December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Anonymous Digicash
by hfinney＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mike Ingle asks about digicash. The simplest system I know of that is anonymous is the one by Chaum, Fiat, and Naor, which we have discussed here a few times. The idea is that the bank chooses an RSA modulus, and a set of exponents e1, e2, e3, ..., where each exponent ei represents a denomination and possibly a date. The exponents must be relatively prime to (p-1)(q-1). PGP has a GCD routine which can be used to check for valid exponents. As with RSA, to each public exponent ei corresponds a secret exponent di, calculated as the multiplicative inverse of ei mod (p-1)(q-1). Again, PGP has a routine to calculate multiplicative inverses. In this system, a piece of cash is a pair (x, f(x)^di), where f() is a one-way function. MD5 would be a reasonable choice for f(), but notice that it produces a 128-bit result. f() should take this 128-bit output of MD5 and "reblock" it to be an multi-precision number by padding it; PGP has a "preblock" routine which does this, following the PKCS standard. The way the process works, with the blinding, is like this. The user chooses a random x. This should probably be at least 64 or 128 bits, enough to preclude exhaustive search. He calculates f(x), which is what he wants the bank to sign by raising to the power di. But rather than sending f(x) to the bank directly, the user first blinds it by choosing a random number r, and calculating D=f(x) * r^ei. (I should make it clear that ^ is the power operator, not xor.) D is what he sends to the bank, along with some information about what ei is, which tells the denomination of the cash, and also information about his account number. The bank debits his account for the amount corresponding to exponent ei, and signs D by raising it to the power di. This leads to E = f(x)^di * r, which is what the bank sends back to the user. The user divides E by r (this is done by calculating the multiplicative inverse of r modulo the bank's modulus, and multiplying E by that), giving C=f(x)^di. The user can then create the actual coin as (x, f(x)^di). This should also have some information appended to it to remember what exponent was used (what denomination this is), so it would actually be (ei, x, f(x)^di). There are some complications in this system. The user may want to withdraw several coins at once, and when he gets back the E values he needs to know which is which (so he knows which r to divide by for each one). So he may want to include some unique tag with his D values he sends to the bank and get the bank to send those back with the E values so that he can distinguish them. The bank will not recognize the coins (ei, x, f(x)^di) when they are deposited (returned to the bank), due to the blinding. But it will need to keep a list of all the x values it has seen so far so that it can detect double-spending. If the ei values encode not only denominations but also issue dates at some level, and if the cash is given a limited lifetime, the list can be purged of old values periodically. I do think a prototype digital cash system would not be too hard to do. It would not have to address all of these problems right away. The larger problem is how to experiment in a meaningful way with diigicash due to the difficulty in giving it value. We've talked about this problem before but I haven't seen any really good solutions. Karl Barrus tried to start up a non-anonymous cash system some months ago but there was nothing to spend it on. (Actually, he does have a remailer which uses his cash, but since other remailers are free that has probably limited interest in the for-pay remailer.) I am continuing to work on a simple TCL interface to much of the PGP functionality which would be needed for such a system (and for other types of experimentation). I have the MP library done, so the additional entry points needed would include the MD5 one-way function, the random- number generation, and the reblocking. Perhaps in another week I will have those hooks in place. Then you could write the control software in TCL, which would be easier for prototyping purposes since it's interpreted. Hal Finney hfinney(a)shell.portal.com

1 0

A Clarification on My Trials and Tribulations
by L. Detweiler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cypherpunks, you just don't get it. Why am I continuing to attack you and your leaders despite your vicious, cowardly attacks on me and my friends? Because, as long as you stand for *lies*, you do not have a right to exist. And to the extent that you promote *lies* you are corrupting the Internet and poisoning cyberspace. J.Gilmore says, `a pseudonym is not illegal unless used for deceptive purposes.' But you cypherpunks, that's the *only* purpose you are using them for! If I asked a tentacle, `are you a pseudonym', and it said `yes', do you think I would have gone to all this trouble to write tens of thousands of words attacking people and a movement I used to respect? If I asked your leaders, `have you ever communicated with me under a pseudonym' and they gave me straight answers, do you think I would still be around? YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO LIE TO ANYONE. Cypherpunks, how many of you have gotten messages, `hey, what do you think about T.C.May or E.Hughes and this pseudospoofing thing? Are you going to do anything about it?' For all of you who don't give a damn about your leaders pseudospoofing, why don't you care that your own leaders could be molesting you with their tentacles in this way? Using them in a manipulative way to gauge your loyalty to the movement and manipulate your trust? On the list and in your email? WHY DON'T YOU GIVE A DAMN? All I can conclude is that everyone here is in favor of deception, treachery, betrayal, and perversions, *particularly* if their leaders are responsible. Where the hell do you think I got all the stuff for `Joy of Pseudospoofing'? You think I made it all up? Your leaders molested me in precisely this way, but both the tentacles and your leaders stonewalled, evaded, and counterattacked. They think it is FUNNY how they have personally driven me to the BRINK OF INSANITY. And they *continue* to escalate instead of making simple statements about their beliefs in pseudospoofing, which would satisfy me and anyone else who has doubts. You want the truth? despite their bland statements your leaders *know* that pseudospoofing is PERVERTED and that is the only reason they refrain from saying anything about it, the only reason they continue to attack me as a deranged lunatic. What am I, the police? I don't GIVE A DAMN about all your perversions, as long as you keep them the hell out of my mailbox. But you *don't*. Everytime I think there is another person I can trust, it was nothing but another Leader Tentacle. Look, if you LIE TO ME in mail, THAT PISSES ME OFF and I will ATTACK you for it in an attempt to get to the TRUTH. and it should PISS OFF EVERYONE ELSE HERE TOO but NOBODY GIVES A DAMN. When I hear strange rumors about deceptions in the media, and your eminent leaders fail to reassure me, why is no one else upset about this? Cypherpunks, don't you give a DAMN that articles by reputable authors may contain DISTORTIONS AND LIES? Look, Markoff is a highly respected writer. And if you lie or deceive a reporter, that is like a personal insult. These people could get *fired* if their articles are incorrect in a serious way. but you don't GIVE A DAMN. you think it is FUNNY that you can TRICK REPUTABLE PEOPLE TO BELIEVE IN LIES and so you can PROPAGATE THEM FURTHER. Is there an honest cypherpunk in the entire world? None have contacted me so far. There are a few people that are slinking away quietly with their tail between their legs, but I think you all are just the same scurrilous cowards that your leaders are.

1 0

The Magic Question
by L. Detweiler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cypherpunks, please tell me what question I can ask of a psychopunk tentacle such that it will not lie and say that it is a real person! If you have any honesty or credibility, tell me that question! You don't believe in honesty, though. You believe you have the right to invade other's attention with your stealth identities. You rant loudly that anyone who attempts to make sure you are real is insane and a `digital stalker'. You believe you have the right to stick any mail message in anyones mailbox, to post to any newsgroup you wish. You believe that you have a right to trample on the rights of others. And you know you are perverted, but attack me as Satan for telling you that. You think you have the right to lie to anyone who asks, `who are you?' Tell me that question. I will go away when someone tells me the question.

2 1

A little Lao Tzu
by W. Kinney 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forgive the non-sequiter, but this seems appropriate... After a bitter quarrel, some resentment must remain. What can one do about it? Therefore the sage keeps his half of the bargain But does not exact his due. A man of Virtue performs his part, But a man without Virtue requires others to fulfill their obligations. The Tao of heaven is impartial. It stays with good men all the time. (Lao Tzu) -- Will

1 0

Larry Dyer
by L. Detweiler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

E.Hughes informs me L.Dyer is the cypherpunks Wired photographer. Could someone help me get in contact with him? E.Hughes says to me, `if you still can't take a joke, don't bother replying.' I'm amused by E.Hughes, the most frigid cyberspatial personality I have ever met, referencing the subject of humor. What is the joke? Who is it on? L.Detweiler? G.Spafford? Wired? NYT? How many sites? How many states does it span? How many countries? How many registered DNS entries? What kind of software? How many fake identities? What about the telephony manipulations? Every practical joker I have ever met at least had the decency to *end* it. ah, what a cruel joke. and the jokers delight in it. they will never stop. to do so would be to admit that they are frauds.

1 0

Re: Hi there!
by Eli Brandt 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I would like to point out that this is an `obviously pseudonymous' > use, not `pseudoanonymous'. Why do you constantly use different usernames for an12070, and have them espouse contradictory positions? To increase the number of apparently-distinct identities which you control! You are attempting to BLUDGEON your opponents into abject cringing SUBMISSION through the sheer force of DEMOCRATIC NUMBERS. > if someone lies to me in email, I am offended and will follow up. if > these tentacles did not claim to be real people, I would go away. You know, you're going to be really embarrassed when you come to your senses. Think about this for a minute. Do you have *any* grounds for believing that we're all the same person? Let me make you an offer: pick the two people whom you think are most clearly a single person. Test your hypothesis. If you prove that they are the same, I will publically apologize to you and denounce "pseudospoofing". If you cannot do so within a pre-agreed time limit, you will stop ranting. Making such a proof should not be too hard -- after all, people connected you and S.Boxx within a week or two. > if you have any knowledge of what is going on, it is your duty to > stop the lie. "Any knowledge" indeed. I am MEDUSA, the controller of ALL TENTACLES. Eli ebrandt(a)jarthur.claremont.edu

1 0

VOTE: Proposition desist
by edgar＠spectrx.saigon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- VOTE: Proposition desist L. Detweiler will cease posting to the cypherpunks mailing list. He will no longer concern himself with the activities of those on the cypherpunks mailing list here or on any other forum. I support -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLQBW294nNf3ah8DHAQHTpAP/fLfxk9SysQIeVLICA0gnvYDbFfhTTTp0 JGL2xRFri7QmtgU6JzO13W9fwlflrpjC39vHcW6wA16SXZtZRXm4xtoYbAAJ8rOn EIyLWQjncpZ1khY8pvO+iLNR/KzqWVa+jdQd/VaQar0Y3eFmxS6tyw5OWdOiJs3q Yau0PJ0mdBk= =OCMw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- edgar(a)spectrx.saigon.com (Edgar W. Swank) SPECTROX SYSTEMS +1.408.252.1005 Cupertino, Ca

1 0

Invasion of Privacy
by L. Detweiler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello again, you darling cryptoanarchists! I just wanted to drop you a line on the subject of my resume. At least one psychopunk has access to my real paper resume and one tentacle has had long had access to an ASCII version. An informer tells me that both have been circulating in some circles for you all to smirk at. I consider this an atrocious breach of my privacy by more hypocrites. My resume is directed at those who I intend, not those who wish to discredit me. If you have knowledge of its circulation, please send me email. Now, back to your regularly scheduled perversions.

2 1

Re: Anonymous Digicash
by Aviel David Rubin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mike Ingle <MIKEINGLE(a)delphi.com> writes: > I want to write a simple digicash program. This will use code from PGP > as much as possible. It will probably be online digicash, but it needs > strong anonymity. For that you need a blind signature protocol. What is > the best one, and where can I get a description of it? > > What is the best/simplest digicash system to implement? > > Is it possible to have a partially blind signature? For example, the > customer generates the cash (random string), blinds it, and sends it > to the bank. The bank adds an expiration date and signs it. The customer > unblinds the random string, leaving a signature on both the cash and > the expiration date. > > --- MikeIngle(a)delphi.com Allowing the bank to choose a timestamp opens the door for a subliminal channel.

1 0

Re: The Magic Question
by jordan＠imsi.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From ld231782(a)longs.lance.colostate.edu Sun Dec 5 03:06:00 1993 You think you have the right to lie to anyone who asks, `who are you?' I live in NYC, and am often approached by panhandlers. Approached is the wrong word, I guess I mean that I walk past them. Every person that walks by gets asked the same question: have any spare change? I choose to give to charity for a variety of personal reasons, but I typically don't respond -- at all -- to requests from panhandlers. I don't look at them or respond verbally to the question. Every now and again, when I don't respond at all, I get an insult fired off at me -- like, 'You could at *least* say no' or somesuch. I feel that so long as there's no reason to believe that the question is an "honest" one -- that is, there's nothing to signal the start of a conversation or a "relationship" ... I am, afterall, just walking by, and the next person behind me gets the same appeal -- there's no reason for me to respond, let alone with the "truth" ... I believe that answering a question like "who are you" can and should get different answers depending on the depth of the "relationship" involved. Is the question poser seeking some sort of "truth" ...? A "name" is simply a label, a tag, something to indirect through to access the "named" ... I'm sure we all know people whom we've called "Jack" the entire time we've known him, and suddenly one day we see Jack in a different situation and someone calls him John. Has Jack (*our* Jack) been "lying" to us? ----- One year I spent a summer at a visual arts workshop with a group of people who knew nothing of my past, and I was sure not to know them in the future (10 years later, I've had no contact with any of them). We gathered in a circle on the first day of activities and introduced ourselves after the leader read our names off a sheet. When my name was read, I just ignored it. My name was read three times, and then the leader went to the next name. At the end of the list, she asked "was there anyone whose name I didn't call" ... a woman put her hand up, and so did I. The leader took down our names, and we continued. That summer, I was "Nick" to everyone at the workshop. We worked in very close quarters, and the group of 40 or so quickly developed the kind of "trust" that's required in such intense situations. People needed to count on one another, and often spent sleepless nights together working on projects, helping each other explore their vision and response to the work we were doing, and generally becoming "friends" ... Inevitably, I was drawn to intimacy with one particular woman. It's one of those things you suddenly find yourself in. We shared many secrets, dark nights, heat. In the end, I was "found out" by some other of the staff. It's not even clear how many people "knew" all along. Even the staff member I worked closest with could have known, but for whatever reason never said a word. The fiction was nearly complete for 12 weeks. I did not intend to defraud, the "truth" was consistant. When word passed around that Nick was not my name, some refused to believe it. Some approached me later and started with "Nick ... er, Jordan ... er ... what do I call you?" I said it didn't matter to me, and most chose to call me Nick for the remainder of our time together. I received a few letters from that particular woman, a christmas card or two. I had to tell the place that receives my mail to look out for mail addressed to Nick Stames and route it to my box. We continued a correspondance, sharing some bits of the next phase of our lives, and she continued to call me Nick. I was, afterall, Nick to her. That's who she "knew" ... ----- Why do you care "who" I am? /jordan

1 0