December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Safemail
by Joseph M. Reagle Jr. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:19 PM 6/18/96 -0400, you wrote: > SafeMail uses a proprietary Russian algorithm. Maybe it is GOST. Schneir covers it, and there is a white paper on it at the b_crypt site. _______________________ Regards, Democracy is where you can say what you think even if you don't think. - Joseph Reagle http://rpcp.mit.edu/~reagle/home.html reagle(a)mit.edu E0 D5 B2 05 B6 12 DA 65 BE 4D E3 C1 6A 66 25 4E

2 1

Oil Change software snoops through hard drive
by declan＠well.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Alan forwarded this to me. Thought it might be interesting. -Declan ------------------------------- Heads up: Privacy & Continuous Access Ks implicated by new software This press release for a new product - a software agent - has implications for privacy and continuing access issues, because it works by scanning user's hard disks and automatically providing software updates. Unanswered Qs: 1) What other kinds of info does/can it troll for? 2) What does it do when it finds unregistered software? 3) Does it implicate ECPA? 4) Will updates be available through other means? 5) Must a user affirmatively grant permission to the software agent? 6) Can a user decline or limit the agent's access? 7) What uses may the agent's owner make of data collected? etc. Alan L --- press release: *** "Digital Oil Change" CyberMedia announced today at PC Expo that it plans to automatically "service" personal computer software via the Net with a newly unveiled product called Oil Change. The company reports that Oil Change automatically replaces outdated, bug-ridden software and hardware drivers with clean updates. CyberMedia says the product is designed to use the Net to find, download, and install updates to Microsoft Windows 95 software applications and drivers. Oil Change reportedly tracks all currently installed versions and revisions of all Windows 95 software and hardware drivers on a PC, and then dials into CyberMedia's Internet Web Server for related updates. Users in need of an update are alerted by Oil Change with a description of what the update will do, and then the product finds the update on a software manufacturer's Web site, downloads, and installs it. Beginning today, CyberMedia says it will offer a free beta version of Oil Change for a limited time at its Web site.

3 2

The IESG: Protocol Action: MIME Security with Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) to Proposed Standard
by Perry E. Metzger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message To: IETF-Announce:; Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor(a)isi.edu> Cc: Internet Architecture Board <iab(a)isi.edu> From: The IESG <iesg-secretary(a)CNRI.Reston.VA.US> Subject: Protocol Action: MIME Security with Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) to Proposed Standard Date: Wed, 19 Jun 96 11:06:28 -0400 Message-ID: <9606191106.aa22287(a)IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US> The IESG has approved the Internet-Draft "MIME Security with Pretty Good Privacy (PGP)" <draft-elkins-pem-pgp-04.txt> as a Proposed Standard. This has been reviewed in the IETF but is not the product of an IETF Working Group. The IESG contact persons are Harald Alvestrand, Keith Moore, and Jeff Schiller. Technical Summary This document describes how Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) can be used to provide privacy and authentication using the Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) security content types described in RFC1847. Working Group Summary This document was not the product of an IETF working group but was reviewed via a 4 week IETF wide last call. The last call failed to raise any significant issues. Protocol Quality This document was reviewed for the IESG by Jeffrey I. Schiller. The protocol provides for an elegant way of encapsulating PGP objects within a MIME framework by making use of Security Multiparts for MIME (RFC1847). This permits a MIME aware user agent to read and process PGP signed and/or encrypted messages, yet it provides sufficient backwards compatibility for users with non-MIME aware mail user agents to make use of PGP directly to manually process messages prepared with this protocol. ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

Re: Federal key registrat
by harka＠nycmetro.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-=> Quoting In:nobody@c2.org to Harka <=- >Speaking to the Commonwealth Club of California in San Francisco, Reno said >her plan would require people to register with the new agency the secret >codes -- or "keys" -- they use to encrypt messages online. My keys? Sure Janet, no problem. pgp -kg (80000 times) Now can I email the hundred meg to you? :) Harka ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR]

1 0

Re: German Federal Bank opposes e-cash
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:25 PM 6/19/96 +0200, Ulf Moeller wrote: >[What follows is my translation of a Reuters news item as seen on a >mailing list.] > >"Risks with computer money" > >Frankfurt - the Federal Bank has once more warned against security risks >with computer money. There is the danger that "Cyber-Money" stored in >computers be counterfeited, said Directory Board member Edgar Meister >at a conference in Schwaebisch-Hall. Then the banks just need to be more careful about issuing it, huh? >In addition there were the danger >of money laundry, because the computer money could be wired across >borders without problems. Which, interestingly enough, is exactly the reason citizens should support it. Barry Goldwater, the 1964 US Presidential candidate, said something like "Any government that is powerful enough to give you everything you want, is powerful enough to take away everything you have." It was true, then, and it's true today. Fast-forward to 1996: Any government powerful enough to be able to eliminate money-laundering is powerful enough to eliminate all of our rights. I'm not willing to take that risk, and the way I see it, people who see digital cash as an undesirable risk to government are a risk to me. Meister announced that, if necessary, the EU >Central Banks would take counter-measures, should computer money and >re-loadable payment cards endanger the monetary policy. (rtr/18.6.96) Maybe somebody should tell Herr Meister that should actions of government be threatening, "Citizens would take counter-measures, should restrictions on computer money and reloadable payment cards endanger their rights." Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: Digital Cash application
by declan＠well.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim: This is a nice idea, but it's not going to happen. Yes, Harry Browne has raised enough money to qualify for matching funds from the FEC. But he's unable to give out the cash or use it to pay down the gvt debt since doing so could violate FEC regulations. The FEC is also unwilling only to certify Browne for matching funds without giving it to him -- he's got to take the money and spend it on campaign foo and nothing else, says the government. Finally, once they give you cash you have to meet a higher degree of scrutiny, which costs money in lawyers and accountants. Talk about bureaucracy. At least this is what the party tells me. I'll be covering their convention, which is in DC a few weeks from now. -Declan >In 1996, the Libertarian Party will apparently qualify for Federal matching >funds for its Presidential political campaign. That does not mean that it >will _accept_ them, being stolen goods. However, a few years ago I heard of >an idea that they should accept the money, and return it to the people, a >small amount at a time, to whomever asks for it. Besides returning the >stolen money to its rightful owners, that would produce substantial positive >publicity for the Libertarian party, embarrassment for the Democrats and >Republicans, while at the same time reducing the amount of money available >for the D's and the R's. > > >But there's been a practical question of how to actively do this, >economically. Issuing checks and mailing them costs money, and they're >traceable, etc. The advent of digital cash suggests an answer: Make the >payments in the form of digital cash, payable on the Web. This will >encourage the use of digital cash, and provide a sudden infusion that will >promote other uses. There's another advantage, however. Since "Netizens" >are somewhat biased towards libertarianism, this will have the effect of >keeping more of this money "in the family" as it were, while at the same >time being open, technically, to everyone who can get on the 'net. > > >Jim Bell >jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

[Free Beer] Talk on "Can Secrets be Stopped?" at Comp Lit.
by Peter Wayner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

After the talk tonight at Computer Literacy, I plan on buying a round or two of beers for cypherpunks. It's just a way of saying "thank you" to the endless stream of information that the list generates. I don't think I could have written the book without the help of many on the list. The talk begins at Computer Literacy (2590 North First Street at the corner of Trimble) at 6:30. It will cover some simple ways to hide information (steganography) and it will be given at a very general level. The bookstore invited me to give the talk to flog my book "Disappearing Cryptography." (For info about the book, check out my web page http://access.digex.net/~pcw/pcwpage.html ) The beer begins flowing at the Tide House after the talk and questions. This is the Tide House at 65 North San Pedro at San Pedro Square in downtown San Jose. They inform me that they offer validated parking at some garage next door. The password for the evening will be "swordfish". I've gotten to know some list members over the years via email and it would be nice to meet you in person. For more information, call the bookstore at 408-435-5015. I would also appreciate it if you could email me so I could get a preliminary head count. Feel free to come at the last minute, but try and send some notice. -Peter Wayner

1 0

Re: Digital Cash application
by declan＠well.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Whether it's a good idea or not -- and I'm told that it could violate FEC rules -- it's not going to happen. A campaign spokesperson told me that "Harry refuses" to take the cash, period. -Declan >At 01:24 PM 6/19/96 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >>Jim: >> >>This is a nice idea, but it's not going to happen. >> >>Yes, Harry Browne has raised enough money to qualify for matching funds >>from the FEC. But he's unable to give out the cash or use it to pay down >>the gvt debt since doing so could violate FEC regulations. The FEC is also >>unwilling only to certify Browne for matching funds without giving it to >>him -- he's got to take the money and spend it on campaign foo and nothing >>else, says the government. Finally, once they give you cash you have to >>meet a higher degree of scrutiny, which costs money in lawyers and >>accountants. >>Talk about bureaucracy. >>At least this is what the party tells me. I'll be covering their >>convention, which is in DC a few weeks from now. > >It seems to me that since paying people funds that were stolen from them >would produce good publicity, which by definition could be argued to be >spending it on the campaign. Sure, it's a non-traditional tactic, but that >doesn't mean it's in violation of the campaign law. They could also email >along a set of libertarian literature, and the recipient would certify that >he would promote the libertarian cause and work for the election of the >candidate, etc, etc. > >As for "lawyers and accountants": I'm sure there are enough >libertarian-leaning lawyers and accountants around who would be willing to >help out to make this project a net positive. Remember, the publicity is >the important thing. > > > >> >>-Declan >> >> >>>In 1996, the Libertarian Party will apparently qualify for Federal matching >>>funds for its Presidential political campaign. That does not mean that it >>>will _accept_ them, being stolen goods. However, a few years ago I heard of >>>an idea that they should accept the money, and return it to the people, a >>>small amount at a time, to whomever asks for it. Besides returning the >>>stolen money to its rightful owners, that would produce substantial positive >>>publicity for the Libertarian party, embarrassment for the Democrats and >>>Republicans, while at the same time reducing the amount of money available >>>for the D's and the R's. >>> >>> >>>But there's been a practical question of how to actively do this, >>>economically. Issuing checks and mailing them costs money, and they're >>>traceable, etc. The advent of digital cash suggests an answer: Make the >>>payments in the form of digital cash, payable on the Web. This will >>>encourage the use of digital cash, and provide a sudden infusion that will >>>promote other uses. There's another advantage, however. Since "Netizens" >>>are somewhat biased towards libertarianism, this will have the effect of >>>keeping more of this money "in the family" as it were, while at the same >>>time being open, technically, to everyone who can get on the 'net. >>> >>> >>>Jim Bell >>>jimbell(a)pacifier.com >> >> >> >> >Jim Bell >jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

FBI utters root passsword to the Constitution
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

FBI InfoSec Guru Randy Perlman (Prilamen? Filament?) was interviewed on CNN BizNews this morning by Deborah Marchini: "Hackers" are menacing the net and society. Marchini prompted him but he concurred: Hackers are a *THREAT TO NATIONAL SECURITY*. There you have it, the root password to the Constitution. Illegal wiretapping, assassination, anything is now justified in the defense of our NATIONAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE. bd

1 0

Re: Digital Cash application
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:24 PM 6/19/96 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Jim: > >This is a nice idea, but it's not going to happen. > >Yes, Harry Browne has raised enough money to qualify for matching funds >from the FEC. But he's unable to give out the cash or use it to pay down >the gvt debt since doing so could violate FEC regulations. The FEC is also >unwilling only to certify Browne for matching funds without giving it to >him -- he's got to take the money and spend it on campaign foo and nothing >else, says the government. Finally, once they give you cash you have to >meet a higher degree of scrutiny, which costs money in lawyers and >accountants. >Talk about bureaucracy. >At least this is what the party tells me. I'll be covering their >convention, which is in DC a few weeks from now. It seems to me that since paying people funds that were stolen from them would produce good publicity, which by definition could be argued to be spending it on the campaign. Sure, it's a non-traditional tactic, but that doesn't mean it's in violation of the campaign law. They could also email along a set of libertarian literature, and the recipient would certify that he would promote the libertarian cause and work for the election of the candidate, etc, etc. As for "lawyers and accountants": I'm sure there are enough libertarian-leaning lawyers and accountants around who would be willing to help out to make this project a net positive. Remember, the publicity is the important thing. > >-Declan > > >>In 1996, the Libertarian Party will apparently qualify for Federal matching >>funds for its Presidential political campaign. That does not mean that it >>will _accept_ them, being stolen goods. However, a few years ago I heard of >>an idea that they should accept the money, and return it to the people, a >>small amount at a time, to whomever asks for it. Besides returning the >>stolen money to its rightful owners, that would produce substantial positive >>publicity for the Libertarian party, embarrassment for the Democrats and >>Republicans, while at the same time reducing the amount of money available >>for the D's and the R's. >> >> >>But there's been a practical question of how to actively do this, >>economically. Issuing checks and mailing them costs money, and they're >>traceable, etc. The advent of digital cash suggests an answer: Make the >>payments in the form of digital cash, payable on the Web. This will >>encourage the use of digital cash, and provide a sudden infusion that will >>promote other uses. There's another advantage, however. Since "Netizens" >>are somewhat biased towards libertarianism, this will have the effect of >>keeping more of this money "in the family" as it were, while at the same >>time being open, technically, to everyone who can get on the 'net. >> >> >>Jim Bell >>jimbell(a)pacifier.com > > > > Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1