December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Netscape gives in to key escrow
by norm＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Netscape browser chose the wrong time, this morning, to tell me that my demo copy was about to expire.

1 0

Re: Why Netscape employees should not leave...
by pcw＠access.digex.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Of course given the great market success of the other Clipper products, I wouldn't be counting my stock options before they hatch. Browsers are not that complicated. Nor are HTTP servers. A US-only, truly secure system would be easy to build. SSL is designed to be expanded to include new algorithms. It's pretty good in that respect. If I were considering launching a Clipperized Browser, I would really consider the negative effect it would have on its marketability and its stock price.

2 1

Netscape GAK page.
by loki＠obscura.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I have gone back and improved the "Netscape GAK?" page based on a good nights sleep and some helpful suggestions (thanks you all who mailed me about the page). I would appreciate feedback on the page, especially from Netscape or its employees (in an official or unofficial capacity). I have tried to be even handed in my presentation of the information, while not hiding the fact that I strongly disagree with the stance that Netscape has taken. <http://www.obscura.com/~loki/GAK.html> -Lance -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMMCoVPPzr81BVjMVAQF5vQf/R1AgxAEhjR8AkD29WbRFHqA7wpw5R6dq B2YJGM9J2g5g9y6gf/YKTGVp/Lp4qmExhi3zZPkOsHefF/xufBZ7N42depO9F0dS cqGcCq8+qhTYeNhjjqMn1DgM9oeuVJdDCF1KUonUhQiiWthTAlgFLsWwcQznq7FK J533laBREzrXmxAQbfxnw/cc7J9wRPuzUgDQ61RlO8x1VtZxugSvbVpFDpDBYL1A W028bnKJfK52cp6nliKjjk6k5ElccPsLk82mS0Fyhfh+Gt4QMLx+UHuKgaVwGHsa m6sAXMxuWDg2x3myW0NKxs8qj9hDZzwG4T7/QFSKbkQkQGFIvWa+Fw== =h3v6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ---------------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell loki(a)obscura.com PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. Mixmaster, the next generation remailer, is now available! http://obscura.com/~loki/Welcome.html or FTP to obscura.com "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche ----------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Cypher secure versus computationally unbounded adversary
by solman＠MIT.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi all, I've just come up with a method for implementing and encryption algorithm that is absolutely secure from passive attacks by a computationally unbounded adversary. Is this a new capability, or am I reinventing the wheel here? Thanks, Jason W. Solinsky

2 2

Suggestion for CP browser
by fc＠all.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I think a CP browser is just the ticket to change the way the world works. How about this: - CP writes a browser with PGP or better quality crypto. - CP makes it freely available to any individual - CP licenses it to corporations for $1 per copy - Funds produced go to support worthy causes, support a permanent home for CP, and support anti GAK efforts (lobying, etc.) I think the CP browser should include an embedded language (not Java - maybe a version of LISP) that does a far better job than Java of assuring limitations on what programs can do. It should also support faking the source of a browser request (for privacy of the user), all forms of digital cash, firewall-type forwarding, pseudonyms, and all of the other things that CPs fight for. -> See: Info-Sec Heaven at URL http://all.net/ Management Analytics - 216-686-0090 - PO Box 1480, Hudson, OH 44236

2 1

Re: prototype slot-machine
by printing＠explicit.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>On Sat, 2 Dec 1995, sameer wrote: > >> I've written up a slot-machine thing for ecash, very >> experimental, very buggy, not very slick, (i'd like to get the >> technical bugs worked out before i put a fancy wrapper on it) and i'd >> *like* to announce it here for testing, but I'm worrying about >> gambling laws.. >> any thoughts? >> On Sun 3 Dec 1995, Attilla wrote: sure, just put it up on a foreign server. bahamas, caymans, etc. >there are several gambling bits going on from what I read. I dont gamble >so I never noted any addresses down, but someone should remember or have >it in their archives. Try this site: Offshore Infomation Services in Anguilla, http://www.offshore.com.ai/ William Knowles printing(a)explicit.com ... //!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\ Graphically Explicit Printing - Advertising - Graphic Design 1555 Sherman Avenue - Suite 203 Evanston IL., 60201-4421 800.570.0471 - printing(a)explicit.com Accept, Embrace, Adapt, Create \\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//!\\!//

4 3

Re: Barring access to Netscape
by Frank Stuart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> >Shouldn't be too hard to hack this into Apache. > > Should my commercial release of Apache/SSL include this? ;-) >(I could make it into a configuration option, so that if the >User-Agent is Mozilla, it passes Back a Refresh: header with the >response....) Well, I think configurable redirects based on User-Agent would be a good thing. However, if you don't control the server being used you can still use client pull to redirect on a page-by-page basis. I've been made aware of at least one non-Netscape browser that does client pulls, so checking the User-Agent would be desirable, but (AFAIK) that isn't possible without modifying the server, using cgi, or something along those lines. I've got the perl script to automatically add (and remove) the meta-http lines to individual pages more or less done, but I won't release it just yet (if at all). Jeff Weinstein's promise to make Netscape's GAK policy publically available is an important step in the right direction. However, whatever their policy statement ends up saying, it should be obvious that their level of commitment to opposing GAK is minimal at best. | (Douglas) Hofstadter's Law: Frank Stuart | It always takes longer than you expect, even fstuart(a)vetmed.auburn.edu | when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.

1 0

Re: Talking to Jim
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sat 2 Dec 1995 05:24 one of the Alices wrote on the subject of Jim's comments about "bubbles" and such, and ended up automatically filtered to my Deleted folder (THAT will teach me to be curious about what ends up there!): > The market seems to "think" that it's a better present judge > of what Netscape has than he does. It's almost as though > the "market" has developed a "mind" of its own. Well, of course! Markets are the most efficient integration of the minds of the participants, hands down. > It's own particular neural network. Exactly. Literally. And huge, too. > It's almost as though there is automated software at work. There is: Wetware. Massive concurrent processing, heavy parallelism, inefficient I/O. Distributed, redundant memory. Inefficient but infinitely adaptable interprocessor routing. Capable of handling any degree of outage. All elements individually expendable. Self-replicating processors that have significant lead time but integrate smoothly into the net. Designs and builds its own outboard peripherals and interconnects. Best damned planetary computing system in this star system. But I diverge... It's not always right (though self-fulfilling prophecy is often a big part of the equation), and it often misses the anolamies, but because it IS an integration is precisely why it may mean something different than you suggest. It may in fact be the best barometer we have of the true depth of the exploding Internet phenomenon. Completely aside from the question of whether or not the seeming Netscape overvaluation bubble bursts, etc., Netscape's share price more directly reflects the personal involvement and upward view of real people with respect to the Internet/WWW than anything else we have. Remember, there are still naysayers out there, declaiming in places from books to columns to TV, while the reality is that computers are now outselling televisions, and a key new form of synergistic human communication is exploding in exponential growth. Humans deal on a personal level only moderately well with linear processes, and poorly with geometric processes -- it's understandable that the growth of the Internet/WWW and the implications of thereof would be late in being recognized and be incorrectly understood until sometime AFTER the changes have rocked the society. Markets, though, more accurately reflect what people are actually doing, what they are willing to do, and what they think "in their gut" will happen. While they also reflect what people might LIKE to happen, they reflect, too, that what people WANT to happen, their desires often MAKE happen. Capitalize ME to the tune of $5 billion, for instance, and I may be influential not only during the course of your life but the lives of your great-grandchildren. Selling Netscape short may or may not be a wise move -- selling market processes short is usually a fool's exercise in self-delusion. We Jurgar Din (that will have to suffice: I do not yet live in a free country) +"The battle, Sir, is not to the strong alone. It is to the+ +vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, Sir, we have no + +election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now + +too late to retire from the contest." -Patrick Henry 1775 + -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQBVAwUBMMCsBEjw99YhtpnhAQE04QH8C+jk59lxyAqkVlfhd2VLw3TJKnECdXXJ fNE7S0QZyd5eqFnZ4wTyHeX18YfTg+xiFZPPfxpRCdgO/x2K8sxFWQ== =/2cN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Netscape Feeding Frenzy
by Aleph One 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It sad to see to many bright people trial and condem a company or its employees in such a short time and with so little evidense. Yes, I like you, dont want to see GAK on Netscape products. But this is ridiculous. It reminds me of the Microsoft Win95 fiasco. (And I do hate Microsoft). Remember all the heat they took just because someone claimed that the installation software took a snapshoot of your system and network and then gave it to Microsoft through the MSN. It even made it into trade magazines like InformationWeek. Of curse they then had their tail between their legs when they realized that it was just the registration wizard that asked for permission and that the information uploaded was much less intrusive. Aleph One / aleph1(a)dfw.net http://underground.org/ KeyID 1024/948FD6B5 Fingerprint EE C9 E8 AA CB AF 09 61 8C 39 EA 47 A8 6A B8 01

1 0

Re: [NOISE] Barring access to Netscape
by Robert A. Rosenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 15:41 12/1/95, Herb Sutter wrote: >At 14:26 12.01.1995 -0500, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: >>If you want to see one way of locking out Netscape users, check out this >>URL which points at a Web Page that will not allow access by Netscape Users > >Just a personal note... while I am strongly in favour of security, this >seems rather petulant and knee-jerkish. > >JeffW: Please add a configuration option to let users override the "Mozilla" >ident, so that they can continue to use Netscape at all sites. I personally >won't use the override, though; if a site is going to insist on trying to >frivolously exlude me as a user based on nothing but the browser I choose to >use, they aren't serious anyway. > >>(the guy is ticked off at them trying to establish their own standards) - > >The _market_ establishes standards (been proven time and time again). His >reaction sounds pretty childish to me, but YMMV... > >Herb I am not advocating his gripe (or the security question) - My message was posted to provide an example of how to treat Netscape users special by locking them out IF you have a need/desire to do so (which was what was being requested).

1 0