) used 9-bit bytes on its data busses, where 8 bits were data-from-outside and one bit was a control-vs-data indicator, which let cards listening to the bus decide whether to think about the byte with their control processors or just shove them onto an output wire. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215

1 0

Re: "Contempt" charges likely to increase
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"unicorn(a)schloss.li" "Black Unicorn" 6-APR-1996 16:17:13.99 >I might add that the Cayman Islands are full of trust companies with >provisions which forbid the disclosure of data to a client who is >coerced. A law on the books refuses to recognize "consent" orders made >under judicial compulsion. This would give the appearance of total >unavailability of evidence and suggest the futility of contempt >charges. Yet courts have still, and with no small measure of success, >imposed sanctions on witnesses so protected. What measure of success? Getting the data, or locking up the witness? -Allen

2 1

Re: Protocols at the Point of a Gun
by Marshall Clow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Scott Brickner wrote: >Somebody who might be Marshall Clow wrote: >>Multiple IP #s, multiple machines, multiple users, ONE account. >>Which router will insert the "suggested" flag, and how will it decide which >>packets to tag? > >The way I envision it (in my nightmares), you'd have two options: have >the account configured as "kid safe", and live in a cyberspace playground, >or have it configured as "adult", and accept responsibility for your kids' >use. > I have no problem whatsoever with this. Guess which option I'd choose :-) However, given the hysteria that is surrounding the CDA, etc., I think that the second option would be "politically unacceptable". The whole thrust [ sorry for the sexual imagery ;-) ] behind [ oops, now it's sodomy ] the CDA is that it's not good enough for parents to take responsibility for their children's use; the government must be involved. -- Marshall Marshall Clow Aladdin Systems <mailto:mclow@mailhost2.csusm.edu> "Eternal vigilance is the price of PostScript" -- MacUser Jan 96 DTP and Graphics column

1 0

Re: Spinners and compression functions
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have had a somewhat related idea to this on compression regarding steaography and which bits are the best ones to use. How about those that a lossy compression method that's reasonable loses first? These are the ones that aren't going to be noticed by the viewer, and (if the compression method is good) will have at least somewhat higher entropy than the rest. -Allen

1 0