December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Lotus Notes
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 19:19 1/30/96, Rich Salz wrote: >>I find this very interesting. RSA prohibits its licencees from using RSA >>software with truly secure keylenghts. > >Hunh? I could find no mention of keylength or keysize in the RSAREF >documents I had around. I'm at home now, but I also recall no mention >of keysize or keylength in the license OSF has, either. So from who did Lotus license RC4? -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

Re: The FV Problem = A Press Problem
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jonathan has written a very nice essay, most of which I agree with fully. However, there is one item that I have a different angle on: At 12:41 AM 1/31/96, Jonathan Rochkind wrote: >It will undermine their credibility among cypherpunks for a long time, >certainly. Maybe even among the net--but among the vast majority of the >public? It's possible that as "among the net" grows to include >increasingly more of the 'the public', things will change. But at >present, I don't think things will have changed yet. The FV propaganda >will probably net good results for FV, although not among cypherpunks. .... >Most people aren't equipped with the knowledge to tell that this was a >'fluff' piece, not meriting a full page story. In fact, most people rely >on newspapers themselves to make these sorts of determinations for >them--what topics are seriously important and newsworthy, and what topics >aren't. Which is why companies can be so succesful when they can use press >releases to influences what shows up in the news. Generally, press >releases aren't seen by the majority of the public, so they don't realize >that a story is taken directly from a press release. Most papers use >press releases to write stories--maybe not the NYT, but most local papers. >And most people either don't realize it, or don't care. Here's my different angle on this: I'm not so sure there even _is_ a "public" on stories like this. Certainly my brother won't read about this, nor my sister, nor my parents, nor most of my neighbors. As with political stories that are read mostly by people interested in politics, I'm sure that most potential readers of the "First Virtual" story either skipped right past it or skimmed it lightly. No doubt the FUD of this story, and the FUD of earlier stories about Internet weaknesses, random number attacks, etc., left a vaguely feeling in these casual readers that all is not right with Internet commerce. But, having said this, I wouldn't underestimate the effects of a group such as ours lose respect for First Virtual, Nathaniel Borenstein, and Simson Garfinkel, to the extent we have. We'll be the sorts who keep the story going, who talk to other journalists, and who make decisions for our companies on what products and strategies to use. The "public" has probably already forgotten the story; we have not. --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

Kill this message too (FV NOISE NOISE NOISE)
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The size of my killfile has increased dramatically in the last couple of days. Can we start talking about something crypto related? --MegaBozo

1 0

No Subject
by Hroller Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Farce Virtual has discovered that some persons using the Internet are not using the names they were born with. We made this discovery in the wake of criticism of our discovery of keyboard sniffing programs, a major discovery we were able to get several reporters to write about. We consider our latest discovery to signal the imminent death of Usenet as we know it. We are taking the unusual step of announcing our discovery to the world, and in a simultaneous series of articles in major newspapers, to alert the world to our discovery. Farce Virtual provides the only reliable solution to this problem. We do not use in encryption, because many of our customers say it is too hard to understand. Instead, we rely on the oldest method in the book: fear, uncertainty, and doubt. We have invented a new term for this: FUD. ``Using the FUD Factor line of products, our customers are protected from those who are not using the names that God gave them,'' said Nathaniel Boringsternlight, Farce Virtual's chief publicist. Asked about women on the Net who are using their married names, Mr. Boringsternlight added, ``It was to deal with married women that I invented Safe-Tickle.'' No further explanation of this comment was offered. There's simply no other way to keep your sanity safe on the net. The program we have demonstrated completely undermines the sanity of all known users of the Internet. -------- Nathaniel Boringsternlight <nsb(a)fvh.fud> Chief Publicist, Farce Virtual Holdings FAQ & PGP key: nsb+faq(a)fvh.fud

1 0

Re: [Fwd: Netscape, CAs, and Verisign]
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:55 PM 1/29/96 -0500, Peter Williams wrote, in response to Alex: >>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. ... >I dont understand how you intend to make CA spoofing illegal. Who >who perform the enforcement? (By illegal, I assume you mean that >there is a criminal offence involved, rather than a tort.) Is providing false documents to a notary criminal fraud, or only civil? >>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. >Notary fees might be best controlled by the notary, not the CA. >Seems an unreasonable restriction of trade to price-fix, even at the low-end. Notary fees can be agreed contractually between the notary and the CA; if they want to do a list price / street price system, or a non-profit, or a dog-eat-capitalist-running-dog competitive system, the market can let you pick your favorites. >There is indeed a large body of legal ramifications in this >area. The best way to learn about it is to become a CA and do it. Risk >taking is part of being in the CA business, however you operate it, >even for free. >>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. >Navigator betas seem to already facilitate users configuring their own >trust points in a manner rather similar to adding a key to your >personal PGP keyring. Letting the user decide whom to trust certainly seems like the best approach, and makes it possible to build a Web of Trust on top of Netscape rather than being stuck with hierarchical certifications. Meanwhile, if Netscape wants to sell the top two slots in their CA list to the highest-bidding advertiser like they do with searchers, they still can. #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

1 0

[flippant reply] Re: [rant] A thought on filters and the V-Chip
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:26 AM 1/29/96 -0500, you wrote: >The cypherpunks relevance of all this is that it should soon be possible to >create completely mediated environments for ourselves and our children. >Through the use of implants and real-time VR processing, it will be possible >to edit our "interface" with the Real World such that unpleasant aspects are >edited out. We will be able to change the attire, hair, facial expressions, >voice, and even smell of those around us to conform to our own esthetic >desires. Likewise with our physical surroundings. Safety may discourage >making a complete transformation in one's surroundings, but one can >certainly soften the edges. Meanwhile, rose-colored glasses are available, or scratched-up hard contact lenses if that's the reality you'd prefer .... Bill, who spends an hour or two wearing headphones on the train several days a week.... #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

1 0

Re: your bogus post
by Robert A. Rosenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:08 1/30/96, watson(a)tds.com wrote: >On Tue, 30 Jan 1996, Paul Graham wrote: > >>... >> A company capable of doing such irresponsible things is not one >> that we would trust with users' money. >> ... > >Some of you must have missed the superbowl ads where people and frogs >were getting frozen to beverage cans, and movie actors moved the grand >canyon with a horse. I think that there is a MAJOR difference between the two types of Marketing. The Superbowl adds are not designed with the intent to imply that what is being shown is Reality (how many viewers would think that what was being shown was a REAL [as opposed to symbolic] effect of the product?) while the FV is intended to play on the technical ignorance of the reader/audience and give a false [or at least slanted] view of reality.

1 0

EFF Compromises, as described in "Wired"
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If Eric Hughes can break his silence to comment on the FV "discovery" of keystroke-capture programs (funny, I've had a couple on my Mac for years, for error recovery), then I guess I can break my silence about "Wired" articles. This afternoon I sat in a bookstore and skimmed the article on what happened at the EFF, about the Digital Telephony compromise that was approved by the EFF board (our own John Gilmore was reported to have been the sole negative vote), and about how the EFF was effectively "chased out of town" as a result of trying to be a political entity. I can't comment on this outlook, as I am nowhere near the inner circles of the EFF. But it underscores a belief I have: that if you play _their_ game, they have already won, and you just don't know it. What's the alternative? Get them to play _your_ (_our_) game, and maybe they won't win. I'm still a member of the EFF, but the more I read about their problems, including a $200,000 debt, the more convinced I am that the Cypherpunks model is a better place to devote one's efforts and hopes to. We're still going strong after almost three and a half years, with no debt (no assets except ourselves, of course) and no "relocations" from Boston to Washington to San Francisco. So, maybe we're doing OK. --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: more RANTING about NSA-friendly cpunks
by Bruce Baugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:41 PM 1/29/96 -0800, "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri(a)netcom.com> wrote: >when you choose to be in fear of it, the bureacrats win. On the contrary. Fear is a right and proper response to irrational demands made by people with lots more force and public support than me. Fear becomes bad only in our response to it. If I get scared into inaction, _then_ the bureaucrats win. If I take the fear as motivation to improve my own security and reduce my dependence on the whims of others, then the bureaucrats lose. It is fear of the risks I run in an unsecured state that motivates me to work on my own privacy, and to pass the info I learn on to others. But fear, in this case, is merely the acknowledgement of the vast potential for harm. Denying it is just foolish. >sheep on the planet, all the way up to the head sheep TCM, who writes >long explanations of why the police state is inevitable and nothing >we can do will stop it, You must be reading an alternate universe's version of Cypherpunks - check to make sure that your quantum stabilizers are in order. In _my_ universe, Tim May is a prominent advocate for freedom and self-government, who has written well on why the collapse of the police state (and all states) is inevitable, and what we can do in the meantime. Side note to list owner: perhaps we need a majordomo hack to check this cross-universe traffic problem. It seems to be becoming increasingly common. Bruce Baugh bruceab(a)teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~bruceab

1 0

Re: Java Sniffer (Was: Re: FV Announces That The Sky Is Falling)
by lyalc＠ozemail.com.au 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Much more likely, IMHO, than a Java sniffer is a Java Trojan horse that pops >up an innocuous dialog box and asks you to enter some sensitive piece of >information, then sends it off somewhere. About all it takes to write that is >a modicum of skill in user interface design. You could write it in any >programming language, but in Java it may be particularly effective, since >people may come to expect to be prompted for sensitive info over the net by >Java apps. Maybe the Java folks who just left Sun decided to seize the >opportunity ;> > >Futplex <futplex(a)pseudonym.com> > A very realistic scenario - any comments or reasons it can't happen ?? second question: How can you be sure you receive the applet that you "think" you've requested ? Any illuminating comments to assit my awareness of java ? lyal

2 1