December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Ignorance is Strength, Escrow is Security
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:01 PM 7/19/96, Steve Reid wrote: >I'm sure the evil Iraqi terrorists (and other horsemen) are snooping the >line, using their newly purchased PCs and FPGAs to crack the 40-bit crypto >so that they can gain the wonderful advantages of 128-bit SSL, which will >of course prevent wiretaps from working, thus aiding them in their >terrorist attacks and bringing about the end of the world as we know it. The Iraqi People's Benovolent Security Protection Brigade (IPBSPB) has no need to snoop the lines, at least for my communications, as I am voluntarily escrowing my communications keys as well as my storage key with the IPBSPB. To the United States government requesting a global key escrow regimen, be careful what you ask for, as you may get it. (Question: I know that the Iraqi IPBSPB has close relations with the French SDECE, so does this mean I can just escrow my keys with the Iraqis and assume they have let the boys at SDECE get copies?) "America will be stronger when 137 nations of the world and their notoriously corrupt security services have access to all communications of Americans." Ignorance is Strength, Escrow is Security, Arbeit Macht Frei. --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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:42 AM 7/19/96, snow wrote: >On Thu, 18 Jul 1996, Doug Hughes wrote: > >> If people break into my house with the element of surprise wearing >> all black in the middle of the night, they have the element of surprise >> FIRMLY on their side.. I'd have to believe that reaching for a gun >> was the most stupid thing I could do in the entire world in this sort >> of circumstance. >> "You'd be right, but you'd be dead" - Dr. SNMP >> If you don't reach for a gun, at least you have the 'chance' for >> restitution on your side. If you're dead, you have no options. > > If you are trained a certain way, you _are_ going to reach for >a weapon, and hell, at least then my kid will have enough money to go to >whatever college she wants. Snow is absolutely right! Surprised in the night, with no clear identification of the entrants (and yelled "Police!!" claims are used by home invaders, so I would not trust this anyway), a trained person will instinctively reach for his weapon. I again ask what was so wrong with the "You are surrounded. Come out with your hands up." routine of years past. Instead of anonymous ninjas in paramilitary black raiding a house and shooting anything that moves, use some "due process." And "due process" is what it's about. Presentation of a warrant, or at least pretty careful announcement of identity. Blasting down doors without presentation of an arrest or search warrant is just not the American way. Are there circumstances that can ever justify no-warning attacks? I suppose so, such as when clear evidence of, say, a bomb-making or terrorist cell is invovled. Neither condition was met at at either Ruby Ridge or Waco, nor in the vast number of midnight drug raids. If a black-clad ninja enters my house without warning, I'll have to react the only way I know how, by reaching for my gun. I don't have the luxury of freezing, exposing my neck (wolf-style), and hoping that the ninjas are "just" the police. And very interestingly, many cops are saying the same thing. They realize that the dangers of being killed in a firefight in the confusion of a pre-dawn raid are not worth the meager gains. And SWAT-raiding the wrong house has resulted in many a million-dollar judgements agasint police departments. --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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

7 10

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids
by Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jonathon Blake wrote: > On Fri, 19 Jul 1996, Hallam-Baker wrote: > > > dangerous people arround besides the government and the government is the > The _only_ difference between a gang of thugs, and a government, > is that the latter admit to being thugs, whilst the former deny > that. They both operate on the same prinicple -- steal from > others, and kill those that oppose them. The people of the USA fortunately disagree. Its no coincidence that Limbaugh has been unable to continue his tv show after his coverage of the OKC bombing. It is not socialy acceptable to call for the murder of Police officers in most countries. By doing so you are discrediting yourself and those who support you. > > only agency that is going to protect society from them. If you don't like > > Governments are the agencies _most_ likely to abuse one's > freedom. << Take Northern Ireland, as an example of what > happens, when a government tries to pacify a region, by > prohibiting everything. >> Troops were sent into Northern Ireland originally to protect the Catholic minority from the protestants. The two communities have been murdering each other for centuries and there are bigots on both sides who think that the events of three hundred years ago "prove" that the other is evil incarnate. Do you support the "punishment beatings" performed by the IRA. So far this year they have committed grievous bodliy harm against 270 people. They have also murdered 4 people. There have been no deaths from police or army use of firearms in that period. Your assertion is therefore false. If you want to discuss the politics of Ireland you should at least visit the place. You will find remarkably less sympathy for your romantic visions of bloodshed amongst the people who have to live with the consequences. The British people have little sympathy for either side and would quite happily leave the two sides to slaughter each other if it wasnt for the fact that the majority of the population wish to remain British and have voted to remain so in regular referenda and national elections. Phill

8 22

RE: Inventor of radio...
by Gregory Ellison 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Friday, July 19, 1996 7:14 AM, Jim Choate wrote: >> I would like to correct a misconception about who is credited with the >> invention of radio. Nikola Tesla has held the credit for the creation since >> the resolution of the original lawsuit in the mid-80's. I've heard this decision referred to many times but have been unable to locate any specifics. Can anyone provide a pointer? -- Gregory <gregorye(a)microsoft.com> "Opinions expressed herein are entirely my own and not the opinions of my employer." My PGP key is on the keyservers >

1 0

NSA response to key length report
by Matt Blaze 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

July 18, 1996 There is currently being circulated, to members of Congress and possibly elsewhere, a four page document entitled ``Brute-Force Cryptanalytic Attacks'' that calls into question some of the conclusions of the ``Minimum Key Lengths for Symmetric Ciphers'' white paper [1]. The document bears no author or organization attribution, but we are told that it originated from NSA. The NSA document argues that ``physical realities'' make parallel key search much more expensive and time consuming than our white paper estimated. However, the NSA document appears to have been written from the perspective of general parallel processing or cryptanalysis rather than exhaustive key search per se. It ignores several elementary principles of parallel processing that apply specifically to exhaustive key search machines of the type that our white paper considered. In particular, NSA argues that interconnections, heat dissipation, input/output bandwidth, and interprocessor communication make it difficult to ``scale up'' a key search machine by dividing the task among a large number of small components. While these factors do limit the scalability of more general purpose multiprocessor computers (such as those made by Cray), they do not apply at all to specialized exhaustive key search machines. The NSA argument ignores the most fundamental feature of brute-force key search: the processors performing the search have no need to communicate with other components of the system while they perform their share of the search, and therefore the system has no need for any of the global interconnections that limit scaling. Indeed, there is no reason that all the components of a parallel search machine must be located even within the same city, let alone the same computer housing. We note that one of our co-authors (Eric Thompson, of Access Data, Inc.) designs and builds medium-scale FPGA-based key search machines with exactly this loosely-coupled structure, and regularly uses them to recover keys for clients that include the FBI. The NSA document also calls into question our cost estimates for ASIC components, suggesting that ASIC chips of this type cost NSA approximately $1000.00 each. However, our $10.00 per chip estimate is based on an actual price quote from a commercial chip fabrication vendor for a moderate-size order for an exhaustive search ASIC designed in 1993 by Michael Wiener [2]. Perhaps NSA could reduce its own costs by changing vendors. Finally, the NSA report offers estimates of the time required to perform exhaustive search using a Cray model T3D supercomputer. This is a curious choice, for as our report notes, general-purpose supercomputers of this type make poor (and uneconomical) key search engines. However, even the artificially low performance results for this machine should give little comfort to the users of 56 bit keys. According to NSA, 56 bit keys can be searched on such a machine in less than 453 days. ``Moore's law'' predicts that it will not be long before relatively inexpensive general-purpose computers offer similar computational capability. /s/ Matt Blaze Whitfield Diffie References: [1] Blaze, M., Diffie, W., Rivest, R., Schneier, B., Shimomura, T., Thompson, E., and Wiener, M. ``Minimum Key Lengths for Symmetric Key Ciphers for Commercial Security.'' January 1996. Available from ftp://ftp.research.att.com/dist/mab/keylength.txt [2] Wiener, M. ``Exhaustive DES Key Search.'' Presented at Crypto-93, Santa Barbara, CA. August 1993. ========================================================================= [Transcription of document circulated to various members of congress and others in June, 1996, apparently by NSA] BRUTE-FORCE CRYPTANALYTIC ATTACKS Two published theoretical estimates of cost versus time to perform brute-force hardware attacks on selected cryptography key lengths differ between themselves and differ significantly from what we find when we buy or build computers to carry out such attacks. The differences lie in assumptions made in the theoretical estimates, which are not fully spelled out by the authors, and in scaling up hypothesized small machines to ever larger ones without accounting for physical realities. The factors not accounted for are: o R&D costs for the first machine, typically on the order of $10 million. o As more and more chips are added to a machine, two effects occur: o Interconnections increase and increase running time; o Heat from the chips eventually limit [sic] the size of a machine. o Memory costs are not included. o When get [sic] to the very fast processing speed estimates, machines can become Input/Output bound; so [sic] it cannot achieve the estimated speed. o Assuming every algorithm can be tested in same amount of time and key length is the only difference. Table 1 are [sic] the average time estimates made for a given cost done by Michael Wiener of Bell Norther Research in 1995. These are published in Bruce Schneier's Applied Cryptography book. Note that these are average times, one-half of the total exhaust time. Table 2 are [sic] the estimates for total exhaust times using Field Programmmable Gate Arrays (FPGA) and Application Specific ICs (ASICs) done for the Business Software Alliance by Blaze, Diffie, Rivest, Schneier, Shimomura, Thompson, and Wiener in 1996. In addition to the above factors not accounted for they have assumed ASICs cost as low as $10. We find ASICs more typically cost $1000 and their capabilities can vary considerably depending upon the specific task. Table 3 are out estimates based on our experience with a Cray T3D supercomputer with 1024 nodes. This machine costs $30 million. [Tables 1, 2, and 3 not transcribed here.]

3 3

Re: Kellstrom Calls for DT Funding
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:33 PM 7/19/96 -0400, Duncan Frissell wrote: >In a "briefing" on TWA 800 when one of the reporters tossed Big Jim >Kellstrom (Deputy Director in Charge of the New York Office) of the FBI a >softball question about what he needed to fight terrorism; he took the >opportunity to call for full funding of the Digital Telephony Bill. He said >the usual about how bad guys conspire and we need to tap. Too bad these people aren't required to show specific examples where the "bad guys" got away as a result of their failure to be able to do wiretaps. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids
by Chris Adams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 18 Jul 96 01:20:16 -0800, tcmay(a)got.net wrote: >I wonder when and how raids in the U.S. moved from the "Come out with your >hands up" verbal announcement (for the cases that needed more than a knock >on the door) to this blast-in-the-doors approach, where the raiders are >dressed in "tactical black" and are wearing black Nomex hoods and carrying >MP-5s and blast any "perp" who looks at them cross-eyed? OTOH, you have to admit that the possibility of being attacked by a (most likely) better armed criminal has bothered many cops - it has to be a rather stresful job. Sadly, they seem to either a) overreact as noted above or b) be led by idiots who order the above... I used to be a fidonet point off of a board run by a cop. He was very reasonable, and unfortunately seemed to be right at the point where he had enough "empowerment" to be blamed but not enough to shine a little common sense into things... Almost like Vietnam - the grunts get shot and ridiculed because the desk-pilots can't make a valid policy. I liked Tom Clancy's description of the CIA: "We have a lot of people who are good at ordering their martninis shaken, not stirred." >As people as diverse as Marine Colonel Jeff Cooper and Watergate felon G. >Gordon Liddy have noted, any black-clad "ninjas" entering a home at 4 a.m. >without clearly announcing themselves are asking for trouble. (Liddy got in >a lot of trouble for calling for "head shots" on rampaging BATFags. >Frankly, I'm not a good enough shot--especially in high-stress >situations--to make head shots with my H & K .45, so I can only hope to >make torso shots.) See, you need to use that computer - automated defense systems. Bet it could do okay with a ballistics module... <g> >least two of them with me. (Interestingly, the same class of folks who want >to ban "military-grade crypto" are also seeking to ban Kevlar vest-piercing >rounds. Fortunately, though KTW ammo is no longer available to "marks" (= >civilians), .45 ACP +P does a pretty good job. Certain +P .357 Magnum What's really funny is that nobody seems to notice that criminals aren't that concerned with breaking laws. I think some people need to go to Dogbert's school of Common Sense... // Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> - Webpages for sale! Se habla JavaScript! // Automatically receive my resume or PGPKEY by sending email with a subject // of 'send PGPKEY' or 'send resume'. Capitalization counts so be careful!

1 0

American People the relation to the Police
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello, Forwarded message: > Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 19:51:39 -0400 > From: Hallam-Baker <hallam(a)ai.mit.edu> > Subject: Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids > > The people of the USA fortunately disagree. Its no coincidence that Limbaugh > has been unable to continue his tv show after his coverage of the OKC bombing. > It is not socially acceptable to call for the murder of Police officers in most > countries. By doing so you are discrediting yourself and those who support you. I am a US citizen. My family were French Heugonauts who came here to escape persecution on religious grounds in the late 1590's. One of my ancestors, Rufus Choate, was a lawyer who argued Women Suffrage to the Supreme Court (he lost AFAIK) in the 1890's. I am operating under two premises. First, that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land. I am also interpreting it literally, under the assumption that our founding fathers were reasonably intelligent men and knew how to express their intents clearly. It is only our desire to avoid the uncertainty that some of the rights imply (eg speech) as well as the potential damage they might cause that clouds the issues for us. In short the uncertainty in constitutional law comes from us and not the Constitution. I disagree. This country fought two wars of liberation (you forgot about 1812) and a civil war to discredit this thesis in relation to a Democracy founded upon individual liberty. It is no coincidence that the Tree of Liberty needs watered with blood on occasion. It is how the value of human life and the pursuits thereof are measured. The entire point of the Second Amendment to the Constitution is to guarantee that the Federal Government does not have sole access to and use of deadly force. The Militia exists to fight the Federal government and other internal insurrections. The Army and Navy are pointed outward, from a constitutional point any use of these forces inside the border of the United States against US citizens is prohibited. At no point is the military given authority over any civil organization or individuals in the Constitution other than in times of war with declaration of Martial Law. I further contend that without Martial Law being called the current use of the military in civil law enforcement are unconstitutional. I will further contend that various parts of the Constitution clearly show intent on the part of the founding fathers to limit the ability of the Federal government to use force. We should recognize what they seemed to have understood viceraly. All rights stem from an individual being alive. Civilization and Democracy in particular should be to increase the ability of an individual to do this. They also understood that democratic government were entered into by the founders (at least, automatic citizenship clouds this issue down the road) voluntarily and with the clear intent to better their position in the world. To this end the avoidance of the use of violence at all costs short of losing your life is a major plus. The constitutional point is to reduce the need for violence. Revolution and War are not murder unless you lose. This is a basic tenet of civilization. I want to be sure you understand I am NOT calling for the use of force against anyone. I believe the only legitimate use of force is in the immediate and direct threat to ones life. I also think that the majority of our current problems can be resolved by the inclusion of the 9th and 10th Amendment in our legal system. > Do you support the "punishment beatings" performed by the IRA. So far this > year they have committed grievous bodliy harm against 270 people. They have > also murdered 4 people. There have been no deaths from police or army use > of firearms in that period. Your assertion is therefore false. How many of them died? Beaten? And from what? Seems I see a article now and again about somebody getting killed from rubber bullets, tear gas, beatings, etc. from police and other related forces. > If you want to discuss the politics of Ireland you should at least visit the > place. You don't have to fall off a mountain to understand the implications of a fall, understanding does not require direct experience in all cases. > You will find remarkably less sympathy for your romantic visions of > bloodshed amongst the people who have to live with the consequences. The > British people have little sympathy for either side and would quite happily > leave the two sides to slaughter each other if it wasnt for the fact that > the majority of the population wish to remain British and have voted to > remain so in regular referenda and national elections. If true, it doesn't speak very highly of the British people. Jim Choate

1 0

Re: "address verification databases"? (was: Netscape download...)
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 17:53 7/18/96, Peter D. Junger wrote: >With much help from Tom Weinstein and a bit of luck, I have succeeded >in downloading the Linux version. But the time I tried before it >finally worked, I typed in the New York City area code (212) rather >than the Cleveland area code (216) and since I had given them a >Cleveland address and ZIP code, they (the server, that is) said that I >had made an error. So that must be one thing that they check. Despite the ITAR, Netscape's US version is already available from the usual free-world FTP sites. Next time, you might want to get your copy there. BTW, can somebody please tell me why PGP generated *.asc files show up in Netscape as "VRML Worlds"? TIA, -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November. Vote Harry Browne for President.

1 0

RE: Inventor of radio... (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: Gregory Ellison <gregorye(a)microsoft.com> > Subject: RE: Inventor of radio... > Date: Fri, 19 Jul 1996 12:02:00 -0700 > > I've heard this decision referred to many times but have been unable to > locate any specifics. Can anyone provide a pointer? You should be able to find it via the patent office webpage. I believe the year was 1985, but I could be wrong. Jim Choate

1 0