December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Unsubscribe
by Michael Ogden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

After numerous attempts at cypherpunks-request(a)toad.com (but to no avail) Please unsubscribe me from this list.... Its been a hoot!

2 1

Re: Cypherpunks-related Cartoons
by jim＠bilbo.suite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Great idea! I'll keep an eye out. I have a "Calvin and Hobbes" taped to the wall next to my workstation that is perhaps remotely related to things Cypherpunk. It is more closely related to technology in general. Anyways, it goes something like this... [Calvin and Hobbes are walking through the woods] Calvin: "You know, Hobbes, it seems the only time most people go outside is to walk to their cars. "We have houses, electricity, plumbing, heat...Maybe we're so sheltered and comfortable that we've lost touch with the natural world and forgotten our place in it. Maybe we've lost our awe of nature. "That's why I want to ask you, as a tiger, a wild animal close to nature, what you think we're put on earth to do. What's our purpose in life? Why are we here?" Hobbes: [contemplates] "We're here to devour each other alive." Calvin: [stunned/blank look on his face, runs into his house] "Turn on the lights! Turn up the heat!" Jim_Miller(a)suite.com

1 0

unsubscribe me please
by Peter H. B. Frelinghuysen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

After trying cypherpunks-request(a)toad.com without success, I ask: please unsubscribe me from this list. Thank You

1 0

Re: Cypherpunks-related Cartoons
by jim＠bilbo.suite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here are a couple of software-related cartoons. They don't directly relate to things Cypherpunk, but Cypherpunks may still find them humorous. The origin of the first one is lost in the mist of time. My copy is a n-th generation photocopy of a photocopy. It goes like this: A woman and two children are standing beside a fresh grave site. It is pouring rain and they are huddled under an umbrella. A man standing next to them asks..."I know this may be an awkward time, but do you recall him ever mentioning source code?" The second cartoon is by Scott Adams and is dated 9-8-1992. It was distributed by United Feature Syndicate, Inc. I don't remember were I got my copy. It goes like this: [Three older-looking geeky engineer types are sitting at a table, presumably taking their lunch break.] Geek #1: When I started programming, we didn't have any of these sissy "Icons" and "Windows". All we had were zeros and ones -- and sometimes we didn't even have ones. I wrote an entire database program using only zeros. Geek #2 You had zeros? We had to use the letter "O". Jim_Miller(a)suite.com

1 0

QUERY: source of info about nat'l. health ID card/number
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please respond by direct email, not list mail (or both if you dig): Anyone know the/a/some source(s) of info about this national health ID card and number plan I'm hearing about? We need info on this, but I'm not sure where the latest version of this stuff is, or what stage it's reached (Hillary's fancy? Legislative action? Development and implementation?) Any info appreciated. -- Stanton McCandlish mech(a)eff.org 1:109/1103 EFF Online Activist & SysOp O P E N P L A T F O R M C R Y P T O P O L I C Y O N L I N E R I G H T S N E T W O R K I N G V I R T U A L C U L T U R E I N F O : M E M B E R S H I P @ E F F . O R G

1 0

Sun secure RPC
by Peter shipley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I remember a referance to Sun's secure RPC where the puplic key was "insecure" because the it did not use a large "key" (to few bits?). does anyone one have info on this? -Pete

1 0

PKP, DSS and USGVMT
by jim＠Tadpole.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Date: Mon, 13 Dec 1993 20:26:42 -0500 From: srctran(a)world.std.com (Gregory Aharonian) To: patents(a)world.std.com Subject: Software patent holds up $1 billion network buy A billion dollar DoD procurement for a new communications network maybe running into problems because of software patents dealing with encryption. The Defense Message System network will serve nearly one million users, and will replace a existing global Defense network. The project, being managed by the Air Force Standard Systems Center, will be a billion-dollar boost for the C/C++ COTS industry, with companies such as Microsoft, Lotus, ATT, and MCI planning to bid on the project. Unfortunately, the encryption technology planned for use in the DMS network is the subject of a long-running battle between the government and Public Key Partners (PKP). PKP claims that the proposed Digital Signature Standard (DSS) put forward by the National Institute of Standards (NIST) in 1991 infringes on public-key patents held by RSA Data Security and Prof. Claus Schnorr, both represented by PKP. Last summer the Commerce Department, after two years of unsuccessfully dealing with the legal challenges of PKP's software patents, said it would hand over an exclusive license for DSS to PKP. But over one hundred companies condemned the plan as illegal, and NIST backed off. The deal was also opposed by the European Community and the Canadian government. The deal would allow PKP to charge $1 for each public-key certificate issued using DSS. As of last week, the DoD was not prepared to say whether the procurement would be delayed by the patent problem. Negotiatons between PKP and the Commerce Department are still underway. For information, see an article in December 15, 1993 issue of Network World, page 4, on the patent issues, and an article in the November 1 edition of Federal Computer Week, page 2, for an article on the DMS procurement. ============================ Greg Aharonian Internet Patent News Service

1 0

Re: Sun secure RPC
by smb＠research.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I remember a referance to Sun's secure RPC where the puplic key was "insecure" because the it did not use a large "key" (to few bits?) . does anyone one have info on this? -Pete Yup. The modulus is too small, and the key exchange was cryptanalyze by LaMacchia and Odlyzko. See @article{nfscrack, author = {Brian A. LaMacchia and Andrew M. Odlyzko}, journal = {Designs, Codes, and Cryptography}, pages = {46--62}, title = {Computation of Discrete Logarithms in Prime Fields}, volume = {1}, year = {1991}, }

1 0

Re: USENET on a tape, and
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com N >unsure if there is enough evidence to connect you to the crime. Or, N >let's say that they believe you have had a long-involved role in N >inciting the breaking of a law. N >-nate But inciting the breaking of the law is "as legal as church on a Sunday." The President of the US (used to?) do(oes?) it all the time. Duncan Frissell --- WinQwk 2.0b#1165

1 0

Signing pictures -- how hard, how long?
by Alan (Miburi-san) Wexelblat 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At the Media Lab, some people have begun discussing the ease with which digital pictures can be altered. One suggested way of ameliorating the problem is to have the original photographer append something like a PGP signature to the picture. This doesn't stop the original photographer doctoring the picture before signing it, but it does stop (I think) people downstream from undetectably doctoring the pic. And if the subject of the photo wants to claim it's been doctored, there's a clearly-responsible person's signature attached. Anyone performing an operation which changed the bits (such as cropping) would have to generate a new signature associating his name with the set of alterations. With luck, newspapers and other information deliverers who care about their reputations would not accept unsigned pictures (just as they don't take pix today without the proper releases). The end user would not likely see the signatures (though they could be delivered and checked in software invisibly to the user), but people with reputations and liability on the line would. One associated question has to do with the soon-to-be-productized next generation of high-end movie cameras. These are all-digital at the source, so the question becomes: how hard would it be to build in digital signing at the source. In theory, you'd like every frame (probably 70 fps in the ultra-high end HDTV cameras) to be signed -- how long would that take? You'd like the signature hardware built into the camera -- what would that cost? Can we come up with a relatively reliable way for the camera operator to handshake with the camera so that it's *his* signature appended to each frame? Perhaps by using some hand-held plug-in module to carry the key or to generate an unique session key each time the camera is turned on? In my opinion we're never going to get a 100% unspoofable system. But I think that a pretty straightforward signature system can get us to a level of reliability where there is at least someone somewhere we can point the finger at as the potential source of doctoring. --Alan Wexelblat, Reality Hacker, Author, and Cyberspace Bard Media Lab - Advanced Human Interface Group wex(a)media.mit.edu Voice: 617-258-9168 Page: 617-945-1842 an53607(a)anon.penet.fi The belief that enhanced understanding will necessarily stir a nation to action is one of mankind's oldest illusions.

3 2