December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Minitel "saved" by hackers?
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 12 Jul 96 at 14:07, Daniel Salber wrote: [..] > Well, sorry if it is. That's what I read in a book about the early history > of telephone. I don't have the reference handy right now, though. Understandable. > BUT: how do you explain that from the original conception (using the > telephone for broadcasting), the telephone came to be a one-to-one > communication tool ? Even if the implementation allowed it, someone had to > think of it, right ? Bell thought of the idea orig. as a broadcaster. Then somehow when it was set up he or someone else in AT&T did that. If I recall (no refs handy) it had to do with the telegraph being (sort of) point-to-point... Bell used to tour the vaudville circuit showing off the telephone. I think the idea emerged during that time... during such shows of tech (common at the time) there was a Q&A from the audience. Rob > > Thanks for the clarification anyway. > > Daniel > > > > --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

1 0

Re: Word lists for passphrases
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:18 AM 7/6/96 -0500, you wrote: >At 12:09 AM 7/6/96 -0500, snow(a)smoke.suba.com wrote: >>On Fri, 5 Jul 1996, Erle Greer wrote: >> >>> Word-List Builder (this is not an ad) >Unix, you can do, but the recursive subdirs aren't a prob for me. A final dream >would be to convert it to VB4, use MS's WWW custom control, and unleash it as a >spider. If you send me the source, I'll give it a shot (port to vb4 with x-controls) ----------< fate favors the prepared mind >---------- Remo Pini Fon 1: +41 1 350 28 82 mailto:rp@rpini.com Fon 2: +41 1 465 31 90 http://www.rpini.com/remopini/ Fax: +41 1 350 28 84 --------< words are what reality is made of >--------

1 0

Re: Net and Terrorism.
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>While the guys fighting the Israelis in Lebanon are more or >less honorable men who fight according to the laws of war, >the Islamic fundamentalists in Algeria are simply vicious subhuman >monsters who deserve to die, each and every one, and their pals in >Egypt and the Sudan are not much better. I hope you're not serious. In case you are: It seems to be typical of American beliefs that Israelis are good, and everybody else "down there" is bad. On the other hand, Israel wouldn't stand a chance if US weren't having them as a pet. They are getting more and more fundamentalistic (yes, there are zionistic fundamentalists, big surprise) and they are not one bit better than anyone around. It seems to me, that a few hothead terrorists create the image of all arabic people in western heads. Consider this: Islam is a lot younger then Christianity. If the Islamic people act like the Christian people we will have a huge problem. A few hundred years ago everybody who didn't agree with the pope was killed (Earth is flat after all). Now, according to my timekeeping, Islam should reach that state around 2100. So there is plenty of time for them to get nastier. (I don't think they will, because Islam is a bit more tolerant than christianity ever was). ps: I'm not Islamic, nor will I ever be, but I don't like fundamentalists, and your views, should they be serious, sound *VERY* fundamentalist to me. ----------< fate favors the prepared mind >---------- Remo Pini Fon 1: +41 1 350 28 82 mailto:rp@rpini.com Fon 2: +41 1 465 31 90 http://www.rpini.com/remopini/ Fax: +41 1 350 28 84 --------< words are what reality is made of >--------

1 0

Re: Need PGP-awareness in common utilities
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:30 AM 7/7/96 +0200, you wrote: > >Which is where the small payments to ratings producers from >ratings consumers comes in. Again this is just the >quantification of a phenomena that we all take for granted. >(Namely, that people who produce quality ratings are producing a >value and trading/contributing it to others.) It sure sounds like I'll have to pay, so someone decides for me, wether some piece of info is important to me. Now, if that isn't the first step to censorship! That kind of reminds me of an insurance company where I can call a toll-intensive number to talk to a salesman who tries to sell my something I don't really need. ----------< fate favors the prepared mind >---------- Remo Pini Fon 1: +41 1 350 28 82 mailto:rp@rpini.com Fon 2: +41 1 465 31 90 http://www.rpini.com/remopini/ Fax: +41 1 350 28 84 --------< words are what reality is made of >--------

2 1

Re: Need PGP-awareness in common utilities
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:30 AM 7/7/96 +0200, you wrote: > >Which is where the small payments to ratings producers from >ratings consumers comes in. Again this is just the >quantification of a phenomena that we all take for granted. >(Namely, that people who produce quality ratings are producing a >value and trading/contributing it to others.) It sure sounds like I'll have to pay, so someone decides for me, wether some piece of info is important to me. Now, if that isn't the first step to censorship! That kind of reminds me of an insurance company where I can call a toll-intensive number to talk to a salesman who tries to sell my something I don't really need. ----------< fate favors the prepared mind >---------- Remo Pini Fon 1: +41 1 350 28 82 mailto:rp@rpini.com Fon 2: +41 1 465 31 90 http://www.rpini.com/remopini/ Fax: +41 1 350 28 84 --------< words are what reality is made of >--------

1 0

Re: Word lists for passphrases
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:51 PM 7/6/96 -0400, you wrote: > > AwakenToMe(a)aol.com writes: > > > I have a util that will create a word list starting from > > > aaaaaaaaaaa on up to anythingggggggg basically you could do every > > > combination. Let me know if ya want it. > > > > That would really be of great use for doing wordlist crack runs. It > > must have taken you a long time to write -- generous of you to offer > > it. I don't think any decent programmer has never tried such an aproach to crack for example PKZIP archives (the one on CD-ROMs, where you have to pay to get the passwords). I certainly did back in 1991. I don't want to put down the usefullness of such a program, but since probably more than 50% of all passwords are vulnerable to dictionary attacks, such a utility has not too much value. (have you ever tried all combinations from "aaaaaa" to "zzzzzz" (there are around 2'176'782'336 <36^6> if you concider all umlauts like the German auml;, uuml;, ouml;, ...). On the other hand, there won't be much more than 10'000 6-letter words in any dictionary. So it seems, a wordlist generator and a wordlist using cracker works a lot better (and is almost as trivial to do - if you keep aside nice features) ----------< fate favors the prepared mind >---------- Remo Pini Fon 1: +41 1 350 28 82 mailto:rp@rpini.com Fon 2: +41 1 465 31 90 http://www.rpini.com/remopini/ Fax: +41 1 350 28 84 --------< words are what reality is made of >--------

1 0

Re: DoD and IRS tax systems (fwd)
by Jeff Barber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm taking the liberty of forwarding this excellent RISKS posting. There are a couple of other related ones in the latest RISKS digest -- see comp.risks. -- Jeff oo -----------------------------cut /\ here------------------------------ Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1996 14:12:51 -0400 From: Carl Minie <CarlM(a)qsc1po.qstr.com> Subject: Re: DoD and IRS tax systems (Wexelblat, RISKS-18.23) As an ex-liberal and small-l libertarian, I submit that the true danger to privacy in the Republic is the practice of gathering detailed financial information from all (law-abiding) Americans under threat of asset confiscation and jail terms, and then giving tens of thousands of government employees access to this information in the course of their employment. I further submit that passing a few wimpy privacy laws and expecting them to prevent this information from being used for personal and political purposes is magical thinking. It doesn't take a genius to surmise that IRS data is used regularly for illegal purposes by everyone from the sitting President (of either party) down to grudge-bearing neighbors and ex-spouses. I believe the IRS attempted to assess the depth of the problem in their Southeastern Region (where my mother worked) at one time, and stopped at well over 300 violations. You or I would have ended up at Leavenworth, but all but a few of the most egregious violators were simply warned not to do it again. You can take voluntary action to keep yourself out of the TRW/ Equifax/TransUnion food chain and off junk mail lists...but Federal law requires you to remain in the IRS's gunsights for your entire productive lifespan. Neither party supports privacy when it means privacy from the government; it is a Democratic president who is enthusiastically supporting the FBI and NSA in their efforts to prevent American citizens from using encryption that they can't break, and to require that every phone, fax, and modem in the United States contain a chip that would allow government agencies to tap in at will. Do I need to add here that the very concept of economic privacy is anathema to those who believe that a portion of everything you earn, keep, spend, or invest belongs to them, and that not handing over the fraction they demand is stealing from them? > Is the Department of Star Wars and the $700 toilet seat > really so excellent a contracting agency that they are the > clear choice to handle IRS business? I don't expect the IRS to be abolished anytime soon...but letting the DoD design its computer systems would be an acceptable second choice. The DoD may be expensive, but they're not very good. My fondest hope is that with a spanking new Government Issue computer system, the IRS that the GSA says can't figure out where 60% of its own budget goes won't be able to find 60% of mine. I don't like paying for $700 toilet seats (or $320,000 spotted owls) any more than you do. The solution which provides the smallest RISK to privacy is not to gather the data in the first place. If tax compliance is truly voluntary, then the IRS should trust that we are reading 21,000 pages of IRS rules and case law and sending in the correct amount. Long Pig ------------------------------

1 0

Re: CCC Crypto Lock
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:10 AM 7/6/96 -0700, you wrote: >MicroPatent, 4 July 96 > > >Systems and methods for protecting software from >unlicensed copying and use (Assignee -- Convex Computer >Corporation) > >... > >Assignee: Convex Computer Corporation > >Patent Number: 5530752 > >Issue Date: 1996 06 25 > >Inventor(s): Rubin, Robert J. > >If you would like to purchase a copy of this patent, >please call MicroPatent at 800-984-9800. > >Copyright 1996, MicroPatent I think there are already such algorithms in use in Europe. (Why buy the patent, if it's already around?) ----------< fate favors the prepared mind >---------- Remo Pini Fon 1: +41 1 350 28 82 mailto:rp@rpini.com Fon 2: +41 1 465 31 90 http://www.rpini.com/remopini/ Fax: +41 1 350 28 84 --------< words are what reality is made of >--------

1 0

Reasonable validation of a software package
by Anonymous User 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Fellow cpunks: I am working on various software packages for UNIX and Windows and since this is commercial work and prior NDA's are involved, I can't include the source code for absolute validation. What would assure one that a package has not been tampered with from the company to the user? (Currently, I am using PKZIP's rather anemic AV protection, as well as signing the archive with my PGP key. I am wondering if there are any other steps I need to take to assure that a package came from me, and wasn't damaged/altered/tampered with in transit.) Thanks in advance.

4 3

Can't block caller ID in Massachusetts?
by David Mazieres 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

My last phone bill said that Nynex is now giving out people's names in addidtion to their phone numbers over caller-id. I therefore called Nynex and told them to block caller-id on my phone line. They said no problem, but... They said nothing I can do will block it when I call 800 numbers. "The people with 800 numbers have special software, and there is nothing you can do to block your identity when calling them. Not even *67." Wow. Maybe I'm not paranoid enough, but I never expected this. I can never again call an 800 number anonymously to get information about something unless I go out to a pay phone. What an incredible inconvenience, and how truly depressing. I know 800 number owners probably used to be able to get lists of calling phone numbers on their phone bills, but this is less disturbing as it would take significant effort to match up the lists after the fact. I just want to be able to call up companies and say, for instance, "If I buy your product, can it do X?" as opposed to, for instance, "I'm stuck with your product, can it do X?". People are often more helpful in the former case. Now, though, they'll know exactly who I am before they even say hello. David

19 31