December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

RE: Mass-market crypto phones
by Mullen Patrick 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

_______________________________________________________________________________ From: Clay Olbon II on Thu, Nov 21, 1996 15:20 >A while back, Eric Blossom posted a URL for a mass-market, phone encyrption >device (http://www.comsec.com/) The point of this post is to posit a The above mentioned crypto phone was incredibly expensive, if I remember correctly. What it basically was (Please keep in mind I may be thinking of a different product) a box containing a modem and a crypto-crunching CPU. Phone in one end, processed by said CPU, and send out other end. I have/had a similar idea, but I want to try make it a totally software product (assuming you have the necessary hw requirements on your computer) where you talk in through a microphone (can something be wired so you can use a regular phone plugged into your computer/modem/soundcard???) your CPU crunches code, and spits out the encrypted data. Obviously, the complementing steps would be done on the receiving end. Has anyone ever tried anything like this? >I think we need to keep a couple of goals in mind. The first, is to get >encrypting phones (or phone add-ons) into Wal-mart, K-mart, etc (where >probably most Americans now buy their phones). The prices need to be low >enough that people will want to buy them (<$100?). Is this technically >feasible? The comsec device from the above URL already demonstrates the >needed capability. Is the cost target possible? My guess is soon, given >the lowering costs and increasing capabilities of current processors. Goals sound good. I feel it *definately* has to be below $100. Personally, I use a phone bought at K-Mart that cost $12 _after_ tax... I wouldn't mind paying $50 for a techno gizmo that made my conversations, inane as they may be, private. The price would also have to be low to assure the other end has a similar techno-gizmo, or I would have wasted my money. Anyone else see the *immediate* need for a standard? >The second goal needs to be to push a similar product for cell-phones. If I'm not mistaken (and I've been known to be from time to time :-), cell phones are already encrypted between the phone and cell tower. That way, they are no less private than a regular phone. Of course, you may be referring to further end-to-end encryption built into the phone in addition to this, but as far as they being less secure than a house phone, I'm not sure about that one. >Given that these goals are met, I think widespread use of crypto over phone >lines would become almost inevitable. However, the fun part would be the >introduction of such products. The FUD coming from police, the government, >etc. would be amazing to behold. Agreed! > Clay >******************************************************* >Clay Olbon olbon(a)ix.netcom.com >engineer, programmer, statistitian, etc. >**********************************************tanstaafl PM USER ERROR: REPLACE AND STRIKE ANY KEY WHEN READY

3 2

Finjan "SurfinGate"
by Mike McNally 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Check out http://www.finjan.com and the stuff about "SurfinGate". The software supposedly can perform an on-the-fly inspection of a Java applet or ActiveX control, and then apply a signature to it along with a "safety" level qualifier to feed into a configurable policy mechanism. Any ideas as to how you can look at an ActiveX control and determine whether it's safe or not? -- ______c_________________________________________________________________ Mike M Nally * IBM % Tivoli * Austin TX * How quickly we forget that mailto:m5@tivoli.com mailto:m101@io.com * "deer processing" and "data http://www.io.com/~m101/ * processing" are different!

2 3

Database law... silver lining??
by Richard L. Field 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Should a database protection law such as HT 3531 be enacted in the U.S., it just may turn out to be the best weapon yet for the protection of personal data. Why shouldn't a "database" be interpreted to include an individual's personal data? All that is required is that it be "arranged in a systematic or methodical way". Heck, that's not so hard. And a "database maker" isn't necessarily Lexis (the compiler of P-TRAK) and friends, it is each individual who originally made a "substantive" (i.e., lifetime) investment in the collection of the contents of his personal database. Based on this reasoning, P-TRAK, etc. would be considered an infringing use, subject to civil and possible criminal actions, injunctions, impoundment, and monetary relief. Hmmm... - Richard Field

1 0

Re: wealth and property rights
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Btw, people of your mentality (communists/socialists) already make it > very difficult for me to accumulate, due to the exhorbitant tax rates > to support those who chose to blow their money as soon as they have > it I don't necessarily want to support "socialism" nor "capitalism". Both are extremes of a situation which does no one any good to exist. However, I would question the implication that "socialists" are responsible for the higher tax rates you currently experience. For example, I could make a strong case that you really have some clever "capitalists" who have learned how to express their "capitalism" quite effectively across the space of all people in a "country". 8-) ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet It is the wise bird who builds his nest in a tree.

2 1

Computer CPU chips with built-in crypto?
by Norman Hardy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An important paper on tamper-proof hardware, discusses CPUs that cypher their memory bus. html: www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tamper.html postscript ftp.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tamper.ps.gz Has special relevance to smart cards.

1 0

Re: Why I Don't Read SF Much Anymore
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 21 Nov 1996 00:14:49 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >On the issue of why many of us don't read as much SF as we once did... >1. I'm a lot older. The stuff that I thought was really great back when I >was 14-22, or so, and even "pretty good" until I was about 25 or so, now >really looks like dreck. (Not all of it, but more than I thought was dreck >at the time.) >Partly this is age and life experience, partly just increased sophistication. Remember Sturgen's (sp?) law: 90% of everything is crap - I think most of us just take awhile before we agree. The SF genre could be characterized by a couple diamonds buried in a manure pit... >(Vernor V. claimed to a friend of mine that the day he spent talking to >several of us was the most fruitful day he'd spent in a long time...I take >this as evidence that folks like us are to the new generation of SF writers >what folks like members of the British Interplanetary Society were to >writers of past generations.) I'd agree 100%. A community as small as the SF writers *needs* outside influence. Must be neat, though, to read a book and go "I *did* that!" >(Interestingly, Eric Drexler says he cannot enjoy it because Simmons does >not give nanotechnology a central enough role. This echoes the point Duncan nanotech (and other things) can spoil a good story by making things too easy. Take most (all?) of Forward's books - great ideas, but it reads like a press release. >- Orson Scott Card, "Ender's Game." A good fictional exploration of online >anony mity. In many ways, Cypherpunks was explicity a kind of combination >of "Ender's Game," "True Names," "The Shockwave Rider," and "Atlas >Shrugged." I think those books are partly responsible for getting a great many people interested in this sort of thing... >- and of course Heinlein, though his best stuff is 30-45 years old now Always a mark of a great SF author: his stuff is still good even if the science is outdated... Ditto EE smith - it's funny, when you read things like the lensmen series it seems cliched until you realize it *is* cliched - because so many others copied him. # Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp # <cadams(a)acucobol.com> | send mail with subject "send PGPKEY" "That's our advantage at Microsoft; we set the standards and we can change them." --- Karen Hargrove, Microsoft (quoted in the Feb 1993 Unix Review editorial)

1 0

Re: Why I Don't Read SF Much Anymore
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 21 Nov 96 10:05:46 -0500, Ken Kirksey wrote: >certain romance in the Gersnbackian view of the future that I enjoy, >especially in contrast to the Grim and Gritty (TM) "reality" of most >modern and post-modern SF. I still find Heinlein's juveniles to be fun >reads, probably for this reason. Ditto for Edgar Rice Burroughs's Mars >books. That's one thing you could say: The predictors of the future are a lot more pessimistic than they used to be... # Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp # <cadams(a)acucobol.com> | send mail with subject "send PGPKEY" "That's our advantage at Microsoft; we set the standards and we can change them." --- Karen Hargrove, Microsoft (quoted in the Feb 1993 Unix Review editorial)

1 0

Re: Finjan "SurfinGate"
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 21 Nov 1996 12:10:51 -0600, Mike McNally wrote: >Check out http://www.finjan.com and the stuff about "SurfinGate". The >software supposedly can perform an on-the-fly inspection of a Java >applet or ActiveX control, and then apply a signature to it along with >a "safety" level qualifier to feed into a configurable policy mechanism. > >Any ideas as to how you can look at an ActiveX control and determine >whether it's safe or not? You can't. Anyone who claims to be able to do so is betting their scanning ability against the collective programming skill of hundreds of brilliant-but-twisted programmers/hackers. Remember CHK4BOMB? The old DOS program that would dump strings from an EXE so you could look for things like "Happy birthday yoshi"? They started encrypting and adding polymorphing and stealthing and . . . Now you could write a program that would scan for more 'obvious' attacks but it will probably be a continual catch-up game. You don't even have the ability to do checksumming of existing files (like you do w/virii). # Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp # <cadams(a)acucobol.com> | send mail with subject "send PGPKEY" "That's our advantage at Microsoft; we set the standards and we can change them." --- Karen Hargrove, Microsoft (quoted in the Feb 1993 Unix Review editorial)

1 0

Re: Database law... silver lining??
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:44 AM 11/22/96 GMT, you wrote: >Real-To: "Richard L. Field" <field(a)pipeline.com> > > Should a database protection law such as HT 3531 be enacted in the U.S., >it just may turn out to be the best weapon yet for the protection of >personal data. Why shouldn't a "database" be interpreted to include an >individual's personal data? All that is required is that it be "arranged in >a systematic or methodical way". Heck, that's not so hard. And a "database >maker" isn't necessarily Lexis (the compiler of P-TRAK) and friends, it is >each individual who originally made a "substantive" (i.e., lifetime) >investment in the collection of the contents of his personal database. Cute, but any such proposal is almost guaranteed to allow for independent creation from a non-database source - e.g., warranty cards, info extracted from you when you ask for credit, public records, etc. For example, one comment to Article 3 of the proposed WIPO treaty on sui generis protection of databases provides: "3.02 The protection provided does not preclude any person from independently collecting, assembling or compiling works, data or materials from any source other than a protected database." (see <http://www.loc.gov/copyright/wipo6.html> for more.) It's very unlikely that Congress (or the PTO) intends to do anything that'll screw up what's already working well for big database publishers. Your theory is similar to a patent flavor for databases, while the proposals floated out so far are much more like copyright - e.g., independent creation is OK, but copying is not, even with wide public distribution, and long protection times. With patent, independent creation is not OK, copying (the information, not the device) is encouraged/allowed, and protection time is short. [Friday, 11/22, is the deadline to submit comments to the PTO asking them to withdraw consideration of the WIPO database treaty from the conference in Geneva. (Or encouraging them to submit it, if that's your opinion.) Comments can be sent to Mr. Keith Kupferschmid at diploconf(a)uspto.gov.) -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. |

1 0

re: sci fi
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Without a doubt contemporary SciFi authors such as Vinge and Stephenson have produced great thought provoking works. Always a good read. But sometimes I'm drawn back to the rollicking rampages of EE Doc Smith or the playful frollicks of Harry Harrison. While not presenting a plausible vision of our future they do offer a significant amount of enjoyment. Pure brain candy! So will some exceptionally creative sort spend 3 or 4 hundred pages exploring BlackNet and the future of global networking? Or has anyone looked at what has happened to trivial networks like IRC's EFnet to see a potential model for how global networking will become balkanized under bandwidth constraints, server cycle shortages, and over worked sysadmins? One physical connection and many virtual, private networks with limitted interoperability and crossover. The internet of the near future may not be the open paradise it is today. I read in InfoWorld that the Telco Dereg act may destroy the local loop market for T1 lines from LD COs. As many as 900,000 new T1's may become available at bargain rates on the order of $40 per month with end point hardware under $700. Watch PairGain Technologies as they are the leader in this hardware market and have some real interesting vox/data over twisted pair toys. Sheesh, I start out talking SciFi and end up talking PairGain! I guess the future is now. diGriz

2 1