December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Crypto Anarchist Manifesto
by jburrell＠crl.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>And is it possible to obtain a copy of your 1988 "Crypto Anarchist Manifesto."? >Sounds like fun. FTP Site? I found it on soda.csua.berkeley.edu last night. I don't think it was there before. Look for it in /pub/cypherpunks/rants/. -- Jason Burrell <jburrell(a)crl.com> Finger for PGP public key. There is no such thing as limited censorship. If you want your freedom, fight now. Don't wait until you've lost it.

2 1

Re: PRIVACY REGULATIONS
by Lile Elam 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just always remember that the cop has the gun, I don't. -lile

1 0

Re: CONTROL FREAKS
by frissell＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I think the point isn't that totalitarian states won't last: we know >that. The point is that those trying to establish a totalitarian >state can do a hell of a lot of damage to the rest of us before they >fail. That's not clearly true. The totalitarian states we know of developed years ago in a much less fluid environment. A few years ago, there was a UK TV drama about a contemporary Labour Party Prime Minister. In the course of the show, the new PM announced that he would immediately impose exchange controls to "keep money in Britain." (This was written before the real Labour Party officially eschewed exchange controls in a furtue Labour government.) The joke is that two weeks before the election of a Labour PM, all the loose investment funds would have left the UK anyway. Nothing left to block. I think that a *new* totalitarian state would have a hell of a time borrowing money and all of the existing states are cash poor. They need to borrow. They don't want to be distracted by rioting pensioners. Even the secret police don't work for free. Currency devaluation would hurt as well. After all, there can't be a totalitarian state that doesn't massively change (introduce uncertainly into) the conduct of life and business in its country (and if it is large, in the world). Markets have a way of dealing with uncertainty. Capital flight (seeking safer investments) and high interest rates (to compensate for risk). DCF

3 2

Proposed changes to the Queensland criminal code.
by pkm＠maths.uq.oz.au 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It seems the fight against evil never ends... This is a clipping from the Sunday Mail, the local sunday newspaper (althogh tabloid would be a better word for it). As you can observe, it is one of those papers that have a paragraph:sentence ratio of 1:1. I hope it is of interest to you all. All spelling mistakes are mine. All grammatical awkwardness are his. :-) .... ONLINE MOVES 'OUT OF LINE'. [Date: 11/09/94 - PKM.] (COMPUTERS with Peter Young) [Title of a regular column - PKM.] Proposed changes to the Queensland Criminal Code to crack down on computer networks carrying information used for criminal acts are sparking an outcry. The proposals have been denounced as unworkable by a number of online information providers who claim their businesses will become untenable if the changes are brought in. As part of a sweeping overhaul of the State's criminal code, Attourney-General Wells plans to create two new offences falling into the category of unlawful use of a computer. They would make persons liable for up to 10 years for providing information via computer networks which contributes to a crime. One charge would relate to aiding the commission of a crime and the other would deal with being an accessory before the fact. Instructions on how to make bombs [like gunpowder? -PKM] or set up a child pornography ring are the type of material the proposed legislation wants to target. The laws would apply equally to material downloaded from a local electronic bulleting board system or that acquired by using a commercial gateway to the international Internet system. The legislation is intended to facilitate prosecution of people who knowingly make such information available on their systems, a spokesman for the Attorney-General said. But Australian Internet service providers have condemned the proposals as impractical and unable to be policed and have called for "common carrier" protection similar to that enjoyed by Telecom. Ian Peter, founder of Queensland-headquartered Internet provider Pegasus Networks, branded the proposed laws "unworkable", saying that they were out of touch with overseas thinking on the problem of balancing free speech against the need to control access to unsuitable information. Rhys Weatherley, president to the non-profit Internet access group BrisNet [Brisbane Net, for the geopolitically deprived - PKM], said the proposed laws would give police "licence to arrest" power over any computer network operator merely because offending material was available on their networks. He said the legislation would make scapegoats out of honest network operators while failing to catch real offenders. BrisNet would be forced to shut down rather than run the risk of prosecution if the laws were adopted in their reputed form. Hugh Irvine, a Melbourne businessman, whose company Connect.com.au is a leading commercial gateway to the Internet, said he was happy to co-operate with authorities to prevent hackers or child molesters from using his service to pursue their practices. However, he said that the planned Queensland legislation was equivalent to charging Australia Post executives because criminals used the mail to help plan a bank robbery. "It is heading down the path of the wrong sort of State-run surveillance and Connect.com.au would be unable to continue functioning as a business if laws in the proposed form become a reality, he said. Also wading into the fray is Electronic Frontiers Australia (EFA), a public interest group set up to monitor threats to civil liberties in cyberspace. EFA skokesman Garth Kidd labelled the Queensland proposals "a worrying development that would stifle the implementation of online services in Australia". .... Comments: The article (and also the proposed legislation) were brought to my attention by my father late last night. As a com- puter professional with ~30 years experience, he was as disgusted as I am with the proposals. He also understood quite clearly how it was unworkable in practice. Some time this week, he will be having a little chat on the subject with Wendy Edmonds, the local MLA (Member of the [State] Legislature Assembly). It seems representative cluelessness is the same the world over. :-< Peter Murphy. <pkm(a)maths.uq.oz.au>

1 0

Re: Running PGP on Netcom (an
by snyderra＠dunx1.ocs.drexel.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:52 AM 9/12/94, SAMUEL KAPLIN wrote: >What illusion of security? If I have my secret keyring residing someplace >where I can't physically control who has access to it, no way is this >keyring secure!! It goes against the definition of a secret. Once you tell >someone a secret, It no longer is a secret. In effect this person has told >Netcom his secret, therefore it no longer is a secret. Just because you're >paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get you. Be paranoid!! But keeping it on your home machine, the bad guys could break into your house, set up a keyboard monitoring program, and get it that way. Or if they wanted to, grab you and force you to reveal your key. It's not black and white. There are degrees of security. I keep my encrypted secret key on dunx1, a UNIX box used by many other people. Anyone who has the ability to can either watch my keystrokes, probe through memory to retrieve my key or message, or probably a few other things I haven't thought of. The benefit, though, of being able to decode messages as soon as I receive them, and being able to send encrypted messages when I'm not at home is major. For me at least, it's a fair trade-off. There isn't anything I send right now that I would find particularly embarassing should it become public knowledge. If I did get into that situation, I'd probably create a second key pair for use only at home, and keep both in use. The bad guys will almost always be able to get your key. Even if they have to get you to get it. The goal is to raise the difficulty such that they aren't willing to do it. Bob -- Bob Snyder N2KGO MIME, PGP, RIPEM mail accepted snyderra(a)post.drexel.edu PGP & RIPEM keys on key servers When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl.

1 0

Just In Case You Missed It
by alano＠teleport.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Date: Sun, 11 Sep 1994 18:33:16 -0700 >From: Bruce Baugh <bruceab(a)teleport.com> >To: alano(a)teleport.com >Subject: Just In Case You Missed It > > >>Path: news.teleport.com!news.world.net!news.sprintlink.net!redstone.interpath.net! ddsw1!panix!zip.eecs.umich.edu!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!europa.eng.gtefsd.com! swiss.ans.net!malgudi.oar.net!news.ysu.edu!doug >>From: acbul1(a)penfold.cc.monash.edu.au (Andrew Bulhak) >>Newsgroups: alt.humor.best-of-usenet >>Subject: [alt.discordia] "official" Discordian secret code >>Followup-To: alt.humor.best-of-usenet.d >>Date: 12 Sep 1994 01:09:02 GMT >>Organization: best of usenet humor >>Lines: 89 >>Approved: best(a)cc.ysu.edu >>Message-ID: <3509ne$4rm(a)news.ysu.edu> >>NNTP-Posting-Host: unix1.cc.ysu.edu >>X-Disclaimer: the "Approved" header verifies header information for article transmission and does not imply approval of content. See .sig below. >>Originator: doug(a)unix1.cc.ysu.edu > >From: snorri(a)nwu.edu (Snorri Abrahamsen) >Newsgroups: alt.discordia >Subject: "official" Discordian secret code > > > In these days of NSA and Clipper and Key/Escrow and PGP and Wilkesman >Kid Ranger Decoder Rings, it seems one of the things most on everyone's >collective hive-like minds must be security. Security and privacy, make >that. > Now Discordians have always had a versatile and powerful secret code, >one that has defied the efforts of the world's greatest spy-masters and >crypto-fiends to crack for countless centuries (or at least since 1962 or >so). It goes like this: > > A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z > 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 > > It's a damn fine code, and whoever invented it should get a big gold >star, lots of LDD medals, and a beefy slap on the ass for good effort and >sheer genius. But I'm afraid that now I have some *SHOCKING NEWS*! > > I have reason to believe that the Discordian secret code has been >_compromised_. You know, "Loose lips sink ships" and all that, right? >(Or is it, "Loose lips sink Golden Apple Corps"? I'm never sure...). >Well, it was worse than loose lips. It is my suspiscion that some >traitorous Discordian actually gave the code to the NSA. > > What to do now for all your Discordian encryption needs? I mean, it >would now be insanely dangerous (or at least not very private) to use the >old encryption scheme. > > I therefore propose creating a new Discordian secret code, perhaps based >on a cypher model (where each character is represented by some word), >although other models might work really well, too. Anyway, here's a start >to a Discordian cypher... > > A Andersianism > B Quasimodo > C yorba linda > D colostomy > E chao > F mojo > >etc... > > This is a fun scheme because the utter apparent randomness of it. Or at >least it seems random... Anyway, it's probably not the best possible >scheme for a Discordian Secret Code. Here's are some alternate schemes I >had for encoding messages: > > * Implosion Method. Write message on lightbulb. Implode lightbulb. >Recipient then reverses time continuum and grabs pre-imploded lightbulb >from alternate timeline, reads message, and tosses back for implosion >before anybody notices. > Advantages: NSA Clipper plans (oddly enough) do not extend as far as >including key/escrow chips in all time travel devices. > Disadvantages: Useless against the Great Race of Yith. > > * St. Gulik Method. Write the message in radioactive ink on box paste >and feed to specially trained homing cockroaches. Release the homing >cockroaches to skitter home. Reassemble message from roach entrails. > Advantages: Enemy cryptographers don't like touching roaches. > Disadvantages: Kills the roaches; difficult to train them to go home. > > * O'Leary's Cow Method. Write message on paper and burn to ashes. >Send ashes to recipient. > Advantages: No way for enemy to decode message. > Disadvantages: No way for recipient to decode message. > > * Formless Spawn Method. Write message on outer surface of trained >Shoggoth in really strong permanent ink. As Shoggoth moves, message will >be scrambled on its surface. With the proper command word, recipient can >command shoggoth to assume original form(lessness), descrambling the >message. > Advantages: Message devours any enemy crytographer who tries to decode it. > Disadvantages: No good if recipient fails sanity check. > > > Any other suggestions for good encryption schemes would be welcome... >I'm beginning to feel insecure already, as well as a little on the insane >side (you try training a shoggoth to act as your message-pod...) > > >-- >Postings to alt.humor.best-of-usenet reflect what the submittor considers to be >the best in usenet humor, and the poster is responsible for the content. The >moderator removes duplicates, copyrighted material, posts without headers, but >does not drop articles based on content. See the group charter for more info. >Sigs may be truncated. Moderator address: best(a)cc.ysu.edu >-- >/-------------------------------------------------------------------------\ >|bruceab(a)teleport.com Bruce Baugh, thoroughly unaffiliated with Teleport| >| "An' besides you IS a rabbit." "Not a 'nothing-BUT-a-rabbit', tho'." | >\-------------------------------------------------------------------------/ > > |"I would call him a Beastialic Sadomasochistic | alano(a)teleport.com | |Necrophile but that would be beating a dead | Disclaimer: | |horse." -- Teriyaki (What's up Tiger Lily?) | Ignore the man | | -- PGP 2.61 key available on request -- | behind the keyboard.|

1 0

Curious content
by paul＠hawksbill.sprintmrn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim, I'm not so sure I'm very fond of the quote that you used in the CP-FAQ: - As Paul Ferguson, Cypherpunk and manager at US Sprint, puts it: "We're located in Herndon, Virginia, right across the street from Dulles Airport and a hop, skip & jump down the street from the new NRO office. ,-)" [P.F., 1994-08-18] As I did say this, and it _is_ true, it somehow lends conjecture to the scenario that Sprint is somehow involved with US Gov't wiretapping schemes. I'd appreciate it if you could either strike the quote or clarify it to reflect the true meaning of my remarks. Concerned, _______________________________________________________________________________ Paul Ferguson US Sprint Managed Network Engineering tel: 703.904.2437 Herndon, Virginia USA internet: paul(a)hawk.sprintmrn.com

2 3

Re: Cracking MD5 for $10M
by sw＠tiac.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>...another algorithm dominates it >for single processor loop detection... at least in storage space. It >works as follows: get a sequence of values v(i+1) = MD5(v(i)); >simultaneously get another sequence w(i+1) = MD5(MD5(w(i))), and start them >at the same place, v(0) = w(0). That is, you're running one of them twice >as fast as the other. I like to call this the "two race cars" algorithm--you start a fast car ahead of a slow car on a single-lane track, and if the fast one runs into the slow one it's a looped track. Funny, just two weeks ago a coworker put a 32-bit CRC function into the programming language I use, and I was playing with finding collisions. (I bet a dollar there would be a non-trivial collision between CRCs of the 76,000 files on our biggest disk and lost.) Has anyone mentioned using this sort of method to generate same-hash texts with, say, opposite meanings? David Wagner says-- >Another thing -- I'm not sure this method is (directly) useful for >generating lots of collisions, if that is what is desired. I believe >Dr. Hellman wrote some paper about the cycling properties of random >functions (out of interest in DES), and he concluded (if I remember >correctly) that when you generate lots of random starting values and >look at their cycling properties, most starting values will drain into >a very few specific cycles. Seems to me that even if lots of random starting points drain into the same cycle, you've still got lots of collisions. Either points where the sequences join the cycle, or points where different tributaries join each other before joining the cycle. --Steve - - - - - - - - - - They say the User exists *outside* of the net. No one knows for sure, but I intend to find out! --ReBoot (Saturday morning 3D animated cartoon)

1 0

PRIVACY REGULATIONS
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, When I wrote: >>If you are stopped by the police, you are required to >>identify yourself if asked. Chris Hibbert responded: This is not true. If you're driving a car you are required to have a license. If you're just walking around, you're not required to have a name, or to tell it. Nope, *this* is wrong. In most jurisdictions, you do not have to provide *physical ID* if you are not in a car, but you do have to identify yourself AND give some account as to what you are up to. A cop has to have a probable cause to arrest you, and not giving your name doesn't provide it. /Au contraire/, you are "interfering with an investigation" or "obstructing justice" or whatever it's called in the particular jurisdiction. If you're surly, a cop can take you in, ... Nonsense. Where do you non-lawyers get this stuff? Surly, rude, impolite, etc. are all protected speech. (Threatening *ACTS* or physical resistance, however, is another thing.) ... Just say "Officer, someone is waiting for me. May I go now?" Just say "no"? I *guarantee* this won't work. If you are asking permission ("May I go?"), aren't you ceding to the officer the legal right to say "no"? If you believe you don't have to interact with the nice man, why not just turn your back and walk away without a word? (I wouldn't advise it.) This has been tested in court. There was a black lawyer several years ago who liked to walk a lot. He lived in one of the fashionable neighborhoods in LA, and occasionally got picked up because he "looked like he didn't belong there". He sued them and won in court every time, and got the police to leave him alone. [No, I don't have references.] A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. The gentleman in question was not a lawyer. He was a black man who was dressed and coiffured in dreadlocks and Rasta man clothes. He did not live in Beverly Hills nor Belaire, but he did like to take long walks in those neighborhoods in the middle of the night. He was arrested for not identifying himself with an "official" ID. When he sued, the court issued a temporary injunction against the police for requiring *documentary* identification. The right of the police to require a person to identify himself was never in question. I'm not sure what the disposition of this particular case was, but that's irrelevant, as it only went to the issue of documentary ID. (If memory serves, there was an interesting result of this case. The California legislature attempted to pass, or passed, a law that required to showing of official identification if demanded by a police officer. I don't know how this law ended up, unfortunately.) S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2 1

Re: CONTROL FREAKS
by SAMUEL.KAPLIN＠warehouse.mn.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subject: Re: CONTROL FREAKS To: cactus(a)bibliob.slip.netcom.com (L. Todd Masco) From: frissell(a)panix.com (Duncan Frissell) Subject: Re: CONTROL FREAKS Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >> After all, there can't be a totalitarian state that doesn't massively chan >> (introduce uncertainly into) the conduct of life and business in its count >> (and if it is large, in the world). Markets have a way of dealing with >> uncertainty. Capital flight (seeking safer investments) and high interest >> rates (to compensate for risk). The main assumption here is that the populous and the markets realize that they are in a totalitarian state. We in the U.S. are evolving closer and closer to this and most seem not to see it, and if they do, not to care about it. The senario that I see, is the borders being closed. (After all we HAVE to stop all of these illegal aliens.) All of the firearms and weapons being removed from private hands. (The crime rate is SO high this is the only way to solve it.) The U.S. economy being isolated from the rest of the world. (The world doesn't trade fair with us, so we just won't trade with you.) Once your economy is isolated from the rest of the worlds who cares what a dollar is worth. If the government says a dollar buys a loaf of bread, then I guess it does. After all they have all of the weapons. The most incideous thing is that the average American would go along with all of the rationalizations listed above. --BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.1 mQCNAy5pUekAAAEEAKrDj64Zj9AJU+gC7/Ivdk8b1ef6a1T9K5CGFeu1yFDSXLyD DLIdGunZR/4ilosLMxdlZcNqPwZ3HgxL+Gk3y2SwYfqKpeWExWPgb696lgzf2BRC tED15ZAwi3UDIkcouv2PBiDwPNUUmnLb5diDXdA3qtALb+XzlwpnimeWAf3FAAUT tCFTYW11ZWwgS2FwbGluIDwrMSAoNjEyKSA1MzAtNzMxNj6JAJUCBRAuaVLjQqfV nzRSzxkBAcXuA/47yIN+sltMyIRqCgUZz/gubdI6LUcpFsTcXsFWppROpAWFPJv0 J9z/UoP1kjJ+nrAAizuKuhmC5eg5OOxUE+tUgSPl6hAtu2xJYmKtCbQpxF0sG8ni 4e8I8Zsk5vcopO5Vub96CiVgPjI5vITCb32kcLKI1yyFaztbHdtOasUthg== =M8Dh --END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fido: Sam Kaplin 1:282/1018 | "...vidi vici veni" - Overheard Compuserve: 75240,131 | outside a Roman brothel. samuel.kaplin(a)warehouse.mn.org | 75240,131(a)compuserve.com | Change is the only constant in the For confidential communications use PGP | Universe..."Four quarters, please." ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- =========================================================================== Processed by WILDUUCP! v1.00 for WILDCAT! ===========================================================================

1 0