December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

GPS privacy/ECM
by Brian D Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have been following the recent discussion on Denning's GPS I.D. plan and had some thoughts: I wonder what the pro-govt anti-privacy types would do if some obnoxious group started publishing a list with the home/work GPS of say various congresspersons/senatepersons? Since cruise missile's already use GPS to find/destroy their target, how long do you figure before some terrorist group use's this ever cheaper tech to trigger one of it's devices? <car bombs, the poor man's air force> What defences are there? Just how small/inexpensive could a home GPS/ECM system be? Personnel dithering? Locally transmitting your own public key encrypted location. This is thoughtfood only. Brian

2 1

RSA & Sec. Dyn.
by Ben Rothke 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It's true: FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Security Dynamics to Acquire RSA in Transaction Valued at Approximately $200 Million Cambridge MA and Redwood City, CA -- April 15, 1996 -- Security Dynamics Technologies, Inc. (NASDAQ: SDTI) and RSA Data Security, Inc. today announced that they have signed a definitive agreement for Security Dynamics to acquire RSA, a Redwood City, California vendor of encryption software. The transaction is intended to be carried out by the merger of RSA and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Security Dynamics in a tax-free transaction accounted for as a pooling of interests. For the year ended December 31, 1995, RSA had revenues and net income of approximately $11,6000,000 and $950,000, respectively. Ben

2 1

TOG_oon
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

4-15-96. FT: "Chatter control in cyberspace. US universities are the testing ground for free speech issues on the Internet." A report on celebrated cases: Cornell, Virginia Tech, Memphis, Jake Baker. "Nearly all the university cases in the US so far have had sexual overtones." Among other commentators quoted, Declan says, "There's a very disturbing trend out there to try to control what students say online." Peter Toren of DoJ says, "I think we can expect this controversy to go on for some time." TOG_oon

1 0

Re: What can the judge do to me?
by Hal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Black Unicorn <unicorn(a)schloss.li> > I've been involved in a private discussion with a list reader about > the extent to which courts can impose contempt fines and sanctions. I > thought I would post the results to the list as many have expressed > interest in the ways that courts might try to compel production of > crypto keys or compel offshore e-cash institutions. The bulk of my > answer follows. I thought this was very interesting and I appreciate Unicorn taking the time to lend us his expertise. > The key to limiting the ability of a court to summarily enter contempt > sanctions has always been the classification of the sanctions. > "Criminal" sanctions, may entitle the witness to a trial by jury. > [...] > "Civil" sanctions do > not require such protections and can be imposed on the spot and > without review. I didn't understand what distinguishes civil and criminal sanctions. Is it the nature of the proceedings, whether it is a civil or criminal case that is before the judge? Or is it the nature of the contempt charge itself, where not doing what the judge wants, in broad terms, is civil contempt? And in that case, what would be criminal contempt? > The court makes a point to justify severe sanctions where testimony is > sought, or the proceedings are threatened. "The necessity > justification for the contempt authority is at its pinnacle, of > course, where contumacious conduct threatens a court's immediate > ability to conduct its proceedings, such as where a witness refuses to > testify, or a party disrupts the court... [t]hus, petty, direct > contempts in the presence of the court traditionally have been subject > to summary adjudication, 'to maintain order in the courtroom and the > integrity of the trial process in the face of an 'actual obstruction > of justice.'" International Union, supra (quoting Codispoti v. > Pennsylvania, 418 U.S., at 513 and citing numerous other sources). Would there be a distinction between contempt by a witness and that by the defendant (in a criminal case)? I could see justification for attempting to compel testimony from a witness who can shed needed light on guilt or innocence in the case. A man's freedom or perhaps his very life is at stake. But it seems to be another matter to compel the defendant himself to provide some information which will be detrimental to himself. The defendant has some Fifth Amendment rights, but for those cases where what he is ordered to do has been found not to be protected by the Fifth Amendment it still seems bizarre to imagine him jailed for contempt if he refuses. Are there precedents for holding a defendant in contempt for standing mute at his own trial? (Part of my problem with this scenario is my sense that despite gradual erosion of the rights against self incrimination, verbally revealing a pass phrase which will unlock an encrypted document seems like testimony, and something which should be protected. Is there such a difference between "Reveal the pass phrase" and "Reveal what you did with the knife", if the judge doesn't believe the denials of the ability to comply?) > Most interesting to the crypto crowd: > > "Contempts such as failure to comply with document discovery, for > example, while occurring outside the court's presence, impede the > court's ability to adjudicate the proceedings before it and thus touch > upon the core justification for the contempt power.... Similarly, > indirect contempts involving discrete, readily ascertainable acts, > _such as turning over a key_ or payment of a judgment, properly may be > adjudicated through civil proceedings since the need for extensive, > impartial fact-finding is less pressing." International Union, supra > (emphasis added). I would guess that "turning over a key" here refers not to production to the court by rather to passing a physical key between two contesting parties, say a seller and buyer of some property that the key gives access to. The phrase "turning over" rather than "production of" suggests this interpretation. So this sounds like something which would be more likely to occur in a civil proceeding than a criminal one. Hal

2 1

Re: Distributed Key Breaking
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:18 PM 4/15/96 +0100, Mark Cooke wrote: >Just as a quick thought - given the prevelance of Web Browsers - has >anyone considered writing a Java Applet that would could run key space >searches and factoring in an easily distributed manner. > >This would seem to be a 'reasonable' way to gain access to more CPU power >- even though the Java code would not be as efficient as a native app. >Perhaps as a supplement to the more 'traditional' methods that have been >used in the past. This approach will become even more "reasonable" as just-in-time compilation and native code Bignum packages get distributed. Regards - Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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

on corporations and subpoenas
by sameer＠c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Suppose a corporation has multiple subsidiaries. Would a subpoena served on the parent corp be binding on the subsidiaries? Or would the better way to handle this be to create spinoff corporations rather than subsidiaries? -- Sameer Parekh Voice: 510-601-9777x3 Community ConneXion, Inc. FAX: 510-601-9734 The Internet Privacy Provider Dialin: 510-658-6376 http://www.c2.net/ (or login as "guest") sameer(a)c2.net

1 0

Re: GPS privacy/ECM
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:03 AM 4/15/96 +0100, Ed Carp wrote: >Clinton is supposed to have either turned off dithering or will soon >(crossing fingers). Dithering is a real nuisance at times... True, but we'll still need DGPS for 1-meter accuracy, as opposed to 20-meter accuracy for uncorrected C/A GPS. Jim Bell, N7IJS

2 1

Re: Trojan Horse Loose On The Internet
by Computer Virus Help Desk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:40 PM 4/15/96 +0800, wolv(a)infosys.utm.my (Ramli Bin Jaafar) wrote: >According to several reliable sources there is a deadly virus on the >Internet. This is NOT a hoax! I hope the following message from CIAC helps explain that this is aTROJAN and NOT a VIRUS: > From: ciac(a)llnl.gov > Subject: RE:PKZIP trojan horse? > Date: Monday, April 01, 1996 11:26AM > ============The following is from PKWare ============= > It has come to PKWARE's attention that a trojan version of PKZIP is being > distributed under the name PKZ300B.ZIP or PKZ300B.EXE. This version is not > an offical version and will attempt to destroy your HD. Delete it immediately > if you have downloaded this version. If you have any further questions about > this trojan version, contact PKWARE at: support(a)pkware.com. > ======= End PKWare Message === > PKWare lists the following as known PKZIP related hacks (modified or bogus versions) as of 06/01/95: > PKZIP120 Early hack of 1.1 > PKZIP20B Hack of 1.1 > PKZIP_V2.EXE Trojan, will erase hard drive > PKZ201.ZIP Hack of 1.93 > PKZ201.EXE " > PKX201.EXE " > PKZ201.EXE " > PKX201.EXE " > PKZ210F.EXE Unknown > PKZIPV2 **TROJAN** will erase hard drives > PKUNZIP.COM Unknown > PKZIP203.EXE Unknown > PUTAV 1.93 Fake putav program (Trojan) > PKZIP 1.99 Unknown > PKZIP 2.02 Unknown > PKZIP 2.2 **TROJAN** destroys hard drives > PKZ305.EXE Hack of 1.93, fave AV, **VIRUS** > PKZ41V.EXE Hack of 1.93 > PKZ300B.ZIP Trojan, will erase hard drives > PKZ300B.EXE " > If you have any questions or problems, please let us know. > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - > Computer Incident Advisory Capability (CIAC) David L. Crawford > (510)422-8193 (510)423-9905 > ciac(a)llnl.gov crawford1(a)llnl.gov > (510)422-8193 (510)423-9905 > ciac(a)llnl.gov crawford1(a)llnl.gov > ************** I hope this answers questions concerning PKZ300.ZIP Computer Virus Help Desk http://www.a1.com/cvhd

1 0

Article on PGP flaws
by David Lesher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm told a periodical: Crypto & Security Vol 15 #1 has an article: Probabilistic [sp] Flaws in PGP {aprox title} by Thierry Moreau Has anyone seen/commented on it? -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

2 1

Hey... someone please teach me...
by Lurch 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

hey, i figured this would be as good place to ask as any... If possible, and if you have some free time, would someone please PRIVATELY mail me and explain PGP and similar types of encryption. I am extremely interested in the topic, but there isn't much I can see from any of the source code floating around everywhere, not too much docs on the algo itself... Please do not recommend books, as I seriously have no ability to get them. :( - Mike

1 0