December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Why PGP 2.5 sucks...
by ER CRAMER 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

PGP 2.5 really sucks... Why? - You can't use your old secret key. So you have to build a new one. Why? I don't know. But PGP 2.5 don't recognize your pass phrase anymore. Maybe that new RSA algoritme is easier to crack. So they force everybody to create a new key... - A new RSA algorithm??? What's wrong with the old one??? - Why not bigger keys than 1024 bits??? - Why can't PGP 2.3a read PGP 2.6 messages anymore after 1 september 1994? The only good thing about 2.5 is that it's legal in de USA and Canada? But why doesn't someone gets a license for PGP 2.3a so that's a legal version too! (or is that inpossible???) ... If you outlaw Privacy, only the Outlaws will have Privacy! Eelco Cramer <crame001(a)hio.tem.nhl.nl> ------ --------------------------------------------------

2 1

unsibscribe
by Trace waz ere 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

unsuscribe udee128(a)bay.cc.kcl.ac.uk

1 0

Re: Why PGP 2.5 sucks...
by rjc＠gnu.ai.mit.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ray Cromwell writes: > PGP 2.5 really sucks... > > Why? > - You can't use your old secret key. So you have to build a new one. > Why? I don't know. But PGP 2.5 don't recognize your pass phrase anymore. > Maybe that new RSA algoritme is easier to crack. So they force everybody > to create a new key... Seems like it should be a simple task to code up a utility to convert old format keys to new ones. -Ray

1 0

Re: FBI decryption capability / MSDOS disk wipe question
by edgar＠spectrx.sbay.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Harry Bartholomew posted: At three sites around the world the hyperdsk.zip file (204,864 bytes) contains only the .exe without any documentation. This is apparently a disk cache with no encryption capabilities. It is usually listed under other names: HYPERDSK.ZIP DCTL 0 DELETED Use SPKT465S.ZIP HYDK420.ZIP TINS 237647 02-14-91 <15>Hyperdisk V4.20, Great 386 Disk Cache HYDK421.ZIP TINS 270730 05-19-91 <15>Latest Of The Greatest Of Disk Caches HYDK422.ZIP DCTL 0 DELETED Use SPKT465S.ZIP HYDK430.ZIP DCTL 0 DELETED Use SPKT465S.ZIP " " " FDUT 255036 12-02-91 HyperDisk V4.3 - The ultimate disk caching utility. And HyperKey V4.14. The shareware release hot from HyperBoard. " " " TINS 270024 12-11-91 <21>Latest Of The Greatest Of Disk Caches V4.30 HYPR460S.ZIP DCTL 0 DELETED Use SPKT465S.ZIP " " " FDUT 291803 07-07-92 HyperDisk, version 4.60 HyperDisk is the finest disk caching utility available. It increases your computer disk drive's performance using advanced features including: support for Conventional, Extended , and Expanded Memory usage; interrupt-driven I/O for both read and write caching; support for PC, XT, AT, 80386, and 80486 type computers; and compatability with all versions of DOS from 2.xx through 5.xx. SPKT465S.ZIP DCTL 400399 09-02-93 SpeedKit from HyperWare Version 4.65 Contains the shareware versions of the world famous HyperDisk, HyperKey and HyperScreen Utilities. New version has updates for XtraDrive, DoubleSpace, new features in HyperKey and HyeprScreen. Documentation and orderform included. Files: 19 Oldest: 8/12/93 Newest: 9/2/93 spkt465s.zip GARB 399508 09-02-xx <diskutil> Speedkit; Hyperdisk disk accelerator v4.65s " " " SIMT 399242 09-07-93 <dskutil> B HyperDisk disk cache w/HyperKey & HyperScreen Note availability of SPKT465S.ZIP at both GARBO and SIMTEL. In January Edgar W. Swank mentioned WIPIT100.ZIP to wipe all free space on your disk. Its free for personal use. I haven't found it though, with Archie searches. WIPIT100.ZIP EGLN 14897 11-21-93 WIPIT v1.00 8/2/93 Wipe all free space on your disk to prevent Undeleting files. Free for personal use. (Files: 4 Newest: 08-02-93 Oldest: 08-02-93) WIPIT100.ZIP is only available (AFIK) on the Eagle's Nest BBS at (408)223-9821. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLduBuN4nNf3ah8DHAQG2ugP+Oa+ewikX73wLniRmaAnNIkmH3/YRN3Ab cqea3WjxQForNx44BqcOfKC73sfBz8+cHjfEvfCtTkvpOcOmiCxWIIEGUUr6R593 2Lio0f5Hif1wCozcrOr0lEXJa2+GRj7GocZyJxTYYQIuHftOweDjcPnlTKfAH0at sG2ejx7MiI4= =a94p -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- edgar(a)spectrx.sbay.org (Edgar W. Swank) SPECTROX SYSTEMS +1.408.252.1005 Cupertino, Ca

1 0

Plee For Help
by r6788＠hopi.dtcc.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hello Fellow Cypherpunks, I need help compiling PGP on DG/UX Release 5.4R3.00 AViiON.. There is no target in the makefile that really fits the system here. I have consulted the sysadm here and he told me to try adding #defines into the source, like #define BSD_SOURCE #define BSD_FLAVOR #define SVR4_SOURCE #define BSD_TTY_FLAVOR I don't want to fudge up the executable, and this isn't working. Someone mentioned to me that i could try make portable. That did not work either. I have gotten it to compile an executable, but only after giving me several errors. I have a little knowledge of c, so i don't need a complete hand holding. If someone would extend a helping hand, i'd appreciate it. On a side note, i have gotten the sysadm here to agree to install PGP2.5, should i be able to compile it and i let him know i did it! He won't install 2.3a. ;<.. I'm using one of the crippled executables to sign this message. Thanks in advance, Joseph R. Rach. r6788(a)hopi.dtcc.edu CIS Student and U.S. Private Citizen. =-=PGP key available thru fingerd.=-= O yeah, almost forgot; Yes, we do have gcc... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.5 iQCVAgUBLdxpAHIt7G0u7ofRAQFN4gQAt+Kym1RRnbJdpTO6+CygDTX9ssw21u5r Qm/7GFlRVUhvumFtWNspAaTM3g/8mGm8gc7Z/fReVNZv5hBeBpShv31a8lO0N4Bt nJFLRq28BVA8tHTj5ysn2QwfGjgvP+5fuj7DP09H1gNs5EtyDQCPAu1aDm29JA5O 6zG6GCmPUSU= =kbJs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Sternlight and damages
by perry＠imsi.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sternlight claims people are violating copyright laws by posting his private email. I will point out that although this may be true, he would have to show damages to him in order to collect anything. From what I know, his financial position is not such that he can afford to pay lawyers for frivolous lawsuits. I suspect he can't do a thing. Feel free to tell him so. Perry

1 0

FWD: Re: David Sternlight's Slurs About Folks With "2.3a" Keys
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In article <evidenceCq3902.BGF(a)netcom.com> you write: >David Sternlight (strnlght(a)netcom.com) wrote: >: In article <199405191106.FAA01087(a)spot.colorado.edu>, >: Richard Johnson <alt.fan.david-sternlight.usenet(a)decwrl.dec.com> wrote: > >: By publishing a private e-mail, both beker and Johnson are in violation of >: my copyright in that message, since it was a private communication and no >: permission was given to republish. > >Actually, David, since you did not register your copyrighted material >with the U.S. Copyright Office before the alleged infringement (I don't >know for sure that you actually authored that work, and you can't prove >that you did because you didn't sign it using *pgp*!!!), you are limited >to recovering your actual damages (such as lost profits), which in my >estimation would be zero...... Moreover, the re-print here is probably >justified as fair use for purposes of comment and criticism... which is >exactly what seems to be occuring here. > >Anyway, you have a difficult burden of establishing that the document >that you claim to be yours is actually yours, as any number of other >people could also claim to have written it. > >Its a funny thing about the net... You can't be sure who wrote what... > >By the way, in your letter, you claim that you discovered a PGP key from >version 2.3a.... Now, how do you know that this was a PGP key? DId you >run it through PGP to verify that it was? Or are you just assuming that, >because it looks like a PGP public key, that it is??? > >: Thus beker has now committed a new violation of his netcom agreement, and >: Johnson shows he has bad judgement. What's more, by trying to make what >: should be a private matter, to be decided by netcom based on their own >: rules, into a public cause celebre, and by writing to netcom as Johnson did >: to intervene in a private matter, he has made the situation worse for beker, >: not better. > >We shall see... > >: Netcom is perfectly capable of telling me to go peddle my papers if I'm >: wrong. > >Please let us know when they do that, David. > > >-- >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >Evidence, Inc. | The Internet Cops are watching, >Evidence(a)Nowhere.Nil | aren't they? >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >"Have you ever had your phones tapped by the government? YOU WILL and >the company that'll bring it to you..... AT&T" >------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- 073BB885A786F666 nemo repente fuit turpissimus - potestas scientiae in usu est 6E6D4506F6EDBC17 quaere verum ad infinitum, loquitur sub rosa - wichtig!

1 0

Re: Patent infringement (fwd)
by gtoal＠an-teallach.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

: This is the argument Schiller's message on 2.6 foreshadowed. However, : there are some counterarguments you can make: : - It's not clear that RSADSI has actually said that merely posting a key with : the words "Version: 2.3a" in and of itself constitutes inducement or : conspiracy to infringe the patent. Schiller speculated that running a key : server which accepted pre-2.4 keys could represent contributory infringement : but I haven't seen any statements from Bidzos that agree with this, let : alone the stronger statement Sternlight is making. Excuse me folks - I think we're missing a big point here: there's no such crime as 'conspiracy to infringe' nor is it a civil offense. What PKP are talking about is agrravated damages - *if* you are *breaking* one of their patents, eg by *running* pgp, then because you are encouraging others to do so by, say, also offering a keyserver service, they can ask for larger damages because they'll say you're *flagrantly* violating their patent and encouraging others to do so. However, if you're *not* violating their patent, there's nothing they can do about the 'encouraging others to do so' part. Running a keyserver, as long as it doesn't run pgp to do its key management, is not infringing PKP's patents, and they can't do anything about it - it's a question of publishing and free speech. It's not even the more restricted commercial speech - keyservers aren't a business. I think if you read the MIT announcements closely you'll see what they say is compatible with this view. G

1 0

other stuff David Sternlight has posted
by Tom Allard 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Favorite posts from David Sternlight: ------- Forwarded Message Newsgroups: sci.crypt Date: Sun, 08 May 94 05:34:13 -0400 From: strnlght(a)netcom.com (David Sternlight) Subject: Re: Someone Get The Classified Docs and Post Them Please! [...] Something did snap, and it did so with the death of Richard Nixon. On thinking of his achievements, and the way he was savagely hounded by the left all his life (not without cause, but not deserving of the extreme demonizing he got), I decided it was time to stop pussy-footing around here, and start calling jerks, cowards, hoodlums, and defamers for what they were. [...] David ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Re: Restoring the list membership
by gtoal＠an-teallach.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

: I'll wait for two days in case anyone on this list has strong objections to : returning the membership to status quo ante. If not, I'll send the form letter. I think it was an excellent opportunity to cull the dead wood. How about instead of resubbing all 500+, you just send them all a mail telling them what happened and how to resub. That way we only get the interested ones back... G

3 2