December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Info please
by davewww 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

davewww(a)fastlane.net

2 1

Re: Silly NetScape RND tricks...
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:05 PM 9/20/95 -0400, Deranged Mutant wrote: > >I've only been skimming the NetScape-related posts lately, but I've yet >to see anyone mention using a keyboard-timing sampler as a source for >some random bits Under windows, you get a lot more entropy from mouse timing and position than keyboard hits. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

ctb196.htm
by Damaged Justice 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[1]Marketplace Technology [2]Front page, [3]News, [4]Sports, [5]Money, [6]Life, [7]Weather, [8]Marketplace Inside Tech  [9]FAQ, Tips and [10]Tricks  [11]Web Column  [12]Hot Sites  [13]Tech News  [14]Tech Reviews  [15]Answer Desk  [16]Shareware Shelf  [17]Web Potholes  [18]Web Resources  [19]Tech Front Resources  [20]Index  [21]Search  [22]Feedback  [23]What's hot  [24]About us  [25]Jobs at USA [26]TODAY 09/08/97- Updated 09:34 AM ET PCs no longer needed to place Net calls Consumers can now make super-cheap, long-distance phone calls over the Internet without even touching a computer - creating a dangerous rival for long-distance companies. Monday, IDT unveils Net2Phone Direct, a service that lets a consumer pick up a phone, dial a number and send the call through the Internet to another phone anywhere in the world. The cost: 8 cents a minute within the USA; 18 cents to London; 29 cents to Japan - all cheaper than traditional long-distance calling. Net2Phone Direct is the broadest service yet. Versions are being tried by others, including units or partners of Deutsche Telekom and Japan's KDD. Says David Goodtree of Forrester Research, "Phone to phone is where the money is." "It's the natural evolution of voice over the Internet," says Yankee Group's Brian Adamik. Several software packages already let a PC user have a voice conversation with another PC user via the Internet. Vocaltec, the leading Internet phone company, offers a service that connects a PC user to regular phones. But phone-to-phone can reach the broadest number of consumers. Net2Phone Direct works like a long-distance, dial-around service. A user dials an 800 number or a local access number, punches in an account number, much like using a phone card, then dials the number to be called. IDT's system sends the call over the Internet to a computer in Hackensack, N.J., which dumps the call back into the regular phone network, through which the call connects to another phone. IDT plans to expand the system by placing its computers in more cities, so the calls travel more over the Net (which is free) and less distance over traditional phone lines (which cost money). Eventually, prices could fall "to under a nickel a minute to anyplace in the country," says CEO Howard Jonas. Until recently, major phone companies had all but ignored developments in Internet telephony. But that's changing. Big phone companies "are keeping a careful eye on it," Adamik says. Last week, Deutsche Telekom announced an investment in Vocaltec. Over the summer, AT&T and Vocaltec allied to fund an Internet telephony start-up run by former AT&T executive Tom Evslin. By Kevin Maney, USA TODAY _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ [27]Front page, [28]News, [29]Sports, [30]Money, [31]Life, [32]Weather, [33]Marketplace ©COPYRIGHT 1997 [34]USA TODAY, a division of Gannett Co. Inc. References 1. http://www.usatoday.com/cgi-bin/redir?SpaceID=342&AdID=875&URL=http://www.u… 2. http://www.usatoday.com/usafront.htm 3. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nfront.htm 4. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sfront.htm 5. http://www.usatoday.com/money/mfront.htm 6. http://www.usatoday.com/life/lfront.htm 7. http://www.usatoday.com/weather/wfront.htm 8. http://www.usatoday.com/marketpl/mkthome.htm 9. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/webfaq.htm 10. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/webfaq.htm 11. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/cc.htm 12. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/ch.htm 13. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/ct000.htm 14. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/review/cr000.htm 15. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/bonus/qa/techform.htm 16. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/cs/cs000.htm 17. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/cp.htm 18. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/cw.htm 19. http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/cyber1.htm 20. http://www.usatoday.com/leadpage/indexusa.htm#ldex 21. http://167.8.29.8/plweb-cgi/ixacct.pl 22. http://www.usatoday.com/feedback/comment1.htm 23. http://www.usatoday.com/leadpage/usanew.htm 24. http://www.usatoday.com/leadpage/credit/credit.htm 25. http://www.usatoday.com/leadpage/usajobs0.htm 26. http://www.usatoday.com/leadpage/usajobs0.htm 27. http://www.usatoday.com/usafront.htm 28. http://www.usatoday.com/news/nfront.htm 29. http://www.usatoday.com/sports/sfront.htm 30. http://www.usatoday.com/money/mfront.htm 31. http://www.usatoday.com/life/lfront.htm 32. http://www.usatoday.com/weather/wfront.htm 33. http://www.usatoday.com/marketpl/mkthome.htm 34. http://www.usatoday.com/leadpage/credit/credit.htm

1 0

Re: "random" number seeds vs. Netscape
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:01 PM 9/20/95 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote: >PC timers inherently run at Mhz speed -- they interrupt every 100th of >a second but you can get finer resolution by querying the clock >chip. Does Windows let you do this? Yes: 1.196 MHz precision. The VTD maintains a 64-bit value that is accurate to 0.8 microseconds. This value is obtained by calling the VTD with AX set to 0100h. The 64-bit value is returned in EDX:EAX. The returned value indicates the time Windows has been running based on a 1.196 MHz clock. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: Cypherpunks Hold a Cracking Party
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:28 AM 9/19/95 -0400, Duncan Frissell wrote: >Just to let everyone know that I've got an assignment from Wired to do a >story with the above working title. > As it turns out, Steven Levy and I had an assignment collision at Wired and were both assigned the story. For some unknown reason, they wanted him to do it instead of me so I will *not* be doing it. Steve -- feel free to use my title if you like. DCF "Anyone know any publications interested in an article on the Crack?"

2 1

Re: Munitions shirt (again)
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:49 PM 9/20/95, Ian Goldberg wrote: >So, Dave and I got free munitions shirts (they're different, though; >the font is smaller and they have a bunch of X'd out Constitutional >Amendments on the back; I think they ere designed by Joel Furr) for >our bug find. > >So I'm wearing it today. The thing is, I live in International House, >a residence that has 50% non-Americans. > >So, any consensus as to whether it's actually illegal to do so? I >remember some disagreement a few weeks ago that AFAIK wasn't resolved. The _consensus_ here seems to be: "This t-shirt is illegal to wear in front of non-Americans," judging by the comments here. The _reality_ is quite different, I think, and the "this shirt is illegal" hype is, in my opinion, just that, hyperbole. Even hyperbull, too. Books and written articles containing crypto algorithms are _not_ illegal for "furriners" to look at. The t-shirt contains at most a fuzzy printing of an algorithm that has been widely printed in various books and in articles in mailing lists like ours. (I agree that there are some unresolved issues with ostensibly machine-readable forms. The t-shirt is not machine-readable by any plausible interpretation of machine-readable.) >As far as I can tell, it's _technically_ illegal, but any LEO would be >out of his mind to try to enforce it (it would have to be a Fed, too, >wouldn't it? Or can regular city cops get you for violating export >restrictions?). Ian did great work on the latest Netscape break, but this is just plain crazy. --Tim May ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

What's with the list? (Old mail?!)
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anyone else get old c'punks postings remailed to them from August?

1 0

Re: Deja Vu / Re: Info please
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On or About 8 Sep 97 at 16:01, TruthMonger wrote: > Dont go swimming on a full stomach. > Don't play with that, you'll shoot your eye out. =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: (408) 259-2795

1 0

Re: Please send me SSL problems...
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From what I can see, GSSAPI has broad acceptance and will soon have broad use. I've heard that Digital, HP, and IBM have all mandated that all security code (except keymgmt and other things that are out of scope) must go through the GSSAPI: no writing your own stuff. I heard, less authoritatively, that Microsoft has the same rules, except they use a FunnyLookingVariant(far) of an earlier GSSAPI draft. /r$

2 1

GAK patents, anyone?
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anyone want to guess how long until they will give 'key escrow' systems special protection? (Actually that would be a good thing, because it would make GAK more expensive :-) ----- http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/sol/notices/terrog.txt ----- Petitioning to Make Special Patent Applications Relating to Inventions For Countering Terrorism New patent applications are normally taken up for examination in the order of their effective United States filing date. However, the Commissioner may provide that a patent application will be advanced out of turn for examination if a petition to make the patent application special under 37 CFR 1.102(c) or (d) is granted. On July 31, 1996, Vice President Gore stated that [i]t is imperative that those seeking to prevent terrorist activities have all of the tools necessary to accomplish their task. In view of the importance of developing technologies for countering terrorism and the desirability of prompt disclosure of advances made in these fields, the Patent and Trademark Office is establishing a new category for petitions to accord "special" status to patent applications relating to counter-terrorism inventions. International terrorism as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2331 is activities that (A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by assassination or kidnaping. The types of technology for countering terrorism could include, but are not limited to, systems for detecting/identifying explosives, aircraft sensors/security systems, and vehicular barricades/disabling systems. Applications which are made special will be advanced out of turn for examination and will be treated as special throughout their pendency by the Patent and Trademark Office. Applicants who desire that an application relating to inventions for countering terrorism be made special should file a petition, with the fee under 37 CFR 1.17(i) which is presently $130.00, requesting the Patent and Trademark Office to make the application special. The petition for special status should be made in writing, should identify the application by application number and filing date, and should be accompanied by a statement explaining how the invention contributes to countering terrorism. Such statement must be set forth in oath or declaration form unless it is signed by a registered practitioner. The petition will be decided by the Director of the patent examining group to which the application is assigned. This new category for a petition to make an application special will be added in the next revision of the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) to the other categories discussed in MPEP section 708.02. Questions concerning this notice should be directed to Magdalen Y. Greenlief, Office of the Deputy Assistant Commissioner for Patent Policy and Projects, (703) 305-8813. Bruce A. Lehman Dated: August 19, 1996 Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks

5 4