December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

"PGP-Scape"? (was Re: Our "New Order")
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

jimbell(a)pacifier.com wrote: [..] > >Methinks the time is right for a "PGPScape" web browser. [..] > Let me see if I understand this concept correctly. The remote site would > pre-encrypt the transmitted data, so that when received it could be > decrypted by the requestor according to his (or a temporarily chosen, to > avoid disclosing the actual recipient.) public key, so as to disguise both > the material and perhaps also the actual requestor? Something like that, yes. Anything to where someone watching cannot tell what a person is reading from a web site... even better if one cannot tell who is reading it. Anonymizing proxies would also be nice. There's also less worry about secure transactions, since if everything's encrypted it's harder to tell if a transaction is taking place, viewing porno or subversive or religious, literature, or if you're just reading something mundane. So much for vaporware, though. > Excellent idea! So is fast-than-light travel, but only if it's implemented. Rob. --- "Mutant" Rob <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a blank message with the subject "send pgp-key" (not in quotes) for a copy of my PGP key.

2 1

"Nations see Internet.." continued
by Mike Ang 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sorry about that -- here's the whole thing again "Nations see Internet as threat to security" made the front page of the Saturday _Globe and Mail_. There are some really nice lines in the article, which basically states that electronic freedoms through the Internet are a direct challenge to the power of nation states. They mention all of the more recent examples in China, Germany, France, and the States. The author obviously wasn't afraid of making large claims. Most of them were acceptable, but some seemed completely unsubstantiated (see below). Here are some of the more interesting paragraphs: But as China, Germany, the United States and now France have discovered recently, data sent electronically over the Internet can be every bit as threatening to a country's laws or its culture as armies of yesteryear. But its elusive nature makes it difficult to track down and impossible to eradicate. And there is growing concern that the very existence of the Internet is a threat to the nation-state. [..] "We think of states as unitary bodies, but what they really are is a bundle of sovereignties -- economic sovereignty, military sovereignty, cultural and social sovereignty." That bundle is now coming undone, or as Mr. Saffo put it, "Digital technology is the solvent leaching the glue out of the state as we know it." .. It's not just cultural or social sovereignty that governments worry about. The power to tax is also being eroded by the increase in economic transactions that take place over the Internet, some encrypted so that prying eyes at the tax department could not read them even if a tax inspector was fortunate enough to stumble upon them. Drug dealers and terrorists are resorting increasingly to this means of moving funds. .. However, advocates of unregulated cyberspace says [sic] this just means that the only people using encryption programs at the moment are those doing it illegally. It's a similar argument to the one often made in Canada against gun control -- the bad guys already have weapons. .. Yay, more FUD. The article does a good job of raising some of the important issues. But I _highly_ doubt that "drug dealers and terrorists" are using digital cash to transfer funds. They also characterize strong encryption as something evil. The author implies that main reason for encrypting financial transactions is to evade the tax department - if I'm sending my credit card # across the net, _of course_ I'm going to encrypt it, and when using digital cash, encryption is generally part of authentication. Comparing crypto to guns works in the sense that the "bad guys" will always be able to have access to them. However, I for one support gun control but do not support mandatory limits on crypto. Where I live, there are no theats that justify allowing everyone to carry guns - the threat to privacy and freedom of speech justifies allowing everyone to use strong crypto. You can use a gun to deprive another person of their life - what harm can you do another with PGP? Perhaps you can harm them by being able to spread hate propaganda, but I don't think that that is a strong enough argument. - Mike. If you've got to flame me, do it by email.

2 1

Nuke em if ya got em "TCMay"
by paralax＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Date: Sat, 03 Feb 1996 22:20:52 -0800 James A. Donald Wrote: At 03:39 PM 2/3/96 -0800, paralax(a)alpha.c2.org wrote: P> Mr. Hayes MAY have used a condescending tone but you have exposed your P> racist roots again. First you embarrass yourself with you lack of knowledge, JAD> Paralax does not know shit from beans. He presumably imagines that Tim is JAD> "embarrassed" because Tim's knowledge of the historical facts differs from JAD> those facts dreamed up by the usual crew of apologists for totalitarian terror. JAD> James A. Donald Historical facts and or personal interpretations thereof were never called in to question by me. I took umbrage with Mr. May's insulting, insensitive and racist comments about Jews and the Japanese. Whether Mr. May's is personally embarrassed by his public display of ignorance and bigotry matters not. He did indeed embarrass himself on an 'International Stage'. I may not know shit from beans (actually I do) but I do know cultural insensitivity, racism, bigotry and ignorance when I see it displayed so blatantly. I encouraged Mr. May to return to topics 'cipher' before further embarrassment ensues. I urge you to do likewise. A. Paralax View

2 1

RC2 protected by copyright?
by thad＠hammerhead.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

RSA issued a statement claiming that anyone using RC2(TM) would be in violation of various laws. I think that they might have a point. You can't protect an idea with trade secrets, certainly not a software idea, if you intend to sell the software. It is easy to reverse engineer it; this is probably what happened with RC2. But, what about copyright? Now, copyrights cannot protect ideas, only the expression of those ideas. An algorithm is clearly an idea, you could write a program that would implement it in a completely different way, not just by translating it (translations are still protected by copyright). RC2, though, as 256 bytes of seemingly random data at the head of it, in a permutation table. This is clearly not any idea, but a bit of text. This text would have to be copied to any interoperable RC2. (You could surely use some different permutation, and probably most of the 256! permutations would be equally secure, but would not interoperate with RC2). I would expect that this copying of text be held to be a violation of copyright. Some might argue that 256 bytes is so small that perhaps it couldn't be copyrighted. Copyright clearly can't protect use of a word, or a short phrase (1000 points of light, say). If the permutation table at the beginning was 65536 16-bit numbers, instead of 256 bytes, then the copyright protection be that much stronger and less open to debate. Do any of the real lawyers on the list want to take a crack at this? Has anybody heard any noise from RSA describing exactly how they intend to go after people? thad -- Thaddeus Beier thad(a)hammerhead.com Technology Development 408) 286-3376 Hammerhead Productions http://www.got.net/~thad

3 2

Re: A temporal remailing (was: CDA = death of crypto)
by lunaslide＠loop.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>At 3:26 AM 2/7/96, anonymous-remailer(a)shell.portal.com wrote: >>CDA means that virtually all underground or 'illegal' traffic will be >>distributed via encryption. >> >>As soon as the loony right and fundo Christians realise this, they *will* >>call for legislation against encryption, and if the CDA is any benchmark, >>they will easily win. > > >4-1-99. NYT: > > "Congress Passes "Children's Protection and Safe Information Highways" Bill" > > "In a vote of 479-12 in the House of Representatives and 93-5 in the >Senate, the "Children's Protection and Safe Information Highways Bill" was >sent to the President, who is expected to sign it on Thursday. > > "The Bill criminalizes the possession of unauthorized cryptographic >programs and extends the Telecom Act of 1996 and the Digital Telephony Act >of 1994 to regulate the new cyberspace frontier. > > "Attorney-General Louis Freeh pushed for the legislation, citing the >growing use of cryptography by dissidents and criminals. "We are hoping >Congress will next pass the "Secure and Decent Cyberspace Bill." This bill, >nick-named the "Crypto-Kingpins Bill," will subject traffickers in illegal >crypto to the same harsh penalties meted out to drug kingpins. "While it >may seem harsh to execute a person for possession of a key greater than 60 >bits, we must consider the terrible consequences for our children of people >writing down things the government cannot read," Freeh said. > > > BAD_nws So the're going to arrest us all? It's unconstitutional (of course!) and unenforcable. It will have the same effect as Prohibition. lunaslide On the meridian of time there is no injustice, only the poetry of motion creating the illusion of truth and drama. Henry Miller -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQBvAzD3EHEAAAEDAMVwZzXozPjX18mCenA5fJsdWZXcrhJCxPR+SoVCmR7d4ZVU mwITzPTHo/GyLvJrWyk5YdhheczyY2VSawaMrCN/nWA7K9lwAylbKyPxqBhRYJ3C 2wi2uD5LY2wypNOQyQARAQABtB5KZWZmIENvbm4gPGx1bmFzbGlkZUBsb29wLmNv bT6JAHUDBRAw+1bqS2NsMqTTkMkBAQkTAwCersFbCyk8O0MbGlNcZDAe24CLEWQ0 0C5EHni33W76UsG1bybcLsuMH6HVwLF7IqZivnzc7wkujYPQvCqn8HEYYTld8V9V Cou4dOvA8kV7rHvAn/LuLx7DRruLFrRoPSk= =OIT9 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

2 1

Re: Fair Credit Reporting Act and Privacy Act
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>On Thu, 8 Feb 1996 jamesd(a)echeque.com wrote: >> A law "protecting" privacy would require government supervision >> of what is on my computer and your computer. At 09:21 AM 2/9/96 -0500, Tim Philp wrote: > Private individuals are not what I was refering to. I am more > concerned about corporations First: You will not get that, because governments invariably privilege large businesses above small businesses and individuals. and invariably privilege old established businesses against new businesses. Secondly if you were able to get that, it would be even worse than the what you will actually get. If you have one law for men who run businesses and one law other folks, then we have selective enforcement and application of the laws, that enables governments to act selectively and capriciously. For example here in California private citizens who attempt to organize recall elections are often subject to extraordinary and confiscatory fines. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: cypherpunks press
by lunaslide＠loop.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>ecarp(a)netcom.com sez: <rm for brevity> >My feeling is that Mitnick getting past security, and Mitnick not having >to decrypt at every stage, and stuff like that is good material, but these >topics generally have big ol' love handles attached to them. Describing >people's hot tub parties, for example, is not exactly cypherpunk material. <more snippin'> >I am imagine many people use (and I am headed this way) nntp.hks.net merely >to avoid large boring non crypto/political threads. Not everyone has this >capability, and now some of them have left because of the S/N. I'm talking >about real cryptographers, not weekend warriors like, well, ok I'm more like >a yearend warrior.On the other hand, Alice and others haven't posted lately, >so perhaps the noise is just the fill-the-vacuum pheonominon. > >> Why don't you go and write some code? Put those busy fingers to better > >Perhaps he is. I am. Are you? I am too, but the other half of my major is philosophy. I can't help BSing about the social issues too.....which seems to be common on the list. Perhaps there is a compromise since there seem to be interests on the part of both parties? Like cypherpunks-tech@toad,com. Any words? lunaslide On the meridian of time there is no injustice, only the poetry of motion creating the illusion of truth and drama. Henry Miller -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQBvAzD3EHEAAAEDAMVwZzXozPjX18mCenA5fJsdWZXcrhJCxPR+SoVCmR7d4ZVU mwITzPTHo/GyLvJrWyk5YdhheczyY2VSawaMrCN/nWA7K9lwAylbKyPxqBhRYJ3C 2wi2uD5LY2wypNOQyQARAQABtB5KZWZmIENvbm4gPGx1bmFzbGlkZUBsb29wLmNv bT6JAHUDBRAw+1bqS2NsMqTTkMkBAQkTAwCersFbCyk8O0MbGlNcZDAe24CLEWQ0 0C5EHni33W76UsG1bybcLsuMH6HVwLF7IqZivnzc7wkujYPQvCqn8HEYYTld8V9V Cou4dOvA8kV7rHvAn/LuLx7DRruLFrRoPSk= =OIT9 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

6 5

Re: violating politicians privacy
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> well, I take it as assumed correct that illegally violating the > credit and personal information of member os Congress (might as well > include the Clintons and the Gores) would get a response on privacy. _Is_ it violating their privacy to get their credit information? After all, they're applying for some mighty big loans from everybody, and putting everybody who pays US taxes down as a credit reference.... #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com / billstewart(a)attmail.com +1-415-442-2215 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

2 1

LAST REMINDER
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, I have 100+ confirmations for my party tomorrow. It's still not too late, though, to RSVP (or even show up without doing so if you have a good excuse). E-mail me or leave a message on my answering machine (510-839-3441). If you've misplaced the URL for the invitation (duh), it is: http://www.c2.org/party/masquerade.html If you miss the party (you'll regret it), there will be pictures on the above Web site sometime next week. S a n d y P.S. Among the guests will be a Cypherpunk who is flying in from out of state. Another guest will be an absolute stranger who had an ad in the personals. One guest is a movie star. Of course, many Cypherpunk luminaries will be in attendance. There will be a significant 2nd Amendment presence. Be there, or be square. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Re: Fair Credit Reporting Act and Privacy Act
by Frank Willoughby 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

As a brief aside to the current discussion. About 2 days ago, NPR (National Public Radio) had a short news blurb about a person who was suing U.S. News & World Report. It seems that his name appeared on a mailing list that USN&WR sold to a credit card company (Citibank, I believe). Basically, his main argument was that the information was private and that the had the right to control how the information was used. It should be interesting to see how this case gets settled. Sorry I didn't post this sooner, but I've been very busy with a security assessment for a company in town. Best Regards, Frank <standard disclaimer> The opinions expressed above are of the author and may not necessarily be representative of Fortified Networks Inc. Fortified Networks Inc. - Management & Information Security Consulting Phone: (317) 573-0800 - http://www.fortified.com/fortified Home of the Free Internet Firewall Evaluation Checklist

1 0