December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Using lasers to communicate
by ericd＠shop.internet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Woooa there.... Lasers are not exactly expensive or complicated.... Check out www.lasercomm.com. 4-15Mb/s lasers. or Cannon 10-100Mb/s lasers. I have installed these products *many* times and their setup and operation is fast and efficient. (used to work for Interop) Exmaple: We used a pair of these, and MBONE, to provide a 2 way real time video confrence link joining an IETF session between a room of users at Japan Interop (local) and a group in Sweeden (IETF). The setup a was last minute point to point Ethernet link from the confrence center to a local hotel acress the road. We had 1.5 hours to perform ALL of the work, from wiring both roofs, seting up the lasers, wiring the internal hotel/confrence center, and setting up systems and projectors. !!The Laser setup took about :15 minutes, tops!! BTW: With this system the transmit "beam" is focused into a "spot" half way between the sending and receiving units. The receiving unit is tuned to look for that focused "spot". This means that there is a very large (area wise) low power laser pattern behind each of the receivers! With a sensitive enough receiver, it is possible to hear this signal! When you need to transport a data stream (1-155Mb/s) to a remote site, this solution works out to be *MUCH* cheaper than leasing circuits from bell, bypass folks, etc.. Another case in point: We (ISN) needed to transport a 100Mb/s (FDDI) between \ 2 sites. Upon checking, the price of PacBell "dim" fiber was outrageous! We had no MFS/TCG/etc fiber in the man hole to latch onto. The choice was clear. As for security, the bottom line is that encryption devices are cheap. Last plus for these units is that most foreign countries do not prevent the use of these point to point optical devices. This is not the case for spread spectrum multipoint or microwave point to point radio devices. Eric Davis At 10:44 PM 2/17/96, SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N wrote: >> If you have a secure link you don't need encryption. Arguably, the >> converse is true; if you have secure encryption you don't need >> a secure link. Isn't the ability to transmit secure data over >> insecure channels one of the primary justifications for encryption? >> > >Of course. My point, though I seem to have failed to state it, >is that encryption is a cheap software thing while laser beams >are expensive, complicated, and still not secure. ------------------------------------------------------------- Eric Davis -- ericd(a)internet.net Director, Information Systems Internet Shopping Network -- http://www.internet.net/ 415-846-7449 Voice -- 415-842-7415 Fax -- KD6HTO Radio ------------------------------------------------------------- - One by one our rights are taken, One by one we loose our - freedom. Step by step we're coming for them, One by one - we're coming. - Inka Inka - Myth of the Machine - Step Back

1 0

Re: Legal status of Indian Reservations and CDA
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Michael Peponis wrote: > If I remember correctly, are not American Indian reservations considered > qusi-sovergin states under the law? Yes and no. Sometimes states are able to go after then for taxes in terms of money made from non-Indians. NYS complains about people going to reservations to buy cheap cigarettes, for instance, and wants taxes collected from non-Indians. I think the Iran-Contra flap involved using a reservation in Calif. to get around some weapons manufacturing or exporting laws. Not sure, though. > If this is true, what would stop me from negotiating with some tribe to > establish an ISP on the reservation and then placing whatever material I wanted > on that site without fear of reprisals from the US goverment. The tribe. They may not be too happy about an ISP on their territory carrying porno, neo-nazi literature or even crypto... Actually, they may look down upon any business deal meant to circumvent US laws, since it can get them into an unpleasant conflict with the gov't. It would be an altogether different situation if they wanted to start their own ISP though... Beware of exploiting poor people on Indian reservations or elsewhere on the planet just to be outside of the laws. Even if it seems for a good cause to you, the locals may not look to favorably. > After all, if they are a soveign state, decency is covered by whatever laws > they have, if any, not the CDA. Their own laws may be stricter. Much stricter. Also, what about the receiver? Or the receiver's ISP? Erotic materials are legal in plenty of countries, but can't the receiver get in trouble? As soon as people see the flawed logic in the Amateur Action BBS case, that's the take they'll go for... and it's back to square one. Rob. - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBMSasCCoZzwIn1bdtAQFwZgGAyPIqr9h4dKNfPFgt/3I3n8qIRvoe4lM7 Lcd6Zsp12hcO9Dbckn202L6O1Qjxy+yi =dY6I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Indian Reservations USC cites
by Greg Kucharo 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ok, one last thing on indian reservations. There is a searchable database of the United States Code at the following address; http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/25/ Title 25 covers Indians. -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCPAzEIa2wAAAEEALouE7MNxsG+QTOJSrMTygYWKblpI9MgOKaFA+5AICNelAw6 6Gj3B0EQr7bwLILk8EJULG+kYh/ND9Kn1EXBK+elXbwpFCLqoyEZrbHJnurhH/t6 VFEwhbN1V0e/bFOCTq8nykoJjZ/uq0mz8HouIbEt6BYWoKVSUIU/T+iDV3TVABEB AAG0DWdoa0Bzb3BoaS5jb20= =gwax -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

Re: True random numbers
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:25 PM 2/17/96 -0400, Sandy Harris wrote: >A possible exception: I wonder if the checksums on Ethernet or IP >packets use a reasonably strong CRC algorithm. The algorithm used with IP packets isn't even particulary good for error detection. It was designed for easy computation on slow, narrow chips. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Re: Using lasers to communicate
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:44 PM 2/17/96 -0500, SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N wrote: >> If you have a secure link you don't need encryption. Arguably, the >> converse is true; if you have secure encryption you don't need >> a secure link. Isn't the ability to transmit secure data over >> insecure channels one of the primary justifications for encryption? >> > >Of course. My point, though I seem to have failed to state it, >is that encryption is a cheap software thing while laser beams >are expensive, complicated, and still not secure. Ah yes, but software without hardware doesn't do much. Wires are expensive, and in many places you can't string them across public right-of-ways. The distance from my house to my neighbor across the street is less than 200 feet. I suspect some form of optical link would work fairly well. I also think it would be hard to tap. I think my point is, don't throw something out of your tool bag just because you can't use it everywhere. Bill

1 0

Re: Legal status of Indian Reservations and CDA
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:03 PM 2/17/96 +0000, Michael Peponis wrote: >If I remember correctly, are not American Indian reservations considered >qusi-sovergin states under the law? > >If this is true, what would stop me from negotiating with some tribe to >establish an ISP on the reservation and then placing whatever material I >wanted >on that site without fear of reprisals from the US goverment. In the last Indian war (the Modoc war), the Indian leaders were hanged as common criminals when the war was over. The current law allows small sins on the reservation. I suspect that if you tried to sell porn from a reservation or thru the mail you would find out the limits of Indian nationhood. Bill

1 0

Returned mail: Host unknown (Name server: ncr-sd.sdca.attgis.com.: host not found)
by Mailer-Daemon＠ig4.att.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The original message was received at Sun, 18 Feb 1996 00:05:33 -0500 (EST) from ncrgw1@localhost ----- The following addresses have delivery notifications ----- sandiegoca.ncr.com!chris.claborne (unrecoverable error) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- 550 sandiegoca.ncr.com!chris.claborne... Host unknown (Name server: ncr-sd.sdca.attgis.com.: host not found) ----- Message header follows ----- Return-Path: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Received: from ncrgw1.UUCP (ncrgw1@localhost) by ncrhub7.attgis.com (8.7.3/8.7.3) with UUCP id AAA01559 for sandiegoca.ncr.com!chris.claborne; Sun, 18 Feb 1996 00:05:33 -0500 (EST) Received: by ncrgw1.ATTGIS.COM; 18 Feb 96 00:05:15 EST Received: from toad.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP id QQadkd19489; Sat, 17 Feb 1996 23:59:52 -0500 (EST) Received: by toad.com id AA23859; Sat, 17 Feb 96 20:35:58 PST Received: from cs.umass.edu (freya.cs.umass.edu) by toad.com id AA23846; Sat, 17 Feb 96 20:35:53 PST Received: from thor.cs.umass.edu by cs.umass.edu (5.65/Ultrix3.0-C) id AA00548; Sat, 17 Feb 1996 23:35:51 -0500 Received: (from lmccarth@localhost) by thor.cs.umass.edu (8.6.12/8.6.9) id XAA24397 for cypherpunks(a)toad.com; Sat, 17 Feb 1996 23:35:50 -0500 From: lmccarth(a)cs.umass.edu Message-Id: <199602180435.XAA24397(a)thor.cs.umass.edu> Subject: Re: Some thoughts on the Chinese Net To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List) Date: Sat, 17 Feb 1996 23:35:50 -0500 (EST) Reply-To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com (Cypherpunks Mailing List) In-Reply-To: <199602171820.NAA12476(a)pipe11.nyc.pipeline.com> from "tallpaul" at Feb 17, 96 01:20:06 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk ----- Message body suppressed -----

1 0

Re: DES_ono
by Frank Willoughby 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Two brief questions about DES, if I may. I have heard of a couple of rumours that DES is considered to be fairly weak. Specifically, the rumors mentioned that there were some questions about the design of the S-boxes and the possibility that there was a trap door which would permit the NSA or other gov't agency to quickly obtain the cleartext. Another rumour was that the French & Israeli intelligence agencies downgraded the classification of DES to one of the lowest strengths of encryption algorithms. I have been wondering about these issues off & on for a while & have tried to do some research on them, but have come up with nothing which would amount to more than hearsay. It's tough to tell if the rumours stem from urban legends or are based on fact. If it isn't too much trouble, I'd appreciate an expert opinion of the two rumours mentioned above. Assuming the rumours of the weakness of DES are true, which symmetric encryption algorithms would you recommend which are substantially more secure than DES (and which are obtainable from Internet or commercial sources)? (It doesn't haver to be exportable). Thanks in advance for your help. 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

5 4

Re: CyberAngels
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:30 AM 2/15/96, Medea wrote: > I bet if you use the word "cryptology" in a sentence, the CyberAsses >would have no idea what you were taking about. "Cripology?" "Oh, yeah, dat be da study of da Crips, one of da gangs we be protectin' da peeples against." --Curtis Sliwa

1 0

Re: Online Zakat Payment: Religious tithe.
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 07:13 PM 2/17/96 +0000, Ed Carp wrote: >On Sat, 17 Feb 1996, jim bell wrote: > >> BTW, I think I've already solved the problem of producing a few dozen >> absolutely simultaneous trigger explosions (+/- 100 nanoseconds) around the >> periphery at the lens foci, without using multiple electronic detonators. >> (in fact, a single blasting cap would do nicely.) "But the margins of this >> book are too small to contain it" Heh heh! > >Actually, it's a quite simple problem to solve. Tom Clancy used a rather >more complicated method, but the idea was correct. >-- >Ed Carp, N7EKG Ed.Carp(a)linux.org, ecarp(a)netcom.com You might be surprised: I have never read anything by Clancy. Tell me, what method did HE use? Jim Bell, N7IJS jimbell(a)pacifier.com Klaatu Burada Nikto -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMSayU/qHVDBboB2dAQF6rQP9F3LRvxn5bSu4MQqlyfy8AjgEkef5csyV kwRIYSJn4A0LmMJSzb+lfuAG5wyOQ26HsTXChmojfpjaY5cdXnPSmYhfwxUPqFPX 33Ymjm/Nd+AROIrd/nqlc8Vib9aqtaJP6oXdN9m30xwVXCok3HwPYWVac24aqh5R +gDvMsxrAWE= =MMYU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1