December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

the problem that destroyed PGP
by peace＠BIX.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Return-path: <peace(a)BIX.com> Received: by bix.com (CoSy3.31.1.50) id <9502112132.memo.28092(a)BIX.com>; Sat, 11 Feb 1995 21:32:20 -0500 (EST) From: peace(a)BIX.com Date: Sat, 11 Feb 95 21:32:20 EST To: cyperpunks(a)toad.com Message-ID: <9502112132.memo.28092(a)BIX.com> Subject: the problem that destroyed PGP So finding a KeyID is the problem that destroys PGP eh? Well I would just take that as the problem to solve, not a reason to throw the baby out with the bath water. All we need to do is design a distributed, hashed database. Should be a piece 'o cake, right? Let's see, first of all the problem is the receiver of a message who gets just the KeyID. First of all, the trusted keys should be expected to be local (in some webby sense). But lets assume that the key is new, not in our local cache. Now my scheme would put a net of keyservers that ALL know each other. The local environment puts in a request to its usual keyserver. That is the keyserver that typically has the keys that the receiver is likely to trust. Now it is certainly possible to imagine a case where a key is not in the receiver's expected server, so what's next. Well the keyserver knows ALL the other servers, right, so just copy the original receiver's request to all the other keyservers. If that gets to be too big, just build a real net where every keyserver is at most two hops away from any other one, then the intermediate servers that could not honor the request would forward it to all the servers it knew. I purposely propose that only two steps would ever be necessary to limit the explosion, but I see that as no real limitation, the rule could even be modified if there was really any need. Hey look, the net supports archie and a host of other non-structured search mechanisms. Why create a search hierarchy where such things are not natural. Why create a naming hierarchy where such things are not natural. By the way, the dockmaster.ncsc.mil note is a good example of a naming hierarchy that has nothing to do with the employment of the person. Anyone working in the security field can get an address there. And any member can get acm.org or ieee.org. But I can post from any of there different net addresses which do not even agree at the very most basic level. So why would my KeyID be naturally associated with any one of .net, .org or .com? Peace ..Tom

5 7

Re: Bernstein
by rishab＠dxm.ernet.in 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Peter F Cassidy <pcassidy(a)world.std.com>: > - I am a writer on assignment from the Economist writing about a > certain cryptographers' tussle with the State Department, a fellow who is > known around the beltway crypto-anarchy, privacy, > niceness-on-the-Internet advocacy crowds as Bernstein. I have the outline There are two of them in my archives: "D. J. Bernstein" (djb(a)silverton.berkeley.edu) at Berkeley who visited the list once; and E. Bernstein, the author of papers on quantum complexity along with U Vazirani. I've never heard of either of them tussling with the State Department. Apart from the name, though, several cryptographer/cypherpunks could fit the bill, from Phil Zimmerman of course to various people who've tried to extract ITAR clearance or FOIA requests. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Electric Dreams subscriptions and back issues, send a mail to rishab(a)arbornet.org with 'get help' as the message Subject. Rishab Aiyer Ghosh rishab(a)dxm.ernet.in rishab(a)arbornet.org Vox +91 11 6853410 Voxmail 3760335 H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA

1 0

Laws, Feds, & the Internet
by Richard F. Dutcher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following was in today's San Francisco Chronicle. BTW, quoting the entire article as I have done is probably a violation of "fair use" - but de minimis ... All under *current* law, folks. [hmmm -- encryption doesn't do much for exhibitionists and braggarts, does it? ;-] ============================== MAN JAILED FOR INTERNET MESSAGES Associated Press Detroit A college student was charged yesterday with posting computer messages describing the imaginary binding, rape, torture and murder of a woman who used to be in his Japanese class. "Torture is foreplay, rape is romance, snuff (killing) is climax," prosecutors say one of Jake Baker's messages read. The student, 20, was charged with the federal crime of transmitting a threat to injure. He was jailed pending a bond hearing today. Baker, who was suspended from the University of Michigan last week, told reporters he was within his rights to post the messages on the Internet. By posting the messages, he gave other Internet users access to them. If convicted, Baker could be sentenced to up to five years in prison. The name of the woman was not released. ================================== =================================== Rich Dutcher, San Francisco Greens P.O. Box 77005, San Francisco, California 94107 USA "That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves." Kim Stanley Robinson, "Green Mars" Greens, of course, only enslave plants - so weed-whackers work better than cops ... ====================================

2 1

Q: ref. for DNA used to solve math. network prob. (fwd)
by root 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Message-Id: <m0rdRDS-0005iFa(a)hip-hop.hh.sbay.org> > Date: Sat, 11 Feb 95 15:27 PST > From: jwgruber(a)aol.com (JWGruber) > Subject: Q: ref. for DNA used to solve math. network prob. > Designated-To: Internet Amateur Mathematics Society > > Hi - I am looking for a reference (newspaper or popular magazine) on a > recent article that described the use of DNA and genetic expression to > solve a complex mathematical problem (linear algebra-matrix systems I > believe) regarding a network of paths or routes between cities. Does > anyone have a reference on this work ? I would be greatly obliged if I > could receive a note on this. Thank you ! > John W. Gruber > Philadelhia College of Pharmacy & Science > JWGruber(a)aol.com > Only peripheraly related to crypto but has anyone got any info on this?

2 1

why pgp sucks
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Matt Blaze, quoting Greg Morgan, wrote: > >Doesn't having some kind of central record of keys go against > >the principle of PGP? > The only "principle" of which I'm aware (and particularly interested > in supporting) is that of having widely fielded, useful and strong > privacy and authentication tools that work properly and transparently. I think the centralization/decentralization confusion comes from PGP's decentralized approach to key generation and authentication, which has been hailed as a good thing. As long as folks can generate their own keys, sign their friends' keys, and upload their keys to servers at their own discretion, I can't see what would make a centralized or standardized distribution method harmful. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBLzv7I33YhjZY3fMNAQGVbAP/Sm8rXLFDXU4te0mBEhmi6CaAbvHTPqRZ kce6+auO1T/3ypEi0c0D2QCJ7mS3Xx/g/n42mHhJHzt5ClhuHlhDRyjOV2rGBpWX OElxuVFpcSIlUnnQ2cvju9k8cDtHnXN+crmmjUXxvqmUB371eyOZ6E140nxfxo2/ JqWBXLFPvpI= =AL3C -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

The NSA (Was Re: Factoring - State of the Art and Predictions )
by mpd＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Perry E. Metzger" <perry(a)imsi.com> writes: > On the other hand, the people in the black community have > the advantage that they can read anything that the open > community produces but not vice versa, and they have at > least a 15 year edge in knowledge about the design of > conventional systems, and who knows (we certainly have no > idea) how much of an edge in the modern cryptographic arena. Such a situation does not apply solely to the NSA. There are, for instance, secret lodges of French mystics who devote themselves to higher mathematics, absorb everything the open community produces, and rarely publish anything or draw attention to themselves. They solve problems, write secret manuscripts, put them on shelves, and have been doing this for centuries. Perhaps the ultimate factoring algorithm already exists within their walls. We would never know if it did, unless they chose to tell us. The NSA is very good at solving problems that require "acres of Crays". They are crack numerical analysts and algorithm designers. They also make nice block ciphers. I do not think, however, that they have deeply profound insights into the complexity of computation that exceed those of the University community, and certainly not by 15 years. > We don't know for sure if the NSA knew about Public Key > before the open community did. Certainly they knew of > differential cryptanalysis and similar techniques, and they > must know quite a lot that we don't. Rumour has it that the NSA nearly had a collective epileptic fit when they realized the implications of Public Key Cryptography. Yes, they did invent differential cryptanalysis and some other techniques before outsiders thought of them, but I'm unsure this implies some great cabal of hidden knowlege on their part. It is more likely a case of throwing research dollars at a problem which had not yet captured the interest of researchers outside the intelligence community. > Overall, I'd say that in the long run the open community is > going to catch up regardless of what the NSA likes. That > does not mean, however, that this is going to happen > particularly soon, or that they don't still know decades > more than we do. I think the NSA has lost its edge completely in the last decade, as cryptographic research in the open community has taken off. It is much the same sort of situation experienced by IBM, when they were slow to catch on to the paradigm shift created by distributed computing and workstations, and companies like Sun rose from nowhere to become major players. If the NSA were a corporation, they would be apologizing to their shareholders, restructuring, and trying to identify a market niche they could continue to be a player in. Since they are funded by government, we don't see them doing this, but it is absurd to suggest that they are still decades ahead of the rest of the world in basic research and technology. -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ mpd(a)netcom.com $ via Finger. $

1 0

Re: So, what's it all about?
by Network Security Observations 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In response to: > In article <199502100151.RAA25844(a)sleepy.retix.com>, you wrote: > > > > > I went to a UNIX trade show yesterday, and the main speaker was a > > > security type. He talked about "the cypherpunks" among other things. > > > He said you are really scary and dangerous and ... > > > But of course he had to also project this adress (cypherpunks(a)toad.com) > > > on the screen. > > can't imagine he is much of a security stud if he is that deluded. > > what was his name? > Lance or Vance something. Rottweiler, maybe? Can anybody tell me who this ignorant twit might be ? A correct name and an email address would help to educate him a bit. Bertil

1 0

Re: Our Ignorance....
by M00012＠kanga.stcloud.msus.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: "L. McCarthy" <lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu> > ... > BTW, with an eye to avoiding rehashes of old flamewars, this does *not* > constitute an invitation to scour the subscriber list for *.gov and *.mil and > announce the results. Consult the archives if in doubt on this point. > > -L. Futplex McCarthy Even so, my guess is that 1/4 to 1/3 of the subscribers to this list are interested government employees--though the most interested are not using addresses with .gov or .mil. Mike o

1 0

Re: Q: ref. for DNA used to solve math. network prob. (fwd)
by cactus＠seabsd.hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The Adleman paper is on the web (I put it up). The url is: http://www.hks.net/~cactus/doc/science/molecule_comp.html I never completed typing the perspectives article since an article appeared in Science that implied that Science doesn't consider it kosher to reprint their articles. As a member of the AAAS, I'm a bit appalled by this position but for the moment I've stopped any progress on entering Science articles into the Web. Enjoy, - - -- Todd Masco | "Let me get this straight. You're making a crypto toolkit, cactus(a)hks.net | and you're worried about it being _obscure_?" - Eric Hughes Cactus' Homepage - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBLz7VORNhgovrPB7dAQHd3gQAgXnpCEQRIxzO6VQSarHhK7nH9j4kncbi IlJawMbNnCf1RD9P3OD7art0w+180luFRJW9d93C5lq3Z36XhCOCgrcHrnGausCM D87DWCEYECMxjuMa362NC1u79UGQ5MThwb4Tl6/kttYzLYyRfCiJLRwexJs5B6mX 6PaKGuNQDV4= =Vgdm - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLz8OFCoZzwIn1bdtAQFC3QGA39rHlZeQgpkQwtsTv0JUEK4UyftbMqSK I8IHti1XiwbwSGgc6zzg5ga0ChRg0B8P =pXZq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Laws, Feds, & the Internet
by Richard F. Dutcher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Date: Fri, 10 Feb 1995 18:17:55 -0500 (EST) > From: Dave Harvey <warrior(a)infinet.com> > Subject: Re: Laws, Feds, & the Internet > To: "Richard F. Dutcher" <rfdutcher(a)igc.apc.org> > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > On Fri, 10 Feb 1995, Richard F. Dutcher wrote: > > > > > The following was in today's San Francisco Chronicle. BTW, quoting > > the entire article as I have done is probably a violation of "fair > > use" - but de minimis ... > > > > All under *current* law, folks. > > > > [hmmm -- encryption doesn't do much for exhibitionists and > > braggarts, does it? ;-] > > > > ============================== > [Article Deleted for the sake of Brevity] > And David Harvey wrote: > Now mind you, this kind of writing is demented, however, what ever > happened to fiction, free speech and such. At this rate, Steven Spielberg > should be in jail as well. I thought you had to prove intent, the saying > something or writing it is not bad as long as you didn't have the intent > or present capability to carry out such. BTW, I like all of Steven > Spielberg's writings and movies, and now HB830 from Oregon rears its head > and fangs. Did this guy intend to threaten or was it fiction? How would > they even know? > > Next thing you know they will limit all free speech. > They *do* have to prove intent -- as to how, that's what juries are for. BTW, he used her real name in the post, with no disclaimers about fiction. From what I have heard, if he had said the same thing in her presence, he could have been arrested for assault. So is saying something that would be actionable in a public space also actionable in a public cyberspace? I dunno, and neither does anyone else. But it's a well-established principle that a threat is a shout of "Fire!" in a crowded theater. The "Law" is very conservative. Not like Newt the Grinch, but like the Catholic Church -- make the least change necessary to accomodate the pressures. If you've got laws to cover telephones and cybercomm looks like telephones, get out the shoehorn. "Free" speech has always been a balancing act. The founders certainly didn't intend to provide "free" speech for blacks and women. Our current case law structure is, in large part, the results of the ACLU's 80-year struggle to prevent a repetition of the wholesale imprisonment of dissidents during WWI. Previously, people were *commonly* tossed in local hoosegows [sp?] at the whim of the local authorities for speaking out on anything [Quakers, Methodists, Baptists, temperance, free love, abolition, suffrage, pacifists, Romanists, Masons, anti-masons, anarchists, populists, free silver, etc. ad nauseum]. "They" have never liked "free" speech ... :-( Wei Dai has the right idea -- be a specialist, support other specialists. [But keep those cards and letters coming ... ;-] =================================== Rich Dutcher, San Francisco Greens P.O. Box 77005, San Francisco, California 94107 USA "That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves." Kim Stanley Robinson, "Green Mars" Greens, of course, only enslave plants - so weed-whackers work better than cops ... ====================================

2 1