December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Moderation
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim C. May's sexual life is not the business of the cypherpunks mailing list. o)__ (_ _`\ Tim C. May z/z\__)

1 0

re: Free Money!
by anonymous＠miron.vip.best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks for the dough! I just love cyber technology. Will spend it wisely.

1 0

Copyright loophole?
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

While doing research at a law library, I came across what appears to be a legal loop-hole in the copyright law. It seems a famous author's publisher had a substantial number of unbound and unsold copies of his works sitting around. Another publisher purchased them from his publisher, without the author's knowledge, and printed an anthology which included an index which was not part of the purchased (copyrighted) items. In Kipling vs. G.P. Putnam & Sons (1903, CA2 NY) 120 F 631, the 2nd circuit found that (from 17 USCS § 501) "Publication of an index to accompany copyrighted volume of author's work although containing words and phrases found in text, does not constitute infringement." From the original opinion: "They were also at liberty to make and publish an index contained in their volumes even though the index, as necessary must, contain words and phrases found in the text." Q1: Could this decision (which has stood since 1903) support the creation, storage and distribution of "standalone" on-line indicies to copyrighted works without infringement? (I could not find a direct reference to "fair-use" in the portion of the opinion referencing the index nor a related ruling, using the 1976 Copyright Act, which overturned the "index' provision.) Q2: How much content can an index contain and still not infringe? Q3: What would be the legal standing of these indicies, or several unrelated "indexes", if they can jointly (but not separately) be used to reconstitute the original copyright work by a private citizen? (Anonymous index posting, especially via a Ross Anderson style Eternity Service, might "practically" circumvent government enforcement.) -- Steve

1 0

What about postscript?
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What if somebody wanted to publish the source code of an encryption program in book form, but make the book dowloadable freely from an ftp site using postscript or PDF format. Surely, the government will be hard pressed to argue the difference between paper media and electronic media here, since the files downloaded cannot be used to encrypt or decrypt data, without somebody first typing in the source. Maybe MIT or PGP should convert at least part of the PGP book into postscript and then request Commerce Department clearance to make it publically available. That should make for a nice court battle. If somebody argues that sophisticated programs can extract the text out of postscript files, what about providing JPEG images of pages of the book?

1 0

Lane Stipes
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bob Hawbaker wrote: > ____________________________________ > Remember, the people who paint lane stripes on the road > of life probably have different objectives than you do.

1 0

Keyserver Draft
by David K. Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Wed Jan 08 08:39:12 1997 Having gotten the subject in the spotlight (!), I'd like to clarify a couple of points about my draft proposal: 1: it is aimed at supporting _automatic_ realtime - as in supporting crypto-aware email packages, so that if an unknown key turns up, the encryption program can go out and collect key data _without_ user intervention. 2: port "assignment" was arbitrary; if the protocol would work better with a single port for send/receive, then "make it so, Number One" :-) 3: I expected that data transfer would work best using ascii text (like ascii-fied keys); if something else would work better, so be it. 4: if checksums or other error-detection/correction isn't necessary, then by all means, leave it/them out. I offered the draft as a _proposal_, fully expecting that it would require modification, editing, revision, et al. I'm not sufficiently pompous/egotistical to believe that I am He Who Knows All. Too, I have a reasonable idea of my own limitations; I'm simply trying to establish *some* kind of common reference point toward a solution of something I see as a possible problem. Happily, I haven't received any _personal_ flames, the comments I've received have been professional/technical. If I get a brownie point or atta-boy out of this, cool. If not, that's fine, too, _as long as the problem is addressed_. I didn't dare propose anything so grand as a distributed system - it seemed that a variation of DNS would handle that. We return you now to FlameFest '97 :-) Dave Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMtMI1sVrTvyYOzAZAQH5fgP+M5kJntTNM+LWd67jt+WGoiGLq8SdRwCa 0MljMYuO0oMzgiTrMTchNaj+cxtVkyUrzz+cgj3XQdJF6cdRlDnSW9xGV9rJJC/B lPf6RD9Vp5Pih9KkqWc+DqKMynGzEm1WXvNZKHDtn3/1etkv0RsEeQejqdNG+5dI rfZhi4xp9mk= =1Pcn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: The Upcoming DES Challenge
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:49 PM 1/7/97, pgut001(a)cs.auckland.ac.nz wrote: >Orbital mind control lasers made mpd(a)netcom.com (Mike Duvos) write: > >>Peter Trei (trei(a)process.com) writes: >>>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'm certainly jumping up and down and cheering. I said a while back that the >>life expectancy of DES would be about two weeks if anyone forked over serious >>cash. > >I'm still a bit nervous about what the reaction will be though - won't the >US government (and anyone else pushing DES) be able to say "It took 10,000 >Pentiums several weeks, noone would bother doing that, so it's safe" (with a >possible side order of "Safer-SK64 is 256 times as secure, anyone we really >like can use that provided they hand over the keys in advance"). This was exactly my concern months ago. PC's are remarkably _inefficient_ systems for attempting to crack codes. I recall estimating, quite approximately, that it might take somewhere about $500,000 of electricity cost alone to check all 2**56 possible decrypts, most of which is going to power unnecessary components. (monitors, hard drives, sound cards, modem cards, etc, etc, etc.) By doing the decrypts on PCs (term used generically; it applies just as well to Mac's, PowerPC's, DEC Alpha's, etc) we make it look like DES is better than it really is. But I'm under no illusion. As the saying went, "When the only tool you have is a hammer, you treat every problem as if it were a nail.) People have PC's, and will use them. Let me suggest, however, that somebody familiar with the details of DES and FPGA's (or other kinds of high-density programmable logic) figure out a ballpark estimate of how much it would cost to implement a minimalist DES-cracker in hardware. Don't do it, just estimate it. Then, when somebody has finally cracked that DES message and someone the news media is trying to suggest that this was an expensive effort, a more economical figure will be quotable. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Why are 1024 bit keys the limit right now?
by AaronH4321＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am just starting at this. I know that part of RSA/PGP's strength comes from the size key you choose. What prevents someone from writting a 2048 bit key? Is it because computers can't handle it? Is 1024 top of the prime number size right now? Am I way off track?

1 0

[ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Forgery detection
by nobody＠zifi.genetics.utah.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim Maya grew a beard to look like his mother. /\_/\ ( x x ) -oo0-(o o)-0oo- Tim Maya

1 0

sig. files with PGP
by harka＠nycmetro.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi there, I have a question reg. PGP: If certain parts of an encrypted message are known, does that compromise the security of the rest of the message? Example: If I always use a signature file, in plaintext messages as well as in encrypted messages, could an attacker knowing that signature file to be part of my encrypted message crack the rest too? Please copy replies to my private e-mail, for I am currently not subscribed to the CP list... Thanks in advance for your help, Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE * */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! * * */ /* * * */ /* E-mail: harka(a)nycmetro.com * * */ /* * */ /* Finger or E-Mail for PGP public key. * * */ /* Key Size: 2047 / KeyID: 04174301 * * */ /* Fingerprint: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 http://www.eff.org */ /* 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /* Note: My old key (KeyID: B2728495) has been revoked. */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMtN8SjltEBIEF0MBAQEEoQf/TVZO2Z9gr8Jik0SnbfE7VbrORETlD7q3 nqIsU5FY6iCJKmXy9Us/VW6LOyuRr0qAMbM8IAdMaX96P1FFFGoZ+6QAH1txV+xs i6+w6TKtHmLZDyMaa40hH5F3/sUUECT5MyW59McO2+seX3gYDwi+jLp6XVZq8BFs uLymgoDmh+NsDXBcOUs9ULCQy8rsu/nYmbwQxlWqhUnPw1o1nnuUGuBZaEfU6xJj gthebIpjCPh9YAthdI/XxE4bmYmS1AVhL4Fz6cwR9yMQ4JC3eEoZnhIUvFd16w6i eOo1Og9sD241ksJTjH7lT0qaRAQFh0ccEQoFoCP/7dAesVjwXKjRhg== =3u9n -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption...

1 0