December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

RE: Encryption
by Benjamin Suto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm probably the last person who could mention something intelligible here, but assuming this encryption algorithm works, and Joe wants to give Jane a file, how would he tell her how to decrypt it? If he found a "secure medium" to give her the passcode under, wouldn't encrypting it be useless since he could just use that secure medium to send the original file? I think that was the whole point of public key encryption, in that there is no need for a secure medium of any sort, since the public key can only be used to encrypt a message.. that only the private key can decode. Someone correct me if I'm wrong. There are probably other flaws inherent in this encryption system mentioned.. I can imagine that you won't even be able to unencrypt the original message. :) ---------- From: Dale Thorn[SMTP:dthorn@gte.net] Sent: Friday, August 30, 1996 5:00 AM To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Encryption It appears to me that PGP encryption et al is really 1940's technology, albeit fancied up by 1990's computers. Why use keys and cyphers when all you should have to do is maximize the randomization of bits in a script? Big computers should not be able to de-randomize such encoding, since the permutations/combinations would be astronomical after just a half-dozen or so random number initializations, as well as the fact that the bits are relatively undifferentiated (just ones and zeros) and are not maintained with their original bytes, words, paragraphs, or pages? <<File: ATT00003.txt>>

1 0

Re: www.anonymizer.com
by nobody＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:12 AM 8/30/96 -1000, NetSurfer wrote: > >I have found and reported to the anonymizer that it does not >always protect you against perl-based cgi scripts. I did this by >accessing a form-based email page (based on Matt's script) which includes >environment variable values in the msg to the recipient. I didn't >receive any response back from them after I emailed them the info. Am I missing something here because isn't the easiest way around all of this is simply not to enter your personal info when setting up Netscape? Granted the page can pick up your ISP and what port you used, but so what? It can't get your name and email address. Use a newsreader such as Free Agent so there's no reason to enter your personal info. If there is a reason to respond to someone who's email is in on a particular page, then copy it and paste to your emailer...

2 1

Re: Reprogramming Beepers?
by bf578＠scn.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >Does anyone know how to reprogram a beeper to a new number. Please >Help Brendan Are you talking about the beeper's ESN or CAP code? changing it to another that is active? Or reconfiguring the beeper company's system? -- ------------------------------------------ There are no facts, only interpretations. I always wanted to be somebody,

1 0

Re: Nuke Singapore Back into the Stone Age
by Jean-Francois Avon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 30 Aug 96 at 5:38, Charley Sparks wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > To: tcmay(a)got.net, cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Date: Fri Aug 30 05:45:44 1996 > We could launch a mail-bomb campaign.. I am looking for the source > for a mail bomb program. WinTel would be nice but I could use Linux Far from my mind to commit such nuisance acts, but by simple curiosity, is there a mailbomb HOW-TO or FAQ floating around? jfa DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee; Limoges porcelain, silverware and crystal JFA Technologies, R&D consultants: physicists, technologists and engineers. PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891

1 0

Re: **"OuR" Project press release** (fwd)
by Jean-Francois Avon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 30 Aug 96 at 12:25, jim bell wrote: > Recommendation for the next one: Rather than try to brute force an > LEO from about sea level, how about lofting the rocket by balloon > up to a starting altitude of, say, 100,000 feet, and letting'er'rip > from there? (this is probably not a new technique...) This technique has been used a lot. But bear in mind that the goal of the whole operation was to perfect their knowledge of the technology of rockets. Launching from a balloon born platform is not a triviality. Ground launch enables much more control in the super critical phase called "countdown and launch", where a lot of the failures occurs. When they will have mastered theses phases, then, the'll start thinking about an airborne launch platform. If you want to learn about it, there is a rocketry group on Usenet. >From there, you can ask directions for various sites, mainly outside of north america, where they experiment with homebuilt liquid-liquid, liquid-solid and other engines. There is also quite a large movement in USA, but I did not find (a year ago), sites that were as experimental as the europeans (Belgians?) ones. It seems that the US sites are more talking about using some commercially built motors, mainly using liquid-solid technology. Have fun jfa DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee; Limoges porcelain, silverware and crystal JFA Technologies, R&D consultants: physicists, technologists and engineers. PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891

1 0

Cypherpunks Lite
by youssefy＠ucla.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There was a posting by someone about three weeks ago that gave the address for a person who ran a filtered version of the cypherpunks list, can someone please repost that information?

1 0

Dr. Vulis is a test, right? [was RE: Desubscribe]
by John Deters 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I can't believe it any more. On Fri, 30 Aug 96 02:47:21 EDT, Dr. (of what, pray tell?) Vulis blathers first: >> > If you don't have the brains to forge the From:, then you have no >> > business being subscribed to any mailing list. and then again: >Whoever uses the term "spam" in derogatory manner, opposes free >speech and deserves to be caned. First, accusing someone of stupidity for not having learned how to telnet to an SMTP server is a bit harsh, especially since the guy might be stuck behind a firewall that mungs his addresses AFTER his messages goes out -- not that Dr. V bothered to find out before the accusation. Second, suggesting anyone be caned for their political beliefs (and resultant speech) is quite obviously NOT the action taken by someone who defends free speech. Again, Dr. V. put those beliefs in his words through his flawed logic. It's like watching a KKKlucker yelling, "you have no right to say that we don't support free speech," and not getting it. And for what -- the thoughtcrime of calling Dr. V a spammer? Hmm. About the closest I can come to finding a "crime" here is trademark infringement. I'm sure Hormel is following this closely. All of this is merely annoying. But slamming Tim May because of his heritage? "criminal Arm*nian grandparents"? Now it's a crime not only to call Dr. V a spammer, but to have ancestors born someplace his ancestors taught him to not approve of. (Can you say "racism", kids? Sure. I knew you could.) When I first started reading this list, it was about the time Jim Bell was espousing the A.P. theories, and I thought him a fool for it. I put his name in my filter, sending his posts to the trash. More and more, I found myself heading to the trash bin to follow a thread that Jim was contributing to. Valuable contributions, mind you, not just more of his A.P. stuff. Of course, I ended up removing him from my filter. (For missing that month of your posts, Jim, I owe you an apology.) At that time, I realized a few things: Filters certainly aren't the answer; and everybody can come up with valuable contributions. Anyway, my current status is to have the filters set to remove posts with the words [NOISE] or [OFF-TOPIC] somewhere in the headers. It helps weed out stuff that really isn't why I'm here reading this list. Given that I feel that even Dr. Vulis might possibly contribute something of value to this list at some unspecified time in the future, I have come to the conclusion that the only solution is to ask him to change his e-mail name field to: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM [NOISE] ) until such time as he can actually come up with something useful to say to the rest of us. Maybe he could even throw in an [-L18] tag, if he's going to continue to [spit | fuck | fart] every posting that leaps through his screen. [ Note to everyone else: that's SARCASM there, hope you got it! ] So, my original question is: is there really a Dr. Dmitri Vulis (KOTM) somewhere? Or is he just some made-up straw man, created by Tim May, John Gilmore and Eric Hughes for their personal amusement, and to add a spot of controversy so we can feel like we're not preaching to the choir with every pro-cypher posting? I often thought that was the case with David Sternlight as well. Or is Dr. Vulis really best-buddies with Tim May, and his way of showing affection is to "fart in his general direction" with every post? If he exists, I pity the unsuspecting students who wander into his class who might not have the genetic makeup he approves of. And now I *completely* understand tenure. John (soon-to-be-spit-upon,no-doubt) Deters. -- J. Deters "Captain's log, stardate 25970-point-5. I am nailed to the hull." +-------------------------------------------------------+ | NET: jad(a)dsddhc.com (work) jad(a)pclink.com (home) | | PSTN: 1 612 375 3116 (work) 1 612 894 8507 (home) | | ICBM: 44^58'36"N by 93^16'27"W Elev. ~=290m (work) | | PGP Key ID: 768 / 15FFA875 | +-------------------------------------------------------+

4 3

GAK by TIS
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Network World, August 26, 1996, Page 1 Key-escrow firewall ready to leave the country by Ellen Messner, Washington D.C. After months of talk about exporting encryption software, there will finally be action. Fulfilling the Clinton Administration's vow to end export restrictions on strong encryption products if they use key-escrow features, the U.S. government this week is expected to permit Trusted Information Systems, Inc. (TIS) to sell its Data Encryption Standard (DES)-equipped Gauntlet firewall overseas. Such exports will allow U.S.-based companies to standardize on an encrypting firewall for all global operations. The Department of Commerce is granting mass-market export status to a specific version of the Gauntlet firewall based on a key-escrow scheme that gives U.S. law enforcement access to a master key for decrypting IP datastreams. The master key for each firewall will reside at Oakland, Calif.-based Source Files, Inc., the third-party private key holder chosen under the government's groundbreaking plan. Vice President Al Gore has supported the Defense Department's view that unbreakable encryption should be controlled because it is a powerful weapon and subject to misuse by criminals and terrorists. However, Gore recently said the government will allow mass export of 64-bit encryption products if they use key escrow. The agreement with TIS is the first evidence that the policy is being put into practice. Until now, few companies other than banks could get the State Department and National Security Agency (NSA) to let them export 56-bit and higher Data Encryption Standard (DES) products. Only 40-bit products, easily broken with available computer resources, were allowed for mass-market export. "We're on the verge of a major shift," said TIS president Steve Walker last week. TIS expects to unveil a raft of other vendors in the network industry that will license the TIS data recovery method for accessing data encrypted with a session key. The government is also considering approving other third- party keyholders in addition to Source File, which has traditionally held source code in escrow on behalf of companies worried about the long-term viability of their suppliers. Just say no Not all are key-escrow converts, however. In fact, it is painfully clear that corporations will continue to balk at the prospect of their encryption keys being held by a third party or the government. Netherlands-based Royal Dutch Petroleum Co., with hundreds of subsidiaries and offices all over the world, is looking to ditch dedicated private lines and send encrypted IP traffic over the Internet instead. The State Department's mass-market license for the Gauntlet means TIS can compete to provide Royal Dutch Petroleum with its encrypting firewall. But Homayoon Tajalli, TIS vice president, acknowledged that the Dutch oil conglomerate is unwilling to hand its encryption keys over to Source File. Hence, as part of negotiations with the U.S. and Dutch governments, Royal Dutch Petroleum agreed to operate its own data recovery center for the Gauntlet master keys. Royal Dutch Petroleum would hand over the master encryption keys to to Dutch law enforcement, which in turn would give the keys to U.S. authorities "if the government shows up with a valid warrant," Tajalli said. TIS went to great lengths to broker the international arrangement, and hopes that not every firewall export will entail such laborious negotiations. Some firewall users are extremely ambiguous about the government's key-escrow plan. "I'm not sure I want the government to have that ability," said Doug Miller, information systems manager at Bluestone Corp. "At all cost, we've got to keep the government out of business operations." [End] Thanks to BC.

2 1

Re: anon.penet.fi closing down
by Blake Wehlage 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

what would be alternatives to anon.penet.fi..... ========================================== Blake Wehlage <jwilk(a)iglou.com> ±» RëVðLû¡ØÑ Bø+ ©ÖmP@ñ¥ «± Goto: http://members.iglou.com/jwilk

1 0

libertarian-punks@toad.com
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

how about creating a mailing list with the captioned name? - Igor.

1 0