December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Guerilla Internet Service Providers
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 2 Jan 96 at 16:32, Jeff Simmons wrote: > Jim Bell writes: > > >At some point, individual urban and suburban blocks could > >easily be "guerilla re-wired" for ISP access without serious > >trenching, etc. The phoneco would still be involved, but in > >a far lower-profit mode, as the supplier of a single T1 to a > >multi-block area. > > That's assuming the phoneco cooperates. Why shouldn't they? What does a hotel do, if not act as a local communication concentrator for guests? What about multi-company PBX installations? Most PBX's have for years supported the facility to handle entirely separate groups of trunks, often called "tenants." This facility is used in shared-receptionist, shared-PBX scenarios. Each incoming trunk call identifies the "tenant" or company to which the call is addressed, so the receptionist may answer appropriately. I even seem to vaguely remember hearing of apartments or co-ops that use a PBX instead of having direct subscriber lines to each apartment. Aggregation of communication facilities within the boundaries of public rights of way seems to be a long-standing practice, at least in the voice field. Voice and data are increasingly indistinguishable, the latest move in that direction being the practice of supporting a PBX with all-ISDN trunks. > Punknet is a 'Guerilla ISP'. Twenty of us share a 128k ISDN > line, distributed via high-speed modems. It's been running > fine for over a year now, but Pacific Bell has evidently > decided to get rid of us. I have to think there is something in the way you have gone about it that leaves you with a defect in the kinds of recourse any of the above examples would have and would not hesitate to use. Maybe you should organize the effort in some formal manner. Some states allow legal standing for unincorporated associations. Maybe a cooperative? Maybe (shudder) a corporation? > We've been told that what they're doing is probably illegal, > but it's the old problem: Where does an 800 lb. gorilla > sleep? Far enough off the ground to make it interesting. 800 lbs makes a satisfying crunch when it hits the ground. Maybe if you poke around you can find a few dozen other groups in similar situations, and make it far more expensive for the telco to harrass you than to deliver service as it is supposed to do. 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 iQBVAwUBMOuHBkjw99YhtpnhAQFG1gH5AQ+b/TXmddMcd/GzoqACnhLGW1Bv6v3Q wW+WnIVPWCL/qZpV6mLcACG9TSQtDJ0Sy1bk4Y9J22bL4/E7aogoNQ== =KjPD -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Guerilla Internet Service Providers (fwd)
by andr0id＠midwest.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Previous exchanges deleted... > >With a tightly focused beam (light is easy, I don't know about lower >frequencies), you can prevent interception except by very obvious physical >devices. (e.g. Someone in a cherry picker truck.) You may be able to >avoid the need to encrypt the link (and all the paranoia about key >management, advances in factoring etc. that that implies.) > >Bill The problem with this comes when you start creating links between much taller buildings like in San Fran. Any give building over 30 stories might sway a foot or so at any given time. Combine that with the other building and you might get a few feet of movement. (movement not including during an earthquake) :) (andr0id(a)midwest.net callsign: N9XLM) ( Computer Consulting & Management ) (P.O. Box 421 Cambria, IL 62915-0421) -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQENAzCsIi4AAAEH/1hb5+tO/n99Nbppf0ImLJ6AaVZ3NlZP0ZHwRQor00uA129i d4zWixNXxc8t2auaqN+asV99LpIip3/nQzBnjydiumeBdGLF2PR9+6X8X/RrqKa1 dVIukxM5Agg2eM6ih+0J38hgKJ3qzKXSz6sjYmpaxvbXZoHHOLUk/ZtHUKvvEyPw hnJEYnut8NUnIeK56lqeqRw86yoeRKymbfCdjdpgeY2aRwK2FJts8sbb7Fs10s4y jgxWIxIipBznbGUTh1hb2XrLGPENwk3E/qqXQJEsrySbtwdl6VgTVQjhDDEJMitL DYeiQ3W5EgxfcdbM1j2FwYu3P/dM6Y0I8xLMYT0ABRG0NmFuZHIwaWRAb2ljdTgx Mi5jb20gKG9pY3U4MTIuY29tIHN5c3RlbSBhZG1pbmlzdHJhdG9yKYkBFQMFEDCs LO90C7R/GkJcSQEB01cH/0KC3sd+u4OxMku5378SJktoN6QIQYLJ7uVbuV4S51yK NAotCGf4Wl6wwjynzZvXKU0H87oDuMiq7FybgMNL2n+4bQIZi0iz0lIuzwoMDu63 NrHUW9Kz42pOnhrEhrdkHhHL9O5GgD1yc40fJ3qw5h7LQEjDxgypyw0IFILFc34u LeRLliNibxKp8JwAxXNHWSgxu28TQvmnkHi0AHP6tJ/uZYe+4dqJtrMMsYFjzZaz DPmxD+dzbTwlQKtJaP1ZkDI0Sr072wrZDv+G86GyGBMX2lpSafpRitnxuUttjU9o wsQ9Qo5xiH1nZRCs/bDzJe/gng+GHzevixDIITurtNA= =SgPT -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

Re: 2047 bit keys in PGP
by Mark Grant, M.A. (Oxon) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 4 Jan 1996, Ian Goldberg wrote: > in a brute-force search. From Applied Crypto, 2nd ed, pp157-158, > setting or clearing one bit takes at _least_ 4.4*10^-16 erg of energy. I thought reversible computing could use an arbitarily small amount of energy in computations ? Or is it that you can use it to get down to this level of energy loss, but not below ? I'm not sure. Mark

1 0

Re: Duplicate messages
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 4 Jan 96 at 7:00, Dr. Dimitri Vulis wrote (to Ed Carp): > Please stop polluting this mailing list with test messages. > Thank you. > > (I wish I could set up procmail on this box.) I find it to be less work to scan messages marked for deletion by the Cohen/Alice/Hallam/Vulis/Nuri filter for the occasional meaningful one than to have to scan the main body of messages to delete the meaningless ones. 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 iQBVAwUBMOv240jw99YhtpnhAQHHfwIAgJU+MoL4jhk9Lv+H8U/ZpNOwaGVlC0Mr 1ij6fjrw3fnvYsd8ChoxxvWGjV30t2/ZagPHbuHezQLI/mHZy9fYwg== =AK3i -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: 2047 bit keys in PGP
by thomas＠inch.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:17 PM 1/3/96, Mark M. wrote: >I really don't see the point of using a key larger than 2048 bits. Any larger >key would actually be harder to factor than brute forcing the IDEA keyspace. the world will never need more than 640K of RAM? <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> the Forest will always be there...and anybody who is Friendly with Bears can find it. - A. A. Milne

2 1

Re: Answer: Windows Eudora and PGP
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:48 PM 1/3/96 -0500, you wrote: >Run, don't walk, to check out: > > <http://www.panix.com/~jgostl/wpgp> > >Qualcomm's own Eudora support team recommended it, and it works seamlessly. >To use it with Eudora, important point: after installing WPGP, You make it sound so easy. Problem is, installing this thing was clunky. Took me a couple of times to make it even appear to install. >go into >Options|Select Keystrokes and make sure "Use Capture mode" and "Use Select >All" are selected >(and "Use Memorizer" should -not- be selected), At least that seems to work... >< otherwise >you'll get errors about 'no selected text'. That's it; you're up and running. > >Example of using WPGP: After writing your message as usual in Eudora, to >encrypt simply click on WPGP's "Enc" button and then click on the window >containing your message; that's it, very slick. Another example: If you get >a PGP-encrypted email and want to reply, just hit Eudora's Reply as usual >(this will ">"-quote the entire original email as usual including the PGP >block), click on WPGP to "Dec"rypt, and click anywhere on your reply >window... it will pick out the PGP block, decrypt it, inform you about valid >signatures etc., and automatically paste the reply back into your window in >the proper place WITH PLAINTEXT PROPERLY QUOTED, as if you'd got the message >straight in the clear and hit 'Reply'. > >Highly recommended. > >Herb I apreciate your enthusiasm, but it has failed to work a number of times for me. Perhaps you should study your instructions a bit more carefully for errors. After I get to the end of the message on Eudora, I select WPGP and follow your instructions by clicking on the ENC button. At this point, I can't maximize Eudora again to "click on the window containing your message" (as you asked). The system asks me for my password, I type it, but when control is returned to Eudora I see neither a signature nor encryption. Frankly, it appears to me that the biggest threat to our security at this moment are the programs which ostensibly are supposed to protect it. I wish I could be more appreciative.

1 0

Re: Massey, CEO of Compuserve, on Internet
by Robert A. Rosenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 16:30 1/3/96, Tony Iannotti wrote: >On Wed, 3 Jan 1996, Robert A. Rosenberg wrote: > >> CIS always knows where you are dialing in from. Here is the start of a >> typical connection (using the Mac Program NAVIGATOR). >> >> >0001NUH [snip] >> That NUH identifies that I am calling in via a V34 Node in NYC and the T01 >> says I got the first modem on the Rotory. If CIS wanted to restrict access >> via the NYS nodes, that NUH would be an adequate flag to trigger this >> action. > >Wouldn't this require some software routines added to check for this? I >expect the decision to build or buy is what CIS is now weighing. Also, I >would imagine that a German could always call a POP outside the country if >they wanted to pay for it..... (note that I am still not in favor of the >action, but these are probably CIS's considerations.) Yes it would require that the Node be checked in the Software. What I was responding to was a claim that there is no way of telling where I am connecting from (which I disproved). As to calling a non-German Node, that is always an option.

2 1

Microsoft has a way to go on E-Mail
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It looks to me as if Microsoft has a way to go on e-mail. Every message I send to the list generates long bounce messages sent back to me. I assume others are getting the same thing. For example, just the latest one, sent from Postmaster <postmaster(a)microsoft.com>: The following recipient(s) could not be reached: Zeke Lucas on 01/03/96 22:50:19 The recipient name is not recognized [MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:northamerica:RED-70-MSG] Bruce E. Johnson on 01/03/96 22:50:19 The recipient name is not recognized [MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:northamerica:RED-70-MSG] Christopher Carper on 01/03/96 22:50:19 The recipient name is not recognized [MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:northamerica:RED-70-MSG] John Douceur on 01/03/96 22:50:19 The recipient name is not recognized [MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:northamerica:RED-70-MSG] Mike Montague on 01/03/96 22:50:19 The recipient name is not recognized [MSEXCH:MSExchangeMTA:northamerica:RED-70-MSG] Etc. Either Microsoft handles undeliverable mail different from most other places, or they don't want employees getting the Cypherpunks list (:-}). I suspect the former. --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

I don't proofread...sorry.
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:30 PM 1/4/96, Jim Ray wrote: >As to the "English lesson," I feel that proofreading messages to >1200+ people is more important than proofing private e-mail, but >some folks evidently disagree with me. For an example of posts >which I feel are properly proofed, please see Tim's posts. They >aren't perfect English (mine aren't either) but there's evidence >that he takes the time to proofread them. This not only makes ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >his posts easier to read, it makes them [IMO] more convincing. >Of course, I usually agree with Tim anyway. [Hi Tim] I'll shut Thanks for the positive comments, but I need to clear the air about this "proofreading" business: I usually don't proofread my posts. I write 'em as fast as I think 'em, then I send 'em! A few of my longer essays I've proofed, reworked, etc., but mostly I just respond by typing directly and then sending. I no longer even use a spelling checker, in fact. This can probably be guessed by some of you, as I sometimes leave out words, which careful proofing would normally catch. I figure that informal communications are tolerant to such informal usages. I also tend to write in a conversational style, so the agonized structuring and restructuring that some writers apparently feel they must go through does not enter in to my own writing. (I'm a relatively fast typist, and am comfortable composing at the keyboard, which not everone is, of course.) One thing I try to scrupulously check are the distribution list and the other message headers, usually because I edit down the distribution list and sometimes to change the thread title to something more closely related to my actual message (as I have done here). --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Microsoft has a way to go on E-Mail
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) said, >Either Microsoft handles undeliverable mail different from most other >places, ... I believe that this is what Mr. Bill called "Eating your own dog food." ;-) Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell The NEW(!) e$ Home Page: http://thumper.vmeng.com/pub/rah/ >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf(a)clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<<

1 0