December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

DES brute force? (was: Re: Borders *are* transparent)
by aba＠atlas.ex.ac.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Peter Trei <trei(a)process.com> writes: > [...] Last September, three or four semi-overlapping efforts > succeeded in brute-forcing 40 bit RC4 (used in export-quality SSL). > > This had three main effects: > > 1. Raising the issue in the media, and thus in the public consciousness. > > 2. Within a month, the government was starting to talk about permitting the > export of stronger (but GAK'd) encryption products. > > 3. It enabled people like Jeff to argue successfully that releasing > only an export-strength product was no longer a viable option.In > practical terms is probably the most important effect of the crack: > I know of at least one other company where it led directly to the > release of both domestic and export versions. > > Any one up for a distributed brute force attack on single DES? My > back-of-the-envelope calculations and guesstimates put this on the > hairy edge of doability (the critical factor is how many machines can > be recruited - a non-trivial cash prize would help). Hmm, 56 bits is a lot of bits... Here's some calcuations of my own for your criticism... using libdes-3.23 ftp://ftp.psy.uq.oz.au/pub/Crypto/DES/libdes-3.23.tar.gz running the "speed" application, on a 100Mhz SGI R4000 Indy, I get ~600k key shedules / sec. (With the ~Mb/s throughput for encrypt, the bottle neck for simplistic brute force is going to be key scheduling). 56 bits = 72057594037927936 worst case = 3800 years ouch! So ideally for a break you would like the whole thing to be completed in say 2 weeks wall clock time, which gives rise to the need for ~100,000 machines of similar throughput, full-time for two weeks. Possible? As far as cash prizes go how much could cypherpunks and friends generate for such a purpose? I'd guess individuals could come up with a fair bit of money... 1000+ list members x 10$ = 10k (or whatever). Also perhaps there are some commercial backers with interests in seeing ITAR squished who might be persuaded to donate? Somebody would need to spend a fair bit of effort publicising it on USENET, to get a good response. There may be problems associated with offering prize money... what if some employees at DES hardware vendors `borrowed' some time on their top of the range DES cruncher? Perhaps this doesn't matter, as it would just make the point even more strongly :-) Also I can't help wondering if there isn't some lateral thinking we can do to reduce the cost... Are there cheap (<100$) PC DES cards which would help significantly? What DES modes are used in typical banking situations? (I am presuming a challenge involving a widely used banking funds transfer protocol would be a suitably juicy targets, based on a criteria of demonstrating the greatest financial risk). Are there any practical published attacks on DES which have space / time trade offs which improve on simplistic brute force whilst still having relatively low memory requirements for each node, and very low communication requirements? Adam -- #!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1 lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/)

1 0

Re: Digital Watermarks for copy protection in recent Billboard
by Alex de Joode 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[..] : > The system will have to rely on proprietary tech and security through : > obscurity. Even know how watermarks are stored without understanding : > the math, one must be able to somehow garble the sound without : > distorting it, but which renders the watermark useless. : Actually, this would be quite easy. The "watermark" would be a : signal that plays inband, but out of our hearing range during the : entire CD. The human ear can only hear in the 20-20,000 (Hz, KHZ?, : whatever) range. It would be trivial to add a digital ID signal at, : say 30,000 or 15 or something like that. This could then be decoded, : if need be. This seems the easiest and most efficient way. This : could also be defeated with a lot of $$ (and/or a LOT of HD space). : If the frequecy is known (it can be found out) it can easily be run : through recording studio eqipment that can very effectively isolate : the frequency and cut it out. If you have a LOT of HDD space : (digital audio at 2 stereo tracks, not sure of the sampling rate or : bit resolution, takes about 20MB of HDD space per minute (2 tracks, : good sampling and bit rate) ) you could probably find the freq. HDD space is -cheap- 2 gig drives sell voor 350 usd in Holland, most music cd's contain 70 minutes of recording thus -at your 20 Mb per minute rate- would require 1.4 gigs. So basicly 'CD-pirates' need to buy a PC with a 2 gig HDD and a CD-R, a 'one-off' investment of say 5000 usd; besides their normal cd maunfacturing, packaging and transportation, those additional 5000 usd are peanuts compared to the total investment for pirating CD's. : fairly easily by isolation and just edit it out, and write the new : stuff to a CD-R. If the signal is purely digital, I would imagine : that it might be even easier that if it were an analog signal (?). : Someone w/ good equipment (Digital Labs' stuff, or SAW (Software : Audio Workshop) would be able to do this w/o much problem. The : question is is the price/effort worth it? In quantity maybe. On an : individual basis, only if you already happen to have the erquipment. : I have a suspiscion that this type of thing will not really come to : any kind of fruition due to not only the ability to defeat this, but : mainly due to things like buying at a garage sale, etc. If it did, : only MASS market piraters would be investigated. (Another example of : a law creating it's own violators. Don't make the law, there won't : be mass piratingof "clean CDs" bEST Regards, -- -AJ-

1 0

Re: ABC news on Internet Telephony
by talon57＠well.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Since this thread has continued I would like to start my comments by making a public apology to David Sternlight for my bad manners the other day. He had done nothing to give me cause for my bad attitude. I was rude and expressed myself poorly. I apologize to him in particular and to the list in general. Brian D Williams - -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAy7eA7wAAAEEAJgUoJWlE/7ntxpdfFKJC0EIx1nPmOrfBkIz3N/qyqPsqY6A WJ9jx1oNow8sMjFPET6kbMw2cScfVOUisekK7xVQWuADUPscRXg8zI3x0ws9z2KV ITL+cO7zODIA1+wZS8v14RJpG4dXF1Q9YsydU8T5bodAcsF5TnsfmVh/uI7xAAUR tChCcmlhbiBEIFdpbGxpYW1zIDx0YWxvbjU3QHdlbGwuc2YuY2EudXM+iQCVAwUQ MWkT/XsfmVh/uI7xAQEZKgP+M15YYXXdVAufR2cIkg964EoBubvUj/3liKbRpkCC hPOm9ed/CJR73+IsgIRUot1LrmT9QRQIy7p9rjYSSOK7Wsf3EuU5Vx2iklUQiuy2 zLexnjxf1VWF+RMe1/NG7TO/J7HzqYVAgWb7EiWYNua2NDPSLNmYsJx+BkhPq4jf vGA= =sIcA - -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMfPYoXsfmVh/uI7xAQGmZgP/afFTovJ7HUfyyfpqnmjP07Gpx6uLSswy 5LFy1YGCQW1/PVpQvS+B+dJB/uj88s6r4OXx7F1GUQbCZfzx6lkD7Bv+EX6f4yvw 7VOBRMQhnHl+H+MD+n/blaR8P1gCx3Yau2uJuT1r8f7f7GccaD+dQJtpabACyz2T Nh5wo6v/MmA= =pC7P -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Digitally signed apology ^^^^^^^ pretty neat eh! Remo Pini wrote: >--- all the following points are based on swiss circumstances, > >they may not apply to US --- A good point, my views are based/biased by being a Chicago based Ameritech (RBOC) employee. DISCLAIMER: all opinions are my own, I do not speak for Ameritech or it's alliance partners. >>point to point circuits are more efficiently handled by circuit >>switching rather than packet switching networks. Nicholas >>Negroponte wrote an interesting piece about asynchronous vs >>synchronous, I believe it is in his book "Being Digital." >Well, from a users point of view, sending packet data over a >packet mode bearer service is more efficient (and cheaper). An >interesting developement in this direction is the PMBS-A/B modes >of ISDN (packet switching to the public switch). The existance of >this service suggests its usability. I agree 100%, I expressed this poorly. I meant to say that asynchronous packet data was more efficent over a packet network, and synchronous data (like voice) was more efficient over a circuit switched network. I share your admiration of ISDN. >>ADSL is an interesting attempt at digital telephony but expensive >>and basically would mean replacing existing central office >>switches. (backbone bandwidth) >We have a well developed DQDB-MAN and ATM net around, and >bandwidth is available (and getting cheaper by the minute). >Currently, a onetime investment of around $2500 per client is >necessary to provide 5MBit/s transfer volume (via the cable TV >networks or the existing broadband networks) One of the problems with a conversion to ADSL here would be that most point to point copper has been replaced with "slick 96" muxes which use 4 framed T-1's (1.536 mbs) to provide 96 voice channels. It is difficult to run 6mbs over a 56kbs channel. ;) Of course this equipment could be replaced. (maybe just new line cards!) The good news is that it is fiber based. >>In a packet network you have to either dedicate a portion of the >>bandwidth for a synchronous circuit, or you have to have a very >>fast network and use very small packets (ATM), expensive either >>way. >Not if you have a dedicated packet switching network for >asynchronous packet transfer only. If you use it for both you >don't have to have a very fast network, you have to have a network >with predictable and constant packet delay. (that's not the same >as fast!) You are correct, actually fast is always the wrong term to use since we are always refering to a portion of the speed of light. Because of different technologies and bandwidth some devices have faster data throughput. >>A single central office has many times the bandwidth of the >>widest part of the internet, and the average state has hundreds >>of CO's. If even a small portion of the Internets current users >>tried placing a call things would grind to a halt. A huge >>increase in the number of backbones and their bandwidth would >>solve this, but who will pay the bill? >I guess Internet-telephony is one of the bandwidth killers. Yes, this is the point I was trying to express. >>Sometime ago the discussion was on the cost of laying new fiber, >>may I suggest the realworld heuristic of "a million dollars a >>mile." >There are of course a lot of alternatives: >- Existing wiring (5 MBit/s over 6 copper wires is possible) >- Usage of the cable networks >- Radio transmissions (RITL - radio in the loop) >- Satellite transmissions Yes, we should always check the alternatives, but lets face it if we have to redo the infrastructure, and redig 250 million trenches, I feel 100% fiber is the way to go. jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> writes >>Sometime ago the discussion was on the cost of laying new fiber, >>may I suggest the realworld heuristic of "a million dollars a >>mile." >In most cases, "new fiber" isn't needed, and will probably only be >rarely needed on long-distance links. As I understand it, most >cableways are laid with extra tubes, into which new fiber cables >can be blown in (using compressed air) long after the trench is >filled. The specific example I saw, there were three 2" diameter >tubes in a larger tube, and according to the contractor (I >asked...) only one of the tubes would be filled at that time. In >addition, while he wasn't sure, he thought that at least some of >the 36-fiber cable in that one tube would remain "dark," or unused >until it was later needed. >I don't know how expensive it is to add that extra fiber cable >into an existing tube, but it would be VASTLY cheaper than the >original trenching operation. Further, much of the improved >transmission technology can be used on the older fibers to >increase their capacity: A fiber now used to transmit a single >2.4 gigabit signal can be upgraded, simply using new channelized >transmitters and receivers to increase the data rate to 8 or 16 >times the previous rate. Jim, the above quote was by me not Remo Pini. I was giving a rough figure for new underground fiber, and yes when we have to install new we always lay extra tubes. The information your contractor friend gave you was very accurate. There is still a great need for new fiber, we are still installing it at a rate of a billion dollars a year. Brian Sacred cows make the best hamburgers.

1 0

Re: the VTW---FBI Connection
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Perry E. Metzger" <perry(a)piermont.com> responded to a nut case: > Anonymous writes: > > We have received information that VTW is run and supported by the FBI, > > which we have suspected for reasons listed here. > > You are out of your mind. What is more, in my case, it doesn't matter. My feelings on the subject of strong crypto are well known and almost always expressed over my .sig file (which gives my address and telephone number). In fact, I just asked to have my name added to a letter addressed to FBI Director Louis Freeh on the subject*. If they don't know where I stand, then they don't care (as seems likely). The United States of America has a very strong statement in the first amendment allowing people freedom of speech and "to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." While exercise of these rights has sometimes resulted in certain sanctions (the Hollywood witch hunts and loss of security clearances come to mind), if people don't stand up for what they believe, then they diminish the very foundations of the country. Sometimes freedom is only available to the brave. (But I don't really think this is one of those times.) * See safe(a)cdt.org or http://www.crypto.com/safe for information on this letter. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | Cave ab homine unius lebri | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | [Beware the man of one | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | book] - Anonymous Latin | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Global Net-Censorship Dispatches at EFF
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 22 Jul 1996 16:28:32 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)eff.org> To: fight-censorship+(a)andrew.cmu.edu Subject: Global Net-Censorship Dispatches at EFF Since the f-c archives are still moribund, I've put the last five weeks of global net-censorship threads from fight-censorship at: http://www.eff.org/pub/Global/Dispatches/ Also check out the Singapore mess at: http://www.eff.org/pub/Global/Singapore/ (If those URLs don't work, try www2.eff.org.) -Declan // declan(a)eff.org // I do not represent the EFF // declan(a)well.com //

1 0

Re: Intel, Microsoft doing Internet Phone Software
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If these people REALLY wanted to promote the use of Internet telephoning, what they'd do is implement a system where an Internet ISP could be "called" over the Internet by a person wanting to place an LD telephone call to that area, and (presumably using A/D and D/A techniques) rather than generating and receiving modem tones, woudl generate and transmit the audio over the telephone line. That way, the target of the call would simply need to pick up the telephone and talk, as he would ordinarily do: He wouldn't even need a computer. He might not even know the call was going over the Internet. The main problem with using Internet telephone is the coordination required between the receiver and the sender. It would be like requiring a fax recipient to be at the machine when the call came in. Perhaps larger companies will install hardware to attach their telephone systems to the Internet, so that an incoming call will automatically ring lines as usual. However, being able to bypass this process for everyone, not just large companies, would be a vast improvment. It would allow motivated people to use the Internet for almost all of their phone calls, not just the small percentage to the few people who happened to have Internet telephone. At 09:48 PM 7/22/96 EDT, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > I would be curious if the standards mentioned include any cryptographic >capabilities. The PGPhone people might want to look into producing a patch for >the Intel (and later Microsoft) programs allowing encryption. (In consideration >of fair use, I am both editing it down and putting on the same ad I see (I use >lynx).) > -Allen > >> [The New York Times] > >> _ Monday July 22 6:03 PM EDT _ > >>Intel Unveils Internet Phone Application > >> SAN FRANCISCO, Calif. (Reuter) - In its quest to make the personal >> computer an indispensable tool, Intel Corp. Monday unveiled software >> that will make it easy to place long-distance phone calls over the >> Internet. > >> The Intel Internet Phone software is the first to allow users of >> different types of computers and software to link up, solving a >> problem that has held back use of the global computer network for >> long-distance telephone calls, even though it would save long-distance >> toll charges. > Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

Re: No more stupid gun thread ...
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:24 AM 7/23/96, Ernest Hua wrote: >Ok. This thread has gone on long enough and covered just about every >point except the one which I originally made in my first response, >which is that I abhor the idea that kids should carry weapons (of any >sort) to school as standard equipment. In fact, I abhor the idea >that kids should carry weapons at school for any reason. > >Enough said. > >I do not care to discuss: > >1. Should kids have any weapons at any time? > >2. Should kids have guns (specifically guns)? > >3. Should kids know how to operate weapons of any sort? Fine, Ernest, then don't discuss these issues! I don't recall _anyone_ arguing the case for kids carrying guns to school. Several people commented on the training they received as children, the training they have given their own children, and their general views. Nothing about giving little 8-year-old Suzie an Uzi to carry to her 3rd-grade class. --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."

2 1

Re: Brute-forcing DES
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:06 AM 7/23/96, Steve Reid wrote: >> Any one up for a distributed brute force attack on single DES? My >> back-of-the-envelope calculations and guesstimates put this on the >> hairy edge of doability (the critical factor is how many machines can >> be recruited - a non-trivial cash prize would help). > >Count me in. I've got a couple of net-connected Pentiums that are mostly >idle. > >Did you consider the possibility of DES chips in your back-of-the-envelope >calculations? They are hundreds of times faster than PCs. I don't know >where to get them or how much they cost, though. I would expect they >wouldn't be too expensive. The cash might be better spent on DES chips >than on a prize. Specialized DES-cracker chips have of course been considered. Diffie and Hellman's nearly 20-year-old paper on cracking DES considered this. Wiener's calculation of a few years ago did more that this: he also architected a basic system. And the "how many bits is enough?" (sorry I don't have the official name on the tip of my tongue) panel considered such designs last year. But actually building a DES cracker entails a level of commitment very difficult to achieve in an informal, volunteer effort. Not exactly something that 10 or 20 people can work on usefully. The advantage of the cracks done last year, the French and Australian cracks, and the MIT cracks, were that the "entry costs" for joining the project were low. --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."

4 3

RE: [Noise] was Re: Giving 6 year old kids Uzi's
by Bill Olson (EDP) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Mon, 22 July 1996, Brad Dolan wrote: > >On Mon, 22 Jul 1996, Ernest Hua wrote: > >> >> > > > Thanks, but if it is all the same to you, I'd rather live >> > > > in a country where everybody << including six year olds >> >> > > > carry, and can use Uzi's, etc, as a matter of course. >> > > >> > > Would you just hand out guns to all teenagers? >> > >> > My twelve-year-old daughter asked for and received a .22 for her >>birthday. >> > Her four and six year old siblings enjoy shooting it, under close >> > supervision. >> >> The question was not whether you might let your little girl operate >> a gun. The question was whether you might let her carry it as part >> of her standard equipment. Would you let her go to school with it >> loaded or with ammo within easy reach? I mean, what's the point of >> carrying a gun without bullets? > >My daughter often carries her gun to school, complete with large >quantities of high-velocity long-rifle cartridges. > >She's homeschooled and marksmanship is one of her extracurricular activities. > >bd > >p.s. In two years of homeschooling, she has advanced 6 grade levels on >the state-mandated achievement tests. > I don't care if it takes my son 6 years to get through 2 grade levels, anyone who allows there kid to pack a gun (or a rifle?) should get their head examined (or join the Freemen--I hear they are short a few members).

2 1

Re: Curfews again
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 21:14 7/20/96, Timothy C. May wrote: >At 6:37 PM 7/20/96, Alan Olsen wrote: > >>I bet the "National Curfew" crap that Clinton is trying to push is not going >>down well either. He seems to think that the problems of a small fraction >>of the country apply to the whole country... (But it makes for good sound >>bites.) What National Curfew? Haven't watched the news all week. Did I miss something? 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