December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Applied Cryptography, 2nd Edition -- Errata version 1.2
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:49 AM 2/9/96, Bruce Schneier wrote: > APPLIED CRYPTOGRAPHY, Second Edition > > ERRATA > Version 1.2 - 1 February 1996 > ... Wow. Does this mean the Third Edition will be coming out soon? (Not to sound harsh, but that's a *lot* of errors still in the book...I thought a lot of reviewers were going to squish out these sorts of things?) --Tim [This Bible excerpt awaiting review under the Communications Decency Act] And then Lot said, "I have some mighty fine young virgin daughters. Why don't you boys just come on in and do em right here in my house - I'll just watch!"....Later, up in the mountains, the younger daughter said. "Dad's getting old. I say we should do him." So the two daughters got him drunk and did him all that night. Sure enough, Dad got em pregnant....Onan really hated the idea of doing his brother's wife and getting her pregnant while his brother got all the credit, so he whacked off first....Remember, it's not a good idea to have sex with your sister, your brother, your parents, your pet dog, or the farm animals. [excerpts from the Old Testament, Modern Vernacular Translation, TCM, 1996]

1 0

Money & CreditCard URLs
by norm＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here is a fragment of html that points to several online money or payment systems. The first two, SEPP & STT, are the two credit card protocols from the previously competing camps and out of which the new standard, SET, is supposed to emerge. STT and SEPP are vague in different ways. Perhaps their offspring will be more completely specified. They both hide the credit card number from the merchant. I would be pleased to receive further such URLs. <H3>Money Protocols</H3> SEPP; STT; NetBill Cybercash, and Ecash. Mondex First Virtual, <a href="http://www.w3.org/pub/Conferences/WWW4/Papers/246/">The Millicent Protocol for Inexpensive Electronic Commerce</a>; <A HREF="http://netmarket.com/nm/pages/account/sid=kcBEtk230F">NetMarket</A> Mark Twain Bank <P>

2 1

Blue Ribbons
by David K. Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- For as long as my 10-yard spool of blue ribbon and box of paperclips hold out, I'm sending a ribbon/paperclip to any snailmail address in the U.S. Note that each one is an individually hand-crafted work of art :-) Dave Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMRnw4cVrTvyYOzAZAQGXUQP/fu7/K7dkjSkbcDAgrOmVNH0OaUn6t5SP E6DKfyfz3Wlu2VIhxCAS0KGHaLdCSH1teGFfIuhwOWikq+FdidJjXjep04/MAuAe +KXI0QoaFYY4dVVi9qX8Uzz1igOHs2MXDXG/6eZ1AlSux+HG1DHPz44PyUY7flWP sVizJ7plH2w= =qrdr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------- "It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." Robert H. Jackson (1892-1954), U.S. Judge <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> My web page: http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/1148

1 0

Perry's whining
by Ed Carp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Why doesn't Perry just shut the hell up? I've got more important things to worry about than Perry's ignorant, fetid whining. Such as that CDA thing in the Telecommunications Bill. Anyone for suing Bill? -- Ed Carp, N7EKG Ed.Carp(a)linux.org, ecarp(a)netcom.com 214/993-3935 voicemail/digital pager 800/558-3408 SkyPager Finger ecarp(a)netcom.com for PGP 2.5 public key an88744(a)anon.penet.fi "Past the wounds of childhood, past the fallen dreams and the broken families, through the hurt and the loss and the agony only the night ever hears, is a waiting soul. Patient, permanent, abundant, it opens its infinite heart and asks only one thing of you ... 'Remember who it is you really are.'" -- "Losing Your Mind", Karen Alexander and Rick Boyes The mark of a good conspiracy theory is its untestability. -- Andrew Spring ---------------------------------------------------------------------- According to the Communications Decency Act, these are the words you may no longer use in your Internet correspondence: Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cock-sucker, mother-fucker and tits. The use of shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cock-sucker, mother-fucker and tits, may now earn you a substantial fine as well as possible jail time, should President Clinton sign this Bill into law. Please refrain from using shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cock-sucker, mother-fucker and tits, to protect your children as well as others, from their evil influence, thus keeping America "ideologically pure".

2 1

Re: Need a "warning" graphic of some kind for CDA
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[This email rated FZ] >Now that we all have web pages that are naughty and might be seen by >little children, I'd like to hve some kind of a graphic that can >universally be seen as a "Warning: The following material is unsuitable >for children and close-minded twits". (or words to that effect). A Frank Zappa icon would be highly appropriate for that - I don't know how his record publishers would feel about someone scanning it off an album cover and retouching for the web, but you could probably work out something. A Zappa IMG button with HREF to a copy of his album language rating label would seem very fitting. Before Bill Clinton signed the Exon Internet Censorship Bill, Tipper Gore brought you Music Censorship. Uncle Frank says "<quote here>" I suppose it's a bit beyond Fair Use? #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com / billstewart(a)attmail.com +1-415-442-2215 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

4 3

Re: Fair Credit Reporting Act and Privacy Act
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Mon, 5 Feb 1996, Duncan Frissell wrote: >> Unfortunately, [a privacy act] would also: >> >> * Require government registration of computers and databases containing >> information about people (whether these computers are used by business or >> individuals). This eases regulation of computers and future confiscation. At 07:04 PM 2/5/96 -0500, Tim Philp wrote: >I don't believe that this follows at all. All that would be required >would be a statutory obligation to comply with the legislation. And how can you enforce this statutory obligation? Privacy laws against private citizens run into the same problem as drug laws: You need intrusive means to enforce them. A law "protecting" privacy would require government supervision of what is on my computer and your computer. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

3 2

Re: RSA-China Crypto
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- BTW, there's an article about it on RSA's home page now. - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMRr/eyoZzwIn1bdtAQHRBAF+PNYhhytVCUQ5LDn9vM5sSFNJ9l0zKm8T mfzCvhN/eE/qLpl8fDi1gvLJDnrWte/Z =t5nc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Reasons in support of crypto-anarchy WAS Re: Why am I (fwd)
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:45 PM 2/8/96 -0500, Perry wrote: >You are annoying me. How much do people want to bet someone kills >Jim Bell in the next six months? 6 cypherbucks, if I can get the ecash software to work again. 12, if you'll accept killfiling as well... #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com / billstewart(a)attmail.com +1-415-442-2215 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

1 0

Re: DSN
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:47 AM 2/1/96 -0500, you wrote: >Anyone heard of DSN? I think thats the right order of the initials... >... its supposedly the only crypto-hardware solution for protecting an >entire network on the Internet. You put one of these $5,000 units at one >end of a lan, and another one somewhere else on the Internet, and the >company gaurantees secure, encrypted transmissions. The TCP/IP headers >and data are mangled, encrypted, etc. Anybody who supposedly makes the "only [whatever-category] hardware solution" for a problem has either not done their literature searching, is going for a really obscure market niche, doesn't understand the problem, or (very rarely) is the first product out on the bleeding edge, or has had their competitors go out of business on them. VSLAN (I forget the manufacturer) used to make an encrypting Ethernet board for PCs, Suns, etc., and did the software work behind it to get a B2 Red Book rating from the NSA. Boeing had a secure FDDI ring about the same time (~5 years ago.) Motorola has made several products for encrypting Ethernets, X.25s, and other networks, which the military buys and likes. Don't know which of these are still on the market, and what new toys have appeared. Meanwhile, the swIPe encrypted/authenticated IP protocol is available, and the similar IPng security protocols are emerging (i.e. the RFCs are written and folks are working on reference implementations.) They'll cost you $0 for software plus a 386-box for Linux, or a used Sun. >It uses 512bit keys and I was just wondering how the authentication is >done. Does anyone have any specs on these units? Supposedly it does not >require a 3rd party entity to verify that the two units are both valid, >when determining the initial public/key pairs. Perhaps there is hardcoded >data in the units that is used to verify this? The company supposedly has >some proprierty method ... how can we be sure this expensive unit can do >its job if information on the encryption has not been released. If you can't get the company to show you the protocols, at least under non-disclosure, ask them if it's NSA-certified and see what the NSA has to say about it. 512-bit keys seem a bit short for either RSA or Diffie-Hellman these days... >[RSA in 5 lines of Scheme, deleted.] Got any short prime-number generators? #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com / billstewart(a)attmail.com +1-415-442-2215 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

1 0

Re: Tell me whats wrong with this
by lunaslide＠loop.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Tell me whats wrong with this section of the telecom bill. I have a six >year old boy I am trying to raise >and it is hard enough to teach him respect and values without explaining why >Ned Beatty is being >bungholed in the woods by Billy Bob or why the Terminator splattered this >guys brains all over the >wall. > Tell me why parents should not be able to censor their OWN >television so that they may raise their children the way THEY see >fit...................Did your dad give you his old >playboys?.........NOOOOO............ <snip> A note here...my dad also did not go to jail for two years and get fined $100,000 when I weasled my way into his closet, without his knowledge, and found his Playboys at age five! >All I'm saying is it's tough to raise a child these days without the added >distortion of modern >programing and parents need not be denied any tool that can help them >achieve success. <rm for brevity> I didn't see anything really wrong with that part of the bill. What it will encourage is advertisers to withdraw from the more violent shows, and in turn will encourage television producers to prefer funding less violent shows. Since I don't watch television that often anyhow, it won't affect me very much. I do see where it will deny those who wish to see such shows the violence they wish to see. This is an issue, and it is indirectly caused by the bill, but it can not be used effectively against the govt. because they did not directly outlaw violence. It is particularly the CDA which boils my blood. One other concern, however, is that the lifting of restrictions on who can compete for what will result in mergers and buyouts of internet providers and that when only a few major companies own the bulk of the industry, the consumers will suffer from content restriction, technological lag and possibly price gouging. I note the car, oil, software and media industries as a few examples. For example, journalists have traditionally been in support of free speech and civil rights; they are, for the most part, rather liberal. However, they, particularly those in television journalism, have been notably absent in this battle over net censorship and have definitely not been there to support us. In fact, they have even spoken to our cause's detriment on many occasions, by the slant of their pieces! I can only attribute this logically to the fact that the internet takes attention away from their industry. The internet competes with television and print as an information source, and this the owners of the media do not want. It's sort of an unspoken conspiricy (appologies, I've already been accused of turning this into ConspiricyPunks once before:-) Nontheless, those are some of my concerns over the telcom bill aside from the obvious CDA. lunaslide On the meridian of time there is no injustice, only the poetry of motion creating the illusion of truth and drama. Henry Miller

1 0