December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Mixmaster Remailer FAQ
by Mixmaster 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Frequently Asked Questions about Mixmaster Remailers [FAQ Verson 1.5 Sept 22 1995] by Lance Cottrell This document is a semi-technical discussion of Mixmaster remailers. I wrote this to answer questions often asked by new users of Mixmaster, and to explain why you would want to use Mixmaster remailers. At the end of this FAQ is a list of currently active Mixmaster remailers. What is the most recent version of Mixmaster? I am pleased to announce the release of Mixmaster 2.0.2 It contains many bug fixes. It also provides random remailer chaining. What is Mixmaster? Mixmaster is a new class of anonymous remailers. Inspired by the existing "cypherpunk" remailers and discussions on the Cypherpunk mailing list <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>, Mixmaster is the next generation in the evolution of remailer technology. What is an anonymous remailer? Quoting from Andre Bacard's remailer FAQ: An anonymous remailer (also called an "anonymous server") is a free computer service that privatizes your e-mail. A remailer allows you to send electronic mail to a Usenet news group or to a person without the recipient knowing your name or your e-mail address. For a non-technical introduction to remailers (not including Mixmaster), I recommend Andre's FAQ. It is posted regularly to: alt.privacy,alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.anonymous or you can get it by sending mail to: To: abacard(a)well.com Subject: Help1 Message: [Ignored] What do I need to use Mixmaster remailers? Unlike other remailers, you can't just make your own message and send it to the remailer. Mixmaster's security comes in part from using a special message format. The disadvantage of this is that you need a special program to make the message for you. Once you have that program (the client) remailing is as easy as running the program, and telling it which remailers you want to use. How do I get the Mixmaster client software? There are two sites for distribution. The first is my machine: http://obscura.com/~loki/Welcome.html/ or ftp to obscura.com and read /pub/remail/README.no-export The other is by anonymous ftp to jpunix.com You will have to follow the instructions there to get Mixmaster. Because Mixmaster contains cryptography, it may not be exported from the U.S and Canada. The reason for the circuitous route to download Mixmaster is to show my good faith efforts to keep Mixmaster from being exported. I have heard rumors that someone has already broken this law, and that Mixmaster is available from Europe. I do not approve of this and will not support that site. How do I get the software to run a Mixmaster remailer? The remailer software is available from the same sites as the client. But I only see one Mixmaster distribution? The same program is used for both the client and the remailer. The only difference is in the installation. For the client you just compile it and you are ready to go. For the remailer, you need to set up mail forwarding and cron jobs. What kinds of computers does Mixmaster run on? Unfortunately, not PCs or Macs. But it is being ported to those right now. Mixmaster runs under UNIX. The only machine it is known not to work on is Dec Alpha. It has been tested on Linux, FreeBSD, SunOS 4.1.3, Solaris, and several others. It has been compiled and tested on Netcom. If you use it on a machine or service not on this list, please let me know so I can add it. How does Mixmaster work, and why should I use it? You should use Mixmaster if you want the highest level of anonymity available, or if your are tired of building remailer messages your self. A discussion of how Mixmaster provides this level of security is beyond the scope of this FAQ, but I put an essay on the subject on my home page <http://obscura.com/~loki/remailer-essay.html> Does Mixmaster use PGP? No, Mixmaster uses the rsaref package from RSA. Mixmaster uses its own keys and key file formats. To add a key to a key ring, simply append the key to your key file using your favorite text editor. When Was Mixmaster Released? Mixmaster was originally released on an experimental basis in late 1994. There were only ever two remailers running Mixmaster 1.0. Mixmaster 2.0 was released on May 3, 1995. There are now 18 publicly available Mixmaster remailers. What is the latest version of Mixmaster? Version 2.0.2 was released on Sept 22, 1995. Mixmaster remailers can now accept messages containing multiple Mixmaster packets. Mixmaster can be told to choose a random set of remailers to chain your message through. It will now route multiple packet messages over independant chains. Several minor bugs were fixed. Version 2.0.1 was released on May 27, 1995. The only changes from 2.0 are some improvements in the documentation, and the inclusion of a more up to date list of remailers. What remailers run Mixmaster? The most recent list of remailers is available on my homepage, along with the remailer list and key file for Mixmaster. You can simply replace your old files with the ones from my site to keep up to date. These files are in ftp://obscura.com/pub/no-export/ They are also available by ftp. Here is the current list of Mixmaster remailers. Send mail to the remailer with the subject remailer-key to retrieve the remailers Mixmaster key. mix mixmaster(a)obscura.com vishnu mixmaster(a)vishnu.alias.net crown mixmaster(a)kether.alias.net knight mixmaster(a)aldebaran.armory.com robomix robo(a)c2.org hroller hroller(a)c2.org syrinx syrinx(a)c2.org replay remailer(a)replay.com hacktic remailer(a)utopia.hacktic.nl crynwr remailer(a)crynwr.com spook remailer(a)spook.alias.net flame remailer(a)flame.alias.net gondolin mixmaster(a)gondolin.org q q(a)c2.org Armadillo remailer(a)armadillo.com precipice mixmaster(a)mix.precipice.com anon mixmaster(a)anon.alias.net secrets secret(a)secret.alias.net Since this is a new FAQ, I am sure it is far from comprehensive. Watch this space for changes to the FAQ. It will be evolving rapidly for a while. Please send any questions you think should be here to: loki(a)obscura.com My outpost on the WWW is <http://obscura.com/~loki/Welcome.html>

1 0

Netscape for OS/2, when? (Re: Another Netscape Bug)
by sentiono＠cycor.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 26 Sep 1995 05:58:19 -0400 (EDT) you wrote: >> It's not an exploit script, but you can find an auto crash "animation" >> for Ray's discovered bug on >> http://hplyot.obspm.fr/~dl/netscapesec/c1.html >> (or click from the updated http://hplyot.obspm.fr/~dl/netscapesec/) >Crashes the 16-bit Windows version 1.1N. >DCF Same here. For more information (not Netscape related), Web Explorer 1.02 for OS/2 also crashes for the long URL. I wish Netscape will port it to OS/2 (already ask them, but no comment from Netscape). I don't try it on Netscape 1.1N as it doesn't run reliably under Win-OS/2 (10 min -> crash! ;) ------------------------------------------------------ Sentiono Leowinata, Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, Canada System Engineer/Programmer Analyst - Cycor Communications Inc. sentiono(a)cycor.ca, 902-629-2488, http://www.cycor.ca/

3 2

RE: More on "Entropy"
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:29 PM 9/25/95, David Van Wie wrote: >David Van Wie wrote: > >>>The entropy E is defined by the sum across n states of -P_i log_2(P_i), > >Timothy C. May wrote: > >>Hah! Another physicist converted to the information-theoretic view of >entropy! > >Indeed. I was able to track down the literature, and it is most >interesting. I am still a little bit skeptical of the "superset including >thermodynamic entropy" school of thought, but I haven't finished reading all >of the materials yet! Clearly, the IT "version" of entropy is a well >defined and useful thing.... Well, the more you adapt to the information theory point of view, the more the Shannon-Kolmogoroff-Chaitin definitions become the natural ones, then the more the whole "thermodynamic" definition of entropy will seem the odd one. One is left with the conclusion that Gibbs-style entropy has _something_ fundamental to do with information theory, and can then consider what those relationships may be. But, perforce, one is left with the most basic interpretation of algorithmic complexity: the complexity of a system is related to the length of the algorithm describing it. A "random" system is one which has no shorter algorithmic description than itself. (The connection of this statement to IQ test questions about describing a sequence is left as an IQ test question for the reader.) --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."

1 0

Re: Please send me SSL problems...
by Christopher Allen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:04 AM 9/20/95, Jeff Weinstein wrote: > I'd just like to let all cypherpunks know that I'm really interested in >getting any feedback you might have about security problems with Netscape >products. I'm particularly interested in bugs in the our implementation >of SSL, and problems in the protocol that are not addressed in SSL 3.0. > > We have been collecting comments on SSL 3.0, and have started incorporating >that feedback into our spec. Please don't assume that our lack of response >means that we are ignoring your comments. Between Navigator 2.0 and >things like the SSL challenge and the RNG fire drill, we just have not had >the time to get a new rev of the spec out. Hopefully soon... As you may know, Jonathan, who is an active member this list, has already written about Consensus' intention to continue to upgrade RSAREF. We'd like to help make sure that RSAREF stays in sync with SSLREF as we upgrade it. For instance, the next major release of RSAREF will be encrypting the private key (which now has to be done outside of RSAREF.) One area in particular we could use some feedback on from you: Currently SSLREF makes 4 calls that are not in the published program interface of RSAREF. These calls are DES_CBCInit, DES_CBCUpdate, RSAPublicEncrypt, RSAPrivateEncrypt. With your license with RSA for RSAREF you are allowed to go under the published interface by using the DES routines only for securing the channel, and the RSA routines are limited to endpoint authentication only. >From what I've heard, SSLREF 3.0 may go beyond those limits, requiring SSLREF 3.0 developers only to use RSA's BSAFE rather than the less expensive (or at least, no up-front fee) RSAREF. What Consensus Development would like to do is extend the RSAREF API such that RSA's concerns as regards direct access to those routines is taken care of, and can be called by non-PEM/non-Mail applications such as SSLREF. We need to extend the API for PGP, so ideally anything new we add to the API should be general purpose as possible, yet also deal with RSA's issues. BTW, to explain RSA's issues regarding the RSAREF API: Consensus is contractually required to get prior approval before licensing RSAREF for any program that goes underneath the published API. This allows RSA to make sure that these routines are not used in patented ways that RSA does not have rights to. In designing new API and getting them to sign off on the new API allows us to offer licenses to anyone without getting RSA's prior approval. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ..Christopher Allen Consensus Development Corporation.. ..<ChristopherA(a)consensus.com> 1563 Solano Avenue #355.. .. Berkeley, CA 94707-2116.. ..<http://www.consensus.com/> o510/559-1500 f510/559-1505..

1 0

Hack Microsoft?
by Ray Cromwell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Microsoft recently got C2-security status approved for Windows NT by the National Computer Security Center, a division of the NSA. They are supposed to put systems through "laborious testing and review" before they approve C2. So, if one can find bugs in NT's security, one can toss a little more egg on the NSA's face and the sham that part of their activies to *help* to secure american computers. A simple violation of NT's C2 status would be to demostrate a flaw in it's memory protection implementation. Personally, I think NT is *riddled* with bugs waiting to be discovered. Hell, even the NT "service pack" is included in the C2 status, which I bet has plenty of holes. If Cypherpunks can find flaws that the NSA can't, or won't divulge, what does that say about their so-called COMSEC ability. -Ray

4 3

ADMIN: Sudden CP Vacation, rest up while you can...
by hugh＠ecotone.toad.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Toad.com (the cypherpunks host machine provided by John Gilmore) was down today for about 12 hours due to disk/netnews problems, and not the NSA or little green men (is there a difference...? :r) ||ugh Daniel Majordomo Potty Trainer Owner-Cypherpunks(a)toad.com hugh(a)toad.com

1 0

Re: Netscape "random" number seed generator code available
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <199509251159.EAA08528(a)mycroft.rand.org>, jim(a)acm.org (Jim Gillogly) wrote: >I'm nervous enough about all the Easter Eggs that have been reported in >Netscape, like the secret keystroke shortcut to get to Fishcam, or the >different behavior it exhibits when it finds a certain obscurely-named >directory at the top level. Would you please elaborate? TIA, - -- - -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMGdsfSoZzwIn1bdtAQG3ZwGAk5ZFceYsUmo9OgQJ9oVZGcNcXnorr9a2 cLP/xy3vB/COr3uKjfr0mcYY6JMMLxfa =nXHi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Re: Security Update news release
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <9509251617.ZM167@tofuhut>, jsw(a)netscape.com ("Jeff Weinstein") wrote: >-- >--PART-BOUNDARY=.19509251617.ZM167.tofuhut >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > Here is the press release we put out this morning regarding the fix >for RNG seed and stack overflow problems. Do the new versions use PGP's randseed.bin? If Netscape even only looks at data used to keep PGP secure, Netscape will be banned from my computer and every computer I am responsible for. -- For good. - -- - -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMGduUCoZzwIn1bdtAQFEgwGA3265JY1cahyqqd2VEe+1RPXI96DQBPRV r1EWdjxzjgXvxplLMagh9yWOPBq9OKRX =F3qb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

truerand
by Jeff Barber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Could someone please send me a copy of the truerand code Matt Blaze posted yesterday? I inadvertently deleted the message and Todd's Cpunk archives seem to have shut down about a month ago. Many thanks. -- Jeff

1 0

Re: Golden Coy Freeh
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.950925144659.21198A-100000(a)nic.cerf.net>, paulp(a)CERF.NET (Paul Phillips) wrote: >On Mon, 25 Sep 1995, John Young wrote: [...] >> If the head of the F.B.I. acknowledged that his agency was >> powerless to crack a cryptography program like Pretty Good >> Privacy, the stampede for that software on the Internet >> would make the run on Windows 95 look puny. > >That's a bizarre and naive statement. Is there anyone that thinks the >spread of strong crypto has been less than rapid only because people are >afraid it won't protect them against the government? Um, sorry, no. The general public doesn't use PGP. If the FBI director admitted that using PGP is safe even against the FBI, the general public just might become aware of it. Perhaps the statement isn't so naive after all. - -- - -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMGdpbioZzwIn1bdtAQG5zwGAmmSuPLdrDV9rBAUmJFuywUC4x1KgeVqP HiD9C8pP+L5xkZw8pyH8xhwfKPZeKOHb =w1IS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0