December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: OTP security
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I was thinking about the thread we had a week or so ago about OTPs. Say > I'm going to burn a CD of what I think are cryptographically random bits, > but somehow I end up with part of my stream being predictable (say every > 16th bit). What does this do to the security of my CD? Depends on how that 16th bit is related to the other bits and whether these predictable bits give any information about the other bits on the disk. If we assume all the other bits are true random and that the 16th bits are predictable only in that they can be predicted left and right but do not depend upon the other bits not in positions 16, 32, 48, 16n etc... we can just discard them and use the rest obtaining perfect security. We can even use all the bits and all we lose is one bit every two bytes and therefore if we are calling the bytes ASCII and say adding mod 13 we only have "imperfect" security on every 2nd character where there are 2^7 eg. 128 possible characters. Suprisingly this yields perfect security as there are still a number of possible pads which lead to reasonable and plausible decryptions. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

1 0

Re: Senator Exon
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dopefiend Viscera K'ock`OfTheMinute is a pimply dweeb sitting at a computer chortling at his own imagined cleverness. \|/ @ @ -oOO-(_)-OOo- Dr.Dopefiend Viscera K'ock`OfTheMinute

1 0

Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > (By the way, if you don't like moderation, you would hate Eric Hughes' > > favored solution.) > > What was that? > > Eric, would like to require a deposit ($20 was the example he > gave) from subscriber/posters. Non-subscribers would not be > allowed to post. Subscribers who voluntarily left the list, > would get their deposit back. Subscribers who flamed twice > (every dog gets one bite) would be kicked off the list and their > deposit would be forfeited (or perhaps turned over to the flame > victim). Obviously, you will not be able to effectively collect from non-posters, since anyone would be able to resell subscriptions. Also, anyone can create a usenet newsgroups like alt.cypherpunks, or cypherpunks.general, which would be free. Lots of competing cypherpunks mailing lists would spring up. You would make some money out of it (like maybe $700 or so), but would waste so much time that it would not be worth the trouble. - Igor.

1 0

Re: Best Computer School?
by Erp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, SpyKing wrote: > This is a little off topic but maybe someone can help. I've got a teenage > son (HS sophomore) who's interested in majoring in computer science in > college with a particular interest in cryptography. He's leaning toward MIT. > Any suggestions from list members as to colleges to investigate? Well in reference to MIT.. I hope he has a 4.0 in highschool, is an allsport, has a 1600 on his SAT's, and a prefect on his ACT.. Just to even think about going there.. Let alone to include how well he'll have to do on his interviews etc.. Also you may wish to have him look again at what he wants to be before he goes to some major college such as MIT, because tuition at MIT costs approx 100,000$/4 years. Personally that is a hell of a lot, but then again *shrug*... I recommend going to a local small college, get his associates, see if that is what he still wants to do, then go on from there. I know many people that started in Computer Science and died after the first year. Now colleges that are good for Computer Sc ience.. I have heard that RIT is good.. but I'm nto sure on that.. I know pretty well positive that MIT is excellent, but when you get down to the basics MIT is more of an engineering school than a science/philosophical school which Computer Sciences falls under.. Another good school from what I've heard is UCLA.. then again you can discredit anything I've said, because I'm still a HighSchool senior myself and have been looking into Computer Criminology for the last three years, and I'm positive it is what i want so *shrug*.. Ok later... Erp **********************************************************8 See about coming from hell at: http://www.fromhell.com/

2 2

Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I distinctly recall how Paul used to call for censoring me. If he's > changed his mind and really doesn't think that anyone should be censored, > it's a welcome development - even if it was brought on by the sandfart > censoring Paul. That is strange indeed as I distinctly recall saying, in as many words, I was "Happy you had stopped posting", as at that time nearly everything you posted was dreck as far as I was concerned. I also recall calling John Gilmore a Fascist censor and several other such things over the incident when you were forcibly unsubscribed from the list. I never advocated censorship, I was merely relieved you had stopped posting so much dreck to the list. Anyway, I don`t want a flame war over it so we`ll just agree to differ over this. > > > I used to respect Gilmore until this series of incidents (unsubscribing > > > me, turning list moderated). Now I only have disdain for him. > > > > I agree entirely, Gilmore was a respected man (despite the EFF being > > a corporate whore) who threw any respect and admiration others had > > for him away. > > I wonder what he thinks he got in exchange... A nice clean list where he and his bunch of "chums" can post whatever slanderous flames they want but the victims are not allowed to respond. > > > Quite a few people have expressed interest in re-creating an unmoderated > > > cypherpunks list at another site if Gilmore decided to stick to his > > > "moderation experiment". > > > > I notice and appreciate the quotes around "moderation experiment", > > this is, without doubt, a permenant measure to silence members of the > > list who dare to offer criticism of anyone an element of {x: x a > > friend or co-censor of John Gilmore} > > Yes - clearly the personality of the submitter is the most important > factor in moderator's rejections, not even the content. Indeed, content based censorship is of an order way above (if any censorship is better than any other) censorship based on subjective criterion such as personality. At least with content based censorship the censored version of the list would be readable because all the flaming and spam would have been cut, as it is all it offers is a good statistical picture of who is in favour with the list fuhrer and his pawns. > > I do not have the resources to run such an unmoderated list but I > > hope someone on this list does and is good enough to start such a > > list, cypherpunks is a shell of what it once was. > > I notice that the sandfart has been challenging his enemies to create > an alternative mailing list. I wonder what their contingency plan is. > Without a doubt, such a competing list would be mailbombed and flooded > with garbage by Gilmore and his entourage. What else? Presumably a number of mailing list chains would be set up to bounce the "flamers", that is people not members of the cypherpunks "in crowd" submissions to the new lists. > > Also, please note this message will be junked onto cypherpunks-flames > > even though it contains no flames or flame bait because it dares to > > criticise the censorship of the list (once again Sandy, I give you an > > opportunity to prove me wrong). > > The sandfart has proven me right already. As I said, I think we're > paying too much attention to him and his censorship, and he's just > a front for Gilmore anyway. Hmm, anyway, once again if anyone on this list has the resources to set up a new uncensored list I ask them to do so as soon as possible, this list is hardly worth the time it takes to read it now. Anyone who had anything worthwhile to say is so disgusted with the censorship they are either tied up in a thread like this criticising it or have chosen not to post at all. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

1 0

Re: Lucifer
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dimitri Vinyl K{rap} Of The Moment styles his facial hair to look more like pubic hair. v-v-v-@@-v-v-v (..) Dimitri Vinyl K{rap} Of The Moment

1 0

[[[ Worldwide Computer Based Business ! ]]]
by bigboy＠gte.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If you have a PC and want to achieve real Financial Independence then you MUST take a look at our Powerful Computer Based Business. No matter who you are or where you live, Our Business is Universal. We distribute software and information all over the world through E-Mail and the Internet. Our program called PC-SUPER-MLM is the most simple and powerful MONEY MAKING software in the world!. of course, you don't have to believe me until you see the actual program. Reply to this message and i will send you a FRE copy of the PC-SUPER-MLM software via E-Mail as an attachement. Have a great day !.

1 0

No Subject
by Thy Tang 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

unsubcrise

1 0

Censorship on Cypherpunks
by winsock＠rigel.cyberpass.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dirtbag L}eninist{ Vermin K}ock{ Of The Month does NOT eat pussy. He only eats asshole if it's got a big dick up in front. Whoever calls him bisexual is a fucking liar. He likes to suck cocks in front of an audience. ,/ \, ((__,-"""-,__)) `--)~ ~(--` .-'( )`-, Dr.Dirtbag L}eninist{ Vermin K}ock{ Of The Month `~~`d\ /b`~~` | | (6___6) `---`

1 0

Re: Handbook of Applied Cryptography
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here's the publisher's URL for Handbook of Applied Cryptography, which amplifies Patrick's summary, and gives ordering info. http://www.crcpress.com/PRODS/8523.HTM Just reading the mouthwatering summaries and the extensive, detailed list of topics is a good primer on crypto.

1 0

Re: Reuters article: "Unstoppable Internet will defy controls"
by nobody＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>More broadly, modern governments rely on their ability to control >information and money to maintain control over their citizens. >But does the Net mean we no longer need government in its present form? The German law professor Alexander Rossnagel has published an article titled "Globale Datennetze: Ohnmacht des Staates - Selbstschutz der Buerger" (global networks: state's impotence, citizens' self-protection) in Zeitschrift fuer Rechtspolitik 1997, p. 26 ff. He describes that decentral networks are difficult to control, and anonymizers, encryption and steganography can be used to defy surveillance. "[The state] can neither enforce matters of public interest, nor offer protection to its citizens", including protection of privacy and legally protected secrets. The state cannot effectively face law violations: "If it somewhere suppresses information, it will be 'mirrored' by many other servers world-wide. If it blocks communication lines, the message will find a way around. Sattelite transmission also renders the question of location almost irrelevant. Theresa Orlowski was denied a license for her porn channel here. Now she is broadcasting from Britain. In cyberspace, functions of social relevance, such as protection of minors, can no longer be fulfilled by the state. They are transferred to the parents exclusively." "The state can only interevene where the immaterial world of the network touches the physical world: It can arrest criminals, seize devices and data storage, when these physically are in its control. It can enforce adherance to its laws where it physically can exersize its power. But in the incorporeal world of the network, to a large extend it is powerless. All these examples indicate a new fact: The networks constitute a new incorporeal social space. Increasingly more social contacts, economic and legal exchanges are being transferred to it. In it, conditions are different from in the social relationships of the physical world. In this new world, the state has no means of coercion, no monopoly of power, and no sovereignty." "Law to be enforced requires power. The democratic constitutional state depends on sovereignty and obediency to laws. Only with these it can universally enforce democratic decisions and protect the citizens' basic rights from violations by third parties. To guarantee this is the fundamental reason for the modern state to exist. Its protective mission continues to apply. However, it has expanded with the civilisatoric development. With Hobbes, the focus was on the procetion of life and limb, with Locke the protection of freedom and property were added, and in this century, facing new threats, the protection of privacy. [... The states'] sovereignty is based on the authority to exclusively exercise physical power in [their territory]. This sovereignty has limits in the immaterial space of global networks. But when the citizen no longer receives the state's protection in the special sphere of the networks and the state can no more enforce matters of public interest there, then its basic legitimation in so far is in danger. According to Thomas Hobbes, 'the citizen's obligation to the sovereign can ... only last as long as he is capable of protecting the citizens'." But that would also endanger democracy and the constitional state. Stating that the normative strategy at large is obsolete, the author proposes new solotions: "When the democratic constitutional state can no longer reliably protect its citizens in the new social space of the networks, in compensation it must enable them to protect themselves." Information and communications technology offers various means of protection: * encryption and steganography * digital signatures * untraceable pseudonyms * certified electronic mail * ecash * software agents * connectivity management programs [whatever that is...] * cellular phones without location data * PICS * secure portable user-controlled devices that support these measures "Some of these measures - for example the encryption program PGP - can be used without any advance concession. The state only has to abstain from impeding regulations. Others - such as digital signatures - depend on an infrastructure that allows the individual to use these protective measures. The citizen of information society still depends on infrastructural prerequsites. But there is a fundamental difference in whether the individual can decide about using self-controlled protective measures himself, or the state or an other large organization offers protection that he cannot influence." "In order to protect and preserve the /old/ goals of freedom and self-determination in the /new/ social space of the networks, law must permit and support /new/ technologies." The article ends with the author's vision of a 'civil information society' as a free democratic society where basic rights are guaranteed by technology. "In this information society, the state has a limited, but fundamental role. [...] it creates a framework for the citizens to protect themselves. Thus they are enabled to freely inform themselves, solve conflicts in free self-organization, and negotiate and practice mutual security without depending on a big brother."

1 0

[STEGO] PGP 3
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dildo L[oser] Vegetable K[ankersore]OfTheMinute has been fired for anally raping officemates. \ o/\_ Dr.Dildo L[oser] Vegetable K[ankersore]OfTheMinute <\__,\ '\, |

1 0

[ANNOUNCE] overview.htm
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dogfucker L[amer] Vinegar K[rud]OfTheMonth died of AIDS last night with his queer lover. /// (0 0) ____ooO_(_)_Ooo__ Dogfucker L[amer] Vinegar K[rud]OfTheMonth

1 0

Re: X.500
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dimitri Vicious K[reep]OfTheMonth's wee-wee is so tiny that only his mommy is allowed to touch it. v-v-v-@@-v-v-v (..) Dr.Dimitri Vicious K[reep]OfTheMonth

1 0

Cellular location
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dead Vasectomy KOTM has been fired for stealing blow jobs. (~\/~) /~'\ /`~\ _ _ `\ /'( ` ) ( `\/' ) `' `\ /' `\ /' Dead Vasectomy KOTM `\ /' `\/' '

1 0

Re: OTP security
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I was thinking about the thread we had a week or so ago about OTPs. Say > I'm going to burn a CD of what I think are cryptographically random bits, > but somehow I end up with part of my stream being predictable (say every > 16th bit). What does this do to the security of my CD? Depends on how that 16th bit is related to the other bits and whether these predictable bits give any information about the other bits on the disk. If we assume all the other bits are true random and that the 16th bits are predictable only in that they can be predicted left and right but do not depend upon the other bits not in positions 16, 32, 48, 16n etc... we can just discard them and use the rest obtaining perfect security. We can even use all the bits and all we lose is one bit every two bytes and therefore if we are calling the bytes ASCII and say adding mod 13 we only have "imperfect" security on every 2nd character where there are 2^7 eg. 128 possible characters. Suprisingly this yields perfect security as there are still a number of possible pads which lead to reasonable and plausible decryptions. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

1 0

Re: Handbook of Applied Cryptography
by bs-org＠c2.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can anybody inform me where to get this book in Europa or can anybody buy it in USA and send it to me. I wil post the money immediately plus shipping At 17:10 1997-01-27 -0500, Mullen, Patrick wrote: >(My apologies if someone else has posted this information and I missed >it.) > >_Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_, Menezes, Oorschot, Vanstone, > CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1997 > >With a foreword by R.L. Rivest > >Contents in Brief: >Table of Contents v >List of Tables xv >List of Figures xix >Foreword xxi >Preface xxiii > >1 Overview of Cryptography 1 >2 Mathematical Background 49 >3 Number-Theoretic Reverence > Problems 87 >4 Pulic-Key Parameters 133 >5 Pseudorandom Bits and > Sequences 169 >6 Stream Ciphers 191 >7 Block Ciphers 223 >8 Public-Key Encryption 283 >9 Hash Functions and Data > Integrity 321 >10 Identification and Entity > Authentication 385 >11 Digital Signatures 425 >12 Key Establishment > Protocols 489 >13 Key Management Techniques 543 >14 Efficient Implementation 591 >15 Patents and Standards 635 >A Bibliography of Papers from > Selected Cryptographic > Forums 663 > >References 703 >Index 775 > >>From the back cover: > ><< BEGIN QUOTE >> >Cryptography, in particular public-key cryptography, has emerged in the >las 20 years as an important discipline that is not only the subject of >an >enormous amount of research, but provides the foundation for information >security in many applications. Standards are emerging to meet the >demands >for cryptographic protection in most areas of data communications. >Public- >key cryptographic techniques are now in widespread use in industry, >especially in the financial services industry, in the public sector, and >by >individuals for their personal privacy, such as in electronic mail. >This >Handbook will serve as a valuable reference for the novice as well as >for >the expert who needs a wider scope of coverage within the aread of >cryptography. It is a necessary and timely guide for professionals who >practice the art of cryptography. > >The _Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_ provides a treatment that >is multifunctional: > >* It serves as an introduction to the more practical aspects of > both conventional and public-key cryptography > >* It is a valuable source of the latest techniques and algorithms > for the serious practitioner > >* It provides an integrated treatment of the field, whil still > presenting each major topic as a self-contained unit > >* It provides a mathematical treatment to accompany > practical discussions > >* It contains enough abstractoin to be a valuable reference for > theoreticians while containing enough detail to actually allow > implementation of the algorithms discussed > >This is the definitive cryptography reference that novice as well as >experienced >developers, designers, researchers, engineers, computer scientists, and >mathematicials alike will find indispensable. ><< END QUOTE >> > >~~ Patrick > >

1 0

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by Nurdane Oksas 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Mon, 27 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > > > California is know for very beautiful girls ... > > > > wrong. > > > well, seems D. Thorn agrees with the song: 'california girls' > > Depends on where you go, and what time of year. So. Cal. is no doubt > a revolving door for the girl markets, especially on the beach board- > walks, or on San Vicente where a lot of joggers run. seems, Americans like their own women , which is all they have seen maybe... > > Anywhere else and it's no different from Cleveland or Pittsburgh. Well, can you say you've been 'anywhere else'? Regards,

1 0

public_law_other_650.html
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[ISMAP] [INLINE] Libel and Slander Tape #650 _________________________________________________________________ On this tape I will discuss libel and slander. It is for your general information only. It is not legal advice. It will give a general outline of the law on the subject as it applies in Ontario. If you have a legal problem, you should talk to a lawyer. We all have the right to have our reputation protected against false statements made against us. This protection is given to us by the law of defamation. On this tape I'll talk about defamation in both its forms - libel and slander. Libel can be a crime, but this section of the Criminal Code is rarely used, so I'll talk about libel and slander only in their civil context - the person defamed suing the defamer; asking for money as compensation for the injury to his reputation. Generally speaking, a defamatory statement is one which tends to lower a person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society. For example, if someone calls you a cheat in your business dealings, you probably have a lawsuit against him. That is, you do if he says it to someone other than you. It's not enough that the statement be made to the person it's about. It has to be communicated to another. What's the difference between libel and slander? Broadly speaking, if the defamatory statement is made in some permanent form, such as a newspaper or a letter, then it's libel. If it's in a transitory form, such as a hand gesture or the spoken word, then it's slander. But a defamatory statement that's broadcast on radio or television will be libel, not slander, even though it's spoken and not written. In the past, there was a good reason to know the difference between libel and slander. Today, if you can prove that you have been libelled, and there is no good defence, then the law will presume you have suffered damages and will fix an amount as compensation for your loss of reputation. In other words, you do not have to prove damages for actual financial loss. For many years, in cases of slander, you had to prove actual financial loss before you would be awarded damages under the law. In part, this was because slanderous statements were not considered permanent and therefore would not have as great an impact as libellous words, gestures or portrayals. Today, under the Ontario Libel and Slander Act, the requirement to prove damages in slander cases has been removed in certain situations. Mainly, these include cases where words are chosen to call into question the reputation of a person in relation to that persons office, profession, calling, trade or business. Therefore, if you could prove that Bill told John you were a cheat and then John refused to enter into a contract with you because of the statement, you would be compensated for the loss of contract and reputation. You would have to prove it was Bill's intention to attack your business reputation, but otherwise, damages would be awarded outright. Unfortunately, the Ontario Libel and Slander Act does not remove completely the requirement to prove damage, in all slander cases. Therefore, it is important to discuss your case with a lawyer to determine how yours would be treated under the law. We said earlier that the law protects a person's reputation. But obviously this protection can have the effect of restricting other rights, such as free speech. So the law tries to balance these competing interests. In certain circumstances, even though a defamatory statement may have been made and a person may have suffered injury to reputation, other interests are considered more important. In those cases, the law provides certain defences that can protect a defamer from liability. The most common defences are: truth (known in law as "justification"); absolute privilege; qualified privilege; and fair comment. The first is the easiest. A statement might well lower your reputation, but if it is the truth then anyone is free to say it. Additionally, if you consent to the statement being made, you cannot later argue you have been defamed. The second defence - that of absolute privilege - covers statements given in evidence at a trial, or made in Parliament, to give the two prime examples. And it extends to the fair and accurate reporting of those statements - the newspaper report of a trial, for instance. Our systems of justice and parliamentary democracy demand that in those situations participants must be free to speak candidly, without having to worry about risking a lawsuit for defamation. The defence of qualified privilege covers other situations. For instance - say a former employee of yours has given your name as a reference, so you get a call from someone who wants to hire him. He asks your opinion. You say: "Well, frankly, I always suspected he was stealing from me." That's an occasion of qualified privilege . You had a moral duty to give your honest opinion and the caller had a legitimate interest in hearing it. As long as you acted in good faith and said what you honestly believed you would have a valid defence to an action for defamation. Finally, there's the defence of fair comment. We are all free to comment freely - even harshly - on matters of legitimate public interest as long as our comments are made honestly, not maliciously, and are based on true facts. For example, say a columnist writes that an MP secretly holds shares in a company which has just got a large government contract. Then he comments that the MP is deceitful and should resign his seat. Well, if in fact the MP owns no shares in the company, then the columnist may be open to a lawsuit. But if the facts are true, that is the MP does own the shares, and the columnist honestly believes bases on those facts that the MP is deceitful and should resign, then he will have the defence of fair comment. If you intend to sue for a libel in a newspaper or a broadcast you must give notice to all those you intend to sue within six weeks of learning of the publication or broadcast, and you must specify in your notice the nature of your complaint, with specific reference to the actual words of which you complained. As well, you must commence your action within three months of learning of the publication or the broadcast. Failure to conform with either of these two steps will deprive you of any right to sue. In cases not involving newspapers or broadcasts, you must commence your action against the defaming party within 2 years of the words being spoken or written. Finally, there's the matter of apology. When a libel has been published in a newspaper or other periodical, or in a radio or television broadcast, the publisher or broadcaster can limit the amount of the damages the broadcaster may end up paying by publishing or broadcasting a full apology at the earliest opportunity. Not only newspapers and broadcasters can limit their damages by offering an apology before the action begins. Any defaming party can offer an apology in the hopes of having their damages reduced. The law of defamation protects your right to your good name. If a person makes a false statement to another to your discredit you can sue for damages. But because of other competing rights in our society, such as free speech and fair comment, there are cases where even the most defamatory statement will not give rise to an award of damages. If you think you have been defamed, you should talk to a lawyer. Home Search Feedback What's New Copyright & Disclaimer About This Site

1 0

No Subject
by babeview＠ntview.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Re: Best Computer School?
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

moscow state university in russia is not bad also. they teach lots of theory... which is good. - Igor.

2 1

Re: Handbook of Applied Cryptography
by bs-org＠c2.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can anybody inform me where to get this book in Europa or can anybody buy it in USA and send it to me. I wil post the money immediately plus shipping At 17:10 1997-01-27 -0500, Mullen, Patrick wrote: >(My apologies if someone else has posted this information and I missed >it.) > >_Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_, Menezes, Oorschot, Vanstone, > CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1997 > >With a foreword by R.L. Rivest > >Contents in Brief: >Table of Contents v >List of Tables xv >List of Figures xix >Foreword xxi >Preface xxiii > >1 Overview of Cryptography 1 >2 Mathematical Background 49 >3 Number-Theoretic Reverence > Problems 87 >4 Pulic-Key Parameters 133 >5 Pseudorandom Bits and > Sequences 169 >6 Stream Ciphers 191 >7 Block Ciphers 223 >8 Public-Key Encryption 283 >9 Hash Functions and Data > Integrity 321 >10 Identification and Entity > Authentication 385 >11 Digital Signatures 425 >12 Key Establishment > Protocols 489 >13 Key Management Techniques 543 >14 Efficient Implementation 591 >15 Patents and Standards 635 >A Bibliography of Papers from > Selected Cryptographic > Forums 663 > >References 703 >Index 775 > >>From the back cover: > ><< BEGIN QUOTE >> >Cryptography, in particular public-key cryptography, has emerged in the >las 20 years as an important discipline that is not only the subject of >an >enormous amount of research, but provides the foundation for information >security in many applications. Standards are emerging to meet the >demands >for cryptographic protection in most areas of data communications. >Public- >key cryptographic techniques are now in widespread use in industry, >especially in the financial services industry, in the public sector, and >by >individuals for their personal privacy, such as in electronic mail. >This >Handbook will serve as a valuable reference for the novice as well as >for >the expert who needs a wider scope of coverage within the aread of >cryptography. It is a necessary and timely guide for professionals who >practice the art of cryptography. > >The _Handbook_of_Applied_Cryptography_ provides a treatment that >is multifunctional: > >* It serves as an introduction to the more practical aspects of > both conventional and public-key cryptography > >* It is a valuable source of the latest techniques and algorithms > for the serious practitioner > >* It provides an integrated treatment of the field, whil still > presenting each major topic as a self-contained unit > >* It provides a mathematical treatment to accompany > practical discussions > >* It contains enough abstractoin to be a valuable reference for > theoreticians while containing enough detail to actually allow > implementation of the algorithms discussed > >This is the definitive cryptography reference that novice as well as >experienced >developers, designers, researchers, engineers, computer scientists, and >mathematicials alike will find indispensable. ><< END QUOTE >> > >~~ Patrick > >

1 0

Re: OTP security
by Rick Osborne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Paul replied: >Depends on how that 16th bit is related to the other bits and whether >these predictable bits give any information about the other bits on >the disk. Yes, I had figured that if the bits depended on eachother, then it would blow the whole system. [Yet another case of my fingers lagging behind my brain.] What I was thinking was more along the lines of something like: 1.You've got 16 hardware devices that each generate random noise. 2.One of the devices fails (or is sabotaged) and emits a predictable stream (10101...) 3.The other 15 devices are just fine, and the stream generated by one device does not effect the stream of another. 4.You do not know of the (failure/sabotage) until *after* you've generated your encyrted documents and they are out of your hands. So the revamped question is: How secure are those documents now? _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ Good evening... as a duly appointed representative of the city, county and state of New York, I order you to cease any and all supernatural activity and return forthwith to your place or origin, or to the nearest convenient parallel dimension.

1 0

Libel/slander & crypto relevancy
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, I have received several private emails inquiring into what possible crypto relevance the recent exchange over libel/slander and the law. It is clear that even in democratic countries like Canada (not know as a freedom of speech protectorate) slander/libel is covered under criminal codes. While it is true that currently these statutes are not heavily used, if at all, this will change as businesses and special interest groups move even further onto electronic networks. Consider the zealous use of the law by the CoS. Ask Julf if the ramifications are not 'real world'. Consider a trial where a person is purported to have altered a transmission by some party. It is not in the juries best interest to rule in the favor of anyone other than the person claiming the damage. Why you might ask? Simply because they are going to see themselves in that same situation and will want to know that they are protected both in spirit as well as actuality. What company will want to use an environment where their contracts and other exchanges can not only be viewed by unknown third parties but are subject to a man in the middle attack, potentialy ruining a company. Consider the ramifications in a political venue. Now some will quickly point out that they can encrypt the entire document, hardly suitable for web pages and other forms of advertisment. I predict that within the next five years these slander/libel laws will be used by some organization to prosecute defamation of their Internet presence (eg web page graffitti). Within 10 years this area will be one of the hotest areas of the new communications law. Now some have held that list operators and such will be protected, most probably not in reality. Consider, we live in a time where a person can get drunk and kill somebody with their automobile and the bar or store they bought the drink(s) from can be charged. There is a current trend in the legal industry to find the person that is easiest to prosecute in the chain of events and it has nothing to do with personal responsibility or other quaint but possibly naive views. I want to thank Toto for acting as the unknowing and unwilling dupe in my taking advantage of his emotional outburst and its results, it wasn't personal I was simply trying to create a suitable environment to make my point. It was a happenstance occurance I could not resist taking advantage of. It is clear that here we have a lawyer in Canada who is not even aware that there is a little used criminal statute in the country he practices in which could be used by citizens sufficiently motivated and having suitable quantities of cash at hand to pursue the matter. This is not a unique occurance by any means, consider the outburst from some list members, supposed legal experts, over some of the references that I forwarded (not what I would call a consistent understanding of the law by any stretch of the imagination). The reality is that the legal industry (after all the main motivation for the legal profession is money) has a serious lacking in trained individuals. This should be a warning sign to everyone in any society which has hopes of embracing communications technology. Lawyers don't make law, they survive by taking their views of the law and convincing juries of from 6 to 12 (YMMV) persons that this is the way to protect 'society' and its best interests. If they don't understand the technology (eg forwarding private email to publicly accessible lists by accident) how in the world are they going to understand what is best, let along convince anyone else? Is this the kind of self-interest you want to trust your criminal communications case, let alone your liberty, to? It has been proposed by at least one party that a district attorney or other public prosecutor would not act on such events. This is also naive. The ramifications for their political opponents to use this 'insensitive and clearly self-interested' refusal to act as a perfect example of how that prosecutor is interested in their own political career and not in the interest of the people they are charged with protecting as well as a good demonstration of their technological ignorance. It would be very difficult to get re-elected in such an environment. Now the crypto relevancy, one of the methods to help reduce if not completely abort such attempts is digital signatures. Recently a couple of co-workers for Tivoli-IBM went to the Usenix conference and while there did some key signings. However, after discussion upon their return it was clear that having had their keys signed and signing others there was no clearly useful way to apply those keys in commen communications. Last year the Austin Cypherpunks did a short term experiment with a system (kourier.ssz.com) which was involved in encrypted file systems, encrypted transfers, traffic analysis, and heterogenous key-ring management. This also made it clear that the legal ramifications, economic issues (eg who pays) as well as the technical hurdles have not been studied sufficiently to call this technology mature. All that I ask is that instead of jumping the gun and saying 'it ain't so' you simply consider the ramifications from 'their' perspective. It truly is amazing what one can learn by walking a mile in another mans shoes. For if there is one truth to be learned it is that this discussion is not about how it is, but rather how it will be and how it should be. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

2 1

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Phillip M. Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> wrote in article <5ch8v4$co9(a)life.ai.mit.edu>... > blanc wrote: > > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis > > However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should > > not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their > > civilians > > in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. > > > The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, > > including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from other > > governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they have the > > resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form alliances, take > > their chances and retaliate, etc. > > I wish this were true, at least of nations which would be friendly > to someone like me (white, Western, etc.). A bully on a school > playground can always be knocked down, no matter how big or how > vicious he is. Sadly, the U.S. bully cannot be knocked down. Bad > enough you get nuclear, chemical, and/or biological stuff waved at > you - if you get into a hot war like Desert Storm, your country is > carpet-bombed with fleets of B-52's until it is thoroughly debilitated. Actually the US is being remarkably ineffective in keeping Cuba etc off the Net. If you don't believe me just try the cuban home page. We had a Web server running in Sarajevo during the siege back in '93. There is no way that the US govt. can hope to control the Internet any more than it can control the phone system. What is astonishing is that the Cuban authorities are so keen to import a technology that breaks down their propaganda. The Cold War was not won by the arms race, it was won in Eastern Europe which was never a major participant. The main instrument that won it was West German TV which broadcast pictures of supermarkets with full shelves into the homes of East Germans every night. The viewers could see that it was not mere propaganda and their relatives confirmed the fact. As a result the East German guards on the Berlin wall simply decided to leave their posts one night. The East Germans couldn't stop the TV signals either. When Dresden started to become a ghost town because people wanted to move to a town which could recieve the broadcasts the East Germans ended up installing their own relay to keep the locals happy. Phill

3 2