December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: "Cryptography Policy and the Information Economy" draft available
by Carl Ellison 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 04:11 PM 12/19/96 -0500, Matt Blaze wrote: >I've got a new draft available of my critique of US cryptography >policy and its impact on the future of the "information economy". >It summarizes comments I made to a recent meeting of the Computer >and Communications Industry Association, and is an updated version >of testimony I gave to the Senate commerce committee earlier this >year. > >Postscript is at ftp://ftp.research.att.com/dist/mab/policy.ps >ASCII text is at ftp://ftp.research.att.com/dist/mab/policy.txt Matt, I liked your draft except for one thing. You never mentioned that the government has never established a legal right to access the cleartext of an encrypted communication or file. Perhaps the most severe flaw in the GAK proposals is that I as a citizen wish to attempt to keep secrets from the government and to force them to take me to court to get a judge to demand that I release those secrets -=- while their proposals are trying to prevent me from even attempting such. - Carl -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMrn+WlQXJENzYr45AQFrFgQAp2jfB3EOLJoOKHIpTne7D4cwL1KzPcRg VoELRWDGS1RkgK5cSgLl9ASWZ7TdcMRiQUbDPMoffMi3UWlfIpomdsHq+E4HE/U+ 6CS+cpUfw/eSwBYkotCfETMAHymknu/o06QYfBX0TQsN/2XOC52xXEd9Nb/8xjUW c4RETw8Os8A= =nkcy -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- +------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Carl M. Ellison cme(a)cybercash.com http://www.clark.net/pub/cme | |CyberCash, Inc. http://www.cybercash.com/ | |207 Grindall Street PGP 2.6.2: 61E2DE7FCB9D7984E9C8048BA63221A2 | |Baltimore MD 21230-4103 T:(410) 727-4288 F:(410)727-4293 | +------------------------------------------------------------------+

1 0

Re: Executing Encrypted Code
by ph＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:52 PM 12/19/1996, Bill Frantz wrote: >At 12:08 PM -0800 12/19/96, Peter Hendrickson wrote: >> If each chip has a unique public/secret key pair, and executes >> authenticated code only, there are some interesting implications. >> Software piracy becomes difficult, if not impossible. Code is sold >> on a processor by processor basis. Code for a different physical >> processor cannot be decrypted or executed. > This makes backup hard. That is the rock the routine copy protection hit > up against. There were many, me included, who simply said, "If your > product is copy protected then I will buy from your competitor." No, you can backup just as much as many times as you like. The code isn't stored on the chip permanently, it is only decrypted there. There is a similar problem, though. If your processor dies you could lose your software library. There are ways to mitigate this. One is for the vendors to just trust people and reissue the code to a new processor. Of course, you track how often you have to do this. Or, you could turn in the broken processor and have the manufacturer certify that it was turned in to the software vendors and that a new version of the software should be generated. This might not be so important if you generally pay for metered software. >> Viruses are not feasible if the authentication is strong. > So is user written code, public domain code etc. If there is an > un-encrypted mode for that kind of code, then viruses again become > possible. User written code is harder to arrange, it is true. You might have a way to execute non-authenticated code but at a speed comparable to an emulator. Or, you might just have another computer for running your own code. Right now it is not uncommon for a software library to exceed the value of the machine. It might actually be economical to have two machines if one of them can support a rich software library which doesn't cost as much money because it can't be pirated. Free software is still possible to run at full speed, but it has to be authenticated. The free software writer just has to do whatever the software vendor had to do to get it okayed. This makes it harder to release free software, but the effort is still a small fraction of the work required to build a significant application. Getting it to execute for particular processors is easy. You could release a piece of software which takes code and encrypts it for your particular hunk of silicon. If you could offer otherwise free software for, say, $20 and know that everybody using it will pay, many people might consider that to be a great deal. Right now the mechanisms of moving the software are too expensive to really make it feasible for something under $20. Development might be a bit tricky, but there are workable solutions. The manufacturer could release special processors which have an additional authentication mechanism for software developers which is specific to each developer. They could authenticate code to run on their own machine, but not on anybody else's. This does make it possible for software developers to pirate software (if the can get a secret key), but if the number of development processors is low, this could be manageable. If the environment was well defined, you could conceivably develop in a high level language on one platform, but deploy for sale on the decrypting-processor platform. Peter Hendrickson ph(a)netcom.com

2 1

Re: Executing Encrypted Code
by Jazzmin Belle Sommers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>>> You could also timestamp the software so that it only runs for a given >>>> length of time. This will encourage people to upgrade regularly. ;-) >>> Or to reset their clocks. Which is what many of us do when software is >>> about to "expire." >>However, why not use "beacons"? chop chop chop I have been using some shareware that simply has a built-in counter. Once the counter runs out, you have to register. I would suppose that one could hack the code to find the counter, assuming you could decompile it (or wanted to). Personally I think this is a decent solution to the problem -- the counter on this particular software let you use it 50 times. That's adequate to determine whether you want to keep it or not. Of course, if you saved the .zip file to disk before you installed it, you could delete the copy and reinstall the .zip. But everyone knows this. Jazzmin Sommers

1 0

Re: Executing Encrypted Code
by ph＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:31 PM 12/19/1996, Timothy C. May wrote: >At 7:34 PM -0800 12/19/96, Peter Hendrickson wrote: >> You could also timestamp the software so that it only runs for a given >> length of time. This will encourage people to upgrade regularly. ;-) > Or to reset their clocks. Which is what many of us do when software is > about to "expire." You are right that this only works in instances where the customer just needs a little prodding to get the upgrade and not in instances where the customer might put up with significant inconvenience to avoid it. However, why not use "beacons"? The clock could have a built-in timer that needs to be reset once a month from an authenticated source. This assumes the presence of net connectivity, but that's not a terrible assumption. Peter Hendrickson ph(a)netcom.com

2 1

Re: Executing Encrypted Code
by ph＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:16 PM 12/19/1996, Ben Byer wrote: > The manufacturer is going to publish a list of ALL of the public keys? > We're talking one key per chip, right? Isn't that an AWFUL lot of > keys, like, in the millions range? Let's say each key is 2048 bits and there are 10 million processors. That's only 2.38 gigabytes, or under $1000. Easy enough to put on the Web or on a set of CD-ROMs. > Also... with a few million possible keys like this, all you need to do > is to either guess or factor just one of them. Yes, my working assumption is that factoring is very hard. >>> Does the authentication defeat this? >> I'm sort of waving my hands around when I say "authentication". >> One approach is for the manufacturer to authenticate software submitted >> by approved vendors. The vendors are then tasked with encrypting it >> for the correct processor. > I'm not sure the "approved" bit would go over too well... one idea > would be to license the compiler writers, who would build the > encryption into compilers. It's still not horribly great, but > better. You have to have the "approved" message so that you don't get viruses and to thwart piracy in case anybody did manage to get the secret key out of the chip. How well it goes over depends entirely on how much you pay for the software. >>> Our computers would only run software from Microsoft? Scary. >> There are all sorts of nifty deals that could be made. Microsoft >> could commission a special run of the processors which only run >> Microsoft approved software. Machines using these processors could >> be given away or sold at a steep discount. > Right; the only reason I could see people using this would be for > economical reasons. And one would expect piracy-proof software to be very inexpensive. Most people who pay for software have little sympathy for those who don't. >> You could also timestamp the software so that it only runs for a given >> length of time. This will encourage people to upgrade regularly. ;-) >> The processors could also support metering. > Right; once the user loses control of what he's running, then you can > pretty much do anything you want as far as metering goes. Right you are - see below. > ObGAK question: Would this be exportable? I mean, you could be > encrypting god knows WHAT into those .exe's... Key escrow? How would > they get the key?!? I can see the headlines, "Key Escrow Database > Leaked to Pirate Firm"... :) While I am certainly not a lawyer, and even the lawyers can't tell you what is legal to export, I would guess that Big Brother would be delighted with the manufacturers of this processor. It can't be used to encrypt communications, only to decrypt software. What is more, you could control the physical processors so that exportable processors accept a different authentication key. Then, the manufacturer of the processor can take care not to authenticate any privacy enhancing programs for the export version of the processor. Free speech and constitutional issues evaporate because the processors are physical devices and not expressions of ideas. Even "better", not very many organizations in the world can afford the fab lines to manufacture a state of the art processor. So, if the G-7 countries are brought onto the reservation, it would be feasible to forbid all free processors. Peter Hendrickson ph(a)netcom.com P.S. Did you hear? For Christmas Big Brother is raising the chocolate ration from 30g to 20g!!!

1 0

Re: Executing Encrypted Code
by ph＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:20 PM 12/19/1996, Timothy C. May wrote: >> However, why not use "beacons"? The clock could have a built-in timer >> that needs to be reset once a month from an authenticated source. This >> assumes the presence of net connectivity, but that's not a terrible >> assumption. > I mentioned "beacons" in the portion of my message you did not quote here. Gack! > As for why they are not being used, they don't exist. Here's how I would do it. When the processor wants to update its clock, it generates a random number and encrypts it for the trusted time source. The trusted time source decrypts its message to get the random number. It timestamps it, encrypts it, and sends it back. This means you can't replay old time messages to keep using your old software. Is it possible to have a little clock and rechargeable battery on a chip? If so, then this technique should be easy to use. If not, then the processor can count the number of cycles it runs and use that as an approximate means of deciding when to check the time. Or, it could demand a time update every time it is power cycled. Peter Hendrickson ph(a)netcom.com

1 0

Expedia New Member Information
by accthelp＠expedia.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Welcome to Microsoft Expedia Travel Services! Below is your new membership information. Please keep this confirmation mail as a record of your Member ID and Password. Your Member ID is: cypherpunks Your Password is: cypherpunks The Expedia Internet address is: http://expedia.msn.com/ Expedia is a free service. To use the Expedia Travel Agent, you will have to type your Member ID and Password on the Sign In page. Whether for business or pleasure, Microsoft Expedia makes it easy for you to plan and purchase travel arrangements that best meet your budget and personal preferences. Expedia is on the job 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. With a click of your mouse, you can: * Reserve and purchase airline tickets * Reserve hotel rooms * Reserve rental cars * Subscribe to Fare Tracker for the lowest airfares to your favorite destinations * Research over 300 destinations in the Expedia World Guide * Chart your course with over 200 city maps * Check out the world of adventure in the Mungo Park online magazine * Catch up on the latest travel news, weather and more We look forward to fulfilling all of your travel needs. Expedia Member Services Start your travel here. http://expedia.msn.com/

1 0

Re: Proof that "cypher punks" have complete degenerated...
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 19 Dec 1996 04:24:14 +0000, geeman(a)best.com wrote: >It wasn't worth commenting on. >Appending data after the ctrl-Z as stego? >Not even worth a letter to the ed! >> No one even commented on the latest Dr. Dobbs issue. I know - I was amazed that made it into the issue. It's almost amazing that someone would go to such effort to do this and miss all the [IMHO] easier ways. Simply astounding... # Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp # <cadams(a)acucobol.com> | send mail with subject "send PGPKEY" "That's our advantage at Microsoft; we set the standards and we can change them." --- Karen Hargrove, Microsoft (quoted in the Feb 1993 Unix Review editorial)

1 0

Code+Data separation
by ph＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Allowing code and data to reside in the same areas of memory is a nice convenience, but it makes security harder to implement because it means code is modifiable and data can be created which just happens to do bad things if it is executed. Are there any modern processors which keep the code and data separated? Peter Hendrickson ph(a)netcom.com

3 2

Life with Dale
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

:From: Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> :I spent part of my growing up years in Leroy West Virginia, pop. :about 15, give or take. I know about hillbillies, and I know about :guns. :If you had the impression I am a whiner, or that that defines me as a :person, you're about as clueful as the other old farts who attack :people they don't know anything about. Name one thing Dale has not experienced.

5 12