December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

RE: POTP Security
by Paul Koning 1695 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: Paul Jackman <jacktech(a)delphi.com> >Newgroups: talk.politics.crypto > Subject: Re: Elementrix One-Time Pad >.. > The algorithm will be published when patent protection is assured. > It is currently patent pending in several countries. I saw that comment earlier. It's rather a curious statement, given that the rule of publication vs. patents is that publication before FILING kills your ability to get the patent (in most countries) whereas publication after filing but before grant is not an issue at all. This explains why you often see a mad scramble in companies when something patentable is about to be announced at a trade show, or explained in a white paper... the filing has to be in the mail before that happens. But only just before... whether the patent office takes days or years to grant the patent doesn't matter. paul

2 1

Re: Diffie-Hellman in GF(2^n)?
by Carl Ellison 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From: David A Wagner <daw(a)CS.Berkeley.EDU> >Date: Sun, 12 Nov 1995 14:43:53 -0800 (PST) >``Hence the fields GF(2^n) out to be avoided in all cryptographic >applications.'' I wonder what this implies about elliptic curve applications over GF(2^n)...

1 0

Re: Lotus Notes RSA Implementation Question
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >1) What is the key size used by the USA licensed version? Charlie Kaufmann goes into moderate detail on Lotus Note's encryption scheme in "Network Security: Private communication in an public world" Each user has both strong (~512 bit) and weak (~400 bit) RSA keys. These, and strong (64 bit) or weak (40 bit) symmetrical session keys are used depending on the location of the users. Peter Trei Senior Software Engineer Purveyor Development Team Process Software Corporation http://www.process.com trei(a)process.com

1 0

Re: Exporting software doesn't mean exporting (was: Re: lp ?)
by tien＠well.sf.ca.us 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I realize I'm a little late in this thread, but I'm pretty far behind in my e-mail. I oversimplify here, but what's new. Anyway, all I wanted to say is that treaties are *not* superior to acts of Congress, as far as I know (they do override state law). I'm not an international lawyer, but it was held long ago that a properly ratified treaty is "equivalent to an act of the legislature." Foster v. Neilson, 27 U.S. (2 Pet.) 253, 314 (1829) (Marshall, C.J.). Note also that a treaty is not necessarily self-executing; if it requires appropriation of funds, Congress needs to act again. Whether Congress may decline to implement is unclear. Finally, the Supreme Court has also held that when there is conflict between an Act of Congress and a treaty, "the last expression of the sovereign will must control." The Chinese Exclusion Case, 130 U.S. 581 (1889). Treaties may still bind the U.S. internationally, putting the U.S. in default. But a U.S. person would not be able to enforce any treaty-based claim if a later U.S. law conflicts, at least in a U.S. court. Lee P.S. I'm not aware of telecom treaties that would shield one from ITAR violations, but would be interested to know of any. I generally refrain from public comment on ITAR because we are in litigation, as most of you know. Perry wrote: >"Peter D. Junger" writes: >> : I understand that you are a lawyer and I'm not, but it is my >> : understanding that international treaties come in to play on this sort >> : of thing. For instance, in international shipments, you can transship >> : items and substances that are illegal to possess in a country through >> : its ports provided that the materials do not originate or terminate >> : their shipment in the country and remain sealed in their containers >> : throughout. It is also my understanding that items like mail and phone >> : calls that happen to transit a country are not necessarily subject to >> : that nations laws provided that the nation is not a terminal point for >> : the mail or call or what have you. >> >> The trouble is that the ITAR's definition of export that is relevant >> to cryptographic software has nothing to do with exporting in the >> normal sense, and therefore it has nothing to do with transhipments. > >I am starting to have trouble believing you are a lawyer. Are you >actually telling me that treaties which explicitly indemnify >transshipment customers against local laws are superceeded by lower >level laws, in spite of the supremecy clause of the constitution? That >might be what the state department would tell you, but I'd have >trouble believing even a lobotomized mongoloid judge would let that >stand. Treaties are treaties, period. > >Perry

1 0

Re: The Crypto Applications we would rather not talk about
by tien＠well.sf.ca.us 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Anonymous remailer and PGP > Unusual applications > >I dont know if anyone else caught it last year >but High Times discovered anonymous remailers >and PGP for an article last year for >anonymous remote control of grow rooms. > Actually, the NYT Magazine did a cover story on pot growing within the last year, and toward the end one of the Americans doing grow rooms in Holland said specifically that he was looking toward anonymous electronic communications as a way to control his grow rooms remotely and securely. Lee

2 1

unsuscribe
by Mary Rose 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

unsuscribe

1 0

unsuscribe all news groups
by Mary Rose 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I wish to unsuscribe to all news groups as I feel I should be on a different planet. Could somebody notify all newsgroups on on my behalf please. Sincerely yours

1 0

New World Encryption
by James M. Cobb 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Friend, An item in 11 09 95 Edupage summarizes a NY Times new- sstory revealing Clinton's wish to spy on the world: OPPOSITION TO ADMINISTRATION'S ENCRYPTION STAND A coalition of 37 major U.S. technology companies has re- jected the Clinton Administration's proposed standard for data encryption, saying that they found Administration of- ficials unwilling to compromise. The government wants an encryption plan that will allow it to gather intelligence overseas, through the use of a key ^^^^^^^^ escrow encryption system. The high-tech companies want an encryption standard that would ensure privacy for both domestic and overseas users. ^^^^ ^^^^^^^^ (New York Times 8 Nov 95 C3) Their opposition to the Administration's plan has been joined by 12 conservative organizations who call it anti-consumer, anti-marketplace, and anti-progress. (New York Times9 Nov 95 C3) Cordially, Jim NOTE. To subscribe to Edupage: send a message to: listproc(a)educom.unc.edu and in the body of the message type: subscribe edupage <your first name> <your last name>

1 0

Current list of Remailers
by John Perry 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello Everyone, Since Raph annonced his new Type-II remailer list, I just wanted to let everyone know that I have updated the type2.list and pubring.mix files on jpunix.com to reflect the most up-to-date status of the Type-II Mixmaster remailers, You can connect to http://www.jpunix.com or ftp to ftp.jpunix.com to get the latest configuration files. John Perry - KG5RG - perry(a)alpha.jpunix.com - PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome! Packet Radio - KG5RG(a)WA4IMZ.#SETX.TX.USA.NA WWW - http://www.jpunix.com PGP 2.62 key for perry(a)jpunix.com is on the keyservers.

1 0

New feature for the Cryptography Technical Report Server
by David J. Bianco 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yes, it's still there! 8-) I posted a note to this list a few months ago announcing that I had set up such a service, and though we've only got a few reports I'm up to a couple o' hundred visitors a week. To me, the amount of activity indicates interest in the subject, but the lack of reports tells me that either authors are not interested in contributing, it's too difficult to contribute, or they don't know about service. I took some time this weekend and wrote a script to handle online submissions. This should make things easier on the authors, I think. If you have a technical report, journal article or book you'd like to index in CTRS (abstract only submissions are supported as well as full-text submission), point your browser at: http://www.itribe.net/CTRS/add-entry.cgi If you try this, please let me know how you liked it. I'm interested in making the submissions process as painless as possible. As always, the main CTRS page is http://www.itribe.net/CTRS/ or https://www.itribe.net/CTRS/ -- ========================================================================== David J. Bianco | Web Wonders, Online Oddities, Cool Stuff iTribe, Inc. | Phone: (804) 446-9060 Fax: (804) 446-9061 Suite 1700, World Trade Center | email: <bianco(a)itribe.net> Norfolk, VA 23510 | URL : http://www.itribe.net/~bianco/

1 0