December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Come On
by Ben.Goren＠asu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:15 PM 7/19/94, Connie Sadler (415)725-7703 wrote: >On Tue, 19 Jul 1994 jdblair(a)nextsrv.cas.muohio.EDU wrote: >[. . .] I find lines like the above [about the women in "True Lies] very >offensive/non-professional. I won't let it stop me from continuing on, but >what's the point? I really don't get it. Neither do I. Connie's right, guys. How can saying that you like women whose best skills are oral sex and who are so klutzy that they kill people accidently do anything to promote civil rights through cryptography? At the least, please be a little more clear with your sarcasm; otherwise, you're just re-inforcing the "harmless guy-stuff" that leads directly to rape and wife-battering. Drunk driving used to be given a wink and a nod, and now drunk drivers rate somewhere near lawyers. Let's do the same for women, and promote cryptography at the same time by getting back on topic. >CS - b& -- Ben.Goren(a)asu.edu, Arizona State University School of Music net.proselytizing (write for info): Protect your privacy; oppose Clipper. Voice concern over proposed Internet pricing schemes. Stamp out spamming. Finger ben(a)tux.music.asu.edu for PGP 2.3a public key.

2 1

Re: GUT and P=NP
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(flashing philosophical credentials) :-P All this stuff about existing in mind and existing in reality reminds me of St. Anselm's proof of the existence of god (Hettinga's Hashed Layman's Version 1.0(tm)): 1. Conceive of perfection. 2. You have just demonstrated that perfection can exist in mind. 3. It is more perfect to exist in mind and in reality than to exist solely in mind. 4. Define god as perfection. 5. Therefore god exists. Now this Midieval brainbuster was pretty much beat to death sometime in the Enlightment, though somebody respectable in the late 19th century (Frege?) liked it a lot... This GUT and P=NP thing smells awfully like scholastic bickering, don't ya think? Just my (unmathematical) opinion... Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) "There is no difference between someone Shipwright Development Corporation who eats too little and sees Heaven and 44 Farquhar Street someone who drinks too much and sees Boston, MA 02331 USA snakes." -- Bertrand Russell (617) 323-7923

2 1

CFS 1.1.0 now available
by Matt Blaze 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A new release of CFS, my encrypting file system for Unix-ish platforms, is now available, This version includes a number of bug fixes and ports to new platforms, reasonably friendly hooks for adding new ciphers, and an online 3-DES mode. Details in the announcement attached below. -matt ================================================================= Source code for version 1.1 of CFS, the Cryptographic File System, is now available upon request for research and experimental use in the US and Canada. CFS pushes encryption services into the Unix(tm) file system. It supports secure storage at the system level through a standard Unix file system interface to encrypted files. Users associate a cryptographic key with the directories they wish to protect. Files in these directories (as well as their pathname components) are transparently encrypted and decrypted with the specified key without further user intervention; cleartext is never stored on a disk or sent to a remote file server. CFS employs a novel combination of DES stream and codebook cipher modes to provide high security with good performance on a modern workstation. CFS can use any available file system for its underlying storage without modification, including remote file servers such as NFS. System management functions, such as file backup, work in a normal manner and without knowledge of the key. CFS runs under SunOS and several other BSD-derived systems with NFS. It is implemented entirely at user level, as a local NFS server running on the client machine's "loopback" interface. It consists of about 5000 lines of code and supporting documentation. You must have "root" access to install CFS. CFS was first mentioned at the work-in-progress session at the Winter '93 USENIX Conference and was more fully detailed in: Matt Blaze, "A Cryptographic File System for Unix", Proc. 1st ACM Conference on Computer and Communications Security, Fairfax, VA, November 1993. (PostScript available by anonymous ftp from research.att.com in the file dist/mab/cfs.ps.) The version being released differs from the version described in the paper in a few ways: * The encryption scheme has been strengthened, and now provides approximately the security of 3-DES with the online latency of only single-DES. * Support for the smartcard-based key management system is not included. * A few of the tools are not included (in particular, cname and ccat). * The performance has been improved. * The security of the system against certain non-cryptanalytic attacks has been improved somewhat. New features in CFS 1.1 include: * User-contributed ports to a number of additional platforms. * Better hooks for adding new ciphers. * 3-DES encryption option. CFS is being distributed as a research prototype; it is COMPLETELY UNSUPPORTED software. No warranty of any kind is provided. We will not be responsible if the system deletes all your files and emails the cleartext directly to the NSA or your mother. Also, we do not have the resources to port the software to other platforms, although you are welcome to do this yourself. The software was developed under SunOS and BSDI, and there are also unsupported user-contributed ports available for AIX, HP/UX, Irix, Linux, Solaris and Ultrix. We really can't promise to provide any technical support at all, beyond the source code itself. We also maintain a mailing list for CFS users and developers; subscription information is included with the source code. Because of export restrictions on cryptographic software, we are only able to make the software available within the US and Canada to US and Canadian citizens and permanent residents. Unfortunately, we cannot make it available for general anonymous ftp or other uncontrolled access, nor can we allow others to do so. Sorry. Legal stuff from the README file: * Copyright (c) 1992, 1993, 1994 by AT&T. * Permission to use, copy, and modify this software without fee * is hereby granted, provided that this entire notice is included in * all copies of any software which is or includes a copy or * modification of this software and in all copies of the supporting * documentation for such software. * * This software is subject to United States export controls. You may * not export it, in whole or in part, or cause or allow such export, * through act or omission, without prior authorization from the United * States government and written permission from AT&T. In particular, * you may not make any part of this software available for general or * unrestricted distribution to others, nor may you disclose this software * to persons other than citizens and permanent residents of the United * States and Canada. * * THIS SOFTWARE IS BEING PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED * WARRANTY. IN PARTICULAR, NEITHER THE AUTHORS NOR AT&T MAKE ANY * REPRESENTATION OR WARRANTY OF ANY KIND CONCERNING THE MERCHANTABILITY * OF THIS SOFTWARE OR ITS FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. If you would like a copy of the CFS source code, please send email to: cfs(a)research.att.com DO NOT REPLY DIRECTLY TO THIS MESSAGE. Be sure to include a statement that you are in the US or Canada, are a citizen or permanent resident of the US or Canada, and have read and understand the license conditions stated above. Also include an email address in a US or Canada-registered domain. The code will be sent to you via email in a uuencoded compressed tarfile.

1 0

FW: Federal Control of Financial Transactions
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Some comments on Duncan's post: All of the arguments which he proposes against reasons why the government can't succeed are true and accurate; however, it is one of those things where "you know and I know, but *they* don't know"...... The examples which you relate of government failures from inefficiency, etc. have been proven time and again in history, but in that case why does history keep repeating itself, in slightly different variations. "......why doesn't Clinton impose wage and price controls, exchange controls, tariffs, and a full-blown industrial policy?" If he can succeed in implementing the Health Plan, and if the National ID were accepted, that would probably next on his agenda (if he were to be re-elected [2 more years]). One saving grace from all the discussions which are going on of the above projects is that they presently are just discussions, and if they could just be kept discussing these things, none of them will ever be accomplished. By the time the discussions are finished, everyone will have version 10.x of every computer app and all companies will be "virtual". Blanc

1 0

RE: Come On
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I think that because there are proportionately so very few females on the list who post, that the gentlemen sometimes forget themselves and include some "men talk". But I haven't noticed anyone follow up on it; they never carry on and on as they do about LD (a much more interesting topic), and it isn't long before they get back to random numbers, Clipper, PGP, the intricacies of money laundering, etc. Blanc

1 0

RE: the Cypherpunk and the Shadow
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It's nice to see an intelligent & honest post from you, LD, even if I do disagree with you in your attitude and your methods of dealing with what you perceive as hypocrisy from the c'punks. I would like to address the issues which you brought up, but I don't want to bother the list with my comments, as I know that many have already gone through these too often and you are not satisfied with their rebuttals. Won't you reply to me personally, so that I may present a superior argument (mine). Blanc

1 0

Schneier
by tim werner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Date: Mon, 18 Jul 1994 23:18:40 -0400 >From: kentborg(a)world.std.com (Kent Borg) > >>No. Schneier is a start, but the source papers... Speaking of Schneier, I have an upbeat note. I ordered his book, when it first came out, from the local Borders book store. When I went to pick it up, they told me that if I decided to buy it I could not return it, since it was not a book that they would otherwise stock. Today I was there checking out the computer books, and they had a copy on the shelf, so I guess it was in enough demand that they decided to stock it. tw

1 0

Kragen == LD?
by nobody＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Kragen J. Sittler", xentrac(a)cybele.unm.edu, writes: >I think that the evidence is pretty strong that Sue isn't Larry. >She's another person completely, with a different posting style, a >moderate feminist and extreme leftist political stance, a willingness >(possibly, probably IMHO) to forward unsubstantiated libels (Ollie >North smuggling drugs? How likely is that?), a great deal of >sensitivity to the feelings of others, and a beautiful capacity to find >symbolism. I could be wrong about any or all of these, but they are >my impression on reading her posts, both here and from the new-age >religion group. Isn't a "Kragen" a fictional sea beast, something like a giant squid or octopus? Something with tentacles? And isn't Kragen's user name, xentrac, close to an anagram for tentacle? And isn't unm the University of New Mexico, adjacent to Detweiler's home state of Colorado? And here Kragen is praising Sue D. Nym for having a "beautiful capacity to find symbolism", when "her" posts seem to be random garbage? And didn't all of Kragen, Sue, and the various anonymous Detweiler posts all appear at about the same time? And hasn't Detweiler frequently discussed the use of multiple pseudonyms to mutually support and praise each other in order to build up an illusionary reputation? Makes you wonder...

4 3

Re: Ms. Nym's stigmata
by catalyst-remailer＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A quick review of the patent stigmata: > I have been reading some fascinating interpretations of these and > other prophecies lately. Frequent Biblical allusions, particularly fond of apocalyptic references. > I think your cause for privacy would actually be > *advanced* by promoting an ID *card* under the following condition: Attempts to mask underlying obsession with veneer of rationality. > Anyone can obtain as many ID cards as they want. Fixation on multiple personalities (tentacles, "pseudo-anonymity"). > Before you accuse me of heresy, consider the system of email address > privacy that was championed earlier by Perry Metzger: you can get any [ and later ] > Well, I do not appreciate threats in my mailbox such as "Go away--I'm not > as gentle as Perry Metzger". I can't believe how torqued-up all you guys > are. This mailing list is like a firing range. Frequent mention of Perry Metzger. Standard unit of torment: Perry Metzger. > system with government? Or do you just want to get rid of governments, > and use "privacy" as the reason? Yikes. Tireless apologist and supporter of government. > People, you may successfully get me to lose this account for no reason. Paranoia never far below the surface.

3 2

Re: Card Playing Protocol
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by kentborg(a)world.std.com (Kent Borg) on Mon, 18 Jul 11:18 PM >>No. Schneier is a start, but the source papers... > >So I should wonder about how to find the sources >mentioned in his bibliography? kb, the Kent who is only human: Get <who cypherpunks> and assign each c'punk, alphabetically, to send you 900/#c'punks sources.

1 0