December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Whut it sez
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 09:33 AM 3/6/96 -0500, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security wrote: > >Note: downloaded from www.vtw.org so cannot guarentee correctness- > > "§2804. Unlawful use of encryption to obstruct justice" > "Whoever willfully endeavors by means of encryption to obstruct, > impede, or prevent the communication of information in furtherance > to a felony which may be prosecuted in a court of the United States, > to an investigative or law enforcement officer shall-..." > >Interesting wording - sounds almost like if you impede the *commission* of >a felony, you is been had. Keyword would seem to be "willingly". You need to learn to read more carefully. The word they (according to VTW) used was "willfully," not "willingly." In any case, assuming they either never made the error you noticed, or they manage to correct it before the bill becomes law, they will have just outlawed the used of encrypted remailers, because: 1. They use encryption to hide the sender and/or the recipient of a note. 2. Any law-enforcement agency could get a "cooperative", computer-literate criminal to upload a message that might, arguably, be part of a larger criminal offense (but really wasn't; the purpose is simply to justify an investigation) . The encrypted remailer is then guilty of violation of this section, even if the underlying crime is never completed or even attempted. Remember, you can have a "criminal investigation" without having a crime. Or a "crime" can be fabricated at the appropriate time, just like they did to those operators of a California BBS, called from Oklahoma by the cops, and using a kid to turn the whole fraud into a crime. > Suspect they meant to say "...obstruct (etc) the investigation of a felony..." Probably. This section is their wish-list to Santa Claus. It's easy to make mistakes when you're excited about something. They're hoping you suckers will support the whole bill despite this booby-trap. You're the fish, the rest of the bill is the worm, and this section is the hook. Will you bite? Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com Klaatu Burada Nikto -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMT4JOvqHVDBboB2dAQFgDQQAmWrTqEaFUC6eFH79cGLeSHXqrXxXb25H 79I+SHT1chhrDQjHYvlPlpovcv/ShyqJB47w8z9XfGTggGKp+WvFVk10du9iviFF GZRsNgkjtdEpattuw/tZpmCrWW+aOAtM0Ziw+cYQsGdDlbkdHZueJTuCjDwUndGm BARsyesyGzA= =kEFi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

test
by uunet!in2.uu.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!athos.itribe.net!logrus!page＠warwick.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

test. d. -- Homo vult decipia; decipiatur. page(a)itribe.net

1 0

Re: Jump Start ecash With IPhone
by clarissa_wong＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> ... With net-phone projects like Free World Dialup ... My thanks to "Declan B. McCullagh" <declan+(a)CMU.EDU> for his timely and informative reply. I am somewhat embarrassed to see the inadequacy of my homework but appreciate the lesson. A web search on "Free World Dialup" yielded several tasty URLs, including: http://www.pulver.com/fwd/ and: http://www.bekkoame.or.jp/~brandon/fwd/servinfo.html These people possess both a subtlety of purpose and an organizational capability that exceed my initial ham-handed efforts, yet their cognizance of the value of ecash is uncertain. > FCC PETITIONED TO STOP MISUSE OF THE INTERNET! It's not surprising that the ACTA coalition chose to solicit their armed friends to protect them from superior technology. But events are unfolding faster than I anticipated. Jim McCoy <mccoy(a)communities.com> pointed out that: > 1- Chaum did not have the clue to pick up on this when two > cypherpunks (who shall remain nameless...) pitched this > and several other ideas to involve ISPs in jump-starting ... I don't know about Chaum but perhaps now one can work around the ISPs, making the game accessible to anyone with a spare computer and some spunk. Sometimes for as little as $20. / month one can buy unlimited 28.8 PPP access. With the proper voice modem, two phone lines, and some software, perhaps Joe's Homebrew International Phone Service can go into business. CW

1 0

Lawz to be.
by A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cut & Paste > "§2804. Unlawful use of encryption to obstruct justice" > "Whoever willfully endeavors by means of encryption to obstruct, ... >Interesting wording - sounds almost like if you impede the *commission* of >a felony, you is been had. Keyword would seem to be "willingly". Jim: >You need to learn to read more carefully. The word they (according to VTW) >used was "willfully," not "willingly." Agree, problem was that to get into E-Mail had to cut/paste in 255 bytes segments but the quoted part is what I got off VTW with minor line length adjustment and separation of elements for clarity. >In any case, assuming they either never made the error you noticed, or they >manage to correct it before the bill becomes law, they will have just >outlawed the used of encrypted remailers, because: No, what the wording seems to outlaw was the use of encryption to obstruct the commission of the crime, not the investigation. Read it again please. >> Suspect they meant to say "...obstruct (etc) the investigation of a >>felony..." >Probably. This section is their wish-list to Santa Claus. It's easy to >make mistakes when you're excited about something. They're hoping you >suckers will support the whole bill despite this booby-trap. Thought the gotcha was down in the part about the Secretary of Commerce. My reading is that the secretary will still be required to grant approval for commercial export. Is past the part about no regulation inside the US (which is true now - still would be nice to see a "Congress shall make no law..."). The puzzler is the requirement that a comperable foreign product must exist before permission to export will be granted. Will this be like "comparable product" price matching in discount houses ? Somehow there never is one... Warmly, Padgett ps did you mean the Thomases and Memphis ? Not aware of similar prosecution in Oklahoma. Besides my understanding was that the online stuff was dropped, the conviction was for stuff sent through the mails. Is that incorrect ?

2 1

What do these words mean on your planet?
by uunet!in2.uu.net!news.ios.com!news2.ios.com!usenet＠warwick.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In <AHALL.96Mar5083553(a)remus.cs.uml.edu>, ahall(a)cs.uml.edu (Andrew Hall) wrote: >>>>>> Sam writes: > Sam> In <AHALL.96Mar1143852(a)remus.cs.uml.edu>, ahall(a)cs.uml.edu (Andrew Hall) > wrote> > >>>>>>> Sam writes: > Sam> In <tilleyDnK4Kp.HsD(a)netcom.com>, tilley(a)netcom.com (Tom Tilley) wrote: > >> >> In article <4h23li$p20(a)news2.ios.com> mrsam(a)soho.ios.com (Mr. Sam) writes: > >> >>> In <tilleyDnG5Js.1DB(a)netcom.com>, tilley(a)netcom.com (Tom Tilley) wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>> a.c, a.flame.r-l, and a.c-e.c.w removed. > >> >>> > >> >>>> In article <4gqd9u$u6(a)news2.ios.com> mrsam(a)soho.ios.com (Mr. Sam) writes: > >> >>> > >> >>>>> Here's one: why doesn't it say 'no tax on capital gains', like for other > >> >>>>> categories, hhhhhhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmm? > >> >>> > >> >>>> I don't know about where you're from, but here on planet > >> >>>> Earth zero'ing out taxes is the same as "no tax." > >> >>> > >> >>> I don't know about what's it's like over there, but in this universe, words > >> >>> mean things. > >> >> Yes, they do, and whether you like it or not "zero out capital > >> >> gains tax" means the same thing as "no tax on capital gains." > Sam> Nope. In case you haven't noticed, a few words differ from one to another. > Sam> And, as I said, words mean things. > >> >> Deal with it. > Sam> I do. I have a dictionary. > >> Please let me know which dictionary it is that says > >> "zero = 17%". I want to be sure not to get a copy. > Sam> The same one that says, for you, that convicted drug users are always > Sam> innocent. >I used common sense for that. What is your excuse? No, you didn't. "Convicted" is not the same thing as "innocent", how does that grab you? Conviction logically follows being proven guilty. And guilty is the opposite of innocent, at least on my planet. -- Mr. Sam: member, talk.politics.misc troll patrol channel operator, #Sci-Fi - Undernet IRC sci-fi/fantasy channel http://www.cyberstorm.com/~rockd/sci-fi.html _____________________________________________________________________________ "Government is not a solution to our | "First of all, keep in mind that most problem, government IS the problem." | of our problem is with working -- R. Reagan. | Americans." -- B. Clinton. _____________________________________|_______________________________________

1 0

testing 1 2 3 v1.0
by uunet!in2.uu.net!gatech!purdue!haven.umd.edu!hecate.umd.edu!not-for-mail＠warwick.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is a test. This is only a test. -- David J. Murphy for now: eg392(a)umd5.umd.edu Remember, only YOU can prevent fire drills!

1 0

Sorry for looping feed
by harry's panix mail 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

SOrry. Not an intentional spam.... but rather a software bug. It has been stoped. Harry Hawk Ray Cromwell > > Please stop this spam addressed to cypherpunks(a)toad.com, now. > > Sincerely, > > Declan > > > ---------- Forwarded message begins here ---------- > > X-Andrew-WideReply: internet.cypherpunks > X-Added: With Flames (listbb v2.2) > Return-path: <owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com> > X-Andrew-Authenticated-as: 0;andrew.cmu.edu;Network-Mail > Received: from po2.andrew.cmu.edu via trymail for > arpalists+cypherpunks(a)andrew.cmu.edu (->listbb+cypherpunks) > ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr0/listbb/Mailbox/0lDXLUK00UdaMX8U4g>; > Wed, 6 Mar 1996 20:03:29 -0500 (EST) > Received: from relay3.UU.NET (relay3.UU.NET [192.48.96.8]) by > po2.andrew.cmu.edu (8.7.4/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA08989 for > <arpalists+cypherpunks(a)andrew.cmu.edu>; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 20:03:25 -0500 > Received: from toad.com by relay3.UU.NET with SMTP > id QQafxy03661; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 19:36:29 -0500 (EST) > Received: by toad.com id AA09621; Wed, 6 Mar 96 16:36:07 PST > Received: from waterville.warwick.com by toad.com id AA09600; Wed, 6 Mar > 96 16:35:57 PST > Received: from cmyk.warwick.com by waterville.warwick.com > id VAA08365 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 1996 21:52:33 -0800 > Received: by cmyk.warwick.com > id TAA21695 for cypherpunks(a)toad.com; Wed, 6 Mar 1996 19:30:02 -0500 > Received: from GATEWAY by cmyk.warwick.com with netnews > for cypherpunks(a)toad.com (cypherpunks(a)toad.com) > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Date: Thu, 7 Mar 1996 00:01:36 GMT > Message-Id: <DnvEqp.8yM(a)pwa.acusd.edu> > Organization: The Fractal Images Company > Content-Type: text/html > From: > uunet!in2.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!info.ucla.edu!ihnp4.ucsd.edu!pwa > .acusd.edu!news(a)warwick.com > Subject: test > Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Precedence: bulk > > Test > --- > Robert Uomini > The Fractal Images Company (http://www.fractals.com) > Voice: 510-528-0258/800-548-0258 > Fax: 510-528-0243 > ******************************************************************************* > * Buying or selling a home? Come visit the most comprehensive set of * > * residential real estate listings and related services on the Internet: * > * The FractalNet Real Estate Server, http://www.fractals.com/realestate.html * > ******************************************************************************* > ---------- > X-Fractalimgs-Data-Name: sample.html > X-Fractalimgs-Content-Length: 1255 > > <html> > <head> > <title>FractalNet Home Page</title> > </head> > > <body> > <p> > This is a test of WebReader. This line should appear as text in the font > chosen by the user, as defined in the Properties file. A horizontal rule > follows: > <hr> > <h1>FractalNet Advertisers</h1> > <hr> > <ul> > <li>Unordered item #1 > <li>Unordered item #2 > <li>Unordered item #3 > <li>Unordered item #4 > </ul> > <ol> > <li>Ordered item #1 > <li>Ordered item #2 > <li>Ordered item #3 > <li>Ordered item #4 > </ol> > <ol> > <li>Ordered item #5 > <li>Ordered item #6 > <li>Ordered item #7 > <li>Ordered item #8 > </ol> > <hr> > <h2>FTP icon</h2> > <blockquote> > Swearest thou, ungracious boy? Henceforth, ne'er look upon me. There is > a devil haunts thee in the likeness of an old, fat man. A tun of man is > thy companion. Wherein is he neat and cleanly, but to carve a capon and > to eat it? Wherein is he cunning, but in craft? Wherein is he crafty, > but in villainy? Wherein is he villainous, but in all things? Wherein is > he worthy, but in nothing? > </blockquote> > <hr> > <address> > Bob > <br> > Bob's address > <br> > </address> > <dl> > <dt>Term 1: > <dd>This is the first definition > <dt>Term 2: > <dd>This is the second definition > <dt>Term 3: > <dd>This is the third definition > </dl> > </body> > </html> > > > >

2 1

Bootable disks
by A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> New hardware drives with replaceable media in the 100+ Mb >range has developed. The Syquest 135 Mb drive, featured in the latest issue >of _PC Mag_ can, with the parallel port version, reportedly boot. >This means one can have the drive that weighs about two pounds and a $20 >disk, place another OS on the disk, and have a very portable remailer >system. Have made some small study of that area and would be somewhat surprised if possible as advertised (BIOS would need some reason to look for disk on parallel port). What *might* be possible is to create a floppy that would install a device driver that would install directly on top of the BIOS intercepts that would transfer the boot to the Syquest but this would only work for an OS that did not replace the BIOS access with "something else" unless you had a driver for *that*. If you *really* wanted to go overboard, it would also be possible to create a PROM that could be plugged into the "bootp" socket of a NIC and do the same thing but the floppy route would be lots easier. A prom is how Iomega used to be able to make Bernoullis the boot disk - went into a socket on the PC2B (and earlier combo) card. Incidently more than one "hard disk encryption system" using this method has been broken once I have grabbed the intercept out of a booted system. Is also effective for recovering from CPTs. Warmly, Padgett

1 0

Re: Truelly Random Numbers
by Mutant Rob 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Tim Fulbright wrote: > > Now I, a lurker for two months, am truelly confused! L. Deitweiler must be > right. Surely one of you cyperpunk fellows could hack together a dongle with > some kind of AD converter and buffer ram to gather a Truelly Random Bitstream > off the environment every couple of milliseconds easier than this raindrop > scheme or recording the fan, you're haviung me on!. Let's go back [..] The raindrop scheme was (politely) laughed off. As for the fan recording scheme, it's a good make-do-with-what-you-already-have method, as opposed to buying and/or building a card. A 'simple AD converter' isn't so simple. Especially if you want to be sure you really have random noise and not something else that just looks random. - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMTz0nSoZzwIn1bdtAQGl6QF+P1V62qg+Mf5K+VN3q0Y1e6/A4EO4uLLr WNxAbtE+OxQXFKnP7ajFUFBbnDLJxLmx =4ysY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: (Fwd) Gov't run anon servers
by mccoy＠communities.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hal Finney writes: >From: mccoy(a)communities.com (Jim McCoy) [...] >> The point is not to make a system which is absolutely, positively, no >> doubt about it, secure against any attacker. If cypherpunks could do >> this they would be working for defense contractors and others who make >> certified systems. The objective is to make a system which is difficult >> to attack, one which costs the attacker time/money. [...] > >I was speaking of present conditions. If and when proven-secure Unix >systems start being used as remailer servers on the net then it may be >worthwhile having a larger key. You are correct in stating that having a huge key on a remailer is as silly as putting a $500 lock on a door made of balsa wood. OTOH, the key selected is vulnerable from attacks which you cannot protect yourself against. No amount of detailed security analysis for a host is going to prevent someone else from factoring the keys, and there is nothing that can be done to prevent this from happening. To prevent this is seesm reasonable to select a key which is at least somewhat outside the range of most attackers, 510 bits seems to be pushing the lower bounds of this range a bit (while more than 1024 is probably useless overkill.) With fairly decent logging and auditing at least you know that you have been screwed when it comes to standard system break-ins, you do not know that you have a problem when your key is factored. [...] >> The unix hosts running remailers also have the advantage in >> that they have been subjected to attack for quite a while now and >> most of the obvious problems (and some of the non-obvious problems) >> have been fixed. > >I am not sure what you mean by this. My experience is that new CERT >advisories come out every few months which represent security holes big >enough to steal remailer keys. Well, most of the announcements in the past year have been attacks through subsystems which a remailer should not be running in the first place (e.g. the recent chargen/daytime/etc attacks.) The fact that the announcements come out in the first place is a "good thing" because it makes you aware of the problem. The timid will then think that the system which is the subject of the announcement is insecure and place their trust in a system which is not under the same sort of public scrutiny (e.g. Windows NT, or a VM/CMS system) but which is even easier to hack. At least people are aware of security issues on Unix hosts... (a quick walk through a Computer Literacy bookstore last night turned up twelve books on Unix/internet-server security and none dealing specifically with Windoze95 or NT security, does that mean that my NT test box is perfectly secure? :) Otherwise, I agree that assuming you have a secure remailer just because you use a big key is a foolish attitude. jim

1 0