December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Fuck UseNet (fwd)
by Kent Crispin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

E. Allen Smith allegedly said: > > From: IN%"ravage(a)EINSTEIN.ssz.com" "Jim Choate" 15-FEB-1997 07:11:54.43 > > >Perhaps in addition to the X-foo structures we have discussed already we > >might consider adding, > > >X-distrib-policy: foo > > >Where foo might be, > > > Public Domain > > All rights reserved, contact author for redistribution > > Distribution for non-commercial uses permitted > > Refer to authors header > > Copyleft > > etc. > > >or whatever the policy might be for a given remailer. This would > >significantly aid folks in their shopping around. > > The basic difficulty with this idea is that _senders_ generally > don't have much of a choice where the messages go, once you've decided > to accept them. In other words, just because you've decided to accept > a message doesn't mean it suddenly becomes > copyleft/public domain/whatever. Now, if you, say, announced that only > subscribers to your particular list, subscribers to any other lists > adopting the same idea, and those who'd sign a consent agreement could > post through your list, that wouldn't be a problem... although I > suspect you wouldn't get many subscribers. > -Allen That wouldn't be the way it work -- Jim operates one of the cp remailers; I operate another. Jim has a standard policy concerning public domain/copyright that is different than mine. So *I* put an X-distrib-policy header in all the cp mail I forward to him. More precisely, all of my incoming mail for "cypherpunks(a)songbird.com" gets the header. This protocol needs a bit of refinement, and perhaps some hacking at majordomo, but seems fairly straightforward. Jim's policy is actually very reasonable. It has a rational basis, though one might disagree with it, and it is easy to deal with it this way. A more extreme policy -- "The operator of this mailing list claims an exclusive copyright on every piece of mail sent to it; by sending to it you agree to this policy", for example -- would be harder to deal with. -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent@songbird.com,kc@llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F

1 0

Re: (fwd) DES challenge organisation
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:02 PM +0000 2/15/97, Adam Back wrote: >Thomas S <ths(a)fh28.fa.umist.ac.uk> writes: >> [...] >> >> 5. The prize money will be split equally between Gutenberg and EFF. >> There is a possibility of using part of it for stickers or >> something similar, but don't count on it. > >Not a good idea. > >How can this be enforced? The RSADSI DES challenge is open to all >comers, and how do you prove that someone who finds the key found it >through this group effort? > >I have a suspicion many people would be tempted to fill in the RSA >challenge form and email it in themselves. $10,000 is a fair amount >of money. Once again, the advantages of an "uncoordinated search" should be mentioned. An uncoordinated search, in which people randomly search chunks of keyspace is obviously less efficient than a coordinated search where no part of the space is searched two or more times. However, an uncoordinated search is only less efficient by a small factor of two or three, with a 95% probability that the key will be found with an effort "only" 3 times greater than with a coordinated search. (The Poisson probability distribution is what's involved here, and the math is fairly easy to work out.) A 2-4x factor is significant, and may warrant a coordinated search. However, the various problems implicit in coordinated searches are factors, too. Also, an uncoordinated search solves the "prize" problem, as whomever finds the key makes the contact with RSADSI. One of the problems with a coordinated search, if the remaining keyspace to be doled out is publically announced, is that as the keyspace is searched and a key _not_ found, the remaining keyspace is increasingly more tempting for "independent searchers" to search. Sort of the way the odds on some lotteries actually become "acceptable" as the lottery pot grows. The organizer of the coordinated search must then, I surmise, keep the assignments secret and dole out keyspace securely. Having the prize money go to the finder of the key, as opposed to some artificial division between EFF, Gutenberg, etc., is also an incentive for people to contribute more CPU time. --Tim May >I know I would be tempted. I have been running Svend Olaf's DES code, >and my intention in the unlikely event that I hit the key had been to >claim the money. > >How does it hurt the publicity if the actual individual who finds the >key takes the money? Surely it adds excitement to the story? > >In fact it would provide people with a possibly more powerful >incentive to try to break the key in the first place -- in the hopes >of winning the prize! $10,000 means more to a lot of people than >opposing ITAR/EAR, and participating in a technical challenge. To >start with a lot of people who's CPUs we could be using don't even >know what ITAR/EAR are! > >> We hope to get a working system up and running ASAP. The fact alone >> that DES is seriously challenged (with a reasonable time frame) >> should give us quite some publicity (by the time the system is >> ready). If we can make use of that, we will have significantly more >> client than for the 48 bit key. > >I would have thought announcing that $10,000 can be won by running >easy to use windows software on a wide selection of newsgroups would >get you lots of CPUs! > >Adam >-- >print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> >)]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc` Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I 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, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: (fwd) DES challenge organisation
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thomas S <ths(a)fh28.fa.umist.ac.uk> writes: > [...] > > 5. The prize money will be split equally between Gutenberg and EFF. > There is a possibility of using part of it for stickers or > something similar, but don't count on it. Not a good idea. How can this be enforced? The RSADSI DES challenge is open to all comers, and how do you prove that someone who finds the key found it through this group effort? I have a suspicion many people would be tempted to fill in the RSA challenge form and email it in themselves. $10,000 is a fair amount of money. I know I would be tempted. I have been running Svend Olaf's DES code, and my intention in the unlikely event that I hit the key had been to claim the money. How does it hurt the publicity if the actual individual who finds the key takes the money? Surely it adds excitement to the story? In fact it would provide people with a possibly more powerful incentive to try to break the key in the first place -- in the hopes of winning the prize! $10,000 means more to a lot of people than opposing ITAR/EAR, and participating in a technical challenge. To start with a lot of people who's CPUs we could be using don't even know what ITAR/EAR are! > We hope to get a working system up and running ASAP. The fact alone > that DES is seriously challenged (with a reasonable time frame) > should give us quite some publicity (by the time the system is > ready). If we can make use of that, we will have significantly more > client than for the 48 bit key. I would have thought announcing that $10,000 can be won by running easy to use windows software on a wide selection of newsgroups would get you lots of CPUs! Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

1 0

Re: Excerpt on SPAM from Edupage, 11 February 1997
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Roy M. Silvernail wrote: > > Clearly, spammers who pay their readers to read their messages (and who > > do get them to read) will have a very high response rate. That may > > justify adding postage to their letters. > > It should also spur development of intelligent agents which can retrieve > this cash without human intervention. Spammers will doubtless alter > their pages to require more interaction to find the key to the cash. > Then the IA's will be improved. Then... remember the copy protection > wars? This isn't necessarily a negative point. > > > The advantages are obvious. The disadvantage is a possibility of someone > > stealing the money on the way, if the letters are not encrypted. > > Or that the money wasn't there in the first place (absent a trusted > signature system), or the key doesn't exist, or the wrong key is > offered, or the sender put the same e-dollar on all 60000 mails sie > sent and it's already been redeemed. Well, if the trusted party performs the encryption by both recipient's public key and the "retrieval key", the problem that you mention can be avoided. - Igor.

1 0

Re: More on digital postage
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:40 AM 2/15/97 -0600, snow wrote: >Mr. Bell wrote: >> At 03:31 AM 2/14/97 -0800, John C. Randolph wrote: >> >Tim may says: >> >>By the way, I think the "junk fax" and "junk phone call" laws are clearcut >> >>violations of the First Amendment. I understand why the herd _wants_ these >> >>laws, as it reduces the costs involved in replacing fax paper, running to >> >>the telephone only to find someone trying to sell something, etc., but it >> >>is quite clearly a prior restraint on speech, however well-intentioned. >> >I have to disagree here. The junk fax law is a restraint on unauthorised >> >use of property, i.e. *my* fax machine, *my* phone, etc. >> However, you connect that fax machine to a phone line, when you know full >> well that should it be enabled to do so, it will automatically pick up the >> phone when it "hears" a ring, and will print out a fax based on information >> provided. It isn't clear why sending a fax is any "wronger" than mailing >> junk mail, or making a (voice) phone call to somebody. > > That is a ridiculous argument. The door to my home is connected >to the street,m and I know full well that that makes it easy for anyone >to come wandering in to my home. Is it legal, just because I have my >home hooked to the street, for someone to come in and help themselves to >a beer out of my fridge? No, you're taking the issue to ridiculous extremes. That's why we have doors, and locks, etc. And, for that matter, "No trespassing" signs. But having an address, and a walkway, and a doorbell is generally considered if not explicit permission, but at least toleration of the idea that somebody can walk up and knock on the door, etc. Having a telephone with a number that anyone can dial is going to result in some level of intrusion. Having a fax machine is a similar issue, unless technology provides a way to block unwanted faxes. I certainly don't claim that we shouldn't try to do anything about these limitations! Quite the opposite, technology should be employed to protect privacy. But faxes are not fundamentally different than telephones, doorbells, and walkways: They facilitate interaction, even potentially undesirable interaction. > Nope. Sure I realize that they _can_, but that doesn't make it right, >and it doesn't make it legal. "Legal" is an arbirary concept; the opposite, "illegal," is merely what some bunch of brainless legislators get together and disapprove. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

Cryptanalysis
by Scott Auge 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Was wondering if anyone could help me with short explainations on the cryptanalysis of SKIPJACK and DES. If ya hit www.sauge.com/crypt you might get a better idea of what i'm trying to accomplish. Vague explanations are OK. Dont want long drawn out explainations on the implementation of an attack (source code, proofs, statistical analysis and the like), just a short explaination of the attack. Thanks all, Scott -- How has the government interfered in your life today?

2 1

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dave Hayes wrote: > > Ok. I'll "put up". > > If the cypherpunks will have me, -I'll- run the cypherpunks > > list. Those that know me know that I will *not* censor, moderate, or > > otherwise alter the content (other than the stuff majordomo does with > > "resend") of any messages to the list. > I think that it is a great idea. If you want to contribute to the > effort to keep the list, this is great. You could join the network of > other cypherpunks mailing lists. > There is a small list for discussing these networking issues, > cypherpunks-hosts(a)algebra.com. It is not for crypto-discussions per > se, but rather for discussing how we proceed with these lists. If I understood the last several hundred messages correctly, they have tried to make the point that the cypherpunks mailing list (unedited) was more ideal than a newsgroup. If this is what Dave is offering, I'm surprised if more people don't jump on it. Then again, they took their good ol' time jumping onto cypherpunks-unedited.

3 4

Re: More on digital postage
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:31 AM 2/14/97 -0800, John C. Randolph wrote: > >Tim may says: > >>By the way, I think the "junk fax" and "junk phone call" laws are clearcut >>violations of the First Amendment. I understand why the herd _wants_ these >>laws, as it reduces the costs involved in replacing fax paper, running to >>the telephone only to find someone trying to sell something, etc., but it >>is quite clearly a prior restraint on speech, however well-intentioned. > >I have to disagree here. The junk fax law is a restraint on unauthorised >use of property, i.e. *my* fax machine, *my* phone, etc. However, you connect that fax machine to a phone line, when you know full well that should it be enabled to do so, it will automatically pick up the phone when it "hears" a ring, and will print out a fax based on information provided. It isn't clear why sending a fax is any "wronger" than mailing junk mail, or making a (voice) phone call to somebody. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

5 5

Mirrors and replies-to
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Well, so far, I've got three cypherpunks mailboxes. One for sirius, one for algebra, and one for toad. It was interesting to me that I got stuff from the mirrors faster than toad until I remembered that the mirrors are wired to the unmoderated list at toad, and I'm still subscribed to the moderated list there. However, I would like it if the mirror operators would reinstantiate a feature of the original list for me. The reply-to field on the mirrors is currently set to cypherpunks(a)toad.com. On the original list, this was set to "sender", both to keep people from replying to the list unnecessarily (hah! :-)) but also to keep mail loops from forming. Mail loops could be a big problem, especially when you guys put together your neo-netnews mailring. (a little jyaism, that... :-)). Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by stupidity." -- Jerry Pournelle The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/

2 1

(fwd) DES challenge organisation
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An announcement forwarded to me (due to being on des-challenge mailing list I think) of proposed organisation for breaking RSADSI's DES challenge. Those interested in participating might wish to join the lists mentioned. In addition the list: des-challenge(a)muffin.org is for discussion of the DES challenge, and can be subscribed to by sending email to majordomo(a)muffin.org. -Adam ====================================================================== Subject: Announcement: Organisation Committee From: ths(a)rz.tu-ilmenau.de (Thomas S.) Date: 15 Feb 1997 18:27:40 +0000 Hi! The six volunteers who answered the call for a committee of management have got together to try to help 'steer' the DES challenge. We have considered the available options of proceeding, and we kindly ask everyone interested in this project to follow our proposals, to avoid waste of efforts. 1. The attempt to break the key will be coordinated. We chose this mainly because we can make a political statement. We don't want it to be a race for money. Each task will be handled by logically separate servers, some of which with be replicated and run as a hierachy. The protocol will use UDP, although there will be gateway servers for other protocols (such as HTTP, SMTP, FAX, etc). We hope that one of the first requests for a key range will be from parties interested in using a "random" approach -- we would appreciate some discussion on how large their ranges should be. 2. There will be one consistent WWW structure for the project. It does not have to managed by a single person. This structure should provide statistics, information for developers, interested users and perhaps even for the press. Several mirrors and translations will be started soon. The starting point is: http://www.des.crypto.org/ [fh28.fa.umist.ac.uk/des/] The url in brackets has to be used till we get the final subdomain. Likewise for the rest of this document. 3. The work of the different groups should be stated and coordinated on the page http://www.des.crypto.org/people.html. [fh28.fa.umist.ac.uk/des/people.html] This is to avoid uncoordinated parallel developmemt. Please write to Thomas S. <webmaster(a)mail.des.crypto.org> [webmaster(a)fh28.fa.umist.ac.uk] if you what want to be mentioned on this page. 3a. Several mailing lists have been set up for the different groups: des-coding for the actual DES routine and optimisation des-networking for the network code and protocol des-www for www contributions and mirrors des-pr for press contact, translations etc (like challenge-pr) des-misc :-) des-announce moderated, important information for users of the client List address: <list>@lists.des.crypto.org [@xtn.net] To subscribe, send mail to majordomo(a)lists.des.crypto.org [@xtn.net] with in the body of the message (several actions allowed): subscribe <list> Achives available (see homepage). 4. The actual DES routine has to be written and optimised. We ask developers to participate and coordinate their efforts using the mailing list des-coding. For obvious reasons, developers outside the USA are prefered, but "publication" of algorithms seems to be a legal way go get around. Please do not use this list to distribute crypto code. 5. The prize money will be split equally between Gutenberg and EFF. There is a possibility of using part of it for stickers or something similar, but don't count on it. We hope to get a working system up and running ASAP. The fact alone that DES is seriously challenged (with a reasonable time frame) should give us quite some publicity (by the time the system is ready). If we can make use of that, we will have significantly more client than for the 48 bit key. The organisation committee: Piete Brooks <Piete.Brooks(a)cl.cam.ac.uk> Jered Floyd <jered(a)mit.edu> Tim Newsome <drz(a)froody.bloke.com> Germano Caronni <caronni(a)tik.ee.ethz.ch> Thomas Roessler <Thomas.Roessler(a)sobolev.rhein.de> Thomas S. <ths(a)fh28.fa.umist.ac.uk>

7 7