December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Clipper Chips in video descramblers
by koontzd＠lrcs.loral.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Recently someone posted reference to GI (General Instruments) getting authority to use Clipper chips in descramblers. One wonders about motivation on their part. ITAR already exempts the use of crypto in video descramblers where the crypto cannot be used for other purposes. DES is already used in descramblers such as the Video Cypher II, and can be exported under commodity jurisdiction. It is unlikely that anyone is going to spend the money to break DES keys and redistribute pirate authorization. The chances of discovery are too large. So, what is their motivation?

2 1

RE: Cyber PsyOps (Re: Shot)
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Jeff Davis "Psychological Warfare is duofold. It harrases the enemy, and hopefully wins the hearts and minds of the population." And then all you have to do is maintain your control over the situation. Once you have persuaded everyone to come over to your psychological point of view and have won their sympathies, all you have to do is leave them to their own imagination and they will, like "herds", self-regulate and organize into a new paradigm of confluence according to the tribal provisions written into the Constitution by Thomas Jefferson, thus giving weight to progressive theory. Then for sure you would have a society based on consensual normalities, the horde for whom you would have prepared the way: aware, informed, and actively participating in your aim. Definitely, this would prove that Marbury v. Madison (1803) was a *not* a fuck up. The Libertarian platform would not reverse that decision, because the Constitution has provided amending provisions, and we can always rectify the errors of shortsightedness. I mean, the FOIA may be useless, but we *could* always sit here and read the damn thing. Psychological Warfare is truly the only way to compete with the NSA on this issue. Blanc

1 0

MacPGP and AOL(again)
by fhalper＠pilot.njin.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have figure out a way to distribute MacPGP on AOL. I uploaded a listing of where to get MacPGP and in the file description I said that I would e-mail individuals that wanted MacPGP but didn't have Internet access, along with sprea ding the word around. I will only have to mail it originally to myself and then forward it to others as they request it. Any comments or suggestions are welcome. Reuben Halper Montclair High~r MyPublicKey.asc

1 0

encryption evaluater software
by Sheedy, E.C.C. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>July 10, 1997 > >---------- > > >Nikkei English News via Individual Inc. : (Nikkei Industrial Daily, July 8, >1997) > >Mitsubishi Electric Corp. said it has developed a software program which >can be used to evaluate the security of various symmetric-key encryption >algorithms, where the sender and recipient share the same key. > >The program analyzes a given encryption technology and displays the amount >of computing power required to deduce the key and decrypt the message. > >Secure and practical data encryption is a necessary technology for the >popularization of electronic money and electronic commerce. Mitsubishi's >program could end up becoming an index by which to objectively evaluate the >many new symmetric-key encryption methods being developed. > >The software combines the differential decryption method developed by >Israeli encryption expert Adi Shamir with Mitsubishi's proprietary linear >decryption method. By attempting to deduce the key with simple >approximations of the encryption algorithm, the program determines the >minimal volume of computations needed to crack the code, and also shows how >long the key should be in order to make decryption nearly impossible. >Mitsubishi said it has also finished development of a software program >which uncovers the key based on the pattern of random numbers generated in >the course of encrypting a message. >The next step for the company is to combine all three decryption methods >into a comprehensive program for evaluation. Working with support from the >Ministry of International Trade and Industry, the company hopes to finish >and publicize its program by next spring, providing it free of charge to >users. (More) ________________________________ kpn research E.C.C. Sheedy n m m m m m n________________________ Security & Card systems P.O. Box 15000 Telephone +31 50 582 17 92 9700 CD Groningen Telefax +31 50 312 24 15 The Netherlands e-mail e.c.c.sheedy(a)research.kpn.com ________________________________________________________________

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Earlier, somebody indicated that large primes of the form 2^(2^n)+1 exist... actually, it is conjectured that beginning with F5, all are composite. This person is probably confusing Fermat numbers with Mersenne numbers (see my earlier post) - large Mersenne primes exist, but not all Mersenne numbers are primes. Also, it was suggested that 2^128+1 is prime; this is false. You can almost do the calculation by hand using Fermat's Little Theorem. But with Mathematica: PowerMod[3, 2^128, 2^128+1] = 47511664169441434718291075092691853899 This is not 1 so 2^128+1 is definitely not prime. > The key property of them is if n is a Carmichael number and n=p*q*r, > then (p-1), (q-1), and (r-1) divide (n-1). > I wonder if Carmichael numbers always have some small factors. Well, many Carmichael numbers do have small factors, but not necessarily. If you derive the formuals for creating Carmichael numbers, you can use them to create Carmichael numbers with prime factors, arbitrarily large if your patience is willing. For example (with just a few minutes of Mathematica time) p = 600035641 q = 1200071281 r = 1800106921 n = 1296230964879005767193383441 p,q,r are prime n is a Carmichael number And incidentally, Carmichael numbers can have more than three prime factors, for instance 7 * 13 * 19 * 37, the smallest Carmichael number with four. > I should point out that the standard argument that picking 'k' > different values for 'a' and then calculating the probability as > (1/2)^k is fallacious. This would be true if the probabilities were > independent, but they aren't. There was a paper on this about five > years ago whose awareness has not been yet widespread. I no longer > have the reference. Well, for our purposes, we only care if the probability is lower or higher than (1/2)^k. Maybe you can be more certain than (1/2)^k in which case you are even happier. So this is "fallacious" because the probabilities aren't independent... so, what, are we talking larger than (1/2)^k or smaller? If smaller, then (1/2)^k is an easy to calculate upper bound. Earlier, I said: >> Failure depends on how many iterations you perform (n iterations = >> 2^-n chance of failure) and the values of the base you choose. >As I pointed out before, this probability is not correct. The trials >are not independent, so you cannot just multiply them together. Okay, this paper you keep referencing - does it apply to primality testing based on pseudoprimes (converse of Fermat's Little Theorem), or other methods, such as Miller-Rabin? The above passage (the double quoted one) applies specifically to Miller-Rabin, a test which has no "bad" inputs - e.g. there exist numbers which will always pass pseudoprime testing, but there do not exist numbers which always pass Miller-Rabin. For M-R, the chance of failure depends on the number of iterations. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLar5AYOA7OpLWtYzAQEyLQP/Wb6m+S0pBQrkqPVrbUgkLCgoT5fmLuKC +0zZ6plve65CuUSalI//L+kZmfaf2WiJnAow1V58i7YJQwMKnds3KomZKbMMpzzb Y3wbQvuNc+T0kSi7uMeJG0vuzgwjgCYzAI0Xqv2i7hkMN1wejqax8tSK0ZKualrr SEJKeTKmBvA= =RwAS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

number theory
by rperkins-remailer＠nyx.cs.du.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > I should point out that the standard argument that picking 'k' > different values for 'a' and then calculating the probability as > (1/2)^k is fallacious. This would be true if the probabilities were > independent, but they aren't. There was a paper on this about five > years ago whose awareness has not been yet widespread. I no longer > have the reference. Okay, my memory has been jogged... is this a paper by Pomerance, "On the distribution of pseudoprimes"? He gave more precise estimates for the number of base-2 pseudoprimes. With his more precise estimates, the chance of a 100 digit number passing the base-2 pseudoprime test is about 1/10^13... I think his work applies only to base-2 pseudoprimes, so my statement concerning the error rate of Miller-Rabin is still correct: for s iterations, the chance of failure is 2^-s. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCUAgUBLar8xIOA7OpLWtYzAQEAmgP2NQx7a3woaZMgT5CeqOFrhqyRcYt3mAPd 9bnf+f19E4Il42e0xw9vQjOMyowB/IkATQf+//ADIFxhE9p+2MOpD8eDr9saGYOV bVwV2/bWtzsHqjsbWRH27/5lEwFXerGfJNSc1ITkZFwp1QwpzmVvn6gkOZ2lf0AJ /q3QneS7iw== =2XH+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: alias in phone book
by dmandl＠lehman.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: hughes(a)ah.com (Eric Hughes) > > >A professor of communications has brought up the fact that it is illegal > >to use a pseudo in the white pages of the phone book. Is this the case? > > I would suggest first, to ask this professor to make a legal citation, > and if one is not forthcoming, to ask for a retraction of the claim. > > Eric It's definitely false, at least here in NYC. A well-known alternative to having an unlisted phone number (a privilege that the phone company charges extra for, the crooks) is to have your phone listed under a different name. So, if I'm listed in the phone book as "Nick Drake," I'm still listed, and so I don't get charged for being unlisted. However, anyone looking for D. Mandl in the phone book won't find me, so I'm _effectively_ unlisted. Strange but true. --Dave.

1 0

Alias in phone book
by jimn8＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I doubt it's illegal to use an alias for the white pages. Pac Bell listed me as "Spaceman Spiff" in the '87 or '88 Palo Alto white pages. Only a few people bothered to call and see if there was "really" a Spaceman Spiff at my number :) The reasons for the strange name were: I didn't want to pay for an unlisted number, and Spaceman Spiff was my pseudonym on a BBS that discouraged use of real names. Of course the law may have changed; Pac Bell may have let my request slide by accident; I'm not a lawyer etc. Just supplying a point of information on the subject, - Jim Nitchals (jimn8(a)netcom.com)

1 0

Aliases (general case)
by dwomack＠runner.utsa.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Actually, it is legal to use an alias for any number of things, including the phone book, *_so long as the purpose is not to defraud_*; thus, using Mother Teresa Charities might be so construed, while using Sam Jones probably would not be. There are prohibitions against using false ID...driver's lic., passport, and so forth...but not against using an alias. This is all after consultation with my attorney... As a side note, it is possible in Texas to file an "assumed name" at the courthouse of the county(ies) wherein you plan to do business...costs about $15, including the notary fees, and lasts 10 years. You can have almost anything for a name....and what would be more natural than having your new "business name" in the phone book? Nice, legal...and cheap (except a business line is a bit more expensive). Can this be done in other states? Regards, Dave

2 1

Keay's story (hitting the street as we speak)
by sfexaminer＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Posted to relevant usenet groups: This story will appear on the front page of the San Francisco Examiner today (4/12/94) in the 3-star and later editions. Keay Davidson is writing a follow-up story for tomorrow: if you were involved or can offer other assistance, please call (415) 777-7793 collect or e-mail sfexaminer(a)aol.com. Hackers retaliate by leaking manual By Keay Davidson` EXAMINER SCIENCE WRITER` Computer hackers waging what they say is a war against government electronic snooping have distributed over international computer networks a copy of the supersecret U.S. National Security Agency's employee manual. The NSA manual, which was sent to dozens of news organizations Tuesday, was distributed ""to embarrass the NSA'' and prove that even the U.S. government's most covert agency can't keep documents secret, said Grady Ward, a software designer from Arcata in Humboldt County. Ward said the document initially appeared on a Texas-based hackers network late last week, and he helped redistribute it over other electronic networks. ""The intent is to embarrass the NSA and demonstrate that even their own security manual can be distributed,'' Ward said. NSA officials said the document is an unclassified employee handbook. Anyone seeking a copy of it would need to file a Freedom of Information Act request, said NSA spokeswoman Judi Emmel. The identity of the person who initially obtained the document and how it was obtained was not clear. The manual warns employees to safeguard the document: ""While you may take this handbook home for further study, remember that is does contain "FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY' information which should be protected. ... Appropriate administrative action will be taken to determine responsibility and to apply corrective and/or disciplinary measures in cases of unauthorized disclosure.

1 0