December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Remailer@jpunix.com down!!!???
by dmandl＠bear.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: "Joshua M. Sled" <jsled(a)eis.calstate.edu> > Subject: Re: Remailer(a)jpunix.com down!!!??? > > On Fri, 13 Jan 1995, Samuel Kaplin wrote: > > > I just read that the remailer at jpunix.com went down suddenly and > > permanently. Anyone know what happened?? I also believe the whole site is > > down as it didn't answer my pings a couple of days ago. > > He was getting spam from AOL at the rate of 25 messages every 5 > seconds... so he took the system down. I missed the specifics of this the first time. How was the spammer doing it? Obviously he wasn't chaining his mail, or there'd be no way to know he was from AOL. Was JP unable to determine the guy's actual address? Or was he posting in the clear sans anonymity? Sorry if this has been covered already. I remember seeing the incident mentioned, but I can't recall the explanation of why JP was powerless to do anything about it. Thanks. --Dave.

1 0

retiring my remailer.. (fwd)
by L. McCarthy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message:

1 0

FW: How do I know if its encrypted?
by Matt Thomlinson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- From: <Ben.Goren(a)asu.edu> To: Matt Thomlinson Subject: Re: How do I know if its encrypted? Date: Friday, January 13, 1995 12:27PM At 9:35 AM 1/13/95, Matt Thomlinson wrote: >make "handful of plaintext" - > "hash of the plaintext" and you've got >yourself >a decent system. :) > >(this way, alice can keep a hash of the plaintext, hash of the ciphertext, and >a key around for recovery, without keeping ANY plaintext. Also, for someone >to request the data, knowing part of the message won't work; now they've >got to know the entire message to recreate the hash. That would be a little more secure, but I'm thinking that the "handful of plaintext" would be a random number of some kind that the user prepends to the file before encrypting. This is kinder on the data haven's CPU; compare even 3DES of, say, 256 bits to IDEA of a few megabytes followed by MD5 of same. Plus, it offers the operater even more deniability: he doesn't even look at the whole file, but just enough to be sure that it's what it's supposed to be. Presumably, the data haven will specify how much a handful is, and offer a client program that generates all this automatically. >matt You sent this to me privately, so that's how I'm replying. If you don't mind, though, please forward this on to the list. b& -- Ben.Goren(a)asu.edu, Arizona State University School of Music Finger ben(a)tux.music.asu.edu for PGP public key ID 0xCFF23BD5.

1 0

C'punks slogan?
by Joshua M. Sled 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mostly because I'm looking at having bumper stickers made, and partly because I'm testing a procmail script :), I want a few suggestions for a good slogan for the C'punks, something that would look good on a bumper sticker... stuff I've come up with so far is like: sub rosa - Cypherpunks 1995 Support your local Cypherpunk Privacy isn't a crime (I think I stole that from somewhere) Ensuring privacy isn't a crime And that's about it.... you should see by now why I'm asking. :) Joshua M. Sled <jsled@ctp.org/jsled@free.org>

2 1

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by pstemari＠erinet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:17 PM 1/12/95 -0600, Larry E wrote: > ... > (1) the people who use the remailer, who get a measure of > comfort from knowing their communication is secure They know it's secure because they made it secure. If they don't care, I don't particularly see why the remailer should care. > (2) legal groups etc. who may try to hold the remailer > liable in some way for what passes through their remailer. It strikes me that this is a very weak defense. Legal beagles will probably argue that the remailer should have either prohibited encrypted communications or else was in collusion with the sending party. --Paul J. Ste. Marie pstemari(a)well.sf.ca.us, pstemari(a)erinet.com

2 1

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by Ben.Goren＠asu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:58 PM 1/13/95, Eric Hughes wrote: > From: Ben.Goren(a)asu.edu > > That of the data haven operator being able to deny knowledge of the > contents of files people send him. He'll only return files that, when > operated on by a strong cryptographic algorithm, make sense. > >This idea doesn't work for the purpose intended. I'll upload straight >ASCII. When you ask for an decryption key, I'll make one up randomly, >apply the decryption algorithm to the flat text, and send that back to >you as a confirmation. >[. . .] Damn. I hate it when I overlook the obvious. Still, I'd like to think there's an answer. Perhaps I'll keep thinking on it. >Eric -- Ben.Goren(a)asu.edu, Arizona State University School of Music Finger ben(a)tux.music.asu.edu for PGP public key ID 0xCFF23BD5.

1 0

NIST Key Certification Document
by chen＠intuit.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At the RSA conference, I came across an interesting-looking tome called _Federal Certification Authority Liability and Policy: Law and Policy of Certificate-Based Public Key and Digital Signatures_. It seems that we can obtain this thing from NIST for a modest fee of $61, but I'm wondering if there might be an online version around somewhere. Does anyone know? -- Mark Chen chen(a)intuit.com 415/329-6913 finger for PGP public key D4 99 54 2A 98 B1 48 0C CF 95 A5 B0 6E E0 1E 1D

1 0

Re: Reefer madness
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks for your replies about the Turkish prison films, and all, I think I comprehendo now. I did see the movie Airplane, but I somehow overlooked that salient point. Blanc

1 0

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by daleh＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You wrote: > >Fine. The operator has no idea of how to make sense of this data >format. Just because someone in the world has an interpretation for >it doesn't mean that I do. > The primary point that I'm trying to make is that there is no such thing as an algorithmic test for a dataset being in a 'state' of encryption. Such a test is beyond alogrithmic capability (at least in our universe). Therefore, an RM/DH operator should just drop the pretense of filtering out non-encyphered submissions. Just take what comes and tell customers that if they don't want you to read it, it's up to _them_ to make certain that you can't. Period! The DH operator could encypher all submissions with his own key so that the DH contents can't be compromised to outsiders. This seems to be a much more real-world approach to the problem than tilting at windmill with encryption filters. (The previous examples were an attempt to demonstrate, in a concrete way, the failure of any such algorithmic approach. Whatever encryption-test algorithm you come up with I guarentee you I can defeat it!) Dale H.

1 0

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by Dr. D.C. Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > From: daleh(a)ix.netcom.com (Dale Harrison (AEGIS)) > Paco begins by > inventing the new [format] of which only Paco knows the internals. Eric Hughes replied: > No operator of any data service can be expected to know about every > data interpretation. The key here is "good faith". An operator can > undertake a good faith effort to remain ignorant about content. While this may be possible, the argument that someone actively tried to remain uninformed about something "dangerous" or potentially "illegal" doesn't seem like a particularly strong defense. Someone with proper credentials might want to comment on whether intentional ignorance is sufficient to avoid culpability. =D.C. Williams <dcwill(a)ee.unr.edu> - --- [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 iQBFAwUBLxdS6yoZzwIn1bdtAQHHYQF/Qe+7AcXH5ub+BMEY91hjbKNwGGUEho5o CN63jwJ4NQYBcLHwhhu9Q+b1wTE9hMrB =lSSE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1