December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

RE: A Libertine Question
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:13 PM 7/29/96 -0400, Duncan Frissell wrote: >Perhaps the communitarians in the audience will have to fall back on >disfellowship as the ultimate sanction (like the early Christians). They >won't be able to apply any more advanced weaponry. Just as the ultimate net sanction is excommunication (usually via the ISP, killfiles etc.), the ultimate communitarian sanction is shunning. Anything more takes force, and government reserves the use of force to itself. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Cave ab homine unius lebri | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | [Beware the man of one | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | book] - Anonymous Latin | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

2 1

Taxes in the digicash world
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi Suppose that digital cash becomes easy enough to use and becomes the mainstream medium in most [or at least many] economic transactions. The question is, how can the government TECHNICALLY collect taxes? I do not mean to start `libertarianism vs. socialism' discussion, I am more interested in the technical aspects of tax collection when transfers of money are protected by strong crypto.. Let's say, maybe this tax would work: every time someone verifies that a piece of digital cash is valid, s/he has to pay the government a little percentage of the amount. Since digital banks are easier to control than other participants of the market, this kind of tax legislation is easier to enforce. Of course these banks may be offshore, and then such collection becomes problemstic. Another alternative that I see is property taxes and poll taxes,or taxes on some commodities such as oil. But incomes seem to be hard to track. What else? - Igor.

4 3

Re: NBC
by Martin Minow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>So how was the tv hacker presentation? I was one interveiwed and was in >las vegas at defcon when it aired. I never saw the final product. > >se7en About what I expected: "We're only exploring, we're not trying to damage anything, etc." -- I didn't tape it so I can't give you more than that impression. Since I've been in this business for well over thirty years and, about ten years ago, had one of my systems infested by Kevin Mitnick, I'm not particularly sympathetic to the "we're just trying to learn" mentality -- if you want to learn, buy a PC and a Linux CD, write some code, give it away, and make a real contribution to the community. Martin.

2 1

Paranoid Musings
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sometimes paranoia strikes. Since these musings are crypto related, I thought I would share them. (1) Now everyone knows that 40 bit RC4 is weak, but just how weak is it? We know that a university CS student can break one message in a week using the universities farm of workstations. But, our foremost reputation agency for crypto strength, the ITAR, allows systems with RC4-40 to be exported. What does this mean? I combine the above with Whit Diffie's observation that, while crypto users are interested in the security of *each* message, organizations which monitor communications want to read *every* message. A TLA interested in monitoring communications would need to crack RC4-40 much faster than 1/week. Now expensive specialized cracking equipment can certainly speed up the process, but there may be a better way. If cryptanalysis of RC4 yields techniques which make the process much easier, then it is the ideal cypher to certify for export. The paranoid conclusion is that there is a significant weakness in RC4. (2) What did Microsoft give up to export its crypto API? Well, if you were a TLA, what would you want. I think I would want an agreement to be able to insert my own code in that vendor's products. Then I would be able to have widely distributed Trojan horses signed by the vendor. I would have the opportunity to significantly weaken standardized crypto systems installed world wide. Conspiracy theorists, start your mailers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Cave ab homine unius lebri | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | [Beware the man of one | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | book] - Anonymous Latin | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

2 1

RE: A Libertine Question
by jbugden＠smtplink.alis.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I find it funny that I'm considered Conservative by most people who know me. Your opinion may vary. ;-) tcmay(a)got.net wrote: >Who takes responsibility when people fail to save enough of their >paycheck to last them through the month? Who takes responsibility when >people drink too much, miss work, and are fired? And so on. One common thread in many of these discussions is the ease with which moral judgements are made about the situation: "fail to save", "drink too much". I know the social psychology explanation that people who view the world as ordered attach these types of judgements to situations which violate their ordered view of the world. "She was just asking for it dressed like that..." However, now I'm puzzled. From what I've read of Tim May, he does not hold such an orderly view of the world. The "rules" of existence may prove to be deterministic, but the results are chaotic. So Tim, where are these moral judgments coming from? >The issue of "who takes care of" people who can't hold their liquor, or >who overeat, or who smoke too much, does not enter into the equation. Think of how many of our laws are being enacted that tacitly make being poor or indigent a crime. Curfews being a recently discussed example. If the equation is one of economics, then "who takes care of" people does indeed enter the equation. I suggest that it is more economical to provide for a minimum quality of life- if only as a form of insurance for myself. Think: Rawls. The alternative is to have garbage collectors to "take care of" those that fall behind. Think: Soylent Green. Better twisted than bitter, as Tiny Tim Cratchet used to say. James

4 4

Dry Under the Waterfall
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If I read *one* more bit of blather about the "information haves and have nots" I am going to take my Streetsweeper down to my local McDonalds and decrease the imbalance between these two groups by reducing the quantity of the latter. It would work just as well as any other solution. The latest blather was in a parting shot in David Kline's last "Market Forces" column in Hot Wired (www.wired.com) "How can we assure that the tired, poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free, the wretched refuse of your teeming shore, the homeless, and tempest-tossed get onto the Net"? (My formulation -- not his.) The answer is we can't. I have been online every day since 1987 or so. Since that time I have begged, pleaded, cajoled, and threatened friends, relatives, casual acquaintances, and total strangers to get them on line. (We are talking here about people who have the cash to easily get wired if they care to.) Sometimes it has worked. Mostly it has not. It has gotten easier to dragoon people onto the net recently but it is still hard. I have taken to telling people who ask me for help setting up their computer systems that I will only help them on the condition that they obtain an ISP account and use it. The usual reason for resistance (beyond a reluctance to spend money) is a failure to appreciate the value of the online experience. No matter how much I plead, many people have not (in the past) been able to see what this all was good for. This was particularly true when online computing was a text-only experience. Non-readers have a problem with text. Now, even though the net is more graphical, it still lacks appeal for 95% of the population (or at least enough appeal to get them on to it). Even though we may know that many people could improve their lives and economic standing by learning to compute and telecommunicate, they don't *know* it and so they are not wired. Par example -- an auto mechanic of my acquaintance was assigned to the office where he worked to handle advanced paper shuffling involving auto parts. He started to use an XT to track parts and got to like it. He asked me for some advice and over the years bought an XT and other machines until he now has two desktops and a laptop networked at home. He's on the net as well. At work, he has become a supervisor in part because he can use computers. The original purchase of a computer has been paid for many times over by increased income. There is nothing new about this, of course. Even without computers, it is obvious that someone who can read and write can average more money in the modern world than one who can't. And yet many people refuse to learn to be good readers. Because they don't read, they also know less. Sans books and periodicals, you simply can't encounter a critical mass of ideas and information sufficient to achieve a self-sustaining intellectual life and the flexible abilities necessary to survive in the current economy. For readers, the modern economy is a piece of cake. And reading is not a "certification" it's a skill. You can get it with minor help. It takes no money and it can't be denied to you by a racist society. Without so much as a high school diploma, a good reader can succeed easily in today's America (credential-happy Europeans have to fend for themselves). Do you doubt this. Assume you are a good reader without credentials. 1) Learn to type. (Used manual portables cost $12 at the Sally Army.) 3) Get a temp job that requires typing. (Lie about your high school diploma. Since you are well dressed from the same Sally Army where you got your typewriter and have excellent communication skills -- these things are under your control -- it shouldn't be much trouble.) 2) Learn to word process. (Commodore 64's and used b/w TV sets cost $25 or less at flea markets. Running the tutorials at hourly PC rental places are pretty cheap as well. If you are a good typist, temp agencies will cross train you on PCs so they can rent your rear end out for more dough.) 4) Become an experienced (permanent) temp word processor on the night shift in the financial district of NYC making $22.50-$27.00/hour. ($18.00/hour -- days.) 5) Then become a (contract) tech writer and start to make more money. All that is necessary for the above is the ability to read and write fluently which is open to all persons of normal intelligence. But most choose not to learn those skills (which is why they pay so much in today's market). Similarly, most people are not interested in learning to compute and in getting wired. Instead they stand around an bitch about how their incomes are flat and they can't find work when they get laid off at 50. Hardly surprising. They've already established that they're dead from the neck up. I wouldn't hire them, why should anyone else. This is the phenomenon of the modern world. So many people one meets are pig ignorant. They are sitting under a waterfall of knowledge cascading over them in a volume unprecedented in human history and yet they contrive not to get wet. Meanwhile, we are told that the information have-nots are being denied access to the wonders of the information age. I'm very sorry but they have already rejected the wonders of the last information age that started 541 years ago with the publication of the Mazarin Bible. People who can't even bother to read and write will not be helped by our cash and Al Gore's preaching. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him think. DCF "So Louis Freeh wants expanded wiretap authority. What's the matter? Craig Livingstone short of reading material"?

5 5

Re: FAA to require transponders on all aircraft passengers
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:56 8/3/96, David Lesher wrote: [Quoting Lucky] >> According to KCBS, a local radio station, the FAA has closed a long >> anticipated deal with a manufacturer of transponder devices. The goal of >> the system to be deployed nationwide is to match aircraft passengers to >> their luggage and thereby identify unaccompanied luggage on board an >> aircraft. > >I thinks they have mixed their marbles.... Nope. This from Micron's website: Editorial Contact: Julie Nash, Micron Technology, (208) 368-4400 Web Site URL http://www.micron.com Fax-on-demand: 800-239-0337 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE MICRON COMMUNICATIONS, INC., ANNOUNCES AGREEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION Boise, Idaho, August 2, 1996 - Micron Communications, Inc., today announced a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRDA) with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to develop a model Positive Passenger Baggage Matching (PPBM) system. The objective of this PPBM system is to automatically recognize when baggage has been placed on an aircraft without an associated passenger. Micron Communications intends to utilize remote intelligent communications (RIC) technology developed for its MicroStamp family of products to design a security system which will enhance current systems and provide efficient tracking of passengers and baggage. "Micron Communications is proud to be associated with products that are designed to help increase the safety of airline travel, while providing operational benefits to the industry and increasing the convenience to the traveler," said John R. Tuttle, Chairman and President of Micron Communications, Inc. "Our experience in microelectronics and systems design should enable us to develop systems that use tomorrow's technology in finding solutions to these important problems." "Once again, an Idaho company is breaking new ground," Senator Larry Craig said. "As chairman of the Congressional-White House Task Force on Terrorism, its exciting to see this kind of high-tech advancement in security being developed here at home by Micron Communications, Inc. The Positive Passenger Baggage Matching system is exactly the kind of common-sense answer we are looking for to improve airline safety and give us all greater comfort when we fly in the future, " Craig continued. Current MicroStamp-based products include the MicroStamp credit card-sized device and the MicroStamp Engine in a 20-pin, small-outline integrated circuit (SOIC) plastic package. Micron Communications believes that the MicroStamp integrated circuit is the first wireless communications technology to integrate a single-chip CMOS solution, which includes a direct sequence spread spectrum (DSSS) microwave-frequency radio operating at 2.45GHz, a microcontroller, and low-power static random access memory (SRAM). It also contains a synchronous serial port allowing additional memory expansion. RIC units are different from RFID tags because they have a central processing unit (CPU), memory and microwave on board. This combination allows RIC units to perform more applications than low-performance RFID tags that use older technology at lower frequencies. MicroStamp RIC units are more powerful and more flexible than RFID units. They are also smaller and cost less than other RIC units of comparable performance. Systems integrators, original equipment manufacturers or end users interested in the MicroStamp family of products should contact Micron Communications Customer Service department, 1-888-MSTAMP1, (888-678-2671). Micron Communications, Inc., is a subsidiary of Micron Technology, Inc., whose common stock is traded on the New York Stock Exchange, Inc. (NYSE) under the symbol MU. MicroStamp and MicroStamp Engine are trademarks of Micron Communications, Inc. -- 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: List for crypto minus political rubbish
by Matts Kallioniemi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 15:25 1996-08-02 -0500, W.K. Woelbeling wrote: >I am looking for a source of info on crypto. While this list is of interest >to (many) people, I find that the amount of political ranting outweighs any >nuggets of information concerning cryptography. Pointers? > >Bill Just about everything on cryptography has already been said far too many times. Just read Applied Cryptography and be done with it. What remains to discuss is politics, psychology and marketing. How do you get people to use the cryptography that already exists and how will the authorities react when people do use it. Matts

1 0

Re: Internal Passports
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:02 AM 8/1/96 -0700, tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) wrote: >Question (a la "Wired"): "When will the United States introduce an internal >passport?" >May: "2005, but they won't call it that." Stewart: "Last week, but they didn't call it that." According to Alaska Airlines, the FAA's policy as of last week has switched to a mandatory policy that if you don't produce government-issued photo-id, you can't get on the plane; the previous policy had been more flexible. The folks stamped my ticket "Documents Verified" - looks suspiciously similar to "Papers In Order". (Which they actually weren't, on my return trip; I handed her my work ID in the same plastic carrier as my train pass, and handed her the credit card I'd bought the tickets with explaining that I wasn't on government business and asking when had the policy changed and commenting. And the nice Rent-A-Xray-Technician who asked if I minded if he searched my computer bag was totally confused when I said "Yes, of course I mind.") You can still travel in a car if someone else is driving, and you can still get on a train without identification, but without papers you can't fly or drive, and you can't ride a horse on the freeway except in the back of a horse trailer. Driver's licenses were the beginning of a long downhill trend. I wonder if they'll still accept an American passport; the country has obviously been taken over by Pod People while we weren't looking.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Defuse Authority!

6 5

Re: List for crypto minus political rubbish
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Aug 03, 1996 14:38:59, 'Matts Kallioniemi <matts(a)cyberpass.net>' wrote: >Just about everything on cryptography has already been said far too many times. >Just read Applied Cryptography and be done with it. What remains to discuss is >politics, psychology and marketing. How do you get people to use the >cryptography that already exists and how will the authorities react when people >do use it. An exemplary air-clearing for a smoke-filled agenda; and two challenging questions which may pose a High Noon amongst munitions-slingers. Bravo, Matts, for cryptic concision.

1 0