December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: HACK ATTACK
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:36 AM 12/29/94, Sandy Sandfort wrote: >Was I the only one who saw ``Hack Attack'' on the Discovery >Channel? The promos were typically sensationalistic. `In cyber- >space, there is no privacy.' `Teenage hackers can read, change >or destroy your computer files.' `No one is safe.' Yada, yada, >yada. They should do a Nova episode to set the record straight. Anyone know a producer at WGBH in Boston? I might, but the string may be a bit too skinny to pull on. If anybody wants to egg me on, send me e-mail, but there might be a more direct connection than any I could dig up... Cheers, 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

1 0

ideath remailer erratic over New Years' weekend
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The anon remailer at ideath.goldenbear.com will likely be available only erratically over the next few days; after the move it will be co-located at a site featuring a 56K frame relay connection, so reliability should be good after that. I don't anticipate losing any traffic, but mail will be travelling via dialup UUCP not TCP/IP until the move is complete and the DNS data is updated. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBLwNY7n3YhjZY3fMNAQE9PAP9HQCb+GlzH2pbuYCatjuX9Rlt/YHfSXmv wC87jhLWi5KneMwbaf49mj2JGNCHtNC+VPetofB/dNvrQyfeRHpJEiDrJlg5q8DS 31L5zh7lTp3yybUlmCVBR7ovn9LAgPui6xMfIKqRtQ9Q7d99E58fBROctdbFxtUM rnA0kdCjq94= =LkeA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

No Subject
by nobody＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anybody know where there are compiled, ready to use versions of triple DES?

1 0

Thanx
by camp＠industrial.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I think I am a more enlightened individual now. First thing when I get back into FTP land I get the FAQ (cool faq name BTW). I was not intending to criticize, it just seemed to be alot more flamish than I expected and I guess that is what expecting things does. gemnis

1 0

Re: Morality masks technical ignorance
by blancw＠pylon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by Adam Shostack ( when bad things happen to good crypto): The technical reason to oppose GAK is that it adds points of failure to a crypto system which need not be there. Those POF are not adequately tied to the consequences of their actions (releasing a key improperly), and as such will be used as points to attack the integrity of the system. ............................................................... And if there were no points of failure added by it, would you approve, agree, to its mandatory requirement? .. Blanc

3 2

Re: Morality masks technical ignorance
by blancw＠pylon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by rishab: :And the key word in _my_ post was _means_, :not _reason why_. Oh - I thought maybe it was "ours is not to reason why". ( kidding! ) :I.e. that (in my view of the Cpunk position) one :can protect privacy not through morals, policies or :law, but through technology. I also don't see much success in attempting to protect privacy through the promotion of morals, policies, or laws, either. However, the list is always engaged in discussing 'privacy rights' as a basis for their own objections to governments' attitudes against the unfettered use of new technologies. Recognizing that we all live in a context made up of philosophical stands, politics, and legalities, and that as you said, "these are the glitches in discourse we have to face on a list that's for both technology and policy", it can't seem real to position this aspect completely out of the realm of thought as a non-valid element. Some people are going to want to think of the applications of technology in moral terms, and in a free society one must make allowances for those kinds of people. It should be possible to at least think about its proper place, occasionally, without suffering too much from the association. .. Blanc

2 1

January meeting with Zimmermann's prosecutor
by Philip Zimmermann 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following is a message from my lawyer, Phil Dubois. He posted it to alt.security.pgp, and I thought I should post it here as well. The message is signed with his key. --Philip Zimmermann -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Phil Zimmermann and his defense team are heartened by the substantial outpouring of support that has been demonstrated through numerous postings in this and other news groups. As we approach a crucial meeting with the prosecutor, it is particularly encouraging to see that many others are willing to devote themselves, both financially and through volunteered time, to Phil's defense. A number of postings have suggested a variety of support activities ranging from petitions to the President to gatherings in San Jose. Phil's lawyers are concerned that some of these activities would not assist in our efforts to protect his legal interests and could in fact hurt. The upcoming meeting with the prosecutor is not a court hearing, but is a private meeting of counsel. Neither Phil nor any judicial official will be present. It will not be a trial or hearing, but a discussion with the Assistant United States Attorney who is handling Phil's case. As such, it is not an appropriate setting for any public demonstrations of support for Phil or for unrestricted dissemination of cryptography. What Phil needs at that meeting is a quiet environment in which serious legal issues can be discussed candidly in an effort to avoid the necessity for any trial. Given the purposes and importance of the meeting, we -- and most especially Phil ZImmermann -- ask that any of his supporters not come to San Jose for any form of public demonstration. We encourage you instead to continue to support Phil's defense by financial contributions. Communications of support to government officials in Washington, DC are also appropriate and helpful. To the extent that effective representation of Phil's interest permits us to communicate with his supporters, we will periodically post announcements to this and other appropriate news groups. Philip L. Dubois Lawyer -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.7 iQCVAwUBLwJTObZ7C+AHeDONAQH1jAP/T6ZMSIAbgjfLliPbDALVMaOkuHBHGdeq ny0KPsZhIz6/K6ate8yr1uF84RtdolHMx73DBpSf6L9H7d3zcPVfy3ArAv44J/kZ jX0y36eCcn9pxhtU+41k9vkSLnGaNdiM5JKpehbRLgP0Gm+dAq0tbGNIXwL0XOEq CKmZXTWj/vs= =4hhB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

My "netcard"
by crawford＠scruznet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I thought y'all would be tickled by the "e-card" I made up in preparation for the MacWorld Expo. I made a bunch of cards from Avery 5371 Laser Business Cards (about twelve bucks for 250 cards, at most office supply stores). On the front is a nifty logo, my name, and my e-mail address. No phone or snail address. (I have a regular card for that, or I can write my number on the e-card if I want the recipient to have it). On the back is a headline "PGP Public Key Encryption Key", followed by these instructions: "Enter the key block exactly as shown. Check carefully to ensure that it is correct. Then remove the spaces between the 8 character groups and add to your public keyring." (Suggestions for wording? I don't have much space...) Following is my ASCII-armored public key, in courier font so it is fixed-width and everything lines up nicely. I added a space after every eighth character. Maybe I should use a narrower space and put it after every fourth. To save space (and user typing) I copied my key into a new keyring and removed all the signatures from it before extracting it as ASCII. It is also in a just-readable 5-point size. Finally, it says "For a fully-signed key, finger crawford(a)maxwell.ucsc.edu". One might ask, "if they can finger, why give the key?" The recipient might not be on the Internet. I don't think you can finger from AOL, and I'm sure you can't from UUCP, AppleLink or CompuServe. In any case, it will be more convenient for the people I meet at the show to enter my key on their laptops back at the hotel, without having to cruise the net looking for my key. I dig it. It needs some sprucing up on the graphic design, but it seems like it will be useful. Regards, Michael D. Crawford crawford(a)scruznet.com <- Please note change of address. crawford(a)maxwell.ucsc.edu <- Finger me here for PGP Public Key.

2 1

re: RFCs 1750 & 1751
by bart＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

adam(a)bwh.harvard.edu (Adam Shostack) wrote: > > > > FYI, RFCs 1750 & 1751 have been issued. 1750 discusses generating > strong random numbers. 1751 standardizes a means of converting a 128 > bit number to a set of English words. > > > Adam > > -- > "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." > -Hume Available for ftp at ds.internic.net (not at a lot of other normal rfc sources yet).

1 0

Re: My "netcard"
by Anonymous User 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Michael D. Crawford <crawford(a)scruznet.com> wrote: > One might ask, "if they can finger, why give the key?" The recipient > might not be on the Internet. I don't think you can finger from AOL, > and I'm sure you can't from UUCP, AppleLink or CompuServe. Yes you can! You just have to know how to use finger-by-email. :)

2 2