December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

[anon1df3@nyx10.cs.du.edu: Re: PGP 2.5]
by dat＠ebt.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

|> Another RSAREF limitation is that it cannot cope with keys longer than |> 1024 bits. Projecting current progress in factoring, how long will 1024-bit keys be secure against something like NSA? Is it the case that by standarizing on 1024-bit keys for the forseeable future, are we merely providing a window of opportunity for cryptopunks which will work fine for awhile but which will slam shut forever once the NSA becomes able (as a result of vast computer power, if nothing else) to routinely factor numbers this large, maybe in about 2150 or so? Remember people thought RSA-129 would take a long time. Cypherpunks write code that will remain secure for a long, long time I hope. Standardizing on RSAREF might, in the very long run, eventually have the same crippling effect that standarizing on clipper could have in the short to intermediate term. If people become complacent about this limitation, it could become institutionalized. If everybody uses PGP 2.5 for the next hundred years, what happens then? If the public PGP depends on RSAREF whose evolution is controlled by RSA, and if eventually a new version comes out which is incompatible with the older versions, and for which source code isn't as readily available, and the world standardizes on it, and it isn't interoperable with older versions, then we lose control, even if we now distribute a version of PGP 2.5 with the key restriction removed. I would be happier if PGP 2.5 did not impose such a limit on key length. If we standardize on something with limitations, we have to remove them in the future. If we standarize on something without limitations, future generations don't have to worry about it. In addition to distributing crypto to the masses, we need to ensure that no infrastructure gets imposed which obviates our methods. I don't know if the 1024-bit key restriction will over time become an important limitation or not -- do you? A better question -- how long will it take? I don't think I'm being paranoid, I'm just curious about the details about what is known about just how hard factoring is, and how that corresponds to the exponential growth in technological capability, and where the crossover point lies for 1024-bit keys. Maybe I should just read the book instead of posting... (Naah!..) -- dat(a)ebt.com (David Taffs)

2 1

PGP 2.5 working on UNIX
by Carl Ellison 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Note -- I built it for my UNIX machine but I needed to edit the rsaref2 makefile in 3 places to specify gcc. cc barfed on the make. The instructions say to make your own directory, but you need to edit the makefile and run make in place in the rsaref2/install/unix directory or the pgp makefile won't find it. You should make rsaref2 first. - Carl P.S. I'll sign my new 1024 bit key with my old 1264 bit key later. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.5 iQCVAgUBLc7EflQXJENzYr45AQEiqAP/Wg4jq/u8636hMd/zmKS8opL683rKnL0a Jv+WVNIqOASyA9UYoAXegmmXDIohW1PjzudQ3SkZPxfhr9yLrz4h7KUZSowNAdlq XaVBJETumF60YYKPzjDLSj2j3z9yqC8HR4Vv5HtbEv/nEIM8RsFW03rIn4HcUiiO fCCA5K70ouc= =6i8v -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.5 mQCNAi3OxA8AAAEEALNdAXftavTBG2zHV7BEV59gntNlxtJYqfWIi2kTcFIgIPSj KlHleyi9s5dDcQbVNMzjRjF+z8TrICEn9Msy0vXB00WYRtw/7aH2WAZx+x8erOWR +yn1CTRLS/68IWB6Wc1x8hiPycMbiICAbSYjHC/ghq2mwCZO7VQXJENzYr45AAUR tC5DYXJsIEVsbGlzb24gMTAyNC1iaXQga2V5IDxjbWVAc3cuc3RyYXR1cy5jb20+ =tEQq -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

RE: C'punks list
by michaelrgn＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What has happened to the list?? My C'punks incoming mail atopped yesterday (5/8/94). I sent a "Who cypherpunks" command and my name is no longer there. There was only about six names that were returned. I've been lurking for a little over a month now and really enjoy the discussion. Where did everyone go??? Mciahel Ragan

2 1

reassuring press release
by Bradley W. Dolan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Date: Mon, 09 May 1994 18:54:08 -0400 (EDT) >From: Stanton McCandlish <mech(a)eff.org> >Subject: 05\03\94 - VOLUNTARY NATURE OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS SECURITY >INITIATIVE (fwd) >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: NIST 94-21 >May 3, 1994 >Contact: Anne Enright Shepherd VOLUNTARY NATURE OF > (301) 975-4858 TELECOMMUNICATIONS SECURITY > INITIATIVE STRESSED BY NIST > OFFICIAL IN TESTIMONY >clear," Kammer said. "This Administration does not seek >legislation to prohibit or in any way restrict the domestic use >of cryptography." ^^^^^^^^^^^^ !!!!!!!!

1 0

I am sorry I bothered you.
by lassie!jim%lassie＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am sorry to have bothered the group known as cyberpunks. Please forgive me, but I must go. There is a TV program about guns in America, I must watch this so I may have a good laff. They say you can buy a gun on the street anywhere. I doubt if I could here near Arizona State University (rated #1 party school by playboy magazine). But if an econimist would look at graphs for public assistance from the Fed and comparied it with crime rate per 1,000 citizens in an area he probly could find an area to purchase guns rather rapidly (he probly would not need to look at the crime figures, just public assistance). Freenzy like a shark. The newspapers do a survey to see what people are concerned about. They are concerned about crime. So they write articles about crime. People get more concerned about crime. So they write more articles 8 (that is supose to be sideways) Intresting to note, no one brags about the statistics involving police officers and violent gun related crime. Could it be that having a hand gun strapped to your belt deters crime? Or is it just the bullet proof vest. I know this is stupid second amendment talk, but it is only one away from cryptographies 1st amendment and 3 away from the 5th that should allow you to have any crypto your heart desires. After they strike down the right to protect your documents on your word processer, what next, torture for confessions? Well one thing for sure you probly won't have a gun to defend your freedom of speech or your freedom to assemble or any other freedom you can think of that can be taken away in the proclamation of national intrest. Sorry for bothering you. -- * Spelling errors are intentional and international * Jim Nalbandian netcomsv!lassie!jim%lassie(a)netcom.com Tempe, Arizona, USA N7SZS(a)K7BUC.AZ.US.NA No free man shall ever be de-barred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain there right to keep and bear arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government. <-------- Thomas Jefferson --

1 0

Re: 05\03\94 VOLUNTARY ... SECURITY INITIATIVE
by drzaphod＠brewmeister.xstablu.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> . . . meant to be used by both the government and > the private sector on a strictly voluntary, as-needed basis -- > and is not intended to be mandated in the future, a National > Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) official said today > in congressional testimony. I would have been impressed if they left out "intended." The above "testimony" is meaningless. How is NIST supposed to know what diabolical plans NSA/etc has in store for us. > But the increasing proliferation of encryption techniques > also is expected to make the law enforcement community's job more > difficult, he said, and the voluntary key escrow approach > provides a way for law enforcement authorities -- when legally > authorized -- to decode messages sent over telecommunications > systems using the key escrow technique. This is the same argument used for the Digital Telephony Bill. That's MANDATORY . . it won't work if it's voluntary. > . . . Companies can choose to use the system when > they need excellent security -- or they can use any other > encryption technologies available in the marketplace. Can companies believe the government's secret[obscure] crypto is safer than PGP or it's offspring? Why does the government feel the need to spend all our money and provide us with inferior encryption? ANSWERS: 1] They're lying to us. 2] They have too much money..and we trust them to print it? It's too bad people, in general, believe what they hear, not what is done. The Master Plan to hypnotize our nation [+the world?] into supporting what they have not a clue about continues . . . -- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- - DrZaphod #Don't Come Any Closer Or I'll Encrypt! - - [AC/DC] / [DnA][HP] #Xcitement thru Technology and Creativity - - [drzaphod(a)brewmeister.xstablu.com] [MindPolice Censored This Bit] - - 50 19 1C F3 5F 34 53 B7 B9 BB 7A 40 37 67 09 5B - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

1 0

This is an abstract from a talk at Cornell University...
by Peter Wayner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subject: Lecture-Peter Shor-Factoring in Poly time Date: Mon, 9 May 1994 02:23:57 GMT FACTORING IN POLYNOMIAL TIME ON A QUANTUM COMPUTER Peter Shor, AT&T Bell Labs Richard Feynman and others have challenged the traditional Turing machine model of computation. A new model of computation based on quantum mechanics has recently been proposed. It is too early to know whether quantum computers will be practical. However, it is shown that quantum computers can factor integers and compute discrete logarithms in polynomial time. Lecture Hall D (north end), Goldwin Smith 11:40am, Monday, May 9 ----------------- Any comments on the veracity?

2 1

MacPGP 2.5
by MWayne＠eworld.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone have any info on whether or not this new version will be available for Macs? How about for PowerPC Macs? Thanks --Mitch

1 0

Missed stuff
by Tommy the Tourist 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Sorry to be a pain. I just resubscribed after whatever it was that happened that caused the massive unsubscription. Anyway, I missed the start of the PGP 2.5 thread. If someone archived the messages between the unsubscription and now, I'd appreciate it they'd get in touch with me so I can get a hold of them. Well, except for the Nalbandian message maybe :-) Zeke -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLc7O2hVg/9j67wWxAQHSZgQAhW9bM3QA1GWjIt7+j1eXjh/fDxGHWq3h p8I2x3HnY5kSPU6/0N66Y+gUISHt7z/ojkZ7tadDgUjAMCeqM3eGPJDjoal1VdIJ 7/OEpsjFVcuHwpZp5qrNHjOd4GGcpixmU1/CY6+FPUUyNXmOak9HlqZ4KMWG/dx3 Gr0p5IKA5lI= =aZVk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------ To respond to the sender of this message, send mail to remailer(a)soda.berkeley.edu, starting your message with the following 7 lines: :: Response-Key: ideaclipper ====Encrypted-Sender-Begin==== MI@```$YS^P;+]AB?X9TW6\8WR:>P&2'9,7.YM5[DU*:IVOLYZ'LR#3R6]%Q. F!LKO;7PXSNM7K3\Q(-"OG(+>&OAJ66?'R7<U=C=-A$)S[(AIZ>L` ====Encrypted-Sender-End====

1 0

Re: Idiots
by Robert A. Hayden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Mon, 9 May 1994, Jim Nalbandian wrote: > >I consider this to be a threat and grounds for removal and notification > >of his service provider. As the owner of several mailing lists, this > >kind of childish behaviour can bring certain nodes to their knees, and > >without the max-posting protections of LISTSERV, majordomo will keep > >sending until it dies, killing toad.com in the process. > > Gee Bob, can't you take a joke?? Not when it will spam the net. This is about as funny as Green Card Lawyers, the Clipper Chip, and Janet "Flambe'" Reno. ____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden(a)krypton.mankato.msus.edu \ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=- \/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Political Correctness is \/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> P.C. for "Thought Police" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- (GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++ n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)

1 0