December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Boycotts and Etiquette
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:19 AM 7/22/96, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >Honestly, this boycott campaign looks out of place on Cypherpunks, at >least to me. I mean, we are for freedom of speech, aren't we? >Sternlight is talking about on-topic things. How come that renowned >defenders of freedom of speech resorted to name calling and attempts to >push their opponent out of the public forum? Note that I have not called for a boycott of Sternlight. The voices you here adding their name to a list are biasing the statistics. Those who don't want to respond to Sternlight, or me, or Vulis, Bell, or VZNuri/LD, should simply *not respond*! A novel idea, eh? I think I have been relatively polite to David, though I sure do wish he'd "pull his punches" with his gratuitous insults (e.g., by ending posts with dismissive remarks about the moral beliefs of his opponents, to name one example). I call these "ad hominem" remarks, in that they call into question the motivations or the basic competence of others to comment, though perhaps David believes that since they are "true," they cannot be ad hominem. {It ain't ad hominem, it's truth.) Perhaps a better word is "disrespectul," in the sense that I get the impression that David thinks nearly everyone who engages in argument with him is either childish (a term he characterized my views as :-}), or foolish, or disingenuous, or oafish, or deceiving, or... Some examples: "...so your contention is false on its face." "Some live in the conversation in their head and require that everything be spelled out. Very well, then:" "Isn't that nice. Some creep is proud enough of his skill at accessing the trivially available InterNIC finger data that he posts it to invoke harassment. And being a coward as well, he hides behind an anonymous remailer." "Another attempt to accuse, read minds, and impute motives." ..... Actually, I started to go back through the Sternlight CP posts I have saved (*), and found a curious thing: the intelligent comments vastly outweighed the "one line repartee" insults! I believe the majority of Net participants (here, in the crypto newsgroups, etc.) lose sight of the good comments because of the flamish ones. (* Indeed, I may have skewed my sample toward less-flamish posts, as I delete most of the simple insult posts.) I believe David would be better served by not yielding to the temptation to add throwaway lines, such as he used in replying to me: " Where I come from we call that "theft". Your ethics may vary in California." This is unneeded, and adds to a tone of ad hominem attack. It is roughly equivalent to making snide remarks about the motives of Kallstrom, Denning, Freeh, etc. Not very persuasive. In fact, in one analysis of the nature of flaming he noted: "And when on occasion (as happens) I rise to provocation, my take on it isn't that the other guy posted "flame bait" but that I allowed myself to be out of control. It's always possible to respond with the standard weapons against provocation when such is deliberate: rapier-like wit, reductio ad absurdum, literate sarcasm, or simple silence aka the filter file. Actual contumely in a response is seldom necessary, except perhaps by reference on rare occasion. We're not children here." Good advice. I agree with him here, and will not try to collect more examples of rudeness...Perhaps we react too strongly to the "Sternlightisms" and lose sight of the better points? Still, in my several years of seeing his posts in sci.crypt, talk.politics.crypto, talk.politics.org.eff (?), and elsewhere, I've seen that often his policy points get lost in the clutter of arguing with others on non-substantive points, of getting pulled into nonsensical crap about "SternFUD," "Bowdark," the "UnDoctor," and whom he has *Plonk*ed. Personally, as a neo-Calvinist who believes that those with whom I disagree on matters of politeness and basic morals are best punished by silence from me, I have often simply ignored threads that involve this kind of pettiness. (But, like David himself said, sometimes I, too, get pulled in...) There is a spectrum of rudeness and "disrepect." I certainly don't hold myself up as a standard of politeness. At one end are some truly rude folks, much ruder than Sternlight, me, or even Perry ("Llywarch Hen" and Vulis come to mind, recently). At the other end are some truly polite folks, such as Hal Finney and Bill Stewart, who make their points while avoiding personal characterizations or cleverly-worded insults. Rather than wasting list space with talk of "pledges" and boycotts, maybe a better approach is for us all to concentrate on better posts.... --Tim May (P.S. I don't intend to pull my punches on the "controversial" posts I like to write, such as about guns, or Ritalin, or "queer rights." While these posts apparently are "offensive" to some here, this kind of post is perfectly "fair game" as I see it.) 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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 3

evidence from the NIC - interpret and use as you will.
by ante 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

See who is sleeping with who. These are the supporters of the sham "hearings". Voters Telecomm Watch (VTW-DOM) 115 Pacific St., #3 Brooklyn, NY 11201 Domain Name: VTW.ORG Administrative Contact: Safdar, Shabbir (SS155) shabbir(a)PANIX.COM (718) 596-7234 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Panix Network Information Center (PANIX5) hostmaster(a)panix.com +1 212 741 4400 Record last updated on 27-Sep-95. Record created on 06-May-94. Domain servers in listed order: NS1.ACCESS.NET 198.7.0.1 NS2.ACCESS.NET 198.7.0.2 The InterNIC Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet Information (Networks, ASN's, Domains, and POC's). Please use the whois server at nic.ddn.mil for MILNET Information. Blaze, Matt (CRYPTO-DOM) 101 Crawford Corners Rd Room 4G-634 Holmdel, NJ 07733 Domain Name: CRYPTO.COM Administrative Contact: Blaze, Matt (MB19) mab(a)CRYPTO.COM (908) 949-8069 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Network Information and Support Center (PSI-NISC) hostinfo(a)psi.com (518) 283-8860 Record last updated on 06-May-93. Record created on 06-May-93. Domain servers in listed order: NS.PSI.NET 192.33.4.10 NS2.PSI.NET 38.8.50.2 The InterNIC Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet Information (Networks, ASN's, Domains, and POC's). Please use the whois server at nic.ddn.mil for MILNET Information. Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT2-DOM) 1634 Eye Street, NW Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006 USA Domain Name: CDT.ORG Administrative Contact: Weitzner, Daniel (DW151) djw(a)CDT.ORG (202) 637-9800 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Palacios, Bob (BP282) bobpal(a)CDT.ORG (202) 637-9800 Billing Contact: Kolb, Danielle (DK1006) dkolb(a)CDT.ORG (202) 637-9800 Record last updated on 19-Apr-96. Record created on 20-Dec-94. Domain servers in listed order: NS.CAIS.COM 205.177.10.10 NS2.CAIS.COM 199.0.216.1 The InterNIC Registration Services Host contains ONLY Internet Information (Networks, ASN's, Domains, and POC's). Please use the whois server at nic.ddn.mil for MILNET Information.

2 1

List of reliable remailers
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = "<remail(a)miron.vip.best.com> cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"portal"} = "<hfinney(a)shell.portal.com> cpunk pgp hash"; $remailer{"alumni"} = "<hal(a)alumni.caltech.edu> cpunk pgp hash"; $remailer{"c2"} = "<remail(a)c2.org> eric pgp hash reord"; $remailer{"penet"} = "<anon(a)anon.penet.fi> penet post"; $remailer{"flame"} = "<remailer(a)flame.alias.net> cpunk mix pgp. hash latent cut post reord"; $remailer{"mix"} = "<mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = "<remailer(a)replay.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"ecafe"} = "<cpunk(a)remail.ecafe.org> cpunk mix"; $remailer{"amnesia"} = "<amnesia(a)chardos.connix.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ksub"; $remailer{'alpha'} = '<alias(a)alpha.c2.org> alpha pgp'; $remailer{'nymrod'} = '<nymrod(a)nym.jpunix.com> alpha pgp'; $remailer{"lead"} = "<mix(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"treehole"} = "<remailer(a)mockingbird.alias.net> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"nemesis"} = "<remailer(a)meaning.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut"; $remailer{"exon"} = "<remailer(a)remailer.nl.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"vegas"} = "<remailer(a)vegas.gateway.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut"; $remailer{"haystack"} = "<haystack(a)holy.cow.net> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"ncognito"} = "<ncognito(a)rigel.cyberpass.net> mix cpunk pgp hash latent"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = "<lucifer(a)dhp.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = "<remailer(a)cypherpunks.ca> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; catalyst(a)netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura(a)replay.com is _not_ a remailer. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (c2 alpha) (flame replay) (alumni portal) Use "premail -getkeys pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu" to get PGP keys for the remailers. Fingering this address works too. Note: The remailer list now includes information for the alpha nymserver. Last update: Mon 22 Jul 96 6:49:22 PDT remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- jam remailer(a)cypherpunks.ca ***-**+***** 17:17 99.99% replay remailer(a)replay.com ***+****+*** 6:16 99.98% alumni hal(a)alumni.caltech.edu *##+*+#*#### 2:13 99.98% nymrod nymrod(a)nym.jpunix.com +##++#*##### 2:54 99.98% lead mix(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu +++-++++++++ 39:07 99.90% portal hfinney(a)shell.portal.com +##+**###### 1:56 99.87% amnesia amnesia(a)chardos.connix.com ----------+ 2:57:13 99.84% alpha alias(a)alpha.c2.org +**-+ .-+*++ 5:10:18 99.75% c2 remail(a)c2.org +++-+ .-+++* 5:36:10 99.57% vegas remailer(a)vegas.gateway.com * * *-**#*#* 22:44 99.39% extropia remail(a)miron.vip.best.com ____.------ 18:58:11 99.29% mix mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com ++--+-+---+ 1:53:12 99.26% treehole remailer(a)mockingbird.alias.net -.--+ --+-- 4:28:09 98.80% penet anon(a)anon.penet.fi ---+------- 11:01:15 98.58% haystack haystack(a)holy.cow.net # *# +##+# 9:28 97.42% ncognito ncognito(a)rigel.cyberpass.net --._--+-.- 13:38:58 97.03% lucifer lucifer(a)dhp.com -++-++++ ++ 47:19 89.37% nemesis remailer(a)meaning.com + ***** 34:32 86.49% flame remailer(a)flame.alias.net -.----- 4:18:14 52.45% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien

3 2

ITAR's 40 bit limit
by David F. Ogren 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Sat Jul 20 19:41:41 1996 Another paradox of the US export regulations. The NSA is allowing 40 bit crypto exports. So as a hypothetical example assume that I write a crypto program that uses 40 bit RC4 to encode data (licensing from RSA). I then get an export license using the accelerated process for 40 bit RC4. I then export my program to Alice who wants to use it to transmit messages to Bob. If she uses my program to encrypt messages to Bob, any reasonably powerful attacker can decrypt her messages. However, what if she runs the program three times with three different passwords. (Ignore the problems of Inner-CBC and Outer-CBC for now.) Now the file is triple RC4 encoded with the equivalent of 80 bit security. Alice and Bob now have strong crypto. And if they run the program five times they have 120 bits of effective protection. The problem of using Inner-CBC is a little tricky, but if we assume that I can export in a DLL format, a Windows program could be written that calls the DLL repeatedly to layer it into triple or pentuple CBC RC4. The entire above discussion is entirely theoretical. I realize that it's a moot point since strong crypto is already perfectly accessible outside of the US. And that strong crypto algorithms can be exported in non-machine readable format (another paradox). (And that running 5-layer RC4 is a really inefficient block cipher.) I just wanted to point out yet another reason why ITAR regulations over crypto are not effectively preventing strong crypto. They are merely making it difficult for American business. - -- David F. Ogren | ogren(a)concentric.net | "A man without religion is like a fish PGP Key ID: 0x6458EB29 | without a bicycle" - ------------------------------|---------------------------------------- Don't know what PGP is? | Need my public key? It's available Send a message to me with the | by server or by sending me a message subject GETPGPINFO | with the subject GETPGPKEY -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMfFutuSLhCBkWOspAQFH7gf9GDjh1tcktyx3Lo4iSxDFTFoB7fuuJO0l SNlkYH1Akchl02b/CWc6CDSAZ8hxoUfoZpqTD7U0xTs1QqOM7y45r1/RvAet870s mkWL7gS5RmiiGN1bgtm844RPAtAhaE0uzT6wJsPQSfAv94CvZGNJEtF2p5lASs2F fK50gmlSbjhhHoh85s/7Ugl7XzTmRGoZzdKQCGpkc6yTJu/aKDyWU3HVSEY9F4Y3 AaHkardJehv/9xqoxks5eqnwjTSJ8+cAptT1iBo6hW+CKv89wQKK/F8RbQb2FWL2 z4GqFfQHdbxVbnspDNtIRUP5qhJuFRhmuS/ARfTYgTN50Gm5g/Cz2w== =2k+F -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: Bare fibers
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:20 AM 7/23/96 -0400, Rabid Wombat wrote: > >> >> Doesn't that make it vulnerable (detectable) to Tempest attacks? >No. >Transmitting light via fiber doesn't emit EM. >Anyway, the original post, as I recall, was about keeping sensitive data >on a second hard drive, connected via (very thin, therefore harder to >notice) fiber. Tempest monitoring was not a factor. It occurs to me that a bare fiber could actually be (randomly) hung across treetops, roofs, power lines, and various other structures, over a many-block distance in suburban areas. Such a fiber wouldn't be protected very well, but it would probably last a few months. It would also be exceedingly hard to find its terminations, and tracing it would be a real pain. (It probably wouldn't be visible against a bright sky more than a meter or two away.) Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

4 3

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

17 Dec '03

At 1:23 7/23/96, Jeff Weinstein wrote: > If you know that the recipient can read a message encrypted with >3DES, IDEA, or RC2-128, then you can send the message using one of >these strong algorithms. Given that you need someones public key >to send them a message, there are several obvious ways to transmit >information about what algorithms they accept along with it. Granted. What about the signature bug? Will Netscape encrypt the outside signature? -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November. Vote Harry Browne for President.

2 1

Re: Digital Watermarks for copy protection in recent Billbo
by Alex F 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > People buying CDs at a garage sale & getting arrested for > >piracy. Wonderful. > > Arrests like this are uncommon. Even buying "cheap bikes" and other "cheap" > (= probably stolen and fenced) merchandise almost never subjects the > purchaser to criminal sanctions. Yes, but concievably if (whoever would be incharge, FBI?) *could*, under law do this, even if they are wrong. It is a lot harder to prove that they intentionally harrassed *you* than it is for them to say that they were following leads and show evidence. Yes, this may never happen, but the mere fact that it *could* is uncomforting. Kinda like the CDA an Clinton saying "we will not enforce this...." Fine, but there is still a law on the books that allows them to if they decide to change their mind. Even if you can't be found guilty, you could still be ruined by legal fees, job loss, etc. > ("Alice's Restaurant" not to the contrary; the confession to Officer Obie > cinched his fate.) Don't wanna end up on that "Group-W" bench! :) > > It would be trivial to add a digital ID signal at, > >say 30,000 or 15 or something like that. This could then be decoded, > > Doubtful. The existing CD standard tops out at a Nyquist limit of about > 20KHz, with the actual sampling at 44 KHz--but there is simply "nothing" at > above 20-22KHz. Putting a signal in at "30 KHz" is simply not possible, > given the Nyquist Theorem and the CD sampling rate. Cds are often sampled at 48 these days. Mine was, and we had to reduce it to 44.1 for mass producing (much to our surprise, since many CD manufacturers love getting stuff at 48 over 44.1) Not familiar with the Nyquist limit w/ regards to sampling rate vs frequency :( Alex F =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Alex F alexf(a)iss.net Marketing Specialist Internet Security Systems =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

1 0

violating ITAR
by Arun Mehta 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 21:43 21/07/96 -0500, snow wrote: > > Put up enough money to defend me and tell me how I can get arrested. > > I'm not doing a lot at the moment, and I wouldn't mind getting my 15 >minutes of fame at this point. I could spare the time too. Maybe you (and whoever else volunteers) could DCC me some software that violates ITAR via mIRC: We announce that this is going to happen, which channel and when, have a virtual party for the condemned person(s), during which we first openly discuss what we are going to do... I doubt they'll want to take me to court in India, but if they do, I know lawyers who would defend me for free. Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta(a)cpsr.org http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/ finger amehta(a)cerfnet.com for public key

2 1

Wiesenthal Center (Canada) and the Ostrich Syndrome (fwd)
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- For Skippy. - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: 23 Jul 1996 08:26:15 -0700 From: Ken McVay OBC <kmcvay(a)nizkor.almanac.bc.ca> Newsgroups: alt.revisionism, can.general, alt.censorship, comp.org.eff.talk, misc.legal, ont.general, bc.general, talk.politics.misc Subject: Wiesenthal Center (Canada) and the Ostrich Syndrome The July 19 article in the Vancouver Sun, "B.C. Internet provider is the largest Canadian site for racist material" is alarming. (See URL http://ftp.nizkor.org/ftp.cgi?orgs/american/wiesenthal.center/press for a copy of the article.) It is not the material found on the websites mentioned, nor the fact that the host server is Canadian - nor indeed that the server is physically located in BC - which give cause for alarm. It is alarming because - either by deliberate design or by abject ignorance - - Sol Littman (and the Simon Wiesenthal Center [SWC] whom he represents in Canada) is fostering and promoting the spread of the "Ostrich Syndrome." Their actions represent a counter-productive denial of reality - akin to the Ostrich burying its head in the sand. Littman is quoted as saying: "We found the longer you leave these groups unexposed, the longer they fester and the more they infect others and the only way to deal with them honestly and forcefully is to expose them to the light of truth." Yet the article concludes, "Littman said he wants to see if Klatt will remove the groups from Fairview voluntarily before the centre takes any other action." The only truth that seems to emerge from such a veiled threat is that Littman has no understanding of the Internet. One is at a loss to determine how removal of the "groups" from one Internet Provider's server would in any way "expose them to the light of truth." If Littman had any knowledge of the Internet, he would know that the Nizkor Project [http://www.nizkor.org/] is an award winning website that is accessed daily by hundreds. In addition to being a source for those who seek information about the facts of the Holocaust, it is used as an electronic resource for those who wish to "deal with [these groups] honestly and forcefully" thereby exposing Lemire and many others - of whom Littman may not even be aware. Nizkor is arguably the "host" to more hate literature than any other website. Since we also include a link to the Zundelsite amongst others, will Littman next be targetting Nizkor and demanding that we remove such links? Or that we hide from public view the mountains of archived material which meticulously documents and uses the "arguments" put forward by these groups as instruments of their refutation and exposure? If Littman and the SWC prefer to bury their heads in the sand while engaging in this futile exercise in darkness, let them do so. But the martyrdom they hand on a platter to Lemire and others whom they find offensive stands in marked contrast to their failure to use the Internet on their own website. Conspicuously absent on the SWC website are links to the increasingly growing number of useful resources for those who truly do wish to participate in the battle to expose racist and anti-semitic groups on the Internet. The Ostrich syndrome is far more dangerous to society than any white supremacist group on the Internet. Such groups will fester in darkness, but wither in light. Kenneth McVay, OBC The Nizkor Project - -- Nizkor Canada | http://www.nizkor.org - -----------------------| Prince Myshkin's Troll Bait Sold Here |-------------------------------------- http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/g/giwer-matt/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQBVAwUBMfVcLJNcNyVVy0jxAQENJQIAwGhMdP82l3S0Ac3uSaYaUcj1TowW6J9F K+l+wRmWwpQBuxq+INEPghNcY54thnc6iQIqGfR5KVoUsFNLAk9lcg== =12JK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

RE: Brute Force DES
by Matt Thomlinson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

well, first of all, I wasn't computing 2^40, I was computing something like 2^(56*0.667) * 8bytes/each or somesuch, I don't recall exactly as I don't have the paper in front of me. In any case, it was the tradeoff between time and space -- 2^40 in time was something like 2^38th in space. But don't trust my numbers, get the paper and rattle them off yourself. It just seems like if we're going to browse all of the way through the DES keyspace, we _ought_ to take notes along the way -- that means building a table. I don't care how big the table is; if it is only 2^30 entries (about 1G entries, each 8 bytes = 8Gig) we reduce our next DES crack by a factor of 8. If we keep 2^31 entries (16Gig) we can cut it down to 2^50, or a factor of 16. If we have 4 - 9 Gig drives (or perhaps three drives and some wiggling, described below) we can save about 2^32 entries and the search becomes a measly 2^48. :) To whittle this down to a 40-bit workload, we'd have to save 2^36 entries* 2^8 bytes/entry = 2^39 Bytes = 512 Gig. Yes, admittedly large. What's the cheapest form of storage, magtape? How much can you store on magtape? The entries can be sorted so that lookup doesn't take long even when you have to mount tapes. Wiggling: We may be able to save less than 2^8 bytes/entry because we know the quality that made the point interesting enough to save (say we only keep points where the top 32 bits were zeros -- no need to save these zero prefixes) but I suppose we'd only be able to cut this storage factor down by a factor of two at most. If you don't have Hellman's paper handy, the apropos formulas are: Total time=T, memory=M, search space=N Time/space tradeoff: M=mt , T=t^2, m*t^2=N In our case, N=2^56; M, T variable. mattt >---------- >From: Ray Arachelian[SMTP:sunder@dorsai.dorsai.org] >Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 1996 3:16 PM >To: Matt Thomlinson >Cc: 'trei(a)process.com'; 'cypherpunks(a)toad.com' >Subject: RE: Brute Force DES > >On Tue, 23 Jul 1996, Matt Thomlinson wrote: > >> why not put together (a LOT of) disk space and we can build a table >> (read: "a cryptanalytic time-memory tradeoff") for cracking DES? Using >> the table, we could brute-search the DES keyspace in less time than it >> would take to do an exhaustive search of a 38 bit keyspace, according to >> the paper. 4 gigs is what, a couple of hundred nowadays? >> >> Making DES equivalent to a 40-bit crack would take approx. 500Gig, but >> publishing the table would push DES out usefulness. Certainly we could >> scale back (make DES equivalent to a 45-bit crack?) if we don't have >> enough disk... > >IMHO it's more expensive to go this route than to build a machine with >dedicate DES cracking chips. 2^40 = 1,099,511,627,776 or about 1 terabyte >worth of space, not 500G. 2^39 would be 500Gb. A 4Gb drive these days is >$800, hardly a couple of hundred dollars. :) > >Even so, that's a ton of hard drives. Further you need machines to hook >these drives up to. Infact, you need a farm of machines. Why? You can >only put 7 on a chain, and maybe if you're lucky four chains in a machine >using four controllers. > >A better idea might be to make small cheap computers, say based on 8086's >or 68000's that replace the drive's controller card, or if that drive >controller card is intelligent enough to be a CPU or contain one, burn >EEPROMs. Have the EEPROMs be able to generate DES (or any other >cypher's) keyspace given a range, and then have them able to search the >whole drive for a match. > >Even so, if you build these drive boxes, all you've accomplished is to >create a nice huge big searchable array. You still will need some sort >of logic to figgure out when it finds the right key, and you still can't >do 3DES or recusively encrypted files, nor know when you've found the key >for data you can't recognize - or rather have these drives recognize. > >However: Reading a 4Gb drive end to end takes less than 2 hours. I know >this because I have a RAID array of them, and it takes 2 hours to >rebuild, so since rebuilding an array requires reading from two drives >and writing to one drive, reading a whole 4Gb drive at full speed would >be something like maybe 1 to 1.5 hours(???) > >You might be better off with 9.0Gb drives if you can afford them because >you then have less controller logic cards to build. > >The drives alone will cost $204,800. $800*(2^40/(4*1024*1024*1024)). >You could get a nice big discount if you buy that many, but this will >also mean however much it will cost you to build the cpu cards for >multiplied by 256 drives, plust the R&D cost, plus the network connection >between all the CPU boards. > >At that point you also run into the MTBF of the drives which means that >your drives will fail quite often. > >If you want to go dirt cheap on the CPU's while using this huge space >method, you could just buy something like 37 Mac IIsi's, hook each up to 7 >of the drives (you'll have to partition the drives as they won't support >volumes that huge.) and network the machines using localtalk. You won't >need a faster connection because all you need for networking is keyspace >distribution and success reporting. But then IIsi's are sloooow machines >and your searches will suffer a hit from the lack of the machine's speed, >plus all the overhead of having an operating system and using the SCSI >chain to talk to the drives. > >IIsi's go for $350-$500 nicely loaded... $14800 for 37 at $400 a pop, >add the drives to that, plus the cost of writing the program and hooking >all of this crap together and that'll be $219,600. Ya got that kinda >dough to spare? > >========================================================================== > + ^ + | Ray Arachelian |FL| KAOS KERAUNOS KYBERNETOS |==/|\== > \|/ |sunder(a)dorsai.org|UL|__Nothing_is_true,_all_is_permitted!_|=/\|/\= ><--+-->| --------------- |CG|What part of 'Congress shall make no |=\/|\/= > /|\ | Just Say "No" to|KA|law abridging the freedom of speech' |==\|/== > + v + | Janet Reno & GAK|AK| do you not understand? |======= >===================http://www.dorsai.org/~sunder/========================= > Key Escrow Laws are the mating calls of those who'd abuse your privacy! >

1 0