December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Public key/3DES datastream software over WAN Bastions
by sdw＠lig.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Has anyone produced software (preferably Unix based) that provides a public key authenticated, DES/3DES encrypted datastream over WAN firewalls/bastions? A typical use would be to connect transaction feeds between two data centers in a secure, automated way over Internet. I can't see anything conceptually difficult with it, and it seems the PGP library could be used to create simple Unix daemons. sdw -- Stephen D. Williams Local Internet Gateway Co.; SDW Systems 510 503-9227APager LIG dev./sales Internet: sdw(a)lig.net In Bay Area Aug94-Feb95!!! OO R&D Source Dist. By Horse: 2464 Rosina Dr., Miamisburg, OH 45342-6430 Internet Consulting ICBM: 39 38 34N 84 17 12W home, 37 58 41N 122 01 48W work Newbie Notice: I speak for LIGCo., CCI, myself, and no one else, regardless of where it is convenient to post from or thru.

2 1

_American_Survival_ mag article
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Oct. issue of _American_Survival_ has an article called "Clipper Inside". Dunno anything else about it, might be good, might suck rocks. -- <A HREF="http://www.eff.org/~mech/mech.html"> Stanton McCandlish </A><HR><A HREF="mailto:mech@eff.org"> mech(a)eff.org </A><P><A HREF="http://www.eff.org/"> Electronic Frontier Fndtn. </A><P> Online Activist

1 0

Re: Such a Sweetie Pie
by merriman＠metronet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Sandy: > > It was nothing. > [What a Nice Guy (tm)] > > @ @ @ @ > @ @ > @ ~ ~ @ > . * * . > . \/ . > . . . . > . . . . . . > . . > . . . >Blanc >(please, no more!) > > Will you two cool it? You're getting my monitor fogged up :-) (or at least take it off the C'punks list - you're scaring my cats :-) Dave Merriman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Finger merriman(a)metronet.com for PGP/RIPEM public keys and fingerprints. Unencrypted Email may be ignored without notice to sender. PGP preferred. Remember: It is not enough to _obey_ Big Brother; you must also learn to *love* Big Brother.

1 0

I ONLY SHOOT BLANCS
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, In response to my candle comment, Blanc wrote: That's not funny, Sandy. (but I'll keep it in mind, whenever I think about you) Well, I still think it was funny, but now I *AM* embarrassed. (Blanc, wipe that smug expression off your face, this instant!) S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Such a Sweetie Pie
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sandy: It was nothing. [What a Nice Guy (tm)] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ~ ~ @ . * * . . \/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Blanc (please, no more!)

1 0

Re: art encryption...
by Pierre Uszynski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: Lile Elam <lile(a)art.net> > > [...] a way an artist can insure a viewer that the art > they are viewing is really that of the artist, the artist can *sign* their > art with their private key and others can check it with their public key. The problem is that's pretty much all that can be done so far: The viewer can *verfify* that the copy is a full un-molested copy of what the artist released, or for physical works, maybe that the object being scanned *is* the original object (maybe). But for pictures released in bitmap form, and then lossily compressed, cropped, scaled, dithered, and whatnot, the (ahem) authenticity of the copy can't be checked anymore. At least not if the signature was, for example, a signed message digest as has been mentioned. Message digests, in the form we now know them, do not resist lossy compression and such injury. That's what they are designed for. So, in particular, a magazine can still take a signed copy of a picture, creatively modify it slightly, and print it claiming this is original work by somebody else. In this case, the printing process itself is most likely enough to dispell any hope of recomputing the same message digest. Handling this case relies back on conventional evidence and juries. Other formats such as CAD drawings, text, and pictures in primitive forms (such as Postscript), and source and binary code, are susceptible to more: It is possible to hide some identifying info in them. But they also are susceptible to mechanical modification (lossless in terms of the "artwork", but lossy in terms of the steganography.) For example, by rewriting "for the same functionality" mechanically or manually. For a mechanical translation, the plaintiff may now have to identify which mechanical process was used before, maybe, having a case again (in addition of conventional legal wranglings). What would be ideal in all these cases is a steganographic process that would map to the whole as much as to the parts. Fractal steganography. In the case of architectural drawings, a signature of the original architects would be embedded in small sets of dimensions, in small sets of proportions, in ways the CAD language is used, in the background details of artwork, in the text included in drawings as well as in CAD files comments and variable names... etc... In summary in sufficiently numerous and different places that mechanical modification, or even extensive manual rework could still forget some instances of the signature. The signature still has to be specific enough to identify certainly the author, as opposed to being attributable to random luck (as in DNA matching). This means this signature requires a rather large number of bits (fewer if the signatures are registered precisely and provably before the works are released), but still enough bits that it is not so easy to hide many of them (depending on the medium: rather hard in text, rather easy in complex pictures.) The signature becomes part of the picture, it is not an afterthought anymore. Fractal message digests, whose verifiability would degrade gracefully as the original is more and more mutilated, would serve the same purpose for verification (you could check that a decompressed, cropped part of a picture is really from the artist who fractally signed the whole.) Conceivably it would be the same if the part was printed in weird colors or something: "some" of it still "is" from the same artist. But, for legal issues, how would that be different from copyright registration? Doesn't copyright registration rely on the same principle: a set of jurors will determine what the chance is that this is the same work or not. This just provides tools to fortify a court case. Enough ramblings :-) I'll stop now, Pierre pierre(a)shell.portal.com

1 0

Nice little privacy threat...
by L. Todd Masco 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just a little tidbit for the privacy-paranoid among us. I live in NYC, while my father, H. L. Masco, MD, lives in Florida. My dad's never lived in NYC, and I've never forwarded mail from his address to mine... in fact, I haven't forwarded anything from his address since before I left Pittsburgh. I just got a mailing from Harry & David that included a pre-printed list of folks from "my" last year's orders so I could repeat order this year. They were my father's orders from last year. Masco isn't that common a surname, so I have to wonder how often this is going to happen to people with more common surnames. -- L. Todd Masco | "A man would simply have to be as mad as a hatter, to try and cactus(a)bb.com | change the world with a plastic platter." - Todd Rundgren

1 0

art encryption...
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by pierre(a)shell.portal.com (Pierre Uszynski) on Mon, 19 Sep 6:32 PM > >What would be ideal in all these cases is a >steganographic process that would map to the whole as >much as to the parts. Fractal steganography. In the >case of architectural drawings, a signature of the >original architects would be embedded in small sets of >dimensions, in small sets of proportions, in ways the >CAD language is used, in the background details of >artwork, in the text included in drawings as well as in >CAD files comments and variable names... etc... In >summary in sufficiently numerous and different places >that mechanical modification, or even extensive manual >rework could still forget some instances of the >signature. [Snip] >But, for legal issues, how would that be different from >copyright registration? Doesn't copyright registration >rely on the same principle: a set of jurors will >determine what the chance is that >this is the same work or not. This just provides tools >to fortify a court case. Pierre, The fractal steganography sounds promising. Is this yours or has it been done? The need for authentic sigs on architectural and engineering drawings is not merely aesthetic. Right now municipal agencies will not accept digital documents because of the lack of verifiable authorship to establish responsibility, and liability, for the health and safety of the design and construction. Hard copy with original seal is required to prevent unauthorized manipulation. Beyond copyright protection, architectural and engineering documents are means to guide actual construction, rather than end products like paintings and drawings in the art world. If there could be a way for buildings themselves to convey authenticity, say, that they are healthy and safe, by a kind decryption by the public that could help prevent concealment of shoddy construction. It's not the drawings that assure safety but field verification of the end result that construction work was done right. What a great help if a building could convey its own message of authenticity about its fitness and safety for habitation and use. That might keep us architects more honest. Probably a long shot that your fractal idea could be stretched this far, but it is certainly needed in the flim flam world of New York City real estate where deception about building safety and health is all too common. Any other thoughts? John

1 0

IMPORTANT: FTP DIRECTORY MOVE
by sysadm＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Over the next four weeks, NETCOM will be re-organizing our anonymous ftp directory structure. In order to cut down on the number of directory entries in pub directory, we will be using a new naming scheme based on the first two letters of your ftp directory name. Thus, in the past, if your ftp directory was named: /ftp/pub/netcom it will be changed to: /ftp/pub/ne/netcom Existing symbolic links will also be moved. If you have a symlink: NETCOM -> netcom in the directory /ftp/pub, it will be changed to: NETCOM -> ../ne/netcom in the directory /ftp/pub/NE. The only directories that will exist in the toplevel pub directory are the directory entries for the two-letter combinations, which will be created as needed. All new ftp directories will also be created according to the new naming scheme. We realize that it will take some time for our customers to prepare for this transition. The actual directories will be moved over between 12:30 and 4:30AM PST Thursday morning. Symbolic links will be made from existing directories (and existing symlinks) to point to the new directory entries, so it should initially be transparent to most customers. You will then be able to start advertising the new directory name, although the old one will still work. These symbolic links will then be removed on December 26th. Any scripts, publications, HTTP references, and so on will need to be modified to point to the new directory location. If you have any questions or comments, please contact sysadm(a)netcom.com. We hope to make this switchover as smooth as possible for everyone! Bruce ___________________________________________________________________________ Systems Analyst / Systems Administration sysadm(a)netcom.com Systems Support Staff NETCOM On-line Communication Services

1 0

Hows THIS For Some Human Interest!
by anonymous-remailer＠xs4all.nl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Its funny, but this girl I'm seeing will be getting some Internet training in the near future for the gov't job she holds. And in the course of talking about that this evening with her, I briefly chatted with her about cryptography privacy and PGP. But when we talked abit more on this subject, she revealed something I found to be pretty interesting. It turns out that her old man was an MI6 operative during WWII. That certainly caused me to raise my eyebrows a bit. He evidently was one of MI6's operatives in Iraq and did some pretty lethal shit. Apparently he was involved in some economic warfare (whatever the hell that means) aginast Axis interests in the area.She told me he still clams up REAL good about his wartime experiences and it takes quite abit of coaxing to get anything out of him. It sounds like his security clearance was pretty reasonable.....likely in the secret/top secret category. As somebody whose closest contact with an operative of an intelligence service has been the cover of a Len Deighton novel, I found this awful intriguing. MI6, from what I understand is one of the oldest and longest running agencies around. I think they started up (offically) in 1910, although Whitehall likely had some spooks earlier than that, given Britain's colonial exposure. And indeed, MI6 is one of the best. Maybe even THE best? Still, you can be damn sure I'm going to remain friends with this lady for some time. What her father has to tell is probably pretty enlightening, to say the least.

1 0