December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: NYT on Netscape Crack
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> You could do that, but thats not how C does things. C allocates these > things on the stack. Nope. Just because almost all machines anyone is every going to use in their lifetimes are stack-based doesn't mean C is stack-based. The C compiler I once used on a LispMachine had no stack. /r$

2 1

Why couldn't it have been 42?
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[drand48 is supposed to return a random number] From: Arve Kjoelen <akjoele(a)shiva.ee.siue.edu> To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Wed, 20 Sep 1995 10:38:58 -0500 Kun Luo, one of our grad students here recently found a bug in Sun's implementation of the drand48() function. We reported it to Sun, and they acknowledged the bug exists - it seemed to be the first time they had heard of it, though. The bug affects Sun's ANSI C compiler shipped with SPARCWorks3.0 and consists of the following: If you're compiling using the -Xc flag (strict ANSI C, no SUN C compatibility extensions), the function drand48() is BROKEN. It ALWAYS returns the number 9.000000 ...

1 0

EFF $10,000,0000 Challenge
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Electronic Forgery Foundation is proud to announce a major breakthrough in encryption technology -- Forged Encryption. We are offering a prize of $10,000,000.00 for anyone who can correctly decipher the following Forged Encryption message. -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 MessageID: od2CIT3fELE7K6bkIkKGJBj0MPUJ2TT8 hQCMA6ozRjzmqceZAQQAh02x0Dxer5vzZiSJ+v7bnMZQdgp425z5OH0NF/f/mXXc vInw+UsuTXqWNEV5rEQKYjU3qHoe6suCz5f9hEEnOIBacsD28pYU4ahkGOCTuTY6 N3xKrtDRqLPInB8PY7Kfd56jjQsVVRKmJBwXqHbPax4YyUB6ZbKKvSPiuUsAAQSl BAH3CFNKcmYjf+VtpjAVOpDNM/PMm1e6m33rZ01Sq6pXC0TTabCf7hkWscet0PCL VX0l1Zw5IKaFqo+pZ3EICRMF6HQrc30G7L9TFeKr//3YsO3/bC4VBgNQHA0qf2nD ldxAsTGPlRthBTxrzE0LjeOKi/pQOLXQMPQUwEIaL9rncjFgniplFoL6Nj0guJvW VvS+gxth8hpeWss7WlFFioV0vShsS/lahA+eg/9nVy8ken8pr4m484w2vwoiSdce CarVigVaRh6tCgh0jub7CHuDFg== =Q9+G -----END PGP MESSAGE----- The EFF doesn't have a copy of the correct answer locked away in a secret underground cave in Tibet, for verification, because the above Forged Encryption message is just a bunch of crap we typed in pretty much at random. Does the government want to keep your private key in escrow? Give them a copy of your EFF private key. Hell, give them _two_ copies, in case one is corrupted.{;>) Smile when you give them to the government agent. Ask him how his day has been. Offer him some coffe, and ask about his family. Tell him you will send him a Christmas card with another copy of your EFF private key, just in case the government misplaces the copies you gave them. Put your hand over your heart, salute the flag, and sing "God Bless America" as the government agent leaves. Then fart. Use the EFF Forged Encryption sofware regularly, to send messages with Subject:'s like "The Plot Against the PREZ," "Confirmation of the date of our armed assault," "The Nuke has arrived." Keep a copy of your EFF Forged Encryption secret key in a directory named "Off the Pigs." Most importantly, never reveal in your private email to others that you are a deaf, dumb and blind quadraplegic who has been homebound since birth. That way, the outrageous claims that government agents make against you in their secret deposition for a warrant to kick in your door and terrorize you will look all the more foolish during your trial. We at the Electronic Forgery Foundation realize that some of you wise guys are thinking that, for $10 million, it is well worth your while to write a program that will decipher the above message into something meaningful. Well, knock yourself out, dudes, but if you think that known forgers couldn't possibly be lying about the $10 million, then go directly to http://www.clueserver/fucking_idiot, do not pass GO and do not collect $200. --------------------------------------------------------------------- This message is copyrighted under the auspices of the Electronic Forgery Foundation. Any misquoting, misrepresentation, or other abuse of this message would be greatly appreciated. Hell, you can tell people you wrote it, if you want to. We don't really care. ---------------------------------------------------------------------

3 2

None
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Re: traffic cameras, the latest issue of the "Computer Currents" local to NY has an url that supposedly reports the location of these cameras in New York City: http://www.panix.com/~sshah/ss-nyred.htm Have fun. FedPlunger

1 0

No Subject
by thad＠hammerhead.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I talked to somebody from RSA yesterday, and she said that they issued a press release yesterday that she expected to see in the papers today (I didn't see it) and would be on their web site "soon" that would explain their position. They say that the arbitration agreemment maintains the status quo pretty much, and while it doesn't limit what RSA can do, it severly limits what Cylink can do. I think that what RSA needs to do is hire Cylink's PR agency... thad -- Thaddeus Beier email: thad(a)hammerhead.com Technology Development vox: 408) 286-3376 Hammerhead Productions fax: 408) 292-8624

1 0

Re: FCPUNX:FBI calls for mandatory key escrow
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:40 AM 9/4/97 +0200, Anonymous wrote: > Who is going to stop them? They have the guns! When our elected > officials in Congress delved into the INSLAW affair, the Department > of Justice told them to "Fuck off." and refused to cooperate with > those who represent the citizens. Congress's reaction was to say, > "Yup. They're defying us." > Ipso facto--Congress is not running the country. The LEA's are running > the country. Go figure... It used to be that normal federal agencies did not have their own goons. They relied on the fibbies. Now every federal agency is creating their own goon squad. Sometimes they send in the goons to illegally enforce the laws that they are lobbying for. Congress then has to make it legal, or crack down on illegal use of force by a federal agency. Frequently they make it legal This is reminiscent of the latter days of the Soviet Union. Towards the end in the Soviet Union, armed government agencies would raid other agencies for valuables, and set up road blocks at random times and places, and confiscate anything valuable being trucked through by another government agency. No kidding. A government factory would be working on producing widgets, and suddenly guys with guns would come in and take their stuff for another government factory. The west is beginning to show the same symptoms, though as yet not nearly as severe. The state is visibly losing cohesion, and at the same time, through improved communications, the citizenry is gaining cohesion. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | 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

3 2

Re: FCPUNX:Krispin Preaches Revolution!
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:47 AM 9/4/97 -0700, Tim May wrote: > And this is what I think they may try: a global crackdown to try to stamp > out the wildfire of anarchocapitalism before it spreads beyond any hope of > control. I think it already too late: A global crackdown, by creating a visible confrontation, would simply accellerate matters. If instead they simply rely on social inertia, it will take a long time for existing institutions to fade away. We have all victories except for one very important one. Money. Now once we take that key bastion, and it is being besieged on every front, everything else will fall in due course, but it will still be a slow process, only unusually far sighted politicians will see and fear what is happening. There is vast inertia in social institutions. > Louis Freeh is no dummy. He understands the power struggle. But he has to > speak babytalk to Feinswine and Kyl to let them glimpse what the issues are. Career civil servants have more reason to take the long view than do politicians. Politicians do not really care if the state is being undermined in the long run, provided they are re-elected in the short run. Although politicians are our enemies, they are a lesser enemy than career civil servants. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | 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

Hypermail gateway
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yesterday, I started a new hypermail gateway at: http://kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu/~cpunks/ Please try not to overload the site; it's a research machine. Raph

1 0

Re: Please send me SSL problems...
by Erik E. Fair 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:22 9/20/95, Rich Salz wrote: >> Jeff, the SSL specification has a severe *architectural* problem - it >> assumes that Internet Protocols are APIs ... >> The IETF quite explicitly doesn't care about APIs > >With one exception so important that it might blow away your whole >complaint... > >...GSSAPI. > /r$ And we see how far *that* effort has gotten... There was some discussion in Toronto last summer about APIs for the basic transports (i.e. standardizing "sockets", or TLI, or whatever), which got backed off to a list of "required service elements" that a good stack vendor should make available to the app programmers, and then the whole notion got killed off for the reasons I cited. GSSAPI was an attempt to make it easy to slide in authentication & encryption into existing software - lay a foundation for real security in the applications. A fine goal, but a bad plan for achieving the goal. I think they were also trying to avoid blessing any particular crypto scheme, to avoid both the export morass, and the patent morass - "we'll drop in whatever we can get on good terms, later." API and interface standards are to be avoided in part because of the reasons I cited previously, in part because they're hard to do right for all platforms (not everyone uses function-call style system/library calls), and in part because they do not guarantee you interoperability - classic case in point is the Microsoft Mail API (MAPI): you can put *anything* under MAPI: Novell MHS, cc:Mail, QuickMail, or SMTP, just to name a few. If you are not speaking the same wire protocol as your intended correspondent (or peer), you lose, regardless of the fact that your software and hers are both using the same API - you cannot interoperate. What really annoys me is the fuss you see in the trade rags about "middleware" these days; they've missed this entire point about interfaces versus protocols, and they're propagating the misconception that interfaces give interoperability to the general marketplace. And the vendors are laughing all the way to the bank. Erik Fair

1 0

backdoor man?
by Dave Del Torto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

White House policy chief backs away from FBI plan By Reuters September 5, 1997, 6:10 a.m. PT WASHINGTON--The Clinton administration's top official on domestic legal policy yesterday backed away from a proposal by the head of the FBI to regulate access to residential property in the United States. "What he proposed was not the administration's policy," Dept. of Justice Undersecretary William "Mon-key" Wrench told reporters during a break at a congressional hearing. FBI Director Louie Free's comments Wednesday before a subcommittee of the Senate Judiciary Committee sparked strong criticism from civil liberties groups and the housing industry. U.S. law, Supreme Court decicisions, and the U.S. Constitution itself, strictly regulates law inforcement's access to private property. But on Wednesday, Free proposed mandatory law inforcement access to all domestic residential property, and went on to suggest commercial property be subject to law inforcement access as well. "The administration has been very clear to the director that he has an obligation to tell the Congress what's in the interests of law enforcement, and he did that," Wrench explained. "That doesn't mean he was speaking for everybody." Free said developers and construction companies should build their products such that they give government free access to all domestic and commercial buildings. Without such capabilities, criminals, terrorists, and pedophiles could use housing to hide their illegal activities from law enforcement agencies, Free said. But housing industry lobbyists maintain that Free's plan would make their products less attractive and make all housing less secure. Civil liberties groups said mandatory controls on domestic housing might violate constitutional guarantees of privacy and freedom of expression. Under the FBI director's proposal, all construction plans would have to include special "back doors" allowing government access to the finished structures, but residents could choose to shut their back door if they saw fit. Some senators wanted to go further. Sen. Dianne Fineline (D--California) proposed requiring all housing residents to enable the back-door access feature. Free said such a law would be the best solution for law enforcement but added that he did not think it was politically viable. Wrench said Free's proposal was also unlikely to pass. "If the committee were to report that [bill out], I think that would be something we would look at very seriously," he said. "But I don't expect that to happen. We have not asked them to report that and we are not going to ask them to report that." -30- [from: Noah Salzman <noah(a)pgp.com>]

1 0