December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Diffie Hellman - logs in Galois fields
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I think polluting this mailing list with trivial questions such as this is > just as bad as polluting it with personal attacks. Read the FAQs. Get a fucking life, seeing as you haven`t yet posted anything relating remotely to the technical aspects of cryptography to this list I think you need to take a long hard look at what your saying loser.... Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Http://www.fatmans.demon.co.uk/crypt/ "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.3ia mQCNAjH9j+cAAAEEAMBvREiQR0ot9dFCO0TiSCSunAYLv2g1Bc6I3bz8FzKXNH53 6mieJf/W4rD+CxJpT0q9RQaaoRtkHJLwbjfK2il3D7mEahMAyqvF/xRJNqkXfhM3 sRJM0Jh43l+W0M5vwokbEbk25/bxWWGspTsLD3YHbzKnG6pOcL5OPIRbv66xAAUR tCdQYXVsIEJyYWRsZXkgPHBhdWxAZmF0bWFucy5kZW1vbi5jby51az6JAJUDBRAy NwfvNkCBjDT0xHEBATQPA/9TORmN/UjNecj03q4anpvdyCLiez5sKuNbnYK50RiP Jj4QpWWvST3smyQ0A86DrZY/re056MXwQmARESx0rFZxdnD0oORICl5r8dJLIy3b j8rbA5olXwZwKz73/X5s13v/pvHYX4cIsbVK8NHXqh5llSKt6TBAuGgkIGF29z5k C4kAlQMFEDI3B9mdtf/umVkv7QEBcRYD/1FBteLqsUmr81euxqqnnrpLlyHb58B/ 9sdATuua4uSjX46hXDZ264YozspNrzSB4NEdrmXOWVX3fiE0ga6XkSSkIeF23V90 En37Z0BdbFzgF00FRYTFyTq8eezQrdg/+rBPUsZUmG5wpq3e12FKHQsX01i+1mB2 YmqqwCV5e95eiQCVAgUQMh8uSb5OPIRbv66xAQEqJwP/fxQyiCasjFcbDpsFfsYp put5cCC/9pOx6X3DlbKShPMpUOS+A9HsTEmJQN8Iawv1nSwPdtc2cR/GhW6ilVjW LSloGdMVLabm9pGpZZMkRaZlXFUkOv7VhfgsUiL+vIDryBCAwUZCzQiWycjt/cPi mUqFH41Z7NkyO8ZFdi5GGX0= =CMZA -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

3 2

Re: 10 minute delay considered inconsequential
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 11 Sep 1996 22:50:22 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >>I've always wondered if the makers of mailer software couldn't include a delay >>option, so that, say, a message might be held for 10 minutes and then sent. >>Imagine how many of the "Sorry about x; I meant y" posts we'd never see. > >I expect there would be little effect. I suspect most of us write articles, >send them out, and only notice the mistakes, typos, whatever when they are >pointed out. True. I guess what we need is an AI mailer that would do something like "Message #324 is rather confusing - did you really mean x?". Oh well. . . # Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp # cadams(a)acucobol.com | V.M. (619)515-4894 "I have never been able to figure out why anyone would want to play games on a computer in any case when the whole system is a game. Word processing, spreadsheets, telecoms -- it's all a game. And they pay you to play it." -- Duncan Frissell

1 0

Child pornography -- Expert witness for Federal jury trial
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Folks, I just got a call from two Federal Public Defenders whose client is charged with possession of child pornography stored in the /tmp directory of a Unix system, in a zip'd file. (These lawyers seem to be reasonably cyber-savvy, and told me they're following what I've been writing about cyber-liberties.) There's evidence saying that other people were using the account at that time, and the attorneys have the relevant wtmp/utmp files. There's also no evidence saying an actual child was exploited -- given the nature of the images, they may have been morphed. I don't think the defendant is accused of *making* them; he's only accused of *possessing* them. The case goes to jury trial soon in a Federal District Court. If anyone is interested in testifying as an expert witness in this case about Unix tech foo (and is qualified to do so), please let me know and I'll pass along your info. I believe at least your expenses would be paid. Here's an opportunity to ensure justice is done and not just rant in cyberspace... :) -Declan (Note I have no idea if the guy is indeed guilty of possessing JPGs the government has banned. What I do know is that any defendant deserves a fair trial and the government must prove that he's guilty of the crimes for which he's charged. And if anyone does molest a child, I say lock 'em up for a good long time.)

1 0

Re: Risk v. Charity (was: RE: Workers Paradise. /Political rant
by craigw＠dg.ce.com.au 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Personally, I paid my way through uni...full fees. I took out a loan when I developed cancer to pay for it (as the health insurance was not finalised for aproval - so they got out of paying). The few months I was unemployed after I left the military because of a confict of interests I earned money by doing whatever I could get (even though I am an engineer I have worked in a petrol station). So why and for what reason sould I have to pay several 10's of thousands each year to support others. I have never taken help from the govenment, I do not feel I should have to pay as well. And what am I paying for...to protect the status quo. I believe that there is more than enough help for ppl available. They just need to get off their butts and work. > > tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) wrote: > > >"Saving for a rainy day," whether saving, investing, getting an education > > (while others are out partying), preparing, etc., all takes effort and > > commitment. If those who save and prepare are then told they have to pay > > high taxes to support those who partied....well, the predictable effect > > [...] is _more_ people in agony. When you tell people that a compassionate > > society will meet their basic needs, a predictable fraction of them will choose > > not to work hard and prepare themselves. > > > > Two questions, two observations: > > Do you have health insurance? > > Do you have life insurance? > > Yes, so? > Yes, so? Myself also yes,yes > > I have commented on your line of reasoning before and and it still > > seems to me that an important part of the discussion is missed. > > Specifically, that anyone can "save for a rainy day" and still not be > > able to provide for events that can always happen: Heart attack, stroke, > > car accident, pinched nerve that leaves you in excruciating pain and > > unable to work for several years. > > Understand what it is you are saying. > ,'~``. \|/ ,'``~. (-o=o-) (@ @) ,(-o=o-), +--.oooO--(_)--Ooo-----oOO-(_)-OOo-------oooO--(_)--Oooo.------+ | | | Soon, we may all be staring at our computers, wondering | | whether they're staring back. | | | | [Network Admin For WPA Business Products. aka doshai >;-) ] | | .oooO http://pip.com.au/~doshai/ Oooo. | | ( ) Oooo. .oooO ( ) | +-----\ (----( )-------oooO-Oooo--------( )--- ) /---------+ \_) ) / \ ( (_/ (_/ \_) Key fingerprint = 2D F4 54 BB B4 EA F1 E7 B6 DE 48 92 FC 8D FF 49 Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key. (if I want to give it to you)

3 2

Re: common sense
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 12 Sep 1996 16:04:14 -0700, HipCrime wrote: >> And rather than "dispensing drugs in clinics," why not simply >> scrap the drug laws entirely? People have a *right* to do as >> they please with their bodies. >Let's hear it for common sense. It's the first decent posting I've >seen to this list. Tell me, how do you walk with that huge chip on your shoulder? # Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp # cadams(a)acucobol.com | V.M. (619)515-4894 "I have never been able to figure out why anyone would want to play games on a computer in any case when the whole system is a game. Word processing, spreadsheets, telecoms -- it's all a game. And they pay you to play it." -- Duncan Frissell

1 0

CU foward post, netcopped again!
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >what is being punished here is not the exploitation of children, which is > > wrong and must be prevented, but the private thoughts of those who > > produce and recieve this material, which are totally private and > > legitimate. > > There is nothing "legitimate" about fucking children, fantasising about > fucking children, or looking at pictures of people fucking children. > > The dangers of this debate are all too apparent, and if this sort of > quote were to reach the tabloid audience I hardly think it would be a > positive contribution to the image of CommUnity... Oh no! - I`ve been netcopped on the CommUnity list *AGAIN*, long live cypherpunks, the last bastion of free speech on the net!!!! ;-) But seriously, this does highlight what we are up against, when CommUnity (for US readers CommUnity, abreviated CU sometimes, is like a UK version of the EFF), supposedly a free speech and online liberties organisation, has posters (and this one is pretty typical) like this which clearly cover all debate on a subject area as "padophilia" if they try to explore the issues any more deeply than saying that fucking children is wrong... Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Http://www.fatmans.demon.co.uk/crypt/ "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey" -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.3ia mQCNAjH9j+cAAAEEAMBvREiQR0ot9dFCO0TiSCSunAYLv2g1Bc6I3bz8FzKXNH53 6mieJf/W4rD+CxJpT0q9RQaaoRtkHJLwbjfK2il3D7mEahMAyqvF/xRJNqkXfhM3 sRJM0Jh43l+W0M5vwokbEbk25/bxWWGspTsLD3YHbzKnG6pOcL5OPIRbv66xAAUR tCdQYXVsIEJyYWRsZXkgPHBhdWxAZmF0bWFucy5kZW1vbi5jby51az6JAJUDBRAy NwfvNkCBjDT0xHEBATQPA/9TORmN/UjNecj03q4anpvdyCLiez5sKuNbnYK50RiP Jj4QpWWvST3smyQ0A86DrZY/re056MXwQmARESx0rFZxdnD0oORICl5r8dJLIy3b j8rbA5olXwZwKz73/X5s13v/pvHYX4cIsbVK8NHXqh5llSKt6TBAuGgkIGF29z5k C4kAlQMFEDI3B9mdtf/umVkv7QEBcRYD/1FBteLqsUmr81euxqqnnrpLlyHb58B/ 9sdATuua4uSjX46hXDZ264YozspNrzSB4NEdrmXOWVX3fiE0ga6XkSSkIeF23V90 En37Z0BdbFzgF00FRYTFyTq8eezQrdg/+rBPUsZUmG5wpq3e12FKHQsX01i+1mB2 YmqqwCV5e95eiQCVAgUQMh8uSb5OPIRbv66xAQEqJwP/fxQyiCasjFcbDpsFfsYp put5cCC/9pOx6X3DlbKShPMpUOS+A9HsTEmJQN8Iawv1nSwPdtc2cR/GhW6ilVjW LSloGdMVLabm9pGpZZMkRaZlXFUkOv7VhfgsUiL+vIDryBCAwUZCzQiWycjt/cPi mUqFH41Z7NkyO8ZFdi5GGX0= =CMZA -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

no internet gambling
by Jüri Kaljundi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From todays Baltic News Service newswire (my free translation): According to the ministry of finance of Estonia, they will not give any licences or permission to organize Internet gambling or lotteries in Estonia. The reason given was, that arranging lotteries on the Internet would take the activity outside from Estonia. According to the news, the only Internet gambling licences given out are in Liechtenstein and Ahvenamaa (part of Finland). My question is: how easy it is to get a licence for Internet casino in either Liechtenstein or some off-shore country (Belize, Bahamas etc) ? I believe Belize was one of the first to sign legislation on Internet gambling, does anyone have more information about the costs and requirements? Jüri Kaljundi AS Stallion jk(a)stallion.ee

2 1

Re: really undetectable crypto
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 12 Sep 96 19:26:56 -0700, Jim Miller wrote: >Most everybody on the list is familiar with the technique of hiding >encrypted messages in the LSBs of image files. Personally, I would not >use such a technique because don't I believe it's really undetectable. I >assume, without proof, that the LSBs of images files have statistical >properties that are sufficiently different from encrypted data that a >clever person could determine whether or not an image file contained an >imbedded encrypted message. Actually, if you use only a few bits - and not, say, bit 15 of *every* pixel - you can feel secure *IF* you are writing truly encrypted data. A regular PGP message has a bunch of header material that most certainly is not random-looking. OTOH, if you only write the raw data, then there is no way to differentiate from the random noise added by any scanner - in most cases, the last couple bits in each RGB triplet of a truecolor image are random. # Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp # cadams(a)acucobol.com | V.M. (619)515-4894 "I have never been able to figure out why anyone would want to play games on a computer in any case when the whole system is a game. Word processing, spreadsheets, telecoms -- it's all a game. And they pay you to play it." -- Duncan Frissell

1 0

DIMACS Trust management workshop, Sept 30 - Oct 2.
by Matt Blaze 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message Received: from amontillado.research.att.com (amontillado.research.att.com [135.205.42.32]) by nsa.research.att.com (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA24206 for <mab-local(a)nsa.research.att.com>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 11:52:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from research.research.att.com (research.research.att.com [135.205.32.20]) by amontillado.research.att.com (8.7.5/8.7) with SMTP id LAA14378 for <mab(a)issr.research.att.com>; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 11:52:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from ns.research.att.com by research; Tue Sep 17 11:48:17 EDT 1996 Received: from henson.rutgers.edu by ns; Tue Sep 17 11:06:01 EDT 1996 Received: (from bquigley@localhost) by henson.rutgers.edu (8.6.12+bestmx+oldruq+newsunq+grosshack/8.6.12) id LAA26298; Tue, 17 Sep 1996 11:02:41 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Sep 1996 11:02:41 -0400 From: Barbara Quigley <bquigley(a)dimacs.rutgers.edu> Message-Id: <199609171502.LAA26298(a)henson.rutgers.edu> To: dimacs-members(a)dimacs.rutgers.edu, local-list(a)dimacs.rutgers.edu, dimacs-dimacs(a)dimacs.rutgers.edu, dimacs-current-postdocs-industry(a)dimacs.rutgers.edu, dimacs-current-postdocs-univ(a)dimacs.rutgers.edu, dimacs-current-visitors(a)dimacs.rutgers.edu, rutgers-list(a)dimacs.rutgers.edu, theorynt(a)vm1.nodak.edu, finite-model-theory(a)informatik.rwth-aachen.de Subject: DIMACS Workshop on Trust Management in Networks, Rutgers University, September 30 - October 2, 1996 DIMACS Workshop on Trust Management in Networks September 30 - October 2, 1996 DIMACS, Rutgers University - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Organizers: Ernie Brickell brickell(a)btec.com Joan Feigenbaum jf(a)research.att.com David Maher dpm(a)allegra.att.com Theme: The use of public-key cryptography on a mass-market scale requires sophisticated mechanisms for managing trust. For example, any application that receives a signed request for action is forced to answer the central question ``Is the key used to sign this request authorized to take this action?'' In certain applications, this question reduces to ``Does this key belong to this person?'' In others, the authorization question is considerably more complicated, and resolving it requires techniques for formulating security policies and security credentials, determining whether particular sets of credentials satisfy the relevant policies, and deferring trust to third parties. This workshop covers all aspects of the trust management problem. Relevant topics include but are not limited to: * General approaches to trust management * Languages, systems, and tools * Certificates and public-key infrastructure * Formal models and analysis * Trust management in specific application domains; including but not limited to: o Banking o E-mail o Internet commerce o Licensing o Medical information systems o Mobile programs and ``code signing'' o Revocation of cryptographic keys For more information: Information about local arrangements, travel, lodging and registration can be found at http://dimacs.rutgers.edu/Workshops/Management. Those without WWW access can contact Pat Pravato at 908-445-5929 or pravato(a)dimacs.rutgers.edu. This workshop is part of DIMACS Special Year on Networks. Information about the Special Year on Networks can be found at DIMACS WWW site: http://dimacs.rutgers.edu or by contacting the center. __________________ Program: Monday, September 30, 1996 8:15 Continental breakfast 9:00 Welcome to DIMACS Fred Roberts, DIMACS Director 9:15 What is "Trust Management," and what are the Workshop Goals? Joan Feigenbaum, AT&T Laboratories 9:45 Let a Thousand (Ten Thousand?) CAs Reign Stephen Kent, BBN Corporation 10:45 Break 11:00 The PolicyMaker Approach to Trust Management Matt Blaze, AT&T Laboratories (Joint work with J. Feigenbaum and J. Lacy) 12:00 Lunch 1:15 SDSI: A Simple Distributed Security Infrastructure Butler Lampson, Microsoft (Joint work with R. Rivest) 2:15 SPKI Certificates Carl Ellison, Cybercash 3:15 Break 3:45 Panel Discussion Moderator: David Maher, AT&T Laboratories Panelists: Blaze, Ellison, Kent, and Lampson 5:30 Wine and cheese Tuesday, October 1, 1996 8:15 Continental Breakfast 9:00 Using PICS Labels for Trust Management Rohit Khare, World Wide Web Consortium 9:30 Managing Trust in an Information-Labeling System Martin Strauss, Iowa State University (Joint work with M. Blaze, J. Feigenbaum, and P. Resnick) 10:00 Trust Management in Web Browsers, Present and Future Ed Felten, Princeton University (Joint work with D. Dean and D. Wallach) 10:30 Break 10:45 IBM Cryptolopes, SuperDistribution, and Digital Rights Management Marc A. Kaplan, IBM Watson Research Center 11:15 Requirements and Approaches for Electronic Licenses David Maher, AT&T Laboratories 11:45 PathServer Michael Reiter, AT&T Laboratories (Joint work with S. Stubblebine) 12:15 Lunch 1:30 Inferno Security David Presotto, Bell Labs -- Lucent Technologies 2:00 Transparent Internet E-mail Security Raph Levien, University of Calfornia at Berkeley (Joint work with L. McCarthy and M. Blaze) 2:30 Secure Digital Names Stuart Haber, Bellcore (Joint work with S. Stornetta) 3:00 Break 3:30 Untrusted Third Parties: Key Management for the Prudent Mark Lomas, Cambridge University (Joint work with B. Crispo) 4:00 Distributed Trust Management using Databases Trevor Jim, University of Pennsylvania (Joint work with C. Gunter) 4:30 Distributed Commerce Transactions: Structuring Multi-Party Exchanges into Pair-wise Exchanges Steven Ketchpel, Stanford University (Joint work with H. Garcia-Molina) Wednesday, October 2, 1996 8:15 Continental Breakfast 9:00 Policy-Controlled Cryptographic Key Release David McGrew, Trusted Information Systems, Inc. (Joint work with D. Branstad) 9:45 An X.509v3-based Public-Key Infrastructure for the Federal Government William Burr, Nat'l. Inst. of Standards and Technology 10:15 Break 10:30 The ICE-TEL Public-Key Infrastructure and Trust Model David Chadwick, Salford University 11:00 A Distributed Trust Model Alfarez Abdul-Rahman, University College, London (Joint work with S. Hailes) 11:30 On Multiple Statements from Trust Sources Raphael Yahalom, Hebrew University and MIT 12:00 Lunch 1:00 Off-line Delegation in a Distributed File Repository Arne Helme, University of Twente (Joint work with T. Stabell-Kul) 1:30 Operational Tradeoffs of Aggregating Attributes in Digital Certificates Ian Simpson, Carnegie Mellon University 2:00 Trust Management for Mobile Agents Vipin Swarup, Mitre (Joint work with W. Farmer and J. Guttman) 2:30 Break 3:00 Trust Management in ERLink Samuel Schaen, Mitre 3:30 Linking Trust with Network Reliability Y. Desmedt, University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee (Joint work with M. Burmester) 4:00 Trust Management Under Law-Governed Interaction Naftaly Minsky, Rutgers University (Joint work with V. Ungureanu) 4:30 Tools for Security Policy Definition and Implementation Polar Humenn, Blackwatch Technology, Inc. ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

RE: Risk v. Charity (was: RE: Workers Paradise. /Politica...
by jbugden＠smtplink.alis.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subject: RE: Risk v. Charity (was: RE: Workers Paradise. /Political rant) Black Unicorn <unicorn(a)schloss.li> >On Mon, 16 Sep 1996 jbugden(a)smtplink.alis.ca wrote: >> Specifically, that anyone can "save for a rainy day" and still not be >> able to provide for events that can always happen: Heart attack, >> stroke, car accident, pinched nerve that leaves you in excruciating >> pain and unable to work for several years. > >Understand what it is you are saying. > >You are saying that everyone on the planet has a right to health > insurance and disability insurance whether they can afford it or not. > This is folly. The result is serious moral hazard problems. Almost, but not quite. I'm saying that within our two countries at least (Canada, U.S.) everyone could have access to medically necessary procedures because the *society as a whole* can afford it. I understand moral hazard and risk pool seperation. I also understand that the insurance bureacracy required to manage much of the U.S. health care system absorbs much of the money going into the system. Managing risk pool seperation proves to be expensive, or perhaps just very profitable. > Social safety nets prevent rioting by the lower classes, revolution and > general civil disorder because they appease the masses. Indeed this > is a form of health and life insurance for the middle and upper classes. Absolutely. And it is a scheme that many of the lower classes pay into. Since it is to our mutual benefit (yours and mine), I choose not complain about it. > Spreading the risk, by itself, does NOT reduce cost. > You must properly PRICE risk. Agreed. But there is a balance between accurately pricing the risk and minimizing the cost of the bureacracy that polices this pricing. There are also many ways to modify behaviour, not all of them direct. We only need a correlation here, not causation. For example, high taxes on smoking and drinking or spot checks for drunk driving. All of these correlate with a reduction in high risk behaviour and a reduction in health costs. Yes, there are people who will engage in high risk behaviour. Yes, they will still receive treatment. No, it is not worth tracking down all of these people. You may also get better privacy because no insurance company is collecting personal data in order to minimize their risk. A Suspicious Persons List is only one manifestation of this type of intrusion. This privacy issue may only increase as genetic screening becomes widespread. There is much potential for moral hazard when the PRICE for your insurance is affected by the accuracy of your disclosure. How will they ever know... Fact: Canada spends less than the U.S. per capita on health care, while covering more people in percentage terms. Ciao, James, qui pete les bretelles du Canada. And he brought the present unto Eglon king of Moab: and Eglon was a very fat man. [Judges 3:17] "Of all tyrannies a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis, _God in the Dock_ "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds." - Emerson

2 1