December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Electronic Cash
by roy＠sendai.cybrspc.mn.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- A pointer to an interesting article in comp.society.privacy. The Message-ID is <comp-privacy5.25.1(a)cs.uwm.edu>. In comp.society.privacy, mckeever(a)cogsci.uwo.ca writes: > Anonymity is not a problem with digital cash. [...] > CONCLUSION: While the techology exists to mimick the anonymity of > physical cash, it is extremely UNWISE to ignore the ease with which > machines can be regulated by government. Consequently, it is unwise to > assume that the benefits of anonymity will continue if digital cash > replaces physical cash, and even if they did, somehow, continue, > taxation would still be quite easily done by regulating the possession > and use of the machines that transfer credits from one entity to > another. [ quote ends ] - -- Roy M. Silvernail -- roy(a)sendai.cybrspc.mn.org "I'm a family man, model citizen." -- Warren Zevon -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUBLlnqlBvikii9febJAQHbagQAjMIV50ik7jeXVO0CWIp4exdbVC3ZBVTu EFmOYU8gCOhj0EgbW47lnYynJHA9UKPx+BWFps8/XtDQr/mcfp5hvduUfRJ5cofG 5DMEaO7m3skjmUz8HWsWD+fgXuSQbsy36h6GqEOsrJxdmTeMRxdgf5hF9Zp+6acd 8EoMxhxCRn0= =M3YO -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

pgp -c,no initialization vector, possible bug, pgp 26ui
by 0x7CF5048D＠nowhere 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In pgp 2.6 UI When pgp is called with the -c switch, the routine idea_encryptfile in crypto.c is called from main in pgp.c. > status = idea_encryptfile( workfile, tempf, attempt_compression); >int idea_encryptfile(char *infile, char *outfile, > boolean attempt_compression) >{ > FILE *f; /* input file */ > FILE *g; /* output file */ > byte ideakey[16]; > struct hashedpw *hpw; Note that idea key is a 16 bytes. Now idea_encryptfile calls squish_and_idea_file in crypto.c with this 16 byte key. > /* Now compress the plaintext and encrypt it with IDEA... */ > squish_and_idea_file( ideakey, f, g, attempt_compression ); Now squish_and_idea_file calls idea_file in the module crypto.c with the same 16 byte key. >static int squish_and_idea_file(byte *ideakey, FILE *f, FILE *g, > boolean attempt_compression) >{

1 0

Re: In Search of Genuine DigiCash
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:25 PM 8/22/94 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >Anonymity is what gives digital cash it's raison >d'etre, it's technological advantages over conventional schemes. I'll try to to come at this from another tack. Cryptography gives anonymity. Anononymity reduces the overhead. The reduced overhead should make digital cash more economically efficient than on-line systems like NetBank, or credit-cards or much of anything else, at the moment. The economic efficiency is what may make digitial cash economical as a way to provide liquidity for internet commerce. The major selling point is *not* privacy. The major selling point is economic efficiency. >If anonymity, untraceability, and other "Chaumian" notions are only >seen as peripheral side effects, then we already _have_ "digital cash" >in the encrypted credit card systems some folks are already offering. They are peripheral side effects. They also are the very things that make digital cash a more efficient medium of exchange. They are not necessary and sufficient conditions for the adoption of digital cash for the very same reasons you outlined above. Privacy is like flight. It's cool. It's literally marvelous. But flight also gives you speed, and speed is what sells flight as a usable technology to most people. Is that a better explaination? >Without the technological approach to untraceability and anonymity, >all we have is the usual "trust". Granted, credit card numbers ought >not to be sent over unsecured channels, but fixing that is easy (with >end-to-end encryption). Trust-based systems are not the foundation for >a free society most of us are seeking. Printing is a faster way to transcribe information than copying a book by hand. A secondary benefit of printing is that improves information flow through a culture. A consequence is increased education, which gives you an enlightment ethic and eventually Jeffersonian democacy. I think we're looking at the elephant from opposite ends here, Tim. You seem to be holding the trunk, I believe... >"Digidollar" was one of the many names coined by folks on this list, >along with Cypherbucks, Digimarks, etc. Ah. How grateful I am not to be burdened with its parentage... Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) "There is no difference between someone Shipwright Development Corporation who eats too little and sees Heaven and 44 Farquhar Street someone who drinks too much and sees Boston, MA 02331 USA snakes." -- Bertrand Russell (617) 323-7923

2 1

RE: in search of real digital cash
by Brian D Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Peter Wayner adds; >Real bankers may be well ahead of everyone on this list. I'm told >that Citibank has some very intriguing work pending at the patent >office. It's for digital cash. >-Peter Wayner Ameritech/Citibank is running a home banking system right now. You can buy a display phone that accepts a Citibank smartcard and gives you complete access to your accounts, it functions just like an ATM, except you can't currently deposit and withdraw. Digicash is rumoured to be forthcomming. Also as part of the startup, the white pages are available. The phones are made by Philips, I'm still trying to track down the exact nature of the smart cards encryption, although I was told it was "Standard bank encryption." I was in charge of installation for this project. I'll keep everyone informed. Brian Williams Extropian Cypherpatriot "Cryptocosmology: Sufficently advanced communication is indistinguishable from noise." --Steve Witham "Have you ever had your phones tapped by the government? YOU WILL and the company that'll bring it to you.... AT&T" --James Speth

1 0

Forward/PATNEWS: Senate Bill 2272 - Prior use rights against infringement (fwd
by Harry S. Hawk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

a conscious being, Gregory Aharonian wrote: > What follows is another Senate Bill, 2272, this one dealing with prior > rights and reexamination. Thanks to Keith Stephens for sending it to me. > It seems to give people who have used a device before it was patented > exemption from infringement. Why a separate bill is needed for such rights > is puzzling, since anyone sued for infringement can prove such prior use in > public can therefore undermine the validity of the patent. This could be part > of the first-to-file movement. Any thoughts? > Greg Aharonian > Internet Patent News Service > ==================== > 103RD CONGRESS; 2ND SESSION > IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES > AS INTRODUCED IN THE SENATE > S. 2272 > A BILL > To amend chapter 28 of title 35, United States Code, to provide a defense > to patent infringement based on prior use by certain persons, and for > other purposes. > DATE OF INTRODUCTION: JULY 1, 1994 > DATE OF VERSION: JULY 5, 1994 -- VERSION: 1 > SPONSOR(S): > Mr. DECONCINI (for himself and Mr. BIDEN) introduced the following bill; > which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary > TEXT: > A BILL > To amend chapter 28 of title 35, United States Code, to provide a defense > to patent infringement based on prior use by certain persons, and for > other purposes. > * Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United* > *States of America in Congress assembled, > SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. > This Act may be cited as the "Patent Prior User Rights Act of 1994". > SEC. 2. DEFENSE TO PATENT INFRINGEMENT BASED ON PRIOR USE. > (a) IN GENERAL.-CHAPTER 28 OF TITLE 35, UNITED STATES CODE, IS AMENDED > BY ADDING AT THE END THEREOF THE FOLLOWING NEW SECTION: > "273. Rights based on prior use; defense to infringement > "(a) DEFINITIONS.-FOR PURPOSES OF THIS SECTION, THE TERM- > "(1) 'COMMERCIALLY USED' MEANS THE USE IN INTERSTATE OR INTRASTATE > COMMERCE, INCLUDING THE USE OF PROCESSES, EQUIPMENT, TOOLING, AND > INTERMEDIATE MATERIALS IN THE DESIGN, TESTING OR PRODUCTION OF > COMMERCIAL PRODUCTS WHETHER OR NOT SUCH PROCESSES, EQUIPMENT, > TOOLING, AND INTERMEDIATE MATERIALS ARE NORMALLY ACCESSIBLE, > AVAILABLE, OR OTHERWISE KNOWN TO THE PUBLIC; > "(2) 'EFFECTIVE AND SERIOUS PREPARATION' MEANS THAT A PERSON, IN > THE UNITED STATES, HAS- > "(A) REDUCED TO PRACTICE THE SUBJECT MATTER FOR WHICH RIGHTS > BASED ON PRIOR USE ARE CLAIMED; AND > "(B) MADE SERIOUS PLANS, AND A SUBSTANTIAL INVESTMENT OR MUCH > OF THE INVESTMENT NECESSARY FOR THE SUBJECT MATTER TO BE > COMMERCIALLY USED; AND > "(3) 'CRITICAL DATE' MEANS THE FILING DATE OR THE PRIORITY DATE, > WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST, OF THE APPLICATION FOR PATENT. > "(B) IN GENERAL.-A PERSON SHALL NOT BE LIABLE AS AN INFRINGER UNDER A > PATENT GRANTED TO ANOTHER WITH RESPECT TO ANY SUBJECT MATTER CLAIMED IN > THE PATENT THAT SUCH PERSON HAD, ACTING IN GOOD FAITH, COMMERCIALLY USED > IN THE UNITED STATES OR MADE EFFECTIVE AND SERIOUS PREPARATION THEREFOR > IN THE UNITED STATES, BEFORE THE CRITICAL DATE. > "(C) LIMITATION OF DEFENSE.-SUBJECT TO SUBSECTION (D), RIGHTS BASED ON > PRIOR USE UNDER THIS SECTION EXTEND ONLY TO THE CLAIMED INVENTION THAT > THE PERSON CLAIMING RIGHTS BASED ON PRIOR USE WAS IN POSSESSION OF PRIOR > TO THE CRITICAL DATE. > "(D) CERTAIN VARIATIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS NOT AN INFRINGEMENT.-THE > RIGHTS BASED ON PRIOR USE UNDER THIS SECTION SHALL INCLUDE THE RIGHT TO > MAKE AND USE VARIATIONS OR IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING VARIATIONS IN THE > QUANTITY OR VOLUME OF SUCH USE. SUCH VARIATIONS OR IMPROVEMENTS MAY NOT > INFRINGE ADDITIONAL CLAIMS OF THE PATENT. > "(E) QUALIFICATIONS.-(1) THE RIGHTS BASED ON PRIOR USE UNDER THIS > SECTION ARE PERSONAL AND SHALL NOT BE LICENSED OR ASSIGNED OR TRANSFERRED > TO ANOTHER EXCEPT IN CONNECTION WITH THE ASSIGNMENT OR TRANSFER OF THE > ENTIRE BUSINESS OR ENTERPRISE TO WHICH THE RIGHTS RELATE. > "(2) A PERSON MAY NOT CLAIM RIGHTS BASED ON PRIOR USE UNDER THIS > SECTION IF THE ACTIVITY UNDER WHICH SUCH PERSON CLAIMS THE RIGHTS WAS- > "(A) BASED ON INFORMATION OBTAINED OR DERIVED FROM THE PATENTEE OR > THOSE IN PRIVITY WITH THE PATENTEE; OR > "(B) ABANDONED ON OR AFTER THE CRITICAL DATE, EXCEPT THAT FOR > ABANDONMENT WHICH OCCURS AFTER THE CRITICAL DATE, RIGHTS BASED ON > PRIOR USE MAY BE USED AS A DEFENSE TO INFRINGEMENT FOR THAT PERIOD OF > ACTIVITY WHICH OCCURRED PRIOR TO ABANDONMENT IF SUCH ACTIVITY WOULD > OTHERWISE, IN THE ABSENCE OF ABANDONMENT, HAVE BEEN ALLOWED UNDER > THIS SECTION. > "(3) THE RIGHTS BASED ON PRIOR USE UNDER THIS SECTION ARE NOT A GENERAL > LICENSE UNDER ALL CLAIMS OF THE PATENT, BUT ARE RESTRICTED IN SCOPE TO > COVER ONLY THAT SUBJECT MATTER CLAIMED IN THE PATENT THAT HAS BEEN > COMMERCIALLY USED, OR FOR WHICH THERE HAS BEEN EFFECTIVE AND SERIOUS > PREPARATION, IN THE UNITED STATES, BEFORE THE CRITICAL DATE. > "(F) BURDEN OF PROOF.-In any action in which a person claims a defense > to infringement under this section the burden of proof for establishing > the defense shall be on the person claiming rights based on prior use.". > (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.-THE TABLE OF SECTIONS FOR > CHAPTER 28 OF TITLE 35, UNITED STATES CODE, IS AMENDED BY ADDING AT THE > END THEREOF THE FOLLOWING: > "273. Rights based on prior use; defense to infringement.". > SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. > The provisions of this Act and the amendments made by this Act shall > take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act. -- Harry S. Hawk habs(a)extropy.org Electronic Communications Officer, Extropy Institute Inc. The Extropians Mailing List, Since 1991

1 0

any documents about crypto history online?
by Tomaz Borstnar 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello! Are there any sources of crypto history on Internet (reachable via mail, ftp, www, etc)? Thanks in advance. Tomaz

2 2

Re: your mail
by Philippe Nave 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > On Fri, 19 Aug 1994 mogsie(a)VNET.IBM.COM wrote: > > > Hi, guys| > > > > I just received my T-shirt as a birthday-gift from my brother| > > > > Or is this just a fraud...? > > > > Hey, yer lucky - my check cleared some time ago and I have yet to get the > shirt. Sure wish I still had the email address of the shirt-source (mea > culpa for not saving it where I could find it...) > > > > -NetSurfer > The e-mail address is : cvoid(a)netcom.com I got my shirt quite a while back; drop them a note and see what's up. [Pardon the 'reply all'; Microsloth Mail never gives the right address for cypherpunks postings..... what a piece of s*** ]

1 0

MIT Fascism
by frissell＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>True enough. Most of our rules have been bundled together. Either you >accept all of them or you walk away. So Tim, if you don't like the FBI >monitoring all of your communications and requiring you to give them copies >of all your secret keys, why don't you just leave? [or are you planing to >do that?] > >JWS So MIT=FBI? I knew it was just another TLA. The fire fights on the Quad must be exciting. How many "citizens" *did* MIT security kill last year? DCF ************************************************************************* ATMs, Contracting Out, Digital Switching, Downsizing, EDI, Fax, Fedex, Home Workers, Internet, Just In Time, Leasing, Mail Receiving, Phone Cards, Quants, Securitization, Temping, Voice Mail.

2 1

Re: Nuclear Weapons Material
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by perry(a)imsi.com ("Perry E. Metzger") on Tue, 23 Aug 9:18 AM >This is sheer ignorance. Hey, that's what commercializing the national security treasure is all about. Ignorance is essential for the market in nuclear "terrorism". The staid NY Times headlined a summary of this topic with "Call 1-800-TERROR". The unknown threat is the weapon. Intelligence is the magic shield. The National Resources Defense Council pointed out in an execellent series on nuclear weapons a few years back that it is impossible to make an accurate count of nuclear devices because every country dissembles even while leaking data to sow fear. Even now, says NRDC, the need is for a reliable way to count so the fictitious can be separated from the real. Lack of precision, ignorance, thank you Perry, helps market fake as well as real nuclear material, just like any other market-driven exotic product (supercomputers?). Recent reports describe the Russian nuclear materials managers proffering their real and Potemkin cache for buy-out to the most gullible deep-pockets, governments. And so goes pumping this lucrative market, and its concomitant market of intelligence, now commercial where once affairs of state. More national security legislation, more powerful computers, more money for salesmen (er, agents). Ignorance drives this market, always has; starting some forty years ago with George Kennan's lurid 'X' essay on containment. Jim Dixon, help out with gritty facts. John

1 0

Nuclear Weapons Material
by iqg1550＠acf4.NYU.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Let's all rejoice at the birth of the latest member of The Horsemen of The Criminal Apocalypse -- The Nuclear Weapons Material Smuggler. I'm sure his four siblings will make plenty of room for their baby brother.

8 8