December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: No matter where you go, there they are.
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > Peter - didn't they say that the checking station is also listening > to the satellites? That way they can tell that you are playing back > signals that you taped earlier because they won't match what the > satellites are broadcasting right now. > > I think your idea would work if you wanted to pretend to be at a point > which was _farther_ from each of the satellites than where you actually > are. Then you could delay all of the signals. But the only way to > be farther would be to be deep underground. You might be able to pretend > to be at the center of the earth, but that is not very useful. > > Actually I suppose this only applies to those satellites which are shared > between you and the checkin station. If you are far away then maybe you > only share one or two. If you know which ones those are, you can lie to > your heart's content about other ones, and for the shared ones you can > again delay the signal and claim to be farther than you are. > > If their authenticated repeaters are used then you have to assume the > checking station has all the satellite signals and again the best you can > do is pretend to be a Mole Man. > > Hal Denning hasn't thought this through. Do the math. The diameter of the earth is 12,576 km The speed of light is about 3e5 km/sec -> max phase shift to simulate = 42 msec. This is on roughly the same scale as network delays, or less. If you are trying to simulate a location in roughly the same area as your actual location (say, on the same continent), the max phase shift to simulate is a lot smaller - probably less than 5 ms. The site checking the incoming packets for their origin has to allow for realistic network delays - say 100 -200 ms. Therefore any site that can see the same set of satellites as the site it is trying to simulate can do so, buffering less than 50 ms of waveforms and pretending to be on the end of a slow link. Denning's plan: A beautiful idea murdered by cold, unfeeling facts. Peter Trei Senior Software Engineer Purveyor Development Team Process Software Corporation http://www.process.com trei(a)process.com

1 0

liibulletin - Announcement of New Related Services (fwd)
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have no joke. I just like saying, "barratry.law.cornell.edu." Oh, and the full-text availability of recent net.relevant decisions (numero dos) should be useful to somebody. So how do I get to be the Unabomber's pen pal? Hmm, what jail was he in again? I wonder if they'll accept packages for him with excessive postage. -rich and now, back to bilingual 9-bit-punks ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 12:13:36 -0400 From: "Peter W. Martin" <martin(a)LII.law.Cornell.EDU> To: Multiple recipients of list <liibulletin(a)listserv.law.cornell.edu> Subject: liibulletin - Announcement of New Related Services [...] The announcement: ================================================================ April 11, 1996 Two New Services from Cornell's Legal Information Institute I. Landmark Supreme Court Decisions Cornell's Legal Information Institute is pleased to announce the addition of important "new" decisions to its Supreme Court collection. Under a license, recently concluded with InfoSynthesis, publishers of the USSC+ CD-ROM, the LII will be placing a steadily growing number of historic decisions on its WWW server. The first of these historic decisions are now in place, including: Brown v. Board of Education (I and II), New York Times v. Sullivan, The "Pentagon Papers" case, and Bakke. These join an existing collection of important decisions dealing with privacy, the First Amendment, administrative law, patents, and copyright. All decisions in this collection carry links to current U.S. Court of Appeals decisions in which they are cited (using the LII's full-text index of Court of Appeals decisions on the Net) and to other related documents in the LII collection (e.g., statutes, topical summaries, the Constitution). The "new" cases are accessible from the base address for Supreme Court materials http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/ or directly at http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/cases/historic.htm Additions will follow on a regular basis. II. LII's Eye on the Courts Joining the current awareness services already offered by Cornell's LII -- BigEar (http://barratry.law.cornell.edu:5123/notify/buzz.html) liibulletin and liibulletin-ny (see http://www.law.cornell.edu/focus/bulletins.html) -- is a new WWW page providing links to newsworthy decisions handed down by any of the many appellate courts now covered on the Net, along with relevant background, when available. LII's Eye on the Courts can be found at http://www.law.cornell.edu/focus/liieye.htm ================================================================

1 0

Re: No matter where you go, there they are.
by Paul_Koning/US/3Com%3COM＠smtp1.isd.3com.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From: hfinney @ shell.portal.com (Hal) @ UGATE >Peter - didn't they say that the checking station is also listening >to the satellites? That way they can tell that you are playing back >signals that you taped earlier because they won't match what the >satellites are broadcasting right now. > >I think your idea would work if you wanted to pretend to be at a point >which was _farther_ from each of the satellites than where you actually >are. Then you could delay all of the signals. But the only way to >be farther would be to be deep underground. You might be able to pretend >to be at the center of the earth, but that is not very useful. No, the situation is better than that. Here's how GPS works (loosely): you have four unknowns (not three): x, y, z, and the current time. You have signals from four satellites reporting their x, y, z, t. Using suitable math you construct four equations in four unknowns, and presto, you get your four answers. Why is time one of the unknowns? Because your receiver only has a rough idea of what time it is. Remember that a microsecond offset amounts to a 300 meter (1000 foot) displacement. So a side effect of GPS position measurement is accurate time measurement. (Some GPS receivers turn this around, and make delivering accurate time their primary task. They get accurate position as a side effect.) Suppose I want to pretend that I am 1000 feet closer to satellite 4 than I really am. Simple, I take the signals from all the other satellites and delay them by 1 microsecond. That looks like a 1 microsecond local timebase error together with a 1 microsecond delay reduction to satellite 4. Yes, the checking station in this purported scheme would also listen to the satellites. That doesn't help at all. It could detect that I replayed a signal from a minute ago (unless I substitute the correct time codes, which wouldn't be hard since they are predictable). But there is no need to do that and indeed it's probably easier not to. In the description of the article, the "signature" [sic] is sent to the checker over some sort of comm link, which has a latency likely to be several milliseconds or more, plus jitter of many microseconds. If I'm a healthy distance away from the target (say, 20 miles) that means I have to introduce an offset of at most 100 microseconds. If I do that in real time -- which is no big deal -- then the checker basically has to be capable of detecting 100 microsecond delays in the authentication data it is getting. And if I'm willing to be closer to the lion's den -- say, a block or two away -- then I only need at most a one microsecond delay. Incidentally, differential GPS is not an issue (re Peter's question). GPS relies on knowing accurately the position and time at each satellite and the speed of light in between. DGPS lets you correct for errors in these. The idea is simple: if you're close to a "reference station", then the errors are essentially the same for both. The reference station is at a precisely known place, so it can look at where the satellites claim it is, and deduce from that how much error there is on the signal from each satellite. It tells you, and you subtract out those errors. So while DGPS lets you get better accuracy, it doesn't interfere with your ability to fool the CyberLocator scheme. paul !----------------------------------------------------------------------- ! Paul Koning, NI1D, C-24183 ! 3Com Corporation, 1-3A, 118 Turnpike Road, Southborough MA 01772 USA ! phone: +1 508 229 1695, fax: +1 508 490 5873 ! email: paul_koning(a)isd.3com.com or paul_koning(a)3mail.3com.com ! Pgp: 27 81 A9 73 A6 0B B3 BE 18 A3 BF DD 1A 59 51 75 !----------------------------------------------------------------------- ! "Be wary of strong drink. It can make you shoot at tax collectors ! -- and miss!" ! -- Robert A. Heinlein, "The Notebooks of Lazarus Long" ! in "Time Enough for Love"

2 1

Re: Protocols at the Point of a Gun
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

As required by the CDA (Competency Disclosure Act) my Ignorance bit is set to "1" for this speculation. At 11:03 PM 4/10/96, Lucky Green wrote: >If my computer creates the IP packet, what is there to prevent me from >modifying the value of the "Minor/Adult" flag at my leisure? Are the "minor/adult" settings (and Christian/Atheist, Southern Baptist/Reformed Baptist, Creationist/Evolutionist, etc. bits) even be proposed to be set at the IP packet level? I'd've thought it would be at the message level, such as this message or a posting to Usenet. (Granted, many messages are presumably the same as IP messages. But I'd assume that the setting would be within the message, so that any forwarder of the packet would not be likely to tamper with internal message settings....) If we assume IP packet creators are altering ratings system settings, they could just as easily be inserting CDA-violating language or images. Which they could, unless messages were encrypted, signed, whatever. (I'm not supporting mandatory ratings. Indeed, I oppose them.) --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" 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: Scientologists may subpoena anonymous remailer records
by Rogue Agent 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timothy C. May (tcmay(a)got.net) wrote: |At 8:12 PM 4/10/96, Steve Reid wrote: [...] |>I don't really know much about remailers, but I don't think there's much |>to know... If I'm mistaken about any of the above, I'm sure someone will |>correct me. | |Glad to oblige. I note also that Jim Byrd and Jim Warren are unclear on |some details. (To Jim Byrd, that "alumni account at Cal Tech" that you |mentioned was one of the Cypherpunks remailers at Caltech that our own |pioneering Hal Finney runs.) Incorrect. The account was tc(a)alumni.caltech.edu, which is not the same as Hal's remailer at hal(a)alumni.caltech.edu. Just an odd coincidence they were on the same machine. There's a whole saga about how CoS tracked the guy down, it's quite a story. Rather than go into it here and leave things out or confuse them further, check out http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/anon/penet.html for a clear, concise explanation of the whole bizarre affair. Check out Ron's "CoS vs the Net" page while you're at it, at http://www.cybercom.net/~rnewman/scientology/home.html. |Cypherpunks remailers account for something like 29 out of 30 of all the |world's remailers, by site count, though not volume. Sophisticated users |know that the Cypherpunks model is the only robust one; Julf's approach |has an ecological niche, but is highly vulnerable to the very subpoena |approach used recently (not "several years ago" as Jim Warren says). It's also suceptible to hacker attack, as happened a few years ago. "Information wants to be free" is not a political statement, it's a fact of nature. One property of information is that it tends to spread. If you don't want the information to spread, don't store it. RA agent(a)l0pht.com (Rogue Agent/SoD!/TOS/attb) - pgp key on request ---------------------------------------------------------------- The NSA is now funding research not only in cryptography, but in all areas of advanced mathematics. If you'd like a circular describing these new research opportunities, just pick up your phone, call your mother, and ask for one.

1 0

machine moved, mailing lists intact.
by Alan B. Clegg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Update: cypherpunks-d, bsdi-users(-d), unix-lizards. The system running the mailing lists has now been physically moved from one place to another (phew, didn't drop it!), and all seems to be OK. A couple of DNS changes still remain to be made, but things seem to be working pretty well. I will be moving a couple of things around and updating some systems OS soon, so we're not all done yet... Please let me know if you see any additional oddities. Just for the record: ISDN really IS cool. I just can't wait to get that other B channel running.. yowza.. 128k to the house! -abc \ Alan B. Clegg Just because I can \ Network Technologist does not mean I will. \ gateway.com, inc. \ <http://www.gateway.com/>

1 0

Re: Bank information protected by 40-bit encryption....
by Lou Zirko 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit With this thread and a prior one about what makes up a challenge worthwile, I could not resist forwarding this to the list. Sorry to those that this might offend or be in violation of local NOISE ordinances. Ah, what the fuck. - -------- clipped from some other mail --------- Subject: Network Engineering Technologies Announces $10,000 Firewall Challenge Excerpt from: -(BUSINESS WIRE) via Individual Inc. [04-08-96 at 15:41 EDT, Business Wire] [snip] The Challenge To claim the $10,000 in NET's Firewall Challenge, individuals must first register with NET, then use a computer to break into NET's secure transaction server and retrieve information stored there about paper currency totaling $10,000, namely: (1) the number of notes, (2) the denomination of each note and (3) the serial number of each note. The first person to supply the correct information to NET between 12:01 a.m. May 1 and 12:01 a.m. May 31 will win the $10,000. In the case of multiple break-ins, the first person sending the correct information to NET's e-mail address will be declared the winner. Participants must be individuals over 18 years of age, not companies, and must also agree to surrender to NET all relevant information about the methods they used to break through the firewall. Further details on the Network Engineering Technologies' $10,000 Firewall Challenge available on the World-Wide Web at http://thefirewall.com or by writing NET at 1714 Ringwood Ave., San Jose, CA 95131. [snip] Lou Zirko (615)851-1057 Zystems lzirko(a)isdn.net "We're all bozos on this bus" - Nick Danger, Third Eye PGP Fingerprint = 96 F2 E2 32 90 4B 8C 2A D1 0B 2A 51 3A 3B D8 6F Public Key available on bal keyserver at MIT -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMW1Fod9BId/c612VAQHKWQP/eKwW1FnuFCTWiZTvOL7r/5VFwLXyrxYF B9pQnk5LjdjX/2rQZN1h1I9/1iMwkwhCrk5/vZeeqG0DNmmFwDbtrHkVTTo3Cvb5 vXh6PVlmcJjln8S8Tv4XAURDsneImm9lY5O0XX8jS+vov7MP5Wp4hpbdfxe1xuZr IlCiBVVoamE= =Phel -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: No matter where you go, there they are.
by Powers Glenn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

- It's called "S/A" (Selective Availability) which is the NWO term for adding - errors that "authorized" users can remove. (Not to be confused with A/S, or - anti-spoofing) It was originally intended to be turned on in wartime to - deny the enemy accurate fixes, but during the Gulf War military GPS - receivers were so scarce that the soldiers had to use commercial products, - so the S/A actually was turned OFF then! - - Since then, pressure has been building to turn off S/A, since its usefulness - is nearly zero. Even so, the amplitude of S/A errors are only a little - larger than natural errors caused by satellite timing errors, atmospheric - propagation variations, etc. The result is that DGPS is useful, which is - (more or less) a fixed antenna and GPS system which knows where it is, and - subtracts where it "seems" to be by GPS every second, and broadcasts the - resulting error data on some terrestrial system to receivers locally. The - result is errors down to the 1-meter level and even lower. That system - compensates for both natural errors and S/A, so the whole purpose of having - S/A is negated. Eventually S/A will probably be turned off permanently, but - even then we'll want to continue to use DGPS systems. Close, but not quite: S/A is an ADJUSTABLE variable, not on/off. it can reduce accuracy to 10 meters or 100 meters or whatever. It's a DoD term, not NWO term. The "this is where you really are" percision location (forgot the designation off hand) is ENCRYPTED (yes, there is crypto revelance here...) in the data stream from the satellites. The difference S/A makes is on the order of magnitude, therefore not "useless." It should be pointed out that different regions of the earth can have different degrees of accuracy based on the S/A system. I doubt S/A will ever be turned off, but this is my opinion. I know Jim's opinion. Discussion of this point is pointless. DGPS transmission are made from a multiple single points, which (to the best of my knowledge) are not networked. glenn

1 0

info
by James Childers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

send info

1 0

I have seen the enemy, and it is us (was Know Your Net.Enemies)
by Michael C. Peponis 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 10 Apr 96 ,Declan B. McCullagh wrote: > Would anyone be interested in collaborating on a "Know Your Net Enemies" > project? > > We'd start with a resource like Bob Chatelle's excellent web pages at > <http://world.std.com/~kip/bcfenatl.html> and with permission build on > it and list the deceptions and misrepresentations each Net-Enemy has > engaged in -- what each has done to restrict liberty online. We'd > include original documents and links as appropriate. > > Who would be listed? Well, there's the family values groups > [AFA/CC/NLC/EE!/FOF/FRC], the green card spammers, Carnegie Mellon > University, Marty Rimm, the Church of Scientology, the Simon Wiesenthal > Center, the NSA, German state prosecutors, Senator Exon, Dorothy > Denning, and so on. > Anyone interested? This would be a great resource. Sure, it's worth a shot, but what is the ultimate goal??? I have noticed that there has been alot of noise about who is doing what, but instead of whining and crying, what are we going to do about it???? Cryptology lets people put an envelope on their communications, which is a significant achievment. Digital signatures allow for authentication, another acheivement, but what else could be coded? Sure, it is technicaly possible to set up net sites whos physical location could not be determined without alot of effort, but at that point, the war has already been lost, that practice is just minimizing the extent of the loss. Seems all the end result is just rialing up everybody, and repeting ad nausum how stupid these people are, like we didn't know that before. These are not technical problems, they can not be coded out of existance. The problem is with people, and must be delt with at that level. Legislation and debate will not do a damm thing, we have our views, others have thiers, and the two will never meet. Personally, I don't even respect the family groups, national security types, etc, thus I really do not care about thier concerns or feelings, nor do they care for mine. At some point and time, people are going to decide for themselves what is their freedom worth. Are they willing to give up all the benifits of a parential govement taking care of them so that they can be truely free. I would say no, even most people here are all for freedom, as long as it does not cost them anything. They are all for freedom as long as they don't have to live in fear for their life because absolute freedom means that everybody can do whatever they want, and some people have no problem blowing you away for the stupidest reasons. Such is human nature, alot of people are not very nice, sorry, that is the way it is. The other one was "We need a stable enviorment to continue generating captital so we can afford to by new toys" Again, we have a choice, give up our freedom for the toys, or give up the toys to be free. As has been said many times before FREEDOM ISN'T FREE. Regards, Michael C. Peponis Public Key Avalible Via Key Servers, or Finger

1 0