December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experim
by Rich Burroughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:54 AM 1/6/97 -0800, "Ross Wright" <rwright(a)adnetsol.com> wrote: [snip] >So my question is: is there going to be a maximum number of times I >can say fuck in a good post? Like a 3-fuck limit? Or will you take >out the magic marker and draw through them? 5 fucks. Rich p.s. Has anyone mentioned censoring the word "fuck," besides Ross? ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb(a)teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause

1 0

'96 Act Tech Fund
by Jeff Grantham 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Greetings, I am a researcher at the University of Colorado and I am looking for information on the Technology Fund mentioned in Section 552 of the Telecom Act. I have had little success in getting information on this fund perhaps because the v-chip has replaced it. This fund was supposed to be a voluntary effort by industry to come up with an alternative to the v-chip. The top 4 networks pledged $2 Million to this fund before the act was passed, but now it seems dead. The original legislation was proposed by Rep. Coburn (R-OKLA). This part of the telecom act is much milder than the v-chip stuff, but nobody knows what happended. If you have any information, web sites, new groups or articles that might be useful it would be very valuable to me. I am willing to share whatever information I find and post the final reserach on my web page. Thanks, Jeff Grantham

1 0

Re: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan
by Rich Burroughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:06 AM 1/6/97 -0800, toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca wrote: >I believe that every "EASY $$$ MONEY" posting ought to be forwarded >to the webmaster at the site from which it originated. > Those who are harboring these generous souls should also be afforded >the opportunity to rake in the cash. I can hardly see how anybody >could possibly resent being reminded of the wonderful opportuninties >they are making it possible for us to learn of. Be careful when mailbombing in retribution for spam. Often the aricles are forged, and sometimes it's with the direct intention of getting someone else mailbombed. I traded some email with a system administrator a few days ago in this boat -- they had cancelled a customer's account, and to get revenge the former customer sent out a bunch of spam that was forged to look like it came from this sys admin's domain. Even if the site wasn't literally mailbombed, the system administrator had to spend a lot of time, I'm sure, delaing with unhappy recipients of the spam, like myself. Mailbombing is almost always a bad plan, IMHO, besides being a denial of service attack and probably illegal in a lot of places. Rich ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb(a)teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause

1 0

Re: Anonymous Post Control
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > Well the obvious answer seems to me to stop majordomo at toad.com > > accepting ANY messages from anonymous sources but let pseudonyms > > post, pseudonymous posting allows the owner of the nym to accumulate > > reputation capital without disclosing his or her true identity. > > Paul Bradley accumulated oodles of reputation capital with his > obscene rants about "brute force attacks on one-time pads". I do not see what was remotely "obscene" about a slip up of this kind, and please refrase from using the plural where it is not appropriate, I posted such a mistake once and immediately realised what I had said and retracted it. > > Now he wants more censorship. If you had cared to comment in the rest of my posting to your reply you would have seen that immediately after stating this solution I confirmed that I do not encourage this or condone it as it is censorship, but that it was merely a solution, not a good one granted but still worthy of mentioning. For those who (ahem) overlooked that part of my posting here it is again. >Bear in mind of course that this is a purely technical answer and I >happen not to believe that anonymous posting should be stopped. But of course you chose not to comment this in as it allowed you to credibly rant about me wanting censorship, at least argue with someone you have a dispute with rather than just randomly picking people and quoting parts of their posts out of context then flaming them. 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"

1 0

$$$ for IP plan.....
by David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

X-within-URL: http://rs.internic.net/arin/ AMERICAN REGISTRY FOR INTERNET NUMBERS PROPOSAL {chop} Below is the proposed plan for the organization structure and fee schedule. The organization will have more detailed bylaws which will be ratified by the Board of Trustees. _________________________________________________________________ An annual membership fee of $1,000 will be charged to all entities joining the American Registry for Internet Numbers (ARIN). Membership is open to any entity/individual wishing to join, regardless of whether the entity/individual receives address space directly from ARIN. Membership is not a requirement for receiving address space from ARIN. _________________________________________________________________ SECTION 2.3 ISP REGISTRATION FEE If an ISP moves from a Small to a Medium category (for example) in the same year, the ISP will be charged the difference. Small $2500/year /24 - /19 Medium $5000/year >/19 - /16 Large $10K/year >/16 - /14 X-Large $20K/year >/14 ================================ Anyone care to calculate the total dollars? -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

2 1

IWD_ism
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1-6-96. "Information-Warfare Defense Is Urged" The Defense Science Board said the Pentagon should launch counterattacks against computer hackers by injecting the attackers' computers with "a polymorphic virus that wipes out the system, takes it down for weeks." The report largely sidesteps as irrelevant the continuing controversy about the export of encryption codes. ----- IWD_ism

3 2

RE: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation" experiment in Jan
by Robert Barnes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Rich Burroughs wrote: >At 02:56 PM 1/6/97 +1000, Robert Barnes <rbarnes(a)gil.com.au> wrote: >[snip] >>My bottom line feeling with respect to this is that we cannot >>expect freedom unless we are willing to exercise responsibility. >>It is apparent that the people who are noisiest about freedom of >>speech and content censoring are working tirelessly to abuse >>the list and provoke the very opposite of their stated ideals. > >Hmmm. There has been some of that, but some of use who have spoken about >freedom of speech have done so because of legitimate concerns, not just to >gain advantage in an ongoing, juvenile campaign. I would say that there had been a lot more than "some of that". I believe that moderation as proposed does not really limit anyones Freedom of Speech. After all the list is intended as a forum to discuss the topic of cryptography and it's use by society, the list is not advertised as a free for all abuse forum or an unlimited conduit for spam. If you want Freedom of Speech go stand on a soapbox in your local town square. Would you complain that people who choose to walk on by and not listen to you are violating your right to Free Speech? Cypherpunks has the right to say "Enough, take the raves, rants and spam somewhere else". You are free to say what you want, but if it is off-topic, I don't want to see it in my inbox. > <snip> > >I think the idea of two versions of the list is an excellent one, and it >avoids the issues raised by presenting the list in only a moderated form. >If people want the spam they can have it, and if they don't they can take >advantage of John and Sandy's work, and read a more coherent version of the >list. I will certainly choose the latter, but it is nice to know that the >choice is mine. John and Sandy -- thanks for getting this rolling. You will certainly be in the minority, but you are right, the choice is yours to make and everyone else's as well. > >Rich >______________________________________________________________________ >Rich Burroughs richieb(a)teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb >U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state >dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause -------------------------------------------------------------- Robert Barnes Phone: +61 7 32529722 Fax: +61 7 32571403 Tritronics (Australia) Pty Ltd Email: robertb(a)tritro.com.au PGP Key fingerprint = 02 A6 22 5E 26 D3 7C 4D E2 91 9E 15 AC EA B1 58 Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:" field to get a copy of my public key

3 2

No Subject
by nobody＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Toto wrote: > > (If you think our list is bad, you ought to see lists which are completely > > dominated by one-line witticisms and inside jokes....) > > Or 10,000 messages saying only, "Merry Christmas", followed a few days > later by another 10,000 messages saying, "Happy New Year". > Anyone who needs 'proof' that I am speaking the truth, here, (and who > has a 10Gb hard drive), can just send me their email address, and I > would be glad to forward them. Thanks for your kind offer. Please send the material to: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Better send several copies of each message to make sure none get lost.) I can also get mail at: aga(a)dhp.com Might as well send to both accounts. Thanks again!

1 0

[DES] DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #5
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

DES Key Recovery Project, Progress Report #5 6 January 1997 Well, the New Year brings changes.... 1. I'm astonished at the low level of reaction RSA's announcement that they will be sponsoring a DES Challenge, with a $10,000 cash prize. I've been working with people at RSA to get this set up. It looks like there'll be an ascii-plaintext challenge (we won't know the full plaintext - just that it's ascii, and long enough to be unambigious), and the full prize will go the first person who emails them the key. This is pretty much what we need to recruit a large number of otherwise dis-interested people, and their machines. The code will be a tad slower than for an attack where we know the full plaintext of the block sought, but not much. 2. As for my code for WinTel machines - it's very close to an initial alpha release (squashing a few last bugs). I intend this to be used only for identifying porting issues. The first 'real' version is a couple weeks away. Once the alpha is out, I'll be looking at the new assembly language code from Eric Young and Svend Mikkelsen to see how it compares with mine. Since Eric independently matched my speed in the DES round, I want to see if he is using any different tricks than I. When it's released, my code will be able to: 1. Run a validity and speed test. 2. Accept a specified 32 bit 'chunk' of the keyspace to test. When it finishes a chunk, it appends information about whether it found the key to a results file, and also any half-matches it found along with a checksum. The latter two items help make cheating and sabotage more difficult. 3. Read it's input (plaintext, IV, etc) from a file. After the actual DES Challenge is announced, I'll hardwire that challenge into the program. 4. Periodically checkpoint it's status to a file. This is so that the program can be stopped at any time neccesary, without losing more than a few minutes work. At startup, it looks in this file for where to continue searching, unless instructed otherwise. It will NOT run as a screen saver. It's actually more efficient to run as a low-priority task in the background - that way it soaks up unused cycles even when a screen saver is not in operation. If someone else want's to incorporate it into an SS, go ahead. The alpha will run in a DOS box under Win95 and WinNT. A GUI interface may come along later. It will NOT talk to a keyspace server, though the format of the input and output should make it possible to add this in the future. I don't have time to develop both myself, and while people on the lists have proposed any number of complex schemes for setting up and managing a server, no one in the US seems willing to do the work (I'm worried about violating ITAR/EAR). I have a pretty good idea what needed in a server. At very least, I'd like to have people register the fact that they are taking part, so we get some idea of the level of effort being expended. The very first time it is started up on a given machine, if it is not given a specific chunk at which to start, it will pick one at random. The checkpointing scheme means that on later runs, it will pick up where it left off, advancing to the next chunk as it completes each one. For this purpose, we don't need cryptographically strong PRNG, just one that provides a fairly smooth distribution of results. This means that the search *will* complete, but the time is not as good as a carefully doled-out keyspace would provide. If you want to do the math, go ahead, but I think it will average about twice as long as a purely doled-out search to search the whole keyspace, and somewhat less to search half the keyspace. Peter Trei trei(a)process.com

1 0

Re: Sandy and I will run a cypherpunks "moderation"
by David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It might have been interesting to instead announce that Sandy & John were starting a NEW list..... It just happened to have the old name. And the old list? Still there at ....... After all, the end result is the same. [One problem -- does this mean SternFUD will be back?] -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

1 0