December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: To find the clock speed of a sun workstation
by mch＠squirrel.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Feb 12, 16:16, Ashfaq Rasheed wrote: } Subject: To find the clock speed of a sun workstation } Hi } } Is there anyway of finding the clock speed of the CPU on a Sun workstation? } As far as i know it can be found only by rebooting the machine and using } module-info? And I believe that the module-info does a no-op loop for a } a known number of times and calculates the time taken. } } I would like to know if there is anyother way to finding it. If you run /usr/etc/devinfo -vp (Sun OS 4.1.x), or /usr/sbin/prtconf -vp (Solaris 2.x) you'll get a line which looks like clock-frequency: 02625a00 This is the clock frequency in hexadecimal in Hz. The above example is from an IPX (40 MHz). Another example. On an SS1000E with two 60 MHz processors, you'll get output indicating two CPU devices each starting with Node 0xffd8e6ac clock-frequency: 03938700 device_type: 'cpu' again 0x03938700 == 60000000 On an Ultra 170E one gets Node 0xf006ea64 manufacturer#: 00000017 implementation#: 00000010 mask#: 00000022 sparc-version: 00000009 ecache-associativity: 00000001 ecache-line-size: 00000040 ecache-size: 00080000 #dtlb-entries: 00000040 dcache-associativity: 00000001 dcache-line-size: 00000020 dcache-size: 00004000 #itlb-entries: 00000040 icache-associativity: 00000002 icache-line-size: 00000020 icache-size: 00004000 upa-portid: 00000000 clock-frequency: 09f437c0 reg: 000001c0.00000000.00000000.00000008 device_type: 'cpu' name: 'SUNW,UltraSPARC' and 0x09f437c0 == 167000000 Watch out for other lines labelled, clock-frequency, these are for other devices. You want the one for the CPU device(s) (i.e. node with device type 'cpu'). -- Mark Henderson -- markh(a)wimsey.bc.ca, henderso(a)netcom.com, mch(a)squirrel.com PGP 1024/C58015E3 fingerprint=21 F6 AF 2B 6A 8A 0B E1 A1 2A 2A 06 4A D5 92 46 cryptography archive maintainer -- ftp://ftp.wimsey.com/pub/crypto ftp://ftp.wimsey.com/pub/crypto/sun-stuff/change-sun-hostid-1.6.2.tar.gz

1 0

Re: Cypherpunks vs. Coderpunks [CORRECTION]
by lmccarth＠cs.umass.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I wrote: > If you want to join coderpunks, my life is made slightly easier if you > mailto:coderpunks-request@toad.com rather than sending directly to me. <sigh> the coderpunks-request address will work, but mailto:coderpunks-approval@toad.com is actually the address that prompts Majordomo to send me a nicely formatted subscription template, and makes my life a little easier. Sorry about the blather. I plead sleep deprivation. Futplex <futplex(a)pseudonym.com> (Volunteer) Coderpunks Bouncer -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMSAeNinaAKQPVHDZAQEYawf9HbnbJLfd9HnCp7hoYHoW6pMAm8fTgcmk 0SkAHoeUsh7neNwEtYAt+KTCv65fS3/YY5Tt8JmQ8D19q5tjjfggYuEfEdqC71FK 16WAKbDN66ucpQmdNkfWExafr4Cw+7jhW3VpJIByDIRdS9opLfK5VNwVETaRHstR bBal9Cr397siQ9WsXYWfw7w3tLxg54T3NP/sXcyNHQ+C6ZJSxUXB1YEFossKCduf cJp3KWfi2IKcD65fy05W164DQmtcL42iwkgHUQoCwilZYE+PEuAOTMqu26dfeTqu iil9dLIEd7lEkHxlFU2ufHDCoSj89zO515FRV1/B+33T8bqzJt3OdA== =a85O -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: CyberAngels
by joseph＠genome.wi.mit.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

not sure if this is the right place. I agree with allen, about the issues of 'nym. But looking at other aspects of these cyberangels I'm unsure how to feel. On one hand they seem resonable, protecting only the children. "Acts bewteen consenting adults are okay" say they. But the protect the children was what the CDA hid under. --Joseph

1 0

Working Very Carefully
by James M. Cobb 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Friend, A 02 11 96 Bloomberg newsstory from Cannes, headlined ----------------------------------------------------- EUROPE'S ONLINE INDUSTRY TAKES SHAPE, COMPETITION HEATS UP reports: Even as they increase their subscriptions in Europe, online services are beginning to work on the legal and social aspects of the services they are providing. How very thoughtful! But what do they have in mind? Jack Davies, president of AOL International, has the answer: The issues involved are "bigger than a prosecutor in Ger- many, bigger than just Germany, it's a global issue. It in- volves a legal structure that may not have kept up with the technology and I think as an industry we have to work very carefully through this issue." Expanding from the Reich to the globe, what does Hans have in mind? DEUTSCHLAND UBER ALLES! But when it comes to contracting,...Jack's in charge. Cordially, Jim NOTE. The newsstory's www.nando.net online filename: info12_8583.html This critical essay was composed 02 12 96.

1 0

Re: Stewart Baker's web site & OECD international crypto policy
by jf_avon＠citenet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

John Gilmore <gnu(a)toad.com> reported: >My favorite was his summary report on the OECD meeting in December, >~steptoe/286908.htm, at which the US tried to parade some of the >fruits of its behind-the-scenes efforts to convince other governments >to become as authoritarian as the US government on crypto policy. Why help "potential enemies"? Why a govt risks it's cherished 'national security'? >If the US government can quietly convince other countries to support >Clipper-like systems (including "mandatory key escrow" and "trusted It probably means that they already cracked the code... :) Definitely, they are insane beyond the safety level... JFA **** NEW PGP 2.6.2 KEY ********* 2048 bits Key ID:24201BA1 1996/02/13 Jean-Francois Avon <jf_avon(a)citenet.net> Key fingerprint = 23 B6 24 31 86 67 FB 35 C7 A7 AF 12 A1 61 E9 3D **** OLD KEY: DO NOT USE ANYMORE UNLESS FOR VERIFYING SIGNATURES **** 1024 bits Key ID:57214AED 1995/10/04 Jean-Francois Avon <jf_avon(a)citenet.net> Key fingerprint = 84 96 76 AE EB 7C AB 15 88 47 87 B0 18 31 74 9F

1 0

Re:
by lunaslide＠loop.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

}>Yet if I read you correctly earlier, you don't think the USG has the right }>to regulate those communications. Why the distinction ? } }Okay, obviously I need to drop down a gear & explain *my* feelings: } }Part of the definition of a "sovereign nation" is to define and carry }out both high and low justice over it's domain - the absolute right }of a sovereign. Is not mentioned in the US constitution because it }was a given. <-------No offense, but what the fuck kind of logic is that? }It is not a given. It was not put in because that is not the type of }government the founders endevored to erect. Read on please, I'll explain }myself. }Further, the purpose of the US Constitution is to: }a) define what the sovereign was (three branches - rock, scissors, & paper) }b) set forth certain limitations on that sovereign ("Congress shall make } no law...") }c) define certain duties of the sovereign (regulation of foreign commerce...) <rm> I cut the rest of your post because the main premise is not correct. The goal was not to create a sovereign government. It clearly states in the Declaration of Independence that the power belongs entirely to the people and that the government is a group of officials who are elected to do the bidding of the people. They have what power we give to them (theoretically, of course. They don't seem to listen much, do they?). sovereign n. 1. A person, governing body, etc., in whom the >supreme power or authority is vested.< adj. 1. Exercising or possessing supreme authority or jurisdiction. 2. Independent, and free from external authority or influence: a sovereign state. This is not what our government is. They are liable to us and the ultimate power lies with us. They are not independent and free from our influence. The opening statements of the Declaration of Independence, before they get to the complaints, outlines the the founding fasthers intentions in forming a government of their own. I have already quoted it in another post. "...to institute new Government, laying it's foundation on such principles and organizing it's powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safty and Happiness." The government seems more intent on _affecting_ our safty and happiness. It's been said before and it will continue to remain true, the govt scares up a new boogyman to frighten the public into giving it more power until finally the people do not have enough power to take back the power thwy gave to the govt. Democracy becomes facism through fear. What really confuses me is how most people in this country do not understand the logic behind this. lunaslide "Prohibition... goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes... A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." - -- Abraham Lincoln On the meridian of time there is no injustice, only the poetry of motion creating the illusion of truth and drama. Henry Miller ________________________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCPAzEX3QEAAAEEAOGQjhnqGH29pO1WDaXs5GFOVPhCBWyYEk9XEwRmscjveWzH AhA6DeOA480zWNqQURyqE2yPmR8WzT+OXYqmeiQiycKyFA41Vs/Ruf+gXXxe7uXS L5BK3K8oKbfoH0D5/TAkMT4r6BprXFQz4pFc3gY2SSaSPElpMjKHaKBsRsyRABEB AAG0HUplZmYgQ29ubiA8bHVuYXNsaWRlQGxvb3AuY29tiQCVAwUQMRffHzKHaKBs RsyRAQGNhwP9E9xEZ9/LCKnhgtnrqgD7pDoXG2pCy8FoyfFjoImGkG+jF1wELXmB Z0mf8F8CgYkys0mif1XeGDMelr1gzlZAm6LgQt4kcvztMW/aRLn18QP+iwltVT/L p8D37mitOjvuk46sWgAChIaPPPIeg/EaYQjQkmlpWKsEYIoTRy+E8mU= =4Gku -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

Re: V-chips, CC, and Motorcycle Helmets
by lunaslide＠loop.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

}At 07:20 AM 2/12/96 +0000, Deranged Mutant wrote: }>> Parents had that ability before. Cable boxes have a "perental control key" }>> on the side that enables them to lock out "offensive" channels. It works }>> quite well and is fairly hard for the kidlets to defeat. (I used it to }>> lockout the religious stations and home shopping channels.) }> }>When I was a kid some friends down the street knew how to unlock the }>Channel 100 XXX movies with a paper clip. A V-chip would hopefully }>be more sophisticated, but then again, so are today's kids... } }Sshhh! You are not supposed to tell them that! <rm> } }Yeah, I know it can be hacked. I also know that if they are that interested }in sex, NOTHING I do is going to stop them. (Which is as it should be. If }they have no exposure to any sexual material as a youth, some rather nasty }problems tend to crop up as adults. (Take a look at the studies of sexual }predators.) But that is a point avoided by the moralists...) <rm> What's really funny here is that the harder you make it for kids to get into something, the more they learn in order for them to get into it. Parents who impose restrictions on their children using all sorts of methods (hiding stuff, using the channel lock out deal, blah blah blah) are challenging their children to use deduction and reasoning to get at what they want. In the case of the v-chip, channel lockout, site blocking software, etc., the parents are turning their children into the most horrendous creatures of all...OH! Cypherpunks! lunaslide "Prohibition... goes beyond the bounds of reason in that it attempts to control a man's appetite by legislation and makes a crime out of things that are not crimes... A prohibition law strikes a blow at the very principles upon which our government was founded." - -- Abraham Lincoln On the meridian of time there is no injustice, only the poetry of motion creating the illusion of truth and drama. Henry Miller ________________________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCPAzEX3QEAAAEEAOGQjhnqGH29pO1WDaXs5GFOVPhCBWyYEk9XEwRmscjveWzH AhA6DeOA480zWNqQURyqE2yPmR8WzT+OXYqmeiQiycKyFA41Vs/Ruf+gXXxe7uXS L5BK3K8oKbfoH0D5/TAkMT4r6BprXFQz4pFc3gY2SSaSPElpMjKHaKBsRsyRABEB AAG0HUplZmYgQ29ubiA8bHVuYXNsaWRlQGxvb3AuY29tiQCVAwUQMRffHzKHaKBs RsyRAQGNhwP9E9xEZ9/LCKnhgtnrqgD7pDoXG2pCy8FoyfFjoImGkG+jF1wELXmB Z0mf8F8CgYkys0mif1XeGDMelr1gzlZAm6LgQt4kcvztMW/aRLn18QP+iwltVT/L p8D37mitOjvuk46sWgAChIaPPPIeg/EaYQjQkmlpWKsEYIoTRy+E8mU= =4Gku -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

Re: Assasination Politics
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"jimbell(a)pacifier.com" "jim bell" 12-FEB-1996 04:18:43.34 >>How much weight is Lotus going to give the opinions of a bunch of >>unbalanced sociopaths when they're thinking about making deal to gak those >>extra 24 bits? Not much, I'll bet. >If "AsPol" actually WORKS, Lotus won't have to "deal" to get "those extra 24 >bits." >Lotus should announce that they have heard of this new idea on CP, called >"Assassination Politics," and have assigned a couple dozen programmers to >implement it by July 1996. They'd back (guarantee) the prizes for the first >such organization, and they'd sell the software to others. At that point, I >think the resignations from government office would skyrocket. It seems likely that any overt organization operating an Assasination Politics scheme will be outlawed... even though the most logical reading of current laws says that it isn't illegal (except for the gambling part). An anonymously constructed one seems a lot more likely - which Lotus could then anonymously patronize. I do have some ideas for making such possible, but I'm waiting on a defense of three points before I'll release them. These points are: A. My previously mentioned problem with a limited but non-libertarian organization. B. I don't trust the average person to look ahead enough to make this (or other Anarcho-Capitalist) schemes work. In other words, the average person has to be able to see that a non-limited organization is a danger to them, etcetera. Moreover, Jim Bell is ignoring the other sources of propaganda than government in convincing the average person that someone is doing something wrong (when, by my ethics at least, they aren't) - such as religion and various organizations like the PFDA. Admittedly, as I've stated before, the requirement for some money would help, at least to the degree that our economy is meritocratic. (A growing tendency, fortunately.) If most people are on a subsistence wage (the result of free trade & automation with varying human abilities), they can't afford enough money for Assasination Politics. (Yes, I'm an intellectual Elitist. Deal with it.) C. While I may not like dealing with the average person very much (see above), I don't want to see them starving in the streets. I can see governmental welfare as being necessary for this, although the private form is definitely preferable. (And yes, I can justify this as being a libertarian - if not Libertarian Party - viewpoint. If I recall correctly, I had a debate with Perry on this on Libernet, in which he tried to dismiss me as "just a Democrat." I was posting under the name ALLENS(a)YANG.EARLHAM.EDU at the time). -Allen

1 0

Re: Response to Perrygram
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:16 PM 2/13/96, Perry E. Metzger wrote: >I will repeat, Tim. You have no job and do nothing for a living. For >you it is probably hard to understand that some of us prefer to get >our mail segregated by topic so that we don't have to spend more time The issue of what I do with my time is a red herring. As it happens, many folks in the "cyberspace activism" spend as much time or more as I do on the Net. In any case, who cares how I spend my time? I also note that for several years Perry was clearly spending a whole lot more time than even I am now on the Net, making the "Top Ten Usenet Posters," or somesuch. I am sure that when Perry was a Shearson-Lehman, or Lehman Brothers, or whatever it was called, and was posting several articles an hour on Extropians, Cypherpunks, Libernet, Usenet, etc., that he would have roughly the same reaction I am now having to someone writing: "Perry, you are writing too much--some of us are trying to get some work done!" He would likely have dismissed their complaints as irrelevant, that no one is forced to read his articles. Likewise today. No one is forced to read my posts, Perry's posts, or anyone else's posts. This is what filters are for. As it happens, I do *not* read all of the posts here. In fact, I delete about 90% of them after scanning the first paragraph, the subject, and the author. Takes me about 15 seconds, tops, to do this, and sometimes I'm even faster. (Do the math: I can "dispose of" about 50 or 60 messages a day in 10-15 minutes...and this is about the best that can be hoped for, even if Perry were the moderator and the 10 or so messages a day that are truly off the wall were screened out...it just wouldn't change the basic time to screen all that much.) >than needed reading our email. However, for some of us, time is >money. I have failed to directly answer your comments on this sort of >thing out of deference to your "elder statesman" status around here, Spare me, Perry. As I mentioned, you certainly used to write a truly vast number of rants to Extropians, Libernet, and, yes, even Cypherpunks. A check of the archives will show this clearly. It is well and good that you apparently are now very busy and cannot write your customary number of articles. But spare us the insinuations (in several of your perrygrams) that because you are too busy to write you are doing critical work and because some of us use our time to write we are slackers. I write because setting down my thoughts and exploring ideas is far more important to me than just about anything else I can imagine doing, including writing C programs. If you don't like this, learn how to use filters and filter me out, or leave the Cypherpunks list. Seems simple enough to me. --Tim May >but this is getting silly. If you want to post about libertarianism, >libernet, so far as I know, still takes postings. If you want to read >about the habits of migrating birds, there are interest groups for >that. We don't have a lot of good places to discuss specifically >cryptography and its impact, and this group was set up *for that*. > >I mean, why not just have one mailing list for all topics of all sorts >if "filtering" and "hitting the 'd' key" are supposed to be the only >way we deal with this stuff, hmm? > >Perry Boycott espionage-enabled software! 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."

3 2

Using /dev/random for PGP key generation? Be Wary
by rngaugp＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Subject: Using /dev/random for PGP key generation? Be Wary I have created a modified version of pgpi for use with a hardware random number generators. Recently, there has been some confusion because people have assumed that I wished people to use this version with NOISE.SYS or an RNG that gathers entropy from timing events called /dev/random. I did indeed mention /dev/random in the readme file, but I did this only because I thought /dev/random would be a likely path for a hardware RNG on a unix system. ( I have never tested this software under unix, but I see no reason why the "RNGDRIVER" feature of the modified PGPI would not work under unix.) Be assured that I originally planed the modification to be used with a real hardware RNG. I tested it with the CALNET/NEWBRIGE RNG under DOS and OS/2. The "RNGDRIVER" feature I tested with OS/2 and the driver in RNG810.ZIP available at ftp.cdrom.com. You may be able to compile and run it under other OSes as well. I see no reason why not. It is my understanding that NOISE.SYS gathers entropy from timing certain events. I have recently learned that a /dev/random works under Linux also by gathering entropy from timing. I am unsure about using my modification, together with these drivers that are not connected to a real hardware RNG. In what way would the use of these drivers' methods of gathering entropy be superior to PGP's method of getting entropy from keyboard timing? If you choose to do something like this, you should think carefully and make a careful study of the code. One thought for the future: It would be nice if BBS'es that run unattended could have a version of pgp that they could run without worrying about running out of entropy! (Because no one is there to type on the keyboard.) Perhaps something like NOISE.SYS (that would get entropy from the COM ports) put together with my mod to pgpi could be made to work. But careful thought an careful design should be done first. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: cp850 iQCVAgUBMR63hs29s2mG+tTVAQFyKwP+Mh95ZNwwrBF+UjEKlEcfaiWY5ab8NthC b3j4cmv9PUXLrCM4DUH2iXtY2f9YNN9GsWT1S1Eu2b0368VBkQTm1+eWcKiDVmlB DumNmt4rZPhYam7wc/5gyGdIyzhGJBeJ0ZOP1kd4w0TfLsDprwKGOD1a0N7T3Ycz gFqBX34x59s= =MDXi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0