December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

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

17 Dec '03

Known-plaintext: Unbreakable, since the pad is never reused Chosen-plaintext: Unbreakable, ditto Adaptive-chosen-plaintext: Unbreakable, ditto Correct but for a different reason. Re-using the pad does render the security useless but the other reason is if we know part of the pad AND the ciphertext (and hence the plaintext) or part of the plaintext and the ciphertext and therefore the pad, We cannot solve the rest of the ciphertext as the pad is true random and the next bits are independent of all the previous ones so we cannot predict from what we have. A better definition of unbreakable, IMHO, is that there is no way to determine the plaintext given unlimited ciphertext and computational resources. Sure, this isn`t a complete definition but at least it definites perfect security in an analytic sense. 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"

5 5

re: sci fi
by Ken Kirksey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>(Where would this world be without Mark Twain (a nym for >Samuel Clemmens), Maxwell Grant (the nym for Walter B. Gibson and others >for the Shadow pulps), and the thousands of other nyms that appear in the >publishing field?) Heinlein used a few nyms. His best stories were published under the names Robert Heinlein and Anson Macdonald. The Heinlein/Macdonald split came about because John W. Campbell didn't want it to look like _Astounding_ was being dominated by one other, though the quailty of the stories was about the same. (All but a couple of dthe Future History stories were published under one of these names, but I don't remember which). Heinlein used other nyms for stories of lesser quailty, or stories he sold to other markets in genres other than sf. He created one nym to sell off stories that he described as "stinkeroos", and went so far as to get a separate PO Box in the name of this nym so that it couldn't be associated with Robert Heinlein. Ken

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

> > Ahh... an OTP isn't unbreakable. Its just so encredibly breakable that > > you never know which break was the correct one ;) > > Note that Schneier says "perfect", not "unbreakable". yes, Perfect is a better term. Strictly speaking it is because there is no finite unicity distance (the amount of ciphertext with which the cipher can theoretically be broken). So, stricly speaking, for a given message C and a prospective pad, P, out of a set of N pads which may or may not be correct: P(P|C) = N^-1 The length of C and the amount of ciphertexts given have no effect in determining the key, nor is there any prospect of a know plaintext attack as the pad is true random and the next bits are totally independent of any others before them. Of course the reason it is perfect is because there are many different pads which give valid decryptions and there is no way of knowing which one is correct. IPG`s algorithm is definitely NOT an OTP and Don Wood is a snakeoil merchant. 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"

3 4

Re: market for hardware RNG?
by Matthew J. Miszewski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> But on thinking about this a little more, I began to wonder if anybody > really wants this. Pessimistically, it occurs to me that: > > 1. Many if not most people don't even understand why a hardware RNG is > desirable. While your potential market is small, it is dedicated. Developers of crypto products are always looking for good random sources. People that really NEED more reliable sources of random bits are willing to pay for them. I dont think your market will be end users. But a little market research should turn up a healthy margin for you. > 2. Users of programs like PGP today already get at least a fairly decent > RNG already. Would they want better? (I'm not suggesting a total > replacement; I assume that the output of any hardware RNG would be hashed > with more "traditional" PC sources, like disk timings, keyboard timings, > etc, which should deter attempts to attack just the hardware part.) Why would you hash good RNG output? I understand your desire to deter hardware only attacks. I just think it might be an overreaction. Of course mine could be an under-reaction 8-) > > 3. Even hardware RNG's aren't "perfect": they could be subverted, > replaced, or perhaps influenced. Would someone who was sufficiently > sophisticated as to recognize the need for it actually accept a real, > functioning device? It would have to go through rigorous testing in the crypto community. RNGs v. PRNGs goes through a yearly debate here on cpunks. There have been some good discussions on the use of white noise and other potential hardware sources. Im not sure if hks is back up or not, but you might look there. If an independant entity could certify the product with a good reputation for dedication to the community, you would get much milage. PGP, Inc. might be interested for instance. I mean I have used PGP for years but have not had the time to go through the code, etc. I trust it because Phil's reputation precedes him. > On the other hand... if this kind of pessimism had infected Phil Zimmermann > before he wrote PGP 1.0, he might have deleted the first 50 lines of code, > erased the file, and said, "fuck it!" Go for it Jim. I would be happy to support you in any way I could. Let me know. It sounds like a good idea. > > Jim Bell > jimbell(a)pacifier.com Matt _________________________________________________________________________ Matthew J. Miszewski | <mjmiski(a)execpc.com> Practice Crypto Civil Disobedience | Export your favorite Cryptosystem ------------------------------------------------------------------------- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

1 0

Re: Bounty Server, Revisited.
by Ian Grigg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Snow, > I have started drafting a proposal statement for the Bounty server. Wow, you've gotta move fast in this game :)) > Bounty Server, The proposal: > Version 0.1 > > Abstract: [chop where agreed or not disagreed] > Background: > It is the "Copylefted" software that interests me at this point. OK, although for my model, I am assuming that all forms are covered. > The proposal: > > What I am going to attempt to do is to set up a "Bounty Server" where > someone can iniate a "bounty" on a peice of technology. The initator > will write up a set of specifications for the technology, and an initial > award to be paid to the developer. They then post it on the server and > send their initial "bid" to the organization. Separate this out, for clarity of model. The initiator (I used Proposer, and called her Alice coz Alice always initiates) proposes the specification, or task. There is no need for Alice to submit an initial bid, although they have that option, as a buyer. BTW, bid to do what? Using market terminology, I have assumed thay bid is to buy, that is provide cash. Offer is to sell, that is provide software. Ah, yes, bid is add to bounty. > This is the "bounty". Other people can add to this bounty, allowing the > totals to add until someone claims that bounty by providing proof of > development to the initiator of the bounty. In software terms they would > upload the software to the server and notify the originator of the bounty, > and the server operators. Other technology will be figured out as it > becomes necessary. This is where I have put most of my efforts, because I need to design the microstructure that is built into our market. > Originally I was going to put the stipulation in that the software written > must be Copylefted. I decided that that wasn't really necessary, but > rather simply desired. To aid in that desire, I am going to build in > an initative to releaseing the software "copylefted". Absolutely - let the market decide. Some of us, for example, do not like copyleft. > To get more specific: [chop] > The first developer to upload a _working_ package to the server will > be awarded the total bounty, ... This worries me. If I, as a junior programmer, am looking to enter the market, I will have the daunting task of beating everyone else. Real life doesn't work that way - there are ways in which I can pick up some newbie tasks for low money, so as to build up experience and/or reputation. I guess the notion of bounty is just that - first one takes all. However, I think that the solution might be a bit limited in the long run. Interesting in that my proposal leads to task distribution by awarding contracts, your proposal leads to task incentives by rewarding speed. > "First" will be soley determined by the time stamp of the server. As soon > as the package is uploaded, the initiator and the server adminstrator > will be notifed, and the bounty marked "claimed". If the package is > accepted by the initiator, the bounty will be marked "closed", the > package moved to an FTP site for distribution (if Copylefted) or > moved offline if not (archived copies will be kept for legal reasons-- > more on that later). At that point a check for the developer will > be cut (or ecash mailed if that works out). OK, my proposals specifically assume no need for a "decision" by Alice. That's not to say either is right, it's just that I prefer to design something that eliminates the individual decision rather than cope with the complexities. I believe it will result, in the end, in a more efficient market. > The Server Adminstrator will also do an cursory check to make sure that > there are no obvious copyright violations. > > In the event that there is a conflict between the initiator and the > developer, the claim will go into adjudication. The server adminstrators > decesion is final, and he will make every effort to settle the claim > fairly. Adjudication will incur an additional fee (see the fees section). Same as above, no adjudication in my system. Although, it is possible to add underwriters, by simply making the task offerers (Bob and Carol) into bond writers who front for programmers. > Status: > > At this point in time I am (obviously) still in the process of developing > the procedures. I have registered a Domain Name (bounty.org) and I have > a couple promises off assistance in certain areas. As well, I have > a server to start off with. Wow, *gotta* move fast. As I say, our stuff is based on a lot of pre-existing software, so we make a lot of assumptions. Given our different approaches we may end up with competing systems rather than one, but that's fine, indeed highly valuable as an experimental approach. What's financing you in this? Or should I say, monetarily enthusing? I have started writing (last night :)) this all up as a paper for presentation to FC97. If you want, we could collaborate, or I will just document your efforts, and concentrate on presenting mine. My efforts are now at http://www.systemics.com/docs/papers/task_market.html TTFN iang.

1 0

Re: [CRYPTO] Bank Cards, Interac, Bank Machines, etc
by Scottauge＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a message dated 96-11-25 22:17:41 EST, you write: > I also heard that the magnetic stripe on the back contains your card > number (the shiny metallized numbers on the front) encrypted using DES > using your PIN as the key. Way out to lunch? Too close for comfort? This seems to be pretty unlikely, cuz I changed my PIN and was still able to use the same card. This means: 1) They can write to a card (pretty unlikely - but not ruling it out - jus don't know) 2) There are more PINs to a card than one (pretty unlikely cuz I chose my number) What I suspect is: Obtain card number Obtain PIN Send both to computer controlling transactions This computer inputs both to an algorithm that says Yea or Nay to continuing (like the numbers point to a valid check/credit/savings account or GL account)... Perform transaction (data likely encrypted the same way back and forth for defeating listening devices).... There may be a hash to the account, the result is not an account number, or some huge look-up database is in play matching PINs to card numbers to accounts.

1 0

Re: Bounty Server, Revisited.
by Omegaman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> The objective is to actually bring this system online. "cypherpunks write code." good. > Background: > > There is a lot of software floating around. It basically falls into > 5 catagories: Commercial, Shareware, Freeware, Gnu (and other > "Copyleft" schemes) and Public Domain. > <Need to fill this in, but at this point we all know what the 5 types > are> > > It is the "Copylefted" software that interests me at this point. There > is quite a bit of high quality "Gnu" software, and at least one > operating system based on the GNU mentality (linux) however there > is a dearth of _enduser_ tools such as mail and news readers for > the more popular end user operating systems, word processors and > graphics editing software, easy to use Graphic Design Software (TeX > is NOT easy to use) and easy to use Cryptographic software. many would pay good money for Linux native versions of programs like Wordperfect, Corelpaint & draw, Pagemaker , etc. > 4) Desired "quality" level: Proof of Concept, Alpha, Beta, Release etc. Needs flesh. What defines "alpha" or "beta" for purposes of bounty or is that up to the person initiating the bounty? > 6) Where the initiators money is to go if the bounty is not claimed: > I will provide a short (8 or 10) list of charities that the money > will go to if the bounty is not met. This is to keep the initiator > honest, as well as the server. Each contributor will also get this > choice. Do you have the charities in mind? They should be listed in the abstract, I think. Who will be publicize the initial bounty offer -- the server or bounty initiator? Information about a specific software project will need to be disseminated beyond bounty.org. More details on conflict resolution are needed in a final draft. The process and priorites the server administator will use to make his judgements should be abastractly discussed and possibly 1 or 2 specific hypotheticals detailed. me -------------------------------------------------------------- Omegaman <mailto:omega@bigeasy.com> PGP Key fingerprint = 6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2 59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63 Send a message with the text "get key" in the "Subject:" field to get a copy of my public key. --------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Dorthy Denning is a boot-licking fasicist!!!
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, I don't know if anyone watched the House Subcomitty on Computers & Technology today on C-Span. Phil Zimmerman, Dorthy Denning, William Reinsch & others were disscussing computer security. Dorthy Denning gave the most pro-government speech I have ever heard. Is this clueless bitch on the government payroll?!! William Reinsch is a lying bastard. Fucking politions!! Fucking goverment!! They all deserve a long rope!! Phil Zimmerman was quite good at attacking the government policies. <sigh> We are truly a country of fools to have put these jackbooted facisit bastards back into office. -- ----------------------------------------------------------- "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii(a)amaranth.com> -----------------------------------------------------------

5 5

Re: SAFEPASSAGE BRINGS STRONG CRYPTO TO WEB BROWSERS WORLDWIDE
by Douglas Barnes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> SAFEPASSAGE BRINGS STRONG CRYPTO TO WEB BROWSERS WORLDWIDE > >BTW, this doesn't come with source code. > No, it does not come with source code. Site licenses and OEM bundling packages will come with a source code option. Partners who work with us in internationalizing the product may also receive source code. However, it did not seem to be useful or appropriate for a consumer-level product like this. We are trying to find a happy medium between making sure that the security is well-reviewed, and doing things that make business sense and map onto standard industry practice for selling software products. Note that SafePassage uses SSLeay for its encryption and SSL protocol layer; SSLeay has publicly available source code, and has been extensively reviewed. Douglas Barnes C2Net

4 3

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

17 Dec '03

oh mindless aga, >> This betrays your ignorance. I.Q. is scaled according to age. One does >> not "improve." Certainly not in your case. > >I have no ignorance, except for being ignorant of stupid people >who call themselves "punks." If you are ignorant of them, then how do you know that they are "stupid"? >Look asshole; it says "LAW DOCTOR" -- that is what "Juris Doctor" >means, stupid. And I am about to stick the motherfucking Laws >right up your cocksucking ASS! How is this possible? It seems that you are possible of rather contemptible contortions! >"Juris" means Law. So Juris Doctor means "Law Doctor." Clinging to technicalities here, aren't we? >that is irrelevant, and you are off-topic. Oooh! Oooh! Point the finger here, aga, at YOURSELF! >Europe is also irrelevant, and you keep missing the point here. >You have added the cypherpunks list again, and that was forbidden. What a wonderful statement: Europe is irrelevant!!! A truly educated mind here. >look asshole, you really want that list killed, do you not? >I have no bounds, as you will soon learn. When one is clapped in irons and thrown into prison for whatever it is that your acts can be classified under, then I am pretty sure they have _some_ bounds. >> > > Be careful who you threaten. It might get you in trouble. One wonders if you ever pay attention to what you actually write, aga? >WRONG! There is NO crime which covers anything that one does >internationally! And mailbombing is NOT "Unauthorized access," >regardless of where it occurs! Uhm...oops, aga, you're wrong here, there are plenty of crimes that are international crimes. War crimes for example, which o against the Geneva convention. Child abduction crimes, which go against the Hague convention. But I am sure they will give you a slight slap on the wrist, after all, you are only a stupid hillbilly with no idea of the law. >Pitt-1975; Dissertation was in 1983 actions. I practiced for >six years, and then became perfect. I currently do not practice for >any parties other than myself, family, corporation or Institutes, >and I need no license for that. And since I do not carry any >license from any State, there is NOTHING that you can do to stop me. Assassination comes to mind... >The State disciplinary board has no jurisdiction, nor does any >Law. A Criminal Lawyer is a specialist in ripping new assholes >on the witness stand, and that must now also be practiced on the net, >it seems. Remember, you are the one who asked for this, "Sadam." You seem to have this absolute _fascination_ with asses, faggots, cocks, and ripping _new_ assholes (as if you weren't a big enough one already. This is obviously some sort of concious repression: you just can't face the truth, can you, aga? >This is a world-wide internet problem that you are about to get >taken care of. You will be among the first locations to be >eliminated. And just remember that your termination is your own >doing. You had your chance to keep the fucking cypherpunks list >OFF of your e-mail to me, and blew it. Do we run and hide now, mommy? >> I suggest a hobby which entails more physical activity. >> > >I pump iron and run three times a week. And as a Tae Kwon Do >black belt holder, I get lots of physical activity. I am in >better physical shape than any other man that you know. He/she/it pumps iron, does he/she/it? Whilst running? No mean feat for a thing without a brain. Assuming that you are better than anyone else you have probably never met, someone who probably has no desire to meet a thing like yourself, is yet another example of your sheer assonance! >And just understand, as far as the internet is concerned, Europe does >not mean SHIT! Of course not...I am sure the European Internet thinks the same as you. After all, an inanimate object seems to think just as much as you! --The Edge

2 1