December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

hash trees and bank solvency
by William "Bud" Kennedy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I am not so much worried about the bank stealing money out of my account as I am worried about them loaning to deadbeat countries to support some governmental idea of foreign policy. Then, of course, there is always the possibility that they will loan it to some deadbeat country, not because of the government, but because of just outright stupidity. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMQu03QQo9ewScbyxAQE4HgP9GqMv8rs8PAEn16h8bZ0JHktAFm85EOr0 QI5BHqN2RYCpWzYpfE8aaD/4KgmKMJJQR2Ae0OSwBx6AY4CdgZlccr/ARn1a2vtN 5Wm7JQ2ymteWy5Jn0IocJkZkscX4q3WHp1Iuw8mhoT9+Y+0urOHHP+mH5YhDvj7R CaHWHAcI+iY= =U0jF -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: "German service cuts Net access" (to Santa Cruz)
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:07 PM 1/28/96, Mike McNally wrote: >Timothy C. May writes: > > "Deutsche Telekom, Germany's national phone company, blocked its 1 million > > customers Thursday from gaining access to Internet "Web sites" maintained > > by customers of Web Communications of Santa Cruz. > >I have this urge to e-mail Deutche Telekom the output of an >appropriate AltaVista query so they can make sure none of that nasty >stuff is reaching impressionable German adults & children. It's interesting that some of the first things to pop up with a AV search of "Webcom AND Zundel" were instructions posted in one of German groups about how to bypass the access restrictions... [Actually, I just tried this search again, and didn't find the messages. Maybe I am misremembering I did last night, or maybe....] A Usenet message claims that Deutsche Bank is on the same Web server (?) and cannot access some of its customers. Whatever the precise truth of this, a side effect of countries trying to disconnect themselves from Bad Thoughts is disruption of commerce. This may provoke a bigger reaction than all of our protests and civil liberties points. --Tim Boycott espionage-enabled software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: [NOISE] Re: NWLibs> Re: Anonymous trashing of Assassination Politics
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 02:17 AM 1/28/96 -0800, Rich Graves wrote: >On Sat, 27 Jan 1996, Jack Hammer wrote: > >> Here might be an interesting example of a snippet from a plot to commit >> criminal syndicalism. > >You know, I'm not really sure whether you're kidding, ignorant, cheering, >or warning. Frankly, I don't fucking care. You guys are all nuts. And I >should know -- ask Clark or AlanD. I guess I should offer a partial apology, even though I'm not really responsible for this. Jack Hammer is the on-air name for John Benneth, who is a local (to me, Portland, Oregon) "moderator" for a "advertised as controversial" radio talk call-in show. He saw my Assassination Politics essay a few months ago, and for a few weeks just before the November sweeps Neilsen ratings period he was trying to bait me into calling in, thinking I'd be a sucker for a local audience. (He _needs_ controversy to be sucessful.) Since then he gave up for a while, although he occasionally snipes at me. I assume his interest will wax and wane as various ratings periods come and go. >I have saved Jim Bell's "Assassination Politics" essay, with his PGP >signature, and soon to be a lot of other things, at > > http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~llurch/Not_By_Me_Not_My_Views/ Thank you. I guess... BTW, I sent the file to you as A16.??? That isn't a really descriptive name. Please change it to something more mnemonic, like ASPOL.TXT or something. >I plan to collect as many off-the-wall conspiracy theories in this >directory as will fit in my disk quota. And when I run out of quota, I'll >raise it for myself. Now, now, Rich, "Assassination Politics" is not a "conspiracy theory". Or, at least, it's not your classic "conspiracy theory." >I think it's time the wacky right and wacky left started looking at each >other's Web pages and lurking on each others' lists. What about the wacky libertarians? Why did you leave us out?!? Waaaaaaahhhh!!! > It's really funny >putting two "Anarchist" pages, one featuring Che Guevara, the other >featuring David Duke, side by side. Both say the guvment is out to get >them; I, on the other hand, am out to "get" the government. But you'll be hearing more about that later. Jim Bell Klaatu Burada Nikto "Something is going to happen... Something....Wonderful!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMQu0VPqHVDBboB2dAQHfegP/W67SNQnzCL7TYdphdVmQ6wwWUjniUkz5 PJG/vJzQONFlsqLyz0o+jn0dZsMquoAWmB6jkrSzN6oAPoSnpAL5e5GPxk7busP+ Jmn56UCCFc6TUPlA69zqI5EA0uctcTGPunnLhNN/aEFTmngwQVmgC8o/eRB8NEyt s2ImX/n6u0s= =0YOC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: Doctor Denning
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 02:52 PM 1/26/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >>What I found interesting was the lack of meat behind >>"Crypto Anarchy is Not Inevitable". It seemed to boil >>down to the vacuous "if everyone could just agree that key >>escrow is a good thing, there would be no problem". > >This is the main reason I haven't bothered to rebut her points: there were >essentially none to rebut. > >(There are substantive criticisms of my points that can be made, including >discussions of what might be done to delay or even head off crypto anarchy >completely. I had dinner a few nights ago with David Friedman, author of >"The Machinery of Freedom," and he made some incisive comments about how >the State might go about heading off this future. I'm glad he's on our >side, and not the government's.) > >Two other reasons I have not sought to rebut her analysis: > >First, I doubt many people saw either my original article (available on Bob >Hettinga's page: http://thumper.vmeng.com/pub/rah/anarchy.html) or >Denning's reaction article. > >Second, I stated my views, she stated her views, not much more to say. >Especially as she has not had an active presence on the Net, either in >talk.politics.crypto or in other forums I have seen, and thus a real debate >on the Net has not been possible. > >Mostly I know I can't change her views, so why bother? Other people may >have their views affected by what I say, and for these people I have >certainly written enough. Tim, trust me on this one. Dorothy Denning doesn't have a PRAYER. You already believe it, but I _KNOW_ it! Jim Bell Klaatu Barada Nikto. This will become important...soon Something is going to happen. Something...wonderful! (BTW, the above few lines, which looks like a canned signature, is not. Careful readers will note that I keep typing it in, which means that it isn't identical every time. This should be a clue to all you lurkers out there that I MEAN this; it's not just an idle macro. (It also means that I'm going to have to RTFM on my Eudora to do automatic signatures, but that's an ENTIRELY different story.) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMQmQGfqHVDBboB2dAQF3lwP+JzEaN+sR9PdvnaWf2EnWJuDddZs86GbS cO7t+BLb/ALvAExBhBmVhMbYU1lFQS92akUQoMXBM/TLf330QR7E0FOjBdv12rqg n4RfFN7xV6Stib7gDOl2Q2niNqBusIzXT5Isv1A7x4NGF5Yxu7fVtUJ52tRBxHFI 9V+68Z21E4c= =SCkf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

The Politics of Mistrust
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Washington Post initiates today a 6-part series on the loss of trust in all American institutions, "The Politics of Mistrust," based on a recent poll sponsored by the Post, Harvard and the Kaiser Family Foundation. While not directly related to technical crypto, a number of findings parallel discussions here about the diminution of personal and economic security. Samples: America is becoming a nation of suspicious strangers, and this mistrust of each other is a major reason Americans have lost confidence in the federal government and virtually every other major national institution. Every generation that has come of age since the 1950s has been more mistrusting of human nature, a transformation in the national outlook that has deeply corroded the nation's social and political life. Mistrustful Americans repeatedly expressed far less confidence in the federal government, the military, the Supreme Court, Congress and the Clinton administration than the dwindling numbers of Americans who were more upbeat about human nature. Fear of crime, economic insecurity and pessimism about the lives of future generations all have separately added to the belief that government is either making things worse or is incapable of making them better. Today, a clear majority of respondents in their early 20s said they do not trust their fellow Americans, a view they share with one in four Americans over the age of 60. "It's like living in the cave man age," said a 29- year-old. "Nobody cares anymore. Nobody cares. They will no sooner run you down and run away than to spit in your face." An environment in which a majority of Americans believe that most people can't be trusted breeds attitudes that hold all politicians as corrupt, venal and self-serving, and government action is doomed to failure. Wages have stagnated, workers change jobs frequently and downsizing corporations offer little protection even to the most loyal of employees. Americans who feel most pessimistic about the economy also are more likely to see the government as a threat. Harvard and Kaiser are to separately publish their own analysis of the poll. The first article offers much more detail and is quite long, about a page and a half. Perhaps someone might offer a site where this and others in the series could be made available as they appear. If so, send me a note.

1 0

Re: PIDAHO and EUDORA PRO 2.2
by David E. Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 03:10 AM 1/28/96 -0800, bruceab(a)teleport.com wrote: >At 09:17 PM 1/27/96 -0800, jdoe-0007(a)alpha.c2.org wrote: >>In response to the "what has John Doe got that PIDAHO >>doesn't" messages I tried to PIDAHO v2.6b. I am unable >>to make it work. Messages from PIDAHO can not be sent to >>the selected and OnLine EUDORA PRO application. >Um, yes, indeed they can. I do it routinely. Eudora Pro >is one of the options in the drop-down list box in the >E-mail|Transfer options... dialog, right below the buttons >for canned settings. And it works just fine. You are >making sure that you've got Eudora with a blank new >message ready to go, right? I'm using an essentially identical setup to jdoe-0007's and I can't get it to work either. It worked nicely under Win31 and Eudora 2.1.2, but Win95 and Eudora 2.2(32) don't play nice with Eudora. It might be a bits thing (sixteen versus thirty-two)... ObCrypto: Um, well, this note is PGP clearsigned? (Seriously, this discussion ought to be Cc:ed to Joel, and/or taken off the list.) dave - ----- David E. Smith, c/o Southeast Missouri State University 1210 Towers South, Cape Girardeau MO USA 63701-4745 +1(573)339-3814, "dsmith(a)midwest.net", PGP ID 0x961D2B09 Do not use old PGP keys 0xFF829C15 and 0x92732139. http://www.midwest.net/scribers/dsmith/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMQvCGDVTwUKWHSsJAQGWbQf9GPtB+VhubUDeBU56eYHJjPQmPfDRgJ6T NApeChNNYv57GH5/E+V7wEVwaWyF+wTdSAYnQVCWMUozSZ02V+m4MdtXT6vUQpya SSWt7h0BadOqbI+KR1gA1etGFC/kIHscRf2aGCUziHlpTe1nm7Hw9Kx/B1j9/Vc6 cFahN7wi+xohbRBJPYqsp/k1qNrDzuhySAW1+zNNSOPvxGQs5QrI9H5rIeL/L+iS wri1sq0GVrktEGue838HGUDG2E6RaELAQe3OV0Y6nhee0KvHAcidK75d988zSP+i DH7L6/nh/KC+72VwiuzoAsPy4PJvlLgmmiiWZYh1t1dtu97YGD1vKg== =CKEw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Netscape, CAs, and Verisign
by Alex Strasheim 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm a big fan of Netscape and their products, and I think they do a good job of addressing the interests of their customers and the public at large with respect to crypto issues. But it's starting to become apparent that there's a fairly serious problem with Certification Authorities and SSL. The problem is simple enough: sites with certificates from one of the CAs that are preconfigured in Netscape have a tremendous advantage over sites with certs from other CAs, and it's expensive and difficult to get a cert if you're running an alternative server like ApacheSSL. This problem is going to get a lot worse when X509 client authentication becomes more popular. Netscape needs to address the situation. It's just not practical or desireable for one company (Verisign) to have a stranglehold on certificates. I'd like to see a less centralized CA that's tied into the existing system of notaries. The idea is to make it necessary to spoof a notary in order to spoof the CA. That won't make spoofing the CA impossible (nothing will), but it will make spoofing the CA illegal. A notary could apply to the CA for the right to work as an agent, for a nominal fee (<$100/year). Only notaries could be agents. If a person wants a certificate, they'd come in and present ID and a key to the notary/agent. The person would have to present a form document stating that he's requesting the cert. The notary would stamp the form and affix a signature to the key which would enable it to be processed automatically by the CA. Fees for the whole procedure ought to be less than $30. The CA ought to operate off of the fees from the agents as a non-profit organization, and the agents ought to keep the fees paid by the people requesting the certificates. Would any of the lawyers on the list be willing to comment on whether or not it's possible or practical to tie a CA into the notary system? Does anyone have any thoughts as to how difficult/risky spoofing my CA is compared to spoofing Netscape or Verisign? I could put up a server and I think I know a laywer who would help me set up a non-profit organiation on a shoestring, but I don't want to do it if the plan is impractical. Morevover, although I don't think it's reasonable to expect Netscape to agree to include a non-existent CA in their browsers sight unseen, at the same time it doesn't seem smart to sink money into setting up the CA without some indication from Netscape that they're willing to give the idea good faith consideration.

6 6

Re: Denning's misleading statements
by pcw＠access.digex.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I've never met Dorothy Denning, so I hesitate to characterize >her as a >villainess. But certainly she's the only noted cryptographer I >know of >who's gone so far out on a limb to defend a position the vast >majority of >computer scientists, civil libertarians, and cryptographers >scoff at. (And >I don't just mean it is we libertarians and civil libertarians >who are >scoffing, I mean that nearly every noted expert who has >carefully reviewed >the various schemes to control crypto and to provide GAK has >found them to >be essentially unenforceable except via draconian police state >methods, and >maybe not even then.) I believe that David Gelerntner, the professor of computer science at Yale University injured by a UNABOMBER bomb, is also a supporter of the Clipper chip. This may or may not be something that arose from the bombing. But I'm not sure how many cavaets and things he adds to his position. He may have changed it. But then he's not exactly a cryptographer. But, on the other side of the fence, I just passed a section in _Takedown_ where Shimomura and the FBI agents decide that the best place for the Clipper phones is "in the trunk." Apparently they don't communicate with regular phones so they were practically worthless. -Peter

3 2

Re: "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail"
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 01:40 PM 1/26/96 -0500, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: >At 20:18 1/25/96, jim bell wrote: > >>Now, I was born in 1958 and thus can't claim personal knowledge of the time, >>but it's truly amazing how UNPERCEPTIVE the public must have been in the >>late 40's and early '50s about "intelligence" realities. Let me give you a >>specific example: The classic movie, "The Man who Never Was," relates the >>(true) story of a counter-intelligence mission done by the British to (I >>think) mislead the Germans into believing that the attack on Sicily would be >>substantially LATER than it actually was. > >The code name for the project was "Operation Mincemeat" and the intent was >to get the defences at Normandy ("Operation Torch" - ie: D-Day) away from >there and transferred to Sicily (which was NOT a D-Day objective) not as >you say to fool them on when the attack was coming. It did its job and much >of the mobile coastal defences were moved out of the area. I apologize for the error (presuming it's an error). I was working from an old memory there, from reading a book called "A Bodyguard of Lies" (William Cave Brown?) which addresses the misinformation/disinformation campaigns that went on during WWII. And, of course, seeing the movie "The Man who Never Was." -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMQlEXfqHVDBboB2dAQHwlwP8DJt2Vg5jmI/gQ8dV5rXJ6mgHFwmzAcMA 12kJWWUJzQg/6M/acTtwTntUYaT9sJ5nxfE6mV58KEpGRuz76ZAZ3LSugG/DlAAx NL1AMqhcv1Xelh+UD7tLqhH/lTt5mDJC0pWWquyOi85l8TOo05142BUOYL9YPx6q 6XjRqUgIDu8= =CcUZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: "Gentlemen do not read each other's mail"
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 04:22 PM 1/26/96 +0100, Asgaard wrote: >Jim Bell wrote: > >> While this may be based on the "classic" view of the start of the direct >> involvement in WWII, I agree with the opinion of an old college professor >> that the US KNEW that the Japanese were going to attack, SOMEWHERE and >> SOMEWHEN (but not exactly), and in fact WANTED the attack to occur to >> justify getting into a war that we "should" have entered. > >Alan Horowitz added: > >>I've read that FDR had a humint source warning of a Japanese strike on >>Pearl Harbor. I also recall reading that J Edgar Hoover received a report >>of a diplomatic conversation detailing the planned attack, but sat on it. > >And this is from a post I sent to the list last summer: >*************************************************************** >I just read 'Infamy' by John Toland (1982), containing 'proof' >- very convincing, in my opinion - of the Pearl Harbour cover-up. >The US president, selected members of his cabinette and a >few admirals and generals knew - from Magic and the 'winds' >execute, radio traffic analysis, diplomatic sources, double >agents - exactly when and where the Japaneese were going to >attack, but didn't warn Hawaii, fearing that too efficient >counter-measures by the Oahu military might make the attack >abort and so not convince the isolationists. The unexpected >tactical capabilities of the Japaneese armada then made a >cover-up all the more important. >***************************************************************** >The unfortunate cipher expert Captain Safford spent most of >his post-war life trying to uphold the honour of his fellow >cryptanalysts, putting the blame on generals and politicians, >but in vain. It's interesting that we even HEARD about Coventry, but of course that was a British decision, a civilian target in an attack during an era where there were already plenty of attacks on civilian targets, and the British UNDERSTOOD why Coventry had to die. (But I don't know WHEN "we" (the general public) first heard about Coventry. Anybody know? (For the historically-impaired: Coventry was/is an English town (small city?) perhaps most famous from the Lady Godiva legend...but I digress... British found out, I guess through Ultra, that it was going to be bombed. Telling the inhabitants would have saved many lives, but (possibly) alerted the Germans that Enigma had been broken. British made the correct choice: Let the city get bombed without (much?) warning. The value of keeping the broken-ness of Ultra a secret far outweighed the value of Coventry.) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMQlC2fqHVDBboB2dAQGfpgP+NloVapAgqC3NxGg7TcVMnx+Q1Cmu2B/w Alp8q6uFvWsRqutFZ2+oDElHFxnZiMwZ0sgJkP0xG57TGoRob/DHY1h3+/NN9sYi KApzJHaElMrPFzwgMRLHNOBU/SQ3GsYDA2i4hWZM5ojsqXJQ7H7ov5FFJLGdV1u1 cOb/mUN8q9Y= =SRGU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3