December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

cryptanalysis for radio communications
by sameer＠uclink.berkeley.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I was wondering if any cryptanalysis packages existed which could help in decrypted information picked up with a scanner. It seems that a bunch of people trying to defend their home from the feds were listening in on the feds radio communications, but now they're encrypting stuff. It's probably not very strong crypto, maybe just a simple XOR. (So I hear.. a friend asked me to help him, 'cause he's the one helping these folk in Nevada.) Thanks.

2 1

Graynet
by szabo＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded from comp.infosystems: Reply-To: an53728(a)anon.penet.fi Date: Tue, 30 Nov 1993 06:03:34 UTC Subject: Information INFORMATIONAL REPORTS - How to trick pay phones into thinking you deposited money - How to clone cellular phones - How to make traffic lights turn green by remote control - How to build and use a bugging device - How to make your electric meter go backwards - How to get cable TV for free - How to create your own pirate TV or radio station $10 each, or all for $40. For informational purposes only. Send self- addressed, stamped envelope. Make checks or money orders out to Kardos. Kardos P.O. Box 2310 Darien, CT 06820 USA ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi.

2 2

Steganography and noise
by W. Kinney 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

3 2

Re: Spreading Technology (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: Spreading Technology (fwd) > Date: Thu, 24 Jul 1997 18:05:17 -0700 (PDT) > From: Mike Duvos <enoch(a)zipcon.net> > > The SU(5) theory was arrived at by political contrivance in > > 1927 when the Solvay Conference was called to resolve the > > various theories that happened to be flying fast and furious > > at the time, instigated by DeBroglie. > Excuse me? SU(5) is a supersymmetric theory. I seriously doubt > it made its appearance in 1927. I didn't say it did, I said the conference which decided what would end up being the 'standard model' was decided in 1927. I further thought it was interesting that the deciding factor was how the participants FELT about the various theories and on NO theoretical or experimental evidence whatsoever. The fact that I used the SU() symbology is a reflection of my thinking and not history. When I took Engineering Physics from Sudarshin at UT in '82 that was what he used because he worked in particle physics. You are of course free to use whatever symbology you feel comfortable with. SU() is the symbology used by physicist as an extension of group theory's U() symbology. The number in the () represents the number of indipendant variables in the model and tells the researcher how many rows and columns they need in their representative matrix. SU(5) is the symbology used for the standard model of quantum mechanics. SU(22), for example, is the commen "Super-string" theory that was of such popularity a few years ago. Glashow & Georgi developed the standard model representation in terms of SU() in 1973. It has become the standard representation via group theories for the standard model since then. Bottem line, all cosmological theories that I am aware of can be mapped onto SU() models. This is the power of this symbology in manipulating the models. For those interested you should check out: Particle Physics in the Cosmos: Readings from Scientific American ISBN 0-7167-1919-3 $9.95 Pay particular attention to the explanation in Chpt. 4 (written by Georgi) around pp. 69. Particles and Forces: At the Heart of the Matter: Readings from Scientific American ISBN 0-7167-2070-1 $11.95 ____________________________________________________________________ | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: Inman vs. crypto
by an41418＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I am almost positive Inman will be confirmed. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3 iQBVAgUBLREvDx1kTJuroDD9AQHe1QH/TWfLMQUFOlMf4Uz2GaKC/jXYLql4upkk qmg2xhRlob55uwTuhHJe1FekHXoPCs7LBPtUAMC4eM+XZppBSCcNsA== =xt6N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi.

1 0

No Subject
by banisar＠washofc.cpsr.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

cpsr.digex.net> Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 08:48:10 +0000 From: Dave Banisar <banisar(a)washofc.cpsr.org> To: Cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: Inman vs. crypto > Message-Id: <9312170947.AA18162(a)anon.penet.fi> > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > From: an41418(a)anon.penet.fi (wonderer) > X-Anonymously-To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Organization: Anonymous contact service > Reply-To: an41418(a)anon.penet.fi > Date: Fri, 17 Dec 1993 09:47:37 UTC > Subject: Re: Inman vs. crypto > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > I am almost positive Inman will be confirmed. > Boy, its a good thing that was posted anonymously. A real budding deep throat (grin) More recently, Inman was quoted by John Barlow in "Decrypting the Puzzle Palace" as saying ' "My Answer", he said "would be legislation which would make it a criminal offense to use encrypted communications to conceal criminal activity...you could have a registry of institutios which can legally use cryphers. If you get somebody using one who isn't registered, then you go after him." '

1 0

RE: Inman vs. crypto
by Pat Farrell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In message Thu, 16 Dec 93 20:40:18 EST, smb(a)research.att.com writes: > While in my opinion it's unlikely > that his nomination will be blocked, the hearings would be an excellent > time to question him on this subject. Today's Washington Post has long articles that describe the glowing recommendations for Inman from the whole political spectrum. His nonination hearings will be a love fest. I doubt that any serious questions will be raised. But you can always hope. Pat Pat Farrell Grad Student pfarrell(a)netcom.com Department of Computer Science George Mason University, Fairfax, VA Public key availble via finger #include <standard.disclaimer>

1 0

Re: inman vs. crypto
by sommerfeld＠orchard.medford.ma.us 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

' "My Answer", he said "would be legislation which would make it a criminal offense to use encrypted communications to conceal criminal activity. This isn't so bad all by itself, but... ..you could have a registry of institutios which can legally use cryphers. If you get somebody using one who isn't registered, then you go after him." ' ... this is absolutely unacceptable! BTW, I just called Sen. Kennedy's office. Kennedy is on the Armed Services committee, and according to the secretary is in favor of the nomination, but I asked a staffer to ask Kennedy to ask Inman about how he reconciles the First Amendment with statements he's made like these. - Bill

1 0

Inman
by dmandl＠lehman.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I seem to recall a major article on Inman in Covert Action Information Bulletin back in, oh, 1982 or so. It might have even spanned a couple of issues of the magazine. It was chock full of dirt (the kind only CIAB could dig up), but unfortunately I can't remember many of the details. Would anyone on the list happen to have a copy? --Dave.

1 0

VIACrypt PGP ?
by James Still 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I would appreciate some commentary as to whether the VIACRYPT PGP MSDOS >package is licensed for use by PKP (Public Key Partners). >It is my belief that it is. Could anyone who has purchased ViaCrypt PGP answer my question? What is the executable filename? Is it still PGP.EXE or did they throw their own little proprietary in there with a VIAPGP.EXE or some such? I appreciate your response! (I'm about to put out another version of a shell program and thought about extending support to ViaCrypt's if it is a different exec...) --- still(a)kailua.colorado.edu -----------------------------------------

2 1