December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: The Difference Between The Right And Left
by Murray Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 27 Nov 1996 22:47:06 -0800, Troy Varange wrote: > The French Revolution perhaps provided the best > definition as the origional coiners of the terms. > > The Left is for radical change and the Right is for > evolutionary change. The Jacobin (sp) sat on the left side while the other guys (I forget their names) sat on the right. Of course both used to be on the left before they klled everyone on the right after which an expansion of sorts happened to fill the seats. I think the event was called the night of the long knives? > > That would put mainstream politics decidedly on the right > wing side of the political spectrum. I would have thought main stream would have been in the middle. > The left wing is a rather motly collection including many > anarchists, communists and nazis, yet many of the same > types are decidedly right wing. mhayes(a)infomatch.com It's better for us if you don't understand It's better for me if you don't understand -Tragically Hip

1 0

Re: Ignoramus Chewed-Off on IPG algorithm
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Hi, > > I was sort of tired of endless talk that "IPG algorithm was not > peer-reviewed, blah blah blah, so we won't even look at it, > blah blah blah", and decided to look at what Don Wood writes and > try to see how his program actually works. > > Of course, I am not an expert in cryptography, and will appreciate all > corrections. The web page to look at is http://www.netprivacy.com/algo.html, > and it describes IPG algorithm in some detail. > > First of all, the description of the algorithm is extremely unclear. I > understand that this may be Don Wood's writing style, but it is certainly > not the most efficient style for precise communications. I suggest that > Don tries to rewrite his description to be more structured. > > Second, I seriously suspect that his algorithm of "trimming" is NOT > going to work right. Just to remind everyone, he generates pseudo-random > A(JV), B(JV), C(JV) such that > > 16384 < C < 20361 > B < 12227 > A arbitrary (at least the web page contains no restrictions > on the value of A). > > and then goes on to "trimming" -- a process that obtains a new value > of A that is LESS than 16384 through this algorithm: > > DO > JV=JV+1 > IF JV=53 THEN JV=0 > A(JV)=(A(JV)+B(JV)) MOD C(JV) > UNTIL A(JV)<16384 > > We shall first note that THERE ARE CASES WHEN THIS ALGORITHM WILL NEVER > STOP! For example, if all A values are _initially_ 16385 and all C > values are 16386 and all B's are 0, it is obvious that the pseudocode > above will be stuck in endless loop. > > No good for IPG algorithm. > > in fact, if only some triplets of A, B, and C have B == 0 and 16384 < A < C, > these triplets will always be ignored (skipped) by his trimming process. Note also that if B(K) == 1, his algorithm will need to make C passes through the loop for JV == k, in order to generate a new value of A(JV). This is very inefficient and results in a bias for triplets with high Bs -- because they will generate good A(JV) more frequently. - Igor.

2 2

Re: Ignoramus Chewed-Off on IPG algorithm
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Let's go on, to the description of the "scrambling tables" and > actual encryption. > > He uses three tables, DIFF, DISP, DETR, each containing 4096 elements. > DISP is randomly generated (or so I understand his term "prescrambled"), > DIFF is a random transposition of DISP (same values as in DISP, but in > another order), and DETR, again, is filled with some random data. > Correction: by "scrambling" Don means transposing elements of the table containing 4096 numbers 1-4096. - Igor.

4 17

Re: Building a DC-NET
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Black Unicorn <unicorn(a)schloss.li> writes: > On Sat, 30 Nov 1996, Simon Spero wrote: > > > (what's the Alice/Bob name for someone trying a denial of service attack?) > > Louis? John the petty small-time bitch? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

"CypherPunks" and The Pink Swastika
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Slothrop" <slothrop(a)poisson.com> writes: <anti-semitic spam> Read the _Pink Swastika_ to learn more about the role the likes of Jason Durbin and John Gilmore played in Hitler's rise to power. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Detweiller spotted?
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn said: >Now that's what I call amazing. Maybe I could rewrite PGP >tomorrow (hee hee). Is anyone else hearing a familiar (and again, constant) voice from the past? Maybe I'm wrong, but has anyone met him in person? Just asking.

2 1

Re: IPG Algorith Broken!
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Some of these bullies, like Paul Bradley, realize that they don't know > the meanings of the words they use. Paul Bradley not only posts nonsense > about brute force attacks on OTP, but also harrasses anyone who exposes > his utter ignorance, in en effort to intimidate them into shutting up. You don`t seem to realise that not only is my reputation unnafected by your worthless drivel about "brute force attacks on one time pads", which everyone else apart from you and Don immediately accepted as a simple misunderstanding of the topic of the message (I was talking about stream ciphers), but I am finding it rather amusing to watch the level of your rants deteriorate to the point where you now label anyone who actually posts about cryptography on this list as a "k00l hAcKiNg D00d" who knows nothing of what he is talking about. And as for harrasing people to shut up if you had been watching the traffic on the list you would have noticed that I disagreed with John over throwing you off the list. I simply wonder if the reason you appear to be so calm offline but a foaming at the mouth lunatic online is that you are scared someone is going to give you the good kicking you so rightly deserve. > "Cypherpunks'" opinion of any proposed new cryptosystem is worthless and > irrelevant. And I suppose the opinion of a man who cannot control his urges to post rants about "sovok jews" and armenian refugees is of great value to the learned and worthy??? Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

2 1

Copyright violations
by varange＠crl.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

But software wants to be free! -- Cheers!

1 0

How long do you want to live?
by All＠Internet.Users 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

HELLO IS ANYONE OUT THERE? HOW LONG DO YOU WANT TO LIVE? WHAT QUALITY OF LIFE? First, imagine this scene. Your daughter or son is on the phone with a 911 dispatcher. Why? You are lying on the floor in the kitchen, clutching your chest, panic stricken. You are 45 years old. In addition to fear, lots of things are racing through your mind. You want to see your children grow to adulthood. You want to travel. You want to enjoy life some more. Right now though, you don't know if tomorrow will come. FACT: According to the World Health Organization more than 12 million people die from heart attacks, strokes and other forms of cardiovascular disease. THESE DEATHS ARE LARGELY PREVENTABLE. FACT: In the U.S. there are 1500 heart attacks each day; 33% resulting in sudden and premature deaths. NO SECOND CHANCE!! FACT: Heart attacks and strokes are not diseases. They are caused by vitamin deficiencies. America's number one killer can be prevented by an optimum intake of essentials nutrients. FACT: A medical breakthrough has made an old dream of mankind come true. Heart attacks and other forms of cardiovascular disease can essentially become unknown during this generation and forthcoming generations. The division I am heading holds the rights to a patented, non prescription, non-surgical means to lower cholesterol, prevent and reverse heart disease. If you are interested in adding more life to your yearsnot just more years to your life, please call me at: 1-800-741-6240 and leave your name, address and phone number for more detailed information. I'd like to ensure you I am not looking for investors or salespeople. This may be one of the most important decisions of your life. Sincerely, Dr. George Tarryk, M.D. Internal Medicine Specialist 1-800-741-6240 Please Only Reply By Phone, Thank you.

1 0

Re: denial of service and government rights
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This thread is probably already due for a change in the Subject line, but I'll leave it untouched for the moment. On 30 Nov 96 at 13:10, Black Unicorn wrote: > On Fri, 29 Nov 1996, Greg Broiles wrote: > [...] > > > I don't see any reason why this wouldn't be true for a > > computer. Fed.Rul.Crim.Pro. 41(b)(1) allows the seizure > > (but seizure is not forfeiture) of "property that > > constitutes evidence of the commission of a > > criminal offense". > > It is true of computers. > Take the case of Ripco (the Chicago BBS raided in the > SunDevil raids back when). > > I don't think "Dr. Ripco" has yet gotten his equipment > back. I don't know for sure, but what I do know is > that 5 years after the raid, he still had certainly > not gotten anything back. [....] > Recall also that Ripco was never specifically charged > (or the minor charges that they did try to pin didn't > stick). > > Also recall that Ripco (now ripco.com) was raided with a > -sealed- warrant. I dont think that the contents of that > warrant have, even today, been released (though I could > be mistaken). Certainly 5 years after they had not. [....] > > But there's a big difference between "seizure" and > > "forfeiture". > > I'd argue with computer hardware it is a distinction > without a difference. Seizing computer hardware (like > Ripco's stuff) for in excess of 5 years is tantamount > to forfeiture given depreciation and so forth. > > Add to this the very liberal rules about how long the > feds can take to even CHARGE you with a crime after > seizure.... And it sums to a very bleak picture, indeed. [....] > > So yes, there may be a statute which gives title to > > the government in computers used to commit crimes, > > and no, the Supreme Court won't necessarily care > > about an "innocent owner". > > Again, I would argue that such a statute needn't even > exist given the rules already well estlablished and > demonstrated in action with regard to indefinate > seizure of computer hardware even in the absence of > criminal claims against the owner. Please forgive my naivete, but are there no legal weapons available to the 'victims' in such cases? I'm passingly familiar with the Operation Sundevil fiasco -- i.e., with the outcome re the principal 'charges'. I'm appalled, however, at the apparent lack of remedies for return of such seized property. Are individuals who find themselves in such a predicament simply at the government's mercy (there's an oxymoron for ya)?? Tired Fighter

5 4