December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

e$ and markets and meta-markets. quote with little comment
by bryce＠digicash.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just thought I would re-print this extract from the recent press release regarding the EUNet/Merita ecash roll-out. Favorite phrase: "interesting new possibilities." Follow-ups directed toward e$. If you post to cpunks without Cc'ing me I probably won't see it. Bryce ******* begin quote from the "companies that accept ecash" section SOM -- SOM, the Finnish Securities and Derivatives Exchange and Clearing House, established in 1987, serves as a neutral integrated securities and derivatives exchange and clearing house. SOM offers real-time financial market information on stocks, options and futures via the Internet, with invoices payable in ecash. Somtel for Windows -the application that offers real-time feed, as well as simulation and position-analysis functions-, is already available via leased line. "The use of money makes stock trading less complicated, with money acting as a practical intermediary between the transactions." states Asko Schrey, President of SOM. "However, since stock trades, as well as the shares themselves, are electronic nowadays, this conventional transmission of money has actually become a bottleneck and a threat to the development of the financial world. Therefore, SOM actively participates in projects to promote and improve the efficiency of payment traffic. We believe that electronic money will offer interesting new possibilities."

1 0

Re: PGP reveals the key ID of the recipient of encrypted msg
by Robert A. Rosenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:12 3/13/96, Matthew Richardson wrote: >On Wed, 13 Mar 1996 00:28:48 -0500, "Robert A. Rosenberg" ><hal9001(a)panix.com> wrote: > >>There is also the problem of knowing WHICH key to use (ie: Even when you >>know the message is intended for you, you must do a test run with each of >>your keys until one works). > >I believe that provided all your keys are in your secret keyring, PGP >will automatically pick the correct one for you. I know that. The situation was that the hypothetical message format itself contained NO INDICATION of who is was for or what key was used to encode it. PGP selects the right key by using the indication that is in the message of what key is to be used.

1 0

recent ( 3 months ) software developements?
by Gary Lee Jeffers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Cypherpunks, Due to really lousey circumstances, I have been unable to monitor my mail for the last 3 months. Also, last 3 months mail currently unavailble to me. I am interested in finding out if there have been any new soft- ware offerings or software upgrades in that time. My particular interest is Dos/Windows. Also, locations where software can be downloaded. Note that a brief description of recent software developements maybe helpful to other Cypherpunks with little time to monitor Cypherpunks list. Beat State, Gary Jeffers

1 0

RE: Leahy bill, legalize crypto
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:41 PM 3/14/96, Robichaux, Paul E wrote: >Tim May said: >>Suppose encryption is allowed, but only with key escrow? [...] >>And it might pass constitutional muster (for the same reasons the FCC >>jurisdiction over airwaves and the ban on encryption by ham operators, got >>approval. > >The restriction on using encryption on the ham bands is an outgrowth of the >world-wide spectrum allocation process. Spectrum's allocated by the >International Telecommunications Union (ITU); every four years, the World >Amateur Radio Council (WARC) meets to go over existing allocations. >Sometimes hams lose (as when the 220MHz band went away) and sometimes they >win. > >The ITU accords were originally signed around WW I, when use of encryption >on the radio bands was of great concern. The whole licensing system is based >on the concept of an Amateur Radio _Service_, whose operators are licensed >by the FCC to use a "public" resource. Said use is restricted by >international treaties to which the US is a signatory. > >The difference here is that the courts have upheld government restrictions >on broadcast spectrum because it's a scarce resource. In the special case of >encryption on ham bands, no one's ever even challenged the restriction >AFAIK. As Duncan Frissell has preached here many times, bandwidth is no >longer as scarce, so I think a constitutional challenge to an encryption ban >would probably be workable. Yes, and I said as much--about the bandwidth limitations--in my post. In the very next line after you stopped quoting!!!!!: "Sure, I understand that Internet bandwidth is not the same as the "public airwaves," but this subtlety may not be enough to stop the parallel from being successfully drawn. Especially if the phone companies and other threatened players are pushing hard for the FCC to step in and regulate." I'm not usually such a quibbler, but it irks me when people stop the quoting at a certain point, then make the same point made in the elided section, then say, "But bandwidth is a scarce resource." Besides which, I think the "scarce resource" argument against crypto over the airwaves is clearly a fig leaf. Only amateur, non-corporate users are affected. The intent of the rules, never repealed, seems more of an attempt to limit the widespread deployment of ham radio for espionage purposes (e.g., a ham sitting above a harbor area reporting on ship movements). This is why I said I could see a parallel argument for limiting crypto. And if other countries are needed to get an international treaty signed, there will be no shortage of such lap dogs available to do the bidding of the U.S. The most otherwise-hostile countries to the U.S. will jump at the chance to impose a worldwide ban on encrypted communications. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" 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."

1 0

e$: Neal Stephenson's geodesic economy
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Sender: e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: rah(a)shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Mime-Version: 1.0 From: rah(a)shipwright.com (Robert Hettinga) Date: Thu, 14 Mar 1996 18:19:49 -0500 Precedence: Bulk To: Multiple recipients of <e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com> Subject: e$: Neal Stephenson's geodesic economy -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- e$: Neal Stephenson talks e$ I used to joke that I read science fiction by the yard. I certainly *buy* it that way. I finally got around around to reading Neal Stephenson's The_Diamond_Age,_ or,_A_Young_Lady's_Illustrated_Primer. I thought that his first book, _Snow_Crash_ was marvellous, and thought that, in ability to create utterly er, novel, reality out of whole cloth, he was right up there with Gibson. I was wrong. He's much better. Gibson's first book, _Neuromancer_, was his best. _Diamond_Age_ was an order of magnitude better than _Snow_Crash_ , and I get the feeling that Stephenson's just getting warmed up. Why am I saying all this? Well, I'm in the process of reading _Diamond_Age_, and there, on page 270 of the recent paperback edition, (Copyright 1995, Neal Stephenson), Stephenson describes, in perfect detail, a geodesic economy-- complete with digital cash, payer anonymity, and money as software food. The story concerns a girl named Nellodee, Nell to her friends, an abused waif of no means whatsoever, and her adventures with a very large nanocomputer disguised as a book. The scene in question is about Miranda, a "ractor", an interactive actress, who has been effectively raising Nell interactively through a cleverly disguised Grimm-like fairytale with Nell as the protagonist. Actually, Miranda's just been acting lines provided by the nanocomputer in the book, back through to Nell over the net. After 2 years of this, Miranda decides she wants to meet Nell. She goes to her boss for help... Miranda sat very still for a moment, hypnotized by the colorful flashing lights on a vintage jukebox. "This is related to Princess Nell, isn't it?" "Is it that obvious?" "Yeah. Now, what do you want?" "I want to know who she is," Miranda said. This was the most guarded way she sould put it. She didn't suppose that it would help matters to drag Carl down through the full depth of her emotions. "You want to backtrace a payer," Carl said. It sounded terrible when translated it into that kind of language. Carl sucked powerfully on his milkshake for a bit, his looking over Miranda's shoulder to the traffic on the Bund. "Princess Nell's a little kid, right?" "Yes. I would estimate five to seven years old." His eyes swiveled to lock on hers. "You can tell that?" "Yes.", she said, in tones that warned him not to question it. "So she's probably not paying the bill anyway. The payer is someone else. You need to backtrace the payer and then, from there, track down Nell." Carl broke eye contact again, shook his head, and tried unsucessfully to whistle through frozen lips. "Even the first step is impossible." Miranda was startled. "That seems pretty unequivocal. I expected to hear 'difficult' or 'expensive.' But--" "Nope. It's impossible. Or maybe" -- Carl thought about it a while -- "maybe 'astronomically improbable' is a better way of putting." Then he looked mildly alarmed as he watched Miranda's expression change. "You can't just trace the connection backward. That's not how media works." "How does media work, then?" "Look out the window. Not toward the Bund -- check Yan'an Road." Miranda swiveled her head around to look out the big window, which was partly painted over with colorful Coke ads and and descriptions of blue plate specials. Yan'an Road, like all of the major throughfares in Shanghai, was filled from the shop windows on one side to the shop windows on the other, with people on bicycles and powerskates. In many places the traffic was so dense that greater speed could be attained on foot. A few half-lane vehicles sat motionless, polished boulders in a sluggish brown stream. It was so familiar that Miranda didn't really see anything. "What am I looking for?" Carl was right. At a minimum, everyone had a small plastic bag with something in it. Many people, such as the bicyclists, carried heavier loads. "Now just hold that image on your head for a moment, and think about how to set up a global telecommunications network." Miranda laughed. "I don't have any basis for thinking about something like that." "Sure you do. Until now, you've been thinking in terms of the telephone system in the old passives. In that system, each transaction had two participants -- the two people having the conversation. And they were connected by a wire that ran through a certral switchboard. So what are the key features of this system?" "I don't know -- I'm asking you," said Miranda. "Number one, only two people or entities can interact. Number two, it takes a dedicated connection that is made and broken for the purposes of that one conversation. Number three, it is inherently centralized -- it can't work unless there's a central switchboard." "Okay, I think I'm following you so far." "Our media system today -- the one that you and I make our livings from -- is a decendant of the phone system only insofar as we use it for essentially the same purposes, plus many, may more. But the key point to remember is that *it is totally different from the old phone system*. The old phone system -- and its technological cousin, the cable TV system -- tanked. It carshed and burned decades ago, and we started virtually from scratch." "Why? It worked, didn't it?" "First of all, we needed to enable interactions between more than one entity. What do I mean by entity? Well, think about the ractives. Think about _First_Class_to_Geneva_ . You're on this train -- so are a couple of dozen other people. Some of those people are being racted, so in that case the entities happen to be human beings. But the others-- like the waiters and porters-- are just software robots. Furthermore, the train is full of props: jewelry, money, guns, bottles of wine. Each one of those is also a separate piece of software-- a separate entity. In the lingo, we call them objects. The train itself is another object, and so is the countryside through which it travels. "The countryside is a good example. It happens to be a digital map of France. Where did this map come from? Did the makers of _First_Class_to_Geneva_ send out their team of surveyors to make a new map of France? No, of course they didn't. They used existing data-- a digital map of the world that is available to any maker of ractives who needs it, for a price of course. That digital map is a separate object. It resides in the memory of a computer somewhere. Where exactly? I don't know. Neither does the ractive itself. It doesn't matter. The data might be in California, it might be in Paris, it might be down on the corner-- or it might be distributed among all of those places and many more. It doesn't matter. Because our media system no longer works like the old system- dedicated wires passing through a central switchboard. It works like *that*." Carl pointed to the traffic on the street again. "So each person on the street is like an object?" "Possibly. But a better analogy is that the objects are people like us, sitting in various buildings that front on the street. Suppose that we want to send a message to someone over in Pudong. We write a message down on a piece of paper, and we go to the door and hand it to the first person who goes by and say, 'Take this to Mr. Gu in Pudong.' And he skates down the street for a while and runs into someone on a bicycle who looks like he might be headed for Pudong, and says, 'take this to Mr. Gu.' A minute later, that person gets stuck in traffic and hands it off to a pedestrian who can negotiate the snarl a little better, and so on and so on, until it eventually it reaches Mr. Gu. When Mr. Gu wants to respond, he sends us a message on the same way." "So there's no way to trace the path taken by a message." "Right. And the real situation is more complicated. The media net was designed from the ground up to provide privacy and security, so that people could use it to transfer money. That's one reason that nation-states colapsed-- as soon as the media grid was up and running, financial transactions could no longer be monitord by governments, and the tax colelction systems got fubared. So if the IRS, for example, wasn't able to trace these messages, theen there's no way that you'll be able to track down Princess Nell." "Okay, I guess that answers my question," miranda said. "Good!" Carly said brightly. He was obviously pleased that he'd been able to help Miranda, and so she didn't tell him how his words had really made her feel. She treated as an acting challenge: Could she fool Carl Hollywood, who was sharper about acting than just about anyone, into thinking that she was fine? Apparently she did. He escorted her back to her flat, in a hundered story high-rise just across the river in Pudong, and she held it together long enough to bid him good-bye, get out of her clothes, and run a bath. Then climebed into the hot water and dissovled into awful, wretched, blubbery, self-pitying tears. Eventually she got it under control. She had to keep this in perspective. She could still interact with Nell and still did, everyday. And if she paid attention, sooner or later she would find some way to penetrate the curtain. Barring that, she was beginning to understand that Nell, whoever she was, had become marked out in some way, and that in time she would become a very important person. Within a few years, Miranda expected to be reading about her in the newspapers. Feeling better, she got out of the bath and climbed into bed, getting a good night sleep so she'd be ready for next day of taking care of Nell. Go buy this book. Cheers, Bob Hettinga -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMUipXfgyLN8bw6ZVAQGhfwP/SpOP6F07hLzxTxyR8XpBBZsqUzPKMSRK 3OLc0xYjTLkQvunuhZ6vyGwUqadCu0My2wIMspgSakjhUJkN0dmMBWif2zzWBsLP fSe+WUJiVuT8dJkcLC844pkLE2fjg07rqRMdHRXSbq5TDEMsHllfyBKb5GfW+NM3 TVUgwwiIX/A= =YDVU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -------------------------------------------------- The e$ lists are brought to you by: Making Commerce Convenient (tm) - Oki Advanced Products - Marlboro, MA Value-Checker(tm) smart card reader= http://www.oki.com/products/vc.html Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion http://www.hyperion.co.uk info(a)hyperion.co.uk See your name here. Be a charter sponsor for e$pam, e$, and Ne$ws! See http://thumper.vmeng.com/pub/rah/ or e-mail rah(a)shipwright.com for details... ------------------------------------------------- --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell The e$ Home Page: http://thumper.vmeng.com/pub/rah/

2 1

AMEX and Netscape
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

American Express Platinum card holders might want to look at the bottom of their statement: CARD USE ON THE INTERNET -- Cardmembers should only conduct transactions over the internet using broswer software that supports industry-standard encryption protocols, such as those offered by Netscape or CyberCash. We anticipate that additional and improved encryption protocols for Card transactions will become available over the next 3-6 months. American Express will keep you informed of new developments in this area. (Any Gold or Green card holders have the same notice?) --- My prefered and soon to be permanent e-mail address: unicorn(a)schloss.li "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information

1 0

To IEEE: Don't Support Leahy Crypto Bill
by anon-remailer＠utopia.hacktic.nl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(To: medialink-list(a)WELL.com, cypherpunks(a)toad.com, action(a)eff.org, hal(a)hal.hpl.hp.com, farber(a)central.cis.upenn.edu, junger(a)pdj2-ra.F-REMOTE.cwru.edu) 12 March 1996 Before IEEE decides to "applaud" Leahy's bill publicly, I hope that the organization carefully considers the bill's shortcomings. In particular it might want to consider the critique written by Peter Junger <junger(a)pdj2-ra.F-REMOTE.cwru.edu> of Case Western University Law School. Junger writes that with Leahy's legislation: "The major threat is that, for the first time, there would be at least colorable Congressional authority for the requirement that one obtain a license before publishing or otherwise disclosing information. And software is, after all, nothing but information." I urge the IEEE to rethink its position. At the very least, please consider supporting Rep. Goodlatte's bill which includes a more explicit prohibition on the executive branch mandating key escrow. It is important that we back that bill before it goes to conference, since we can have little impact on it thereafter. Please redistribute this letter as appropriate. Warmly, Philomela =-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= DRAFT -- Do NOT Redistribute! IEEE Applauds Leahy Encryption Bill =-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= DRAFT March 12, 1996 The Committee on Communications and Information Policy of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, United States Activities applauds the proposed Encrypted Communications Privacy Act. This legislation, introduced by Senators Pat Leahy (D-VT), Patricia Murray (D-WA) and Conrad Burns (R-MT), will remove unnecessarily restrictive controls on the export of encryption technology. Current restrictions on the export of encryption technology harm the interests of the United States in three ways: they handicap American producers of software and hardware, prevent the development of a secure information infrastructure, and limit the ability of electronically active Americans to maintain their privacy. The proposed legislation addresses all of these issues, while maintaining prohibition on the use of cryptography to hide criminal activities. Technological progress has moved encryption from the realm of national security into private sphere. Current policies, as well as the policy-making processes, should reflect this new reality. We applaud recent changes in information policy which mitigate the severity of controls on encryption technologies. With the additional changes sought by Senators Leahy, Murray and Burns, the United States can maintain its historical leadership in cryptography. Without the handicap of limitations on their ability to export secure systems, American software and hardware producers have the potential to excel in the global market for secure products. The removal of unnecessary restrictions on exports will also enable the creation of a Global Information Infrastructure sufficiently secure to provide seamless connectivity to customers previously unreachable by American companies. The United States is a leader in Internet commerce. However, Internet commerce requires cryptography. Thus American systems have been hindered by cold-war restraints on the necessary cryptography as these systems have moved from the laboratory to the marketplace. This legislation would open the market to secure, private, ubiquitous electronic commerce. The cost of not opening the market to secure American Internet products may include the loss of decades of leadership in Internet technologies, just as the Internet is entering its most profitable period. Finally, Sen. Leahy, Murray and Burns would be serving all users of electronic information systems in creating a truly global market for secure desktop environments. Having secure and private electronic spaces is of particular interest to the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, United States Activities and its members. The Committee on Communications and Information Policy of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, United States Activities applauds Senators Pat Leahy (D-VT), Patricia Murray (D-WA) and Conrad Burns (R-MT) for their foresight and supports the proposed legislation to liberalize controls on cryptography. Sincerely, [Signed] Visit http://www.ieee.org/ for more information.

1 0

Re:LACC: PC Phones Home? -Reply
by Raymond Mereniuk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Writes >A few questions: >1- How does the PC know where it is? >2- How does the PC know it has been stolen? ...deleted text... > #1 is the use of CallerID on the line when the software calls, >which is defeated by the use of line blocking by the thief. The ...deleted text... >Obvious solution for potential thieves: wipe the disks and reinstall >an OS once you steal a PC. This should be done anyway to remove any >bits of data which might identify the original owner. >Conclusion: Yet another useless piece of software riding the >computer security bandwagon. >jim You should visit their web site at http://absolute.com for more information as they can do what they say they can. A high level format does not change bad track assignments and neither will fdisk so if you hide something in an assigned bad track (cylinder or cluster or whatever it is called) nothing will see it. Now all you have to do is activiate the software in the bad track, I don't know how that is done (trade secret??) but maybe someone has figured out how to do it. Calls to 1-800 numbers can not block caller-ID, call-blocking will not stop the calling number from being passed to the appropriate equipment setup at the receiving end. Maybe these people have developed the ultimate virus, you can't detect it, you can't remove it, and you don't know it even exists. I don't really know how well this software package works but your comments had many errors. Normally Lurking Raymond

1 0

RE: Leahy bill, legalize crypto
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:50 AM 3/14/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >At 2:41 PM 3/14/96, Robichaux, Paul E wrote: >>Tim May said: >Besides which, I think the "scarce resource" argument against crypto over >the airwaves is clearly a fig leaf. Only amateur, non-corporate users are >affected. The intent of the rules, never repealed, seems more of an attempt >to limit the widespread deployment of ham radio for espionage purposes >(e.g., a ham sitting above a harbor area reporting on ship movements). I think Tim is absolutely right. If you look at "The Code Breakers" that kind of thinking was common in the WW1-WW2 era. The age of the 30 minute war somewhat diminished the strength of the argument. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Re: PGP reveals the key ID of the recipient of encrypted msg
by Robert A. Rosenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 16:36 3/11/96, John Pettitt wrote: >I can see a case where one would want to broadcast a message (say on usenet) >with *no* indication of the intended recipient (not even a non registered >key-id). It would seem to be easy enough to hack up something that does not >have key-IDs - to know if it's for you try decryption and if it works then >it was for you. This does not scale well as the recipient must trial >decrypt all messages which could use *a lot* (tm) of CPU time. There is also the problem of knowing WHICH key to use (ie: Even when you know the message is intended for you, you must do a test run with each of your keys until one works). Thus you want private keys whose ownership is not publicly linked to your known identity (but is known to your correspondents). So long as you have your corespondent's published Public Key, you can use it to do a one-time transmission of a private Public Key to be used to do anonymous (ie: Not Linked to your Public Identity) transmissions to you.

4 3