December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

CTIA Daily News from WOW-COM - July 8, 1998
by CTIA Daily News 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

============================================= Welcome to today's edition of the CTIA Daily News from WOW-COM. Please click on the icon / attachment for the most important news in wireless communications today. =============================================

1 0

Re: Initial summary/analysis: Junger v. Daley
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks to Greg for the excellent summary and analysis. Responses by Peter Junger and his attorneys, those involved with Bernstein and Karn, and others on the technical and legal interpretation would be welcome. On the interplay among the three cases: We have heard that there was meeting in DC of the three teams with the US side. And that there may have been a report on this meeting at the recent DC security conference. Is there a public report available? Note: Greg meant to quote Judge Gwin on source code: "all but *un*intelligible to most people." The contrast between Patel and Gwin remind of the campaign of Wassenaar members to claim relaxation of crypto controls while not truly doing so, as in the recent Irish and US press release deceptions. More are expected as the US trade and crypto czars make their global rounds to arrange overt-covert deals for marketing munitions. The complicity of the banks and giant corps is not surprising with their legacy of doing just that -- as one defense expert says, expect ex-gov crypto watchdogs to aid the market titans to lure government buyers while peddling cheap knockoffs to voters. Amazing that the NYT sent up that trial balloon for government access to key strokes in lieu of GAK. Who's pushing that, working on the technology?

1 0

Ephemeral, was RE: Junger et al.
by Ed Gerck 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Regarding my comment below: >Ed Gerck writes: >[...] > > BTW, I think that Gwin was struggling to express the notion that > > source code (syntax) is a device whenever there is a clear binding > > between that source code and known semantics, together with proper > > pragmatics (the enviroment, as defined in semiotics), in order to > > perform the desired function. > I received some private postings which questioned it by questioning its logical consequences, as for example: >So the judge should forbid publishing/export of Applied Cryptography >and the PGP Book with source code, right ? > First, IMO, this subject is hard to discuss because it is politically involved and also applies just to a particular set of countries -- so it is not based on a "universal" ruling. Further, I also think it is absurd to try to outlaw cryptography because it is essential and not just to obtain privacy (as in my posting on logical semantics and crypto, some months ago [1]). In fact, I think that cryptography is needed to provide *secure routing* [1] (a property that is more basic than secure content and which I think will be impossible to forbid in the future). However, I also think that the arguments being thought by each side may carry their own intrinsic worth. Further, even though the whole subject is IMO ephemeral because unworkable, some of those arguments may have a far reaching consequence and transcend the issue. Should we overlook that? IMO, no. Even thrash can be recycled ;-) My remark above was in this line of reasoning. So, it ought not to be extrapolated to printed books -- I am not at all concerned about the legal aspects. In fact, laws can be wrong and IMO this is a clear example. But, regarding printed books -- yes, the comment above (and others in that line) are right. If this logic exercise is carried to its fully immoral end, then books should not be allowed to carry complete and workable source code. Which does not show that the argument is illogical, just immoral. Technically, the argument is sound. As Hume pointed out a long time ago, if we were guided only by reason and logic then surely I should prefer to destroy the rest of the world instead of enduring even a small pain in one of my fingers. While this shows that logic is not all, it also shows that one cannot deny logic by moral or ethics but rather define what precedes what in case of conflict, for each society. While this can have different answers for different societies, eg where in some suicide is moral, the cryptography issue may take a different twist if the link to secure routing is further investigated and cryptography is not only used just for secure content as it is today. Thanks, Ed Gerck =========== Reference: [1] http://www.mcg.org.br/trustdef.htm#A.4.1 ______________________________________________________________________ Dr.rer.nat. E. Gerck egerck(a)novaware.cps.softex.br http://novaware.cps.softex.br --- Meta-Certificate Group member, http://www.mcg.org.br ---

1 0

RE: Junger et al.
by Trei, Peter 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> -----Original Message----- > From: Mok-Kong Shen [SMTP:mok-kong.shen@stud.uni-muenchen.de] > Anonymous wrote: > > > Does it matter who might 'read' the material, in regards to the > protection > > of free speech? Whether it is written so that Russians or computers > might > > be able to read it? If source code is written on a napkin, it can be > > currently exported, but what if tomorrow a vendor announces a 'napkin > > computer' which can directly read from napkins akin to a super-low > densiy > > floppy disc. > > Put the source code on a neuro-disk and you can export it under > any crypto law that can ever be invented till eternity. > > M. K. Shen [Trei, Peter] Tell that to the thousands forbidden to leave the nations which claim or claimed to own them, on the basis that they once had access to state secrets. The thankfully defunct Soviet Union regularly forbade dissidents to emigrate, on the basis that at some point in their lives they had had access to 'sensitive' information. I have no doubt that similar restrictions could be put in place in other nations. Peter Trei

2 1

Re: Lotus Notes signature / encryption
by Charlie_Kaufman＠iris.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Could someone kindly tell me about the drawbacks of the Lotus Notes >signature / encryption system (export version)? I guess my first question would be "compared to what?". Compared to the Lotus Notes domestic version, the crypto is weaker in two ways. First, there is a backdoor by which all but 40 bits of each symmetric key is encrypted under a public key whose private half is known to the U.S. government. This encrypted value is included in all messages where the key is passed aroung. Depending on how you feel about breaking 40 bit keys, this means it is somewhere between easy and trivial for the U.S. government to eavesdrop on your communications It also uses 512 bit RSA keys for distribution of encryption keys, which makes it attackable by attackers other than the U.S. government. While no one has ever publicly demonstrated breaking a 512 bit RSA key (last I heard), the workfactor is well understood and it's clearly feasible (and in fact overdue). Compared to exportable versions of S/MIME or SSL, the crypto is considerably stronger. Against attackers other than the U.S. government (and even a paranoid would admit there are other attackers to be concerned about (e.g. the French government)), the workfactor to attack the symmetric keys is 64 bits - a little shakey but not the weakest link in most systems. Further, RSA signature keys are 630 bits, which is better than most exportable systems. Compared to non-exportable (but internationally available) systems, like PGP and strong S/MIME and SSL, the crypto is substantially weaker. Another aspect to consider is the strength of the PKI. Lotus Notes uses an organizationally based PKI, meaning that to a large degree your security depends on the trustworthiness and competence of your system administrator. With PGP, your security is under your own control to a much larger degree. For people who are more security aware than their administrators (as most PGP users are), the PGP PKI offers better security. For people who are less security aware than their administrators (as most Lotus Notes users are), the Lotus Notes PKI offers better security. Finally, a "drawback" that might be relevant to this group is the fact that because the Lotus Notes export version has a key-escrow-like backdoor, using it offers tacit political endorsement for the U.S. government's contention that key escrow is a technically practical compromise between the needs of users for privacy and the "needs" of government to know all the secrets of everyone on the planet. In my mind, this argues strongly in favor of using real strong crypto if that is an option, but using weak crypto as an alternative is offering tacit political endorsement for the even more dangerous contention that weak crypto is good enough. Your mileage may vary. --Charlie Kaufman (charlie_kaufman(a)iris.com)

1 0

Re: IP: "CyberCash can't oust credit cards"
by Dave Birch 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ryan Lackey said >I think resistance to new payment schemes on the part of a merchant is in >cost and effort to set up. Having a free apache commerce plugin which >handles >a variety of payment systems... What's wrong with this model is that it imports historical physical models that are irrelevant on the Net. Why does the merchant take payments at all? Imagine this scenario: you go into the Good Guys and buy a Walkman. The clerk gives you a ticket. You go round to your branch of Wells Fargo and get a cashiers cheque made out to the merchant, walk round to the merchant's branch of BankAmerica -- or BankBank, or whatever it's called now :) -- and deposit the cheque in the merchants account. BankBank gives you a receipt which you take back to the Good Guys and pick up your Walkman. Now, apart from all of the walking around, this is not a bad system. The Good Guys don't need cash registers, links to First Data etc etc. The Good Guys don't need to put up stickers saying "we take Visa", because the bank takes everything. The Good Guys don't care how you paid. The bank is much better placed than the merchant to handle the risks associated with payments and therefore the information asymmetries associated with the payment are significantly reduced (there's a good article about this in the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta's Economic Review, 1Q98). On the Net, there's no walking around. In the physical world, it clearly makes no sense for every bank to build a network out to every merchant: hence it makes sense to have physical payment instruments (e.g. notes, cheques) and credit/charge cards. On the Net, though, every participant is connected. When you buy a book from Amazon, what is the point of sending your credit card details to Amazon just so that they can send the details on to an acquiring network, third-party processor etc. Surely it makes more sense for merchants to have deals with payment agents (this is the model in OTP, Smart Access etc). When you press the button marked "Pay" on your browser, wouldn't it be more natural for a message to go to your bank than to the merchant? Thus, I get a "ticket" from Amazon saying "you owe $20 for this book". I pass the ticket to a payment agent (which may be a bank) and pay them (the negotiation being between my wallet and the agent"). The agent sends me a receipt to keep: I send the receipt to Amazon and they send me a book. Alternatively, perhaps the receipt let's me play Doom for a month or get ten upgrade to an item of software or whatever. All Amazon care is that the money has been paid: what do they care whether I used DigiCash or Mondex, Visa or MasterCard? You might argue that the merchant would discount for cleared funds (pay by Mondex and get 2% off) but I think that its frankly too much bother for them to work out N different prices by M different payment methods. I would imagine that just a merchants run loyalty schemes ("double points if you buy cornflakes") then so would payment agents ("double points for DigiCash") but each could operate their business independently. I would argue that the idea that merchants take payments is outdated. Since merchants don't care about cypherpunk favourites such as bearer instruments and anonymity, they'll be perfectly happy to have an acquiring account with BigBank and get a statement at the end of the month that details the payments taken and says "Money collected $1000, our fee $50, deposited to your account $950". Now, the merchant hasn't had to buy a commerce server, negiotiate 10 different acquiring agreements, implement SET or do anything else. Hey, so it's 5%: so what? Regards, Dave Birch. === mailto:daveb@hyperion.co.uk ===== http://www.hyperion.co.uk/ ===

1 0

Re: Rats in the Walls
by Reeza! 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:21 PM 02 07 98 +0200, Anonymous wrote: >"Reeza!" <howree(a)cable.navy.mil> wrote: > >> At 04:41 PM 02 07 98 +0200, Anonymous wrote: >> >and there are indeed safe havens elsewhere, >> > >> >"Educate, don't Agitate" >> > >> >> Tell me more,,, > >You and who's army? > What army? I'm in the navy, and I'm getting sick of it.

1 0

Re: Covert Access to Data and ID
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Froward From: Anonymous To: die(a)pig.die.com Cc: jy(a)jya.com Subject: Intel plans for world domination Date: Wed, 8 Jul 1998 10:51:04 -0500 Good afternoon gentlemen, I've been reading the correspondence on the possibility of govt keystroke access with some interest. I'm in a slightly odd position as I'm responsible for security in one of the larger wintel companies. As such I've been getting quite a feeling of deja vu reading your mails. Intel and others are moving in exactly this direction with a number of initiatives, most notably the PC98, PCXX, and "Wired For Management". WfM in particular is very scary - one of the components is a facility for PC's to download and run digitally signed software before the OS is booted - between "the end of BIOS initialisation and when control is transferred to a high-level OS" in the words of one Intel document. The code is verified by routines embedded in the BIOS and will allegedly use some subset of X.509v3 and PKCS#1. As so often happens in circumstances like this I can't risk passing documents directly as I can't be sure of their provenance - I really have no idea which ones are now considered trade secrets and which have been made public. Instead I recommend you have a look at the Intel WfM site http://www.intel.com/ial/wfm/ with particular reference to the "Pre-Boot Execution Environment" (PXE) and "System Management BIOS" (SMBIOS). The Microsoft pc98 site is at http://www.microsoft.com/hwdev/pc98.htm and the Intel one at http://developer.intel.com/design/pc98/. ---------- And, DM reminds of the DIRT program Ray Arachelian first posted here: There's an article on page 37 of the July 6, 1998 issue of NetworkWorld about a new software product for Windows machines that is basically a trojan horse that allows access to all keystrokes and files on a system from a remote "America's Most Wanted"-type HQ. I can't find the article online at www.networkworld.com, but you can go the the company's site at http://www.thecodex.com/dirt.html to see it. Sale of DIRT is "restricted to military, government, and law enforcement agencies", the article says.

1 0

Join StarDates.com, The Internet's Best FREE Dating Service!
by hizaici72＠prodigy.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

That's right! Stardates.com is the internet's best FREE dating service. No gimmicks, no free trials that expire, just FREE Click the link below: http://209.2.134.99/ and select JOIN FREE from the menu options to fill out our on-line application. All personal information is kept strictly confidential. We even have an anonymous email system to keep your email address private. So if your your looking to meet people, join Stardates.com Hey, what do you have to lose? Sincerely, Michael Sole Vice-President StarDates **************************************************** Bulk Email Advertising Works Best!! This Could Have Been Your AD !!! For Advertising Information Please Calll 1-510-653-4709 Evenings PST **********************************************

1 0

Jim Bell Message
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded from a long-time cpunk who received a call from Jim Bell yesterday. Jim asked that this message be publicized: 7/7/98 By this post he is publically accusing the Federal Government of having spied on him from two physical addresses. These are two houses to the North & to the East of his parent's house. The government moved in within 6 months (approx) of the time before his arrest. One of the addresses is 7217 Mississippi, which is listed as "Billy King", who died a couple of years ago. The house is ostensibly being occupied by his widow (or that is the impression). It is listed as being as owned by Alverna King, but he has his doubts. The other is address is 7302 Corregidor, purchased about 2.5 - 3 years ago by someone. Listed as being the address of Sundown Development, a small business company. A second floor was added soon after it was acquired by the company. They aren't listed as the owners on record, but they are listed as being at that address. Thinks this is a sham. The govmt was basically next door spying on him for at least a year, before it started provoking him. In response to his using the internet for freewheeling debate, they engaged in some bugging that is illegal under Washington State law. It is illegal to use bugging without the knowledge of the participants. He has developed a technique for identifying when someone is tailing him. Found this on Father's day when some people got a little too close to him. He drove to his Sister's party on Hayden Island in Oregon, and noticed the tails. Identified them as Rixen Marine, which he thinks is a sham, another front organization. One of the reasons he was arrested (though they're not willing to admit it) is because was way too successful in tailing _them_. A few more days and he would have blown their entire operation. He couldn't go into the details of how he found out these things. Did research & sophisticated observation. Will be getting friends to do searches in databases, etc. to gather more info to substantiate his suspicions. He said his recent arrest was on a probation violation charge - failure to pay a fine or something, wasn't clear on the specifics. There will be a hearing on his case this Friday the 10th. Prosecutors last year didn't know what the govmt was up to - not told of the spying (a "black operation"). Their method of spying on him are techniques which are possible, though rarely used. If people knew they would be very surprised. It will be a big story - big as Watergate - when it comes out. Their usage of these high-tech methods for access is difficult, so not used often. The government is trying to cover up their reaction to what he wrote in his essays. ------------------- <end of message>

1 0

Covert Access to Data and ID
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dave Emery's remarks on government access to keystrokes (proposed by the NYT as an alternative to GAK) points to the probable increase of intrusive devices to counter increasing use of encryption and other privacy and anonymity measures. This topic comes up here now and then, with mentions of a slew of methods to protect privacy of data during transmission or storage. But the possibility of logging the initial creation or manipulation of data is not as often discussed, nor how to tie a person to the data, as now being asked in legal and law enforcement fora to identify, catch, convict and jail computer culprits. That the NYT floated the idea surely means someone is testing public response to an idea that seems to be more intrusive than GAK: the logging of initial data and any manipulation of it, prior to encrypting, and maybe including a means to link the actions to the user. If this is logging (and related retrieval) is done covertly, encryption could thereby become a falsely reassuring cloak of privacy. Dave thinks devices like these are surely in the works, and he can say more about their sponsors, technologies and implementations. One driving force, as he previously noted, is the desire for devices to assure copyright protection, backed by the WIPO treaty, which now being considered for approval. See the House report on it at: http://jya.com/hr105-551.txt (141K) And the EFF and ACLU opposition to it: hr2281-opp.htm Other forces, though, are employers who want to snoop, law enforcement, government, marketers, actually the same groups who dislike privacy protection measures, but often prefer to snoop covertly while loudly proclaiming support for privacy. Thus, the more general question Dave has raised is how widespread is the development and implementation of technolgies for covert surveillance on the Web and in desktop boxes -- happily spreading quietly while attention is focussed on the very encryption which it will circumvent? And what are these devices, or what might they be, what might be countermeasures and who might be working for and against them. SDA must have insights to share. Over to Dave Emery and those more knowledgeable. For those who missed his earlier message we've put it, with a follow-up at: http://jya.com/gaks-de.htm

4 3

U.S. relaxes licensing grip on encryption
by Xena - Warrior Princess 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(From the Mercury News, see subject line) http://www.sjmercury.com/business/center/encrypt070898.htm It's a start, at least.

1 0

RE: Democracy... (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: Matthew James Gering <mgering(a)ecosystems.net> > Subject: RE: Democracy... (fwd) > Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 18:46:04 -0700 > > So if a Texas DPS officer pulled over a car from Louisiana he couldn't > > hassle them in regards to the pot they had in the car. Even > > though it was illegal for Texas citizens. > > Wow, you learn something new every day. You didn't learn anything because you weren't paying attention. This was supposition based on a strict interpretation of the Constitution. You should try reading *every* word. ____________________________________________________________________ The seeker is a finder. Ancient Persian Proverb The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Larry Gilbert, AOLers, and the Hyper-real flamer
by AIMSX＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hmm... have you ever thought... that my mother may not exactly love the idea of me having access to other people's accounts... so I need to do what she DOES condone? You just don't seem to be using your brain. >Some of them have over 100 accounts on the same ISP, and are >truly so full of shit, that they're swimming in it. Kid, by bullshiting, all >you're doing is enforcing the view that AOL users are really AOLusers.

2 1

Re: software
by HyperReal-Anon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 16 Sep 1998 CHerr58414(a)aol.com wrote: > > if u got any freeware for encripting and decodeing that would be great so if > you can mail me back some info. Thanks > > we gots lotz of hardware for people of ur abillitiez in fact our hardware is really really hard so if u got any pictures of urself that would be great so if you can mail us back some. Thanks LamenessMonger

1 0

Nita Daniel
by sixdegrees 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just a quick update from sixdegrees(tm). Unfortunately Nita Daniel (machita(a)gurlmail.com) asked not to be listed as your contact with sixdegrees. We also wanted to make sure you were aware that you currently have no other confirmed contacts, so it will be hard for you to have a productive sixdegrees experience. As you probably know, without any confirmed contacts, you won't get any results from our networking searches. So, we just wanted to recommend that you head over to http://www.sixdegrees.com , log-in, and go to MY CONTACTS to list additional relationships. ==================================================================== PLEASE NOTE: All replies to this address are processed by a computer. If you have any problems, questions or requests send an e-mail to issues(a)sixdegrees.com and someone will get back to you as soon as possible. ==================================================================== E.DB.BRESP.3

1 0

Re: Democracy...
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 9/15/98 10:27 PM, Jaeger (Jaeger(a)hempseed.com) passed this wisdom: > >hey, would you care to show us where "seperation of church and state" is >to be found in the constitution/bill of rights? absolute right and >wrong is not a religious belief (necessarily).. your religious beliefs >do not affect the nature of reality. there are absolute truths by [snip] >> Ever heard of seperation of church and state? Democracy? the rights of >> >> the individual? While you certainly have the right to practice your >> religion in what ever manner you so choose demanding that everyone >> else >> does, or that the president of the us of ais subject to you PERSONAL >> faith decisions is outragous The first amendment states only that there shall not be 'an establishment of religion' it says nada about 'separation of church and state.' The intention was simple; that there would never be an 'official' state religion. It didn't say religion had no place. They were escaping a regime with an established state religion that used the goverment to stamp out religious deviationism. That was the sole reason for that clause in the 1st amendment. Brian B. Riley --> http://members.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key> "...if you drink much from a bottle marked "poison." and it is almost certain to disagree with you, sooner or later" _Alice in Wonderland_: (Lewis Carroll)

1 0

Democracy...
by Vivek Vaidya 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>>Almost 60 percent of those polled said they thought Clinton was fit to be >>>president. By what standard? That's the trouble. Americans have no >>>standards -- no unchangeable yardsticks by which they measure right and >>>wrong, truth from fiction. > >>By *their* standard, by their own personal judgement. There's no moral >>yardstick, and God help us if there is in the future. Who makes the >>yardstick? Who sits down and says, "This is the moral standard in this >>country, abide by it or suffer the consequences"? > >Sorry but there are absolutes and there is a moral yardstick. Whether this > is accepted or not is beside the point. > >There has to be absolutes otherwise any action can be excused (or damned). > The real cry should be >"God help us to instigate Your yardstick". God doesn't change and neither >does His measure. > >1)Love the Lord, with all your heart, with all you soul with all your mind >and all your strength >2)Love you neibour as yourself. > >Everything else hangs on these. > Ever heard of seperation of church and state? Democracy? the rights of the individual? While you certainly have the right to practice your religion in what ever manner you so choose demanding that everyone else does, or that the president of the us of ais subject to you PERSONAL faith decisions is outragous Vivek Vaidya ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

8 10

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Electronic Security & Counterintelligence" must become pervasive, and this is only possible if we release the private sector from artificial constraints on encryption, and if we return to our democratic foundation, the respect for personal privacy. We cannot regulate this, we can only nurture this fundamental national security arena. TAKEDOWN: Targets, Tools, & Technocracy Robert David Steele http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usassi/ssipubs/stratcon/steele.htm Another excerpt: 2.The greatest obstacle our government faces today in assuring national security and national competitivenessthe cause of causes for conflict and economic lossis the growing gap between those with power and those with knowledge.

1 0

serene rebel
by sixdegrees 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just a quick update from sixdegrees(tm). Unfortunately serene rebel (serene_rebel(a)hotmail.com) asked not to be listed as your contact with sixdegrees. We also wanted to make sure you were aware that you currently have no other confirmed contacts, so it will be hard for you to have a productive sixdegrees experience. As you probably know, without any confirmed contacts, you won't get any results from our networking searches. So, we just wanted to recommend that you head over to http://www.sixdegrees.com , log-in, and go to MY CONTACTS to list additional relationships. ==================================================================== PLEASE NOTE: All replies to this address are processed by a computer. If you have any problems, questions or requests send an e-mail to issues(a)sixdegrees.com and someone will get back to you as soon as possible. ==================================================================== E.DB.BRESP.3

1 0

Re: Encrypting files.
by Neels Kriek 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Try DataSafe. Dunno which algo it uses but easy to use and anything is better than zip ;) www.novastor.com hope this helps -----Original Message----- From: Sunder <sunder(a)brainlink.com> To: Lars Weitze <chromedemon(a)netcologne.de> Cc: Cypherpunks <cypherpunks(a)toad.com> Date: Wednesday, September 16, 1998 18:25 Subject: Re: Encrypting files. >Lars Weitze wrote: >> >> Does anyone now a program for WindozeNT to store encrypted data on harddisk. >> At the moment i use >> ZIP-Files with a Password on them (I now it is not very secure). >> I am living outside USA and do not want any software with backdoors >> ,"masterkeys" or stuff like that. > >http://www.pcdynamics.com/SafeHouse/ > >-- > >=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== >.+.^.+.| Sunder |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. >..\|/..|sunder(a)sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ ><--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ >../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. >.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... >======================= http://www.sundernet.com ========================== > >

1 0

SNET: U.S. Patent Programmable subcutaneous visible implant
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: jeremy.compton(a)stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jeremy Compton) Subject: SNET: U.S. Patent Programmable subcutaneous visible implant Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 01:35:49 +1200 To: snetnews(a)world.std.com -> SNETNEWS Mailing List United States Patent 5,638,832 Singer, et. al. Jun. 17, 1997 Programmable subcutaneous visible implant Abstract A subcutaneous implant for displaying various re-programmable information or decorative patterns beneath the surface of the skin of a person or an animal. A biologically inert subcutaneous implant is constructed of a flexible material so as to conform to the skin's surface. The subcutaneous implant includes a battery for providing power to the implant. The subcutaneous implant also includes a receiver for receiving programming information from a user, and a display for displaying the programming information through the skin. Inventors: Singer; Andrew J. (Palo Alto, CA); White; Sean (San Francisco, CA). Assignee: Interval Research Corporation (Palo Alto, CA). Appl. No.: 477,096 Filed: Jun. 7, 1995 Intl. Cl. : A61B 19/00 Current U.S. Cl.: 128/899 Field of Search: 128/897-899, 654 References Cited | [Referenced By] U.S. Patent Documents 4,233,964 Nov., 1980 Jefferts et al. 128/899 5,041,826 Aug., 1991 Milheiser 5,074,318 Dec., 1991 Campbell et al. 5,205,286 Apr., 1993 Soukup et al. 128/899 5,322,034 Jun., 1994 Willham et al. 5,324,940 Jun., 1994 Ekstrom 5,482,008 Jan., 1996 Stafford et al. 128/899 Primary Examiner: Cohen; Lee S. Assistant Examiner: Lacyk; John P. Attorney, Agent or Firm: Brooks & Kushman 19 Claims, 4 Drawing Figures -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com -> Posted by: jeremy.compton(a)stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jeremy Compton)

1 0

SNET: U S Patent: Identification system
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: jeremy.compton(a)stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jeremy Compton) Subject: SNET: U S Patent: Identification system Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 01:35:51 +1200 To: snetnews(a)world.std.com -> SNETNEWS Mailing List United States Patent 5,041,826 Milheiser Aug. 20, 1991 Identification system Abstract A passive integrated transponder (PIT) is attached to or embedded in an item to be identified. It is excited via an inductive coupling from an interrogator. The PIT responds to the interrogator via the inductive coupling with a signal constituting a stream of data unique to the identified item. The signal is in the form of two different frequencies, a shift from one frequency to the second during a bit cell representing a data "one", and a shift from the second frequency to the first frequency representing a data "zero". The responsive signal is then detected and processed for utilization in a data storage or display device. Inventors: Milheiser; Thomas A. (Littleton, CO). Assignee: Destron/IDI Inc. (Boulder, CO). Appl. No.: 481,833 Filed: Feb. 16, 1990 Related U.S. Application Data Division of Ser No. 388,761, Aug. 2, 1989, abandoned, which is a continuation of Ser. No. 165,310, Mar. 8, 1988, abandoned, which is a division of Ser. No 814,492, Dec. 30, 1985, Pat. No. 4,730,188, which is a continuation-in-part of Ser. No. 580,401, Feb. 15, 1984, abandoned. Intl. Cl. : H04Q 1/00 Current U.S. Cl.: 340/825.54; 340/825.69; 375/272; 455/41 Field of Search: 340/825.54, 825.55, 825.69, 825.72, 825.34, 825.94, 572; 455/118, 41; 375/45, 62, 78, 81, 52; 370/53, 112 References Cited | [Referenced By] U.S. Patent Documents 3,109,143 Oct., 1963 Gluth 375/81 3,510,779 May, 1970 Klapper 375/81 3,689,885 Sept., 1972 Kaplan et al. 455/41 X 4,287,596 Sept., 1981 Chari 375/52 X 4,313,033 Jan., 1982 Walker et al. 370/112 X 4,368,439 Jan., 1983 Shibuya et al. 375/62 X 4,388,730 Jun., 1983 Nash et al. 375/81 X Primary Examiner: Weldon; Ulysses Attorney, Agent or Firm: Sirr; Francis A., Hancock; Earl C. 14 Claims, 8 Drawing Figures [USPTO] -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com -> Posted by: jeremy.compton(a)stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jeremy Compton)

1 0

IP: White House decision affects e-mail scrambling software
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: believer(a)telepath.com Subject: IP: White House decision affects e-mail scrambling software Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 18:17:36 -0500 To: believer(a)telepath.com Source: Fox News - AP White House decision affects e-mail scrambling software 6.56 p.m. ET (2256 GMT) September 16, 1998 By Ted Bridis, Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) The Clinton administration relaxed some restrictions Wednesday on the export of powerful data-scrambling technology a decision that could help Americans who want to guarantee the privacy of their e-mail and other electronic information. The White House said U.S. companies can begin selling high-tech tools overseas that use the so-called 56-bit Data Encryption Standard or its equivalent, which has an unlocking key with 72 quadrillion possible combinations. The government imposes limits on exports of the most powerful scrambling technology now anything above 56-bit because it fears that authorities, even with a judge's permission, won't be able to read the messages of criminals or terrorists. The export limits do not directly affect Americans, who are legally free to use encryption technology of any strength. But U.S. companies are reluctant to develop one version of their technology for domestic use and a weaker overseas version, so they typically sell only the most powerful type that's legal for export, even to Americans. Vice President Al Gore called the new rule's balance between privacy and not helping criminals "probably one of the single-most difficult and complex issues that you can possibly imagine.'' "We must ensure that new technology does not mean new and sophisticated criminal and terrorist activity,'' Gore said. "And we must ensure that the sensitive financial and business transactions that now cruise along the information superhighway are 100 percent safe in cyberspace.'' Privacy advocates, though, derided Wednesday's announcement as a modest step, noting that a non-profit group of researchers demonstrated earlier this summer it can unscramble a 56-bit coded message in just days. Experts have suggested that scrambling sensitive e-mail or online credit-card transactions using less than 90 bits is vulnerable, while most experts consider 128-bit encryption practically unbreakable. Some companies that sell encryption products nonetheless praised the announcement. The president of the Business Software Alliance, Robert Holleyman, called it "a significant improvement over what we have today.'' The administration previously limited the export of 40-bit encryption technology, which has more than 1 trillion combinations. "It's a step but it's a small step,'' said Alan Davidson, an encryption expert for the Washington-based Center for Democracy and Technology. "We're worried that 56 bits is not enough.'' Barry Steinhardt, president of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a San Francisco-based civil liberties group, said: "We assume this is done to throw a bone to industry at a time when the administration needs all the friends it can get.'' "But it's half a step, and it continues to rely on dangerous technologies,'' he said. The White House also said Wednesday that it will allow U.S. companies to use unlimited-strength encryption to communicate with their subsidiaries in all countries except seven terrorist nations: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Sudan, North Korea and Cuba. It also agreed to allow U.S. encryption companies to sell the most powerful scrambling tools overseas to insurance companies and health and medical organizations in more than 40 countries. And the administration said it will establish a technical support center for federal, state and local authorities who might be confronted with criminals using encryption. In June, the Electronic Frontier Foundation used a custom-built computer worth less than $250,000 to crack a 56-bit encrypted message in less than three days to win an industry contest. The EFF published a book describing exactly how to build a replica of its code-breaking computer. © 1998 Associated Press. All rights reserved. ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ----------------------- ********************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address ********************************************** www.telepath.com/believer **********************************************

1 0

IP: Digital Biometrics Awarded Rhode Island State Contract
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: believer(a)telepath.com Subject: IP: Digital Biometrics Awarded Rhode Island State Contract Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 12:00:41 -0500 To: believer(a)telepath.com Source: PR Newswire http://www.prnewswire.com Digital Biometrics Awarded Rhode Island State Contract DBI Tenprinter 1133S Systems Selected For Rhode Island's Live-Scan Fingerprinting MINNEAPOLIS, Sept. 15 /PRNewswire/ -- Digital Biometrics, Inc. (Nasdaq: DBII) a leader in biometric identification systems integration company, today announced the award of the Rhode Island State contract for an initial order of six TENPRINTER 1133S live-scan fingerprinting systems. These systems will enable police agencies to eliminate the need for the traditional ink method of taking fingerprints, and significantly speed fingerprint processing of criminal and suspected criminal fingerprints with a higher degree of accuracy. Live-scan systems such as the 1133S are special-purpose computer-based systems which capture, digitize and transmit fingerprint images, and provide a significant improvement in image quality and ease-of-use compared to the traditional ink-based method of taking fingerprints. Live-scan systems are used in law enforcement and increasingly in non-law enforcement applications such as employment screening, new employee enrollment, firearms registration, and security screening. James C. Granger, President and Chief Executive Officer of Digital Biometrics commented, "We are very pleased that Rhode Island has chosen DBI for their fingerprinting network. Rhode Island joins the growing list of states that have chosen our live-scan technology." Rhode Island joins Minnesota, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Connecticut, Oregon, Nevada, Alabama, Indiana, Illinois, North Carolina, Tennessee, Colorado, California and Virginia as recent U.S. purchasers of Digital Biometrics TENPRINTER Series live-scan fingerprinting systems. Digital Biometrics also supplies live-scan systems to the Scottish Criminal Records Office and has recently won an OEM agreement with TRW for England and Wales. Digital Biometrics is a provider of biometric identification systems and systems integration services. DBI is a leading supplier of computer systems-based products and services for fingerprint capture for law enforcement and commercial applications. In addition, its Integrated Identification Solutions Division delivers total solutions through customized applications and product integration to solve complex information systems problems, including identification problems, in commercial and government markets. SOURCE Digital Biometrics, Inc. ©1998 PR Newswire. ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ----------------------- ********************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address ********************************************** www.telepath.com/believer **********************************************

1 0