December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: GSM technology
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:43 AM 1/20/97 -0500, Nurdane Oksas wrote: > Does anyone use ADSL lines? or are they still very expensive? I just had a very interesting talk with somebody from Northern Telecom (Canada's Phone Company). NorTel has apparently skipped ISDN and is now deploying ADSL. Some areas already have access to ADSL at, can you believe this, $60/month. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://www.mersenne.org/prime.htm

1 0

Re: Question on Diffie-Hellman patent
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, On Mon, 20 Jan 1997, Andrew Loewenstern wrote: > Tim Dierks writes: > > Here's a summary of some relevant crypto patents: > > > > Name Number Filed Issued Expires > > > > Diffie-Hellman 4,200,770 Sept. 6, 1977 Apr. 29, 1980 Sept. 6, 1997 > > Hellman-Merkle 4,218,582 Oct. 6, 1977 Aug. 19, 1980 Oct. 6, 1997 > > RSA 4,405,829 Dec. 14, 1977 Sept. 20, 1983 Sept. 20, 2000 > > So who's planning on throwing a big party on Sept. 6th? Will Jim Bizos be > celebrating? :-) I'll call dibs on that. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Server Authentication
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:26:05 -0800 (PST) > From: Eric Murray <ericm(a)lne.com> > Subject: Re: Server Authentication > > I think that you can get access to the server's certificate. > I know you can from the CGI interface. Unfortunately it's the > raw ASN.1 encoded certificate, so you would have to ASN.1 decode it. > Bleah. > > If the SSL handshake completes, then you can assume that the client > has verified and authenticated the server certificate. The only problem > would be that the authentication might not be up to the plugin's standards- > i.e. a connection to www.foo.com is somehow intercepted by > www.ripoff-plugins.com. The server www.ripoff-plugins.com presents a cert > who's name is www.foo.com. The browser correctly presents a pop-up dialog > noting the discrepancy, and the luser operating the client clicks > on the 'OK' button, allowing the SSL handshake to finish. Oops. Isn't LDAP v3 supposed to answer some of these questions related to server authentication as well anonymity of the users site (if desired)? Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

1 0

Re: GSM technology
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Steve Shear <azur(a)netcom.com> writes: >> [very useful explanation of GSM TDMA, and the new HSCSD] > >64 kbit/s tied to ISDN is very nice technology. > >> ENCRYPTED GSM LINKS >> If the GSM phone includes a data port, as some already do, just connect >> your laptop, dial your ISP and 'push' the encrypted traffic over that link >> (e.g., using TCP/IP and PGPfone). > >This would obviously be possible, but to my mind reduces the appeal of >the system. Not every one has a laptop. [snip] Retrofitting the stonger encryption (e.g., IDEA) to some existing GSM phones may be practical (as I've discussed in previous postings), but unless the service providers support the stonger crypto (seems very unlikely at the moment)parties at the other end of the line will need an Eric Blossom-like device or a laptop running PGPfone. I can see no way around this. > >Also, the cell phone tarriffs may be higher if you need higher >bandwidth to get the software only voice codec implementations in >PGPfone to produce equivalent full-duplex voice quality to that >expected from a digital mobile phone. I may be wrong, but the faster laptops are already able to support the GSM codes and rates in PGPfone (or could). However, most of the service providers may only be offering 9.6kb/s GSM data links at this time, and this would surely impact voice quality. If or when 28.8kb/s data is common via GSM voice links via PGPfone should be better than the default GSM coded voice. --Steve PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear (N7ZEZ) | Internet: azur(a)netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet, electronic currency and wireless development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler

1 0

Server Authentication
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 09:26:05 -0800 (PST) > From: Eric Murray <ericm(a)lne.com> > Subject: Re: Server Authentication > > I think that you can get access to the server's certificate. > I know you can from the CGI interface. Unfortunately it's the > raw ASN.1 encoded certificate, so you would have to ASN.1 decode it. > Bleah. > > If the SSL handshake completes, then you can assume that the client > has verified and authenticated the server certificate. The only problem > would be that the authentication might not be up to the plugin's standards- > i.e. a connection to www.foo.com is somehow intercepted by > www.ripoff-plugins.com. The server www.ripoff-plugins.com presents a cert > who's name is www.foo.com. The browser correctly presents a pop-up dialog > noting the discrepancy, and the luser operating the client clicks > on the 'OK' button, allowing the SSL handshake to finish. Oops. Isn't LDAP v3 supposed to answer some of these questions related to server authentication as well anonymity of the users site (if desired)? Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

1 0

Re: GSM technology
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Steve Shear <azur(a)netcom.com> writes: >> [very useful explanation of GSM TDMA, and the new HSCSD] > >64 kbit/s tied to ISDN is very nice technology. > >> ENCRYPTED GSM LINKS >> If the GSM phone includes a data port, as some already do, just connect >> your laptop, dial your ISP and 'push' the encrypted traffic over that link >> (e.g., using TCP/IP and PGPfone). > >This would obviously be possible, but to my mind reduces the appeal of >the system. Not every one has a laptop. [snip] Retrofitting the stonger encryption (e.g., IDEA) to some existing GSM phones may be practical (as I've discussed in previous postings), but unless the service providers support the stonger crypto (seems very unlikely at the moment)parties at the other end of the line will need an Eric Blossom-like device or a laptop running PGPfone. I can see no way around this. > >Also, the cell phone tarriffs may be higher if you need higher >bandwidth to get the software only voice codec implementations in >PGPfone to produce equivalent full-duplex voice quality to that >expected from a digital mobile phone. I may be wrong, but the faster laptops are already able to support the GSM codes and rates in PGPfone (or could). However, most of the service providers may only be offering 9.6kb/s GSM data links at this time, and this would surely impact voice quality. If or when 28.8kb/s data is common via GSM voice links via PGPfone should be better than the default GSM coded voice. --Steve PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear (N7ZEZ) | Internet: azur(a)netcom.com Lamarr Labs | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 7075 West Gowan Road | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Suite 2148 | Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- Internet, electronic currency and wireless development 1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future! --Adolf Hitler

1 0

RE: GSM technology
by Blake Coverett 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Lucky wrote: > I just had a very interesting talk with somebody from Northern Telecom (Canada's Phone Company). NorTel has apparently skipped ISDN and > is now deploying ADSL. Some areas already have access to ADSL at, can you believe this, $60/month. NorTel isn't exactly Canada's phone company. NorTel manufactures telecom equipment. It is however 51% owned by BCE, which owns or has controlling interest in Bell Canada and several of the regional carriers as well a huge mess of other telco stuff. ISDN is available fairly widely in my area of the country, but I'm not aware of an commercially available ADSL UUNET Canada has been conducting ADSL trials in a couple of cities, but that's all I've heard of thus far. regards, -Blake (who would love to be proved wrong as the price sounds great)

1 0

Re: Airport security [no such thing]
by Alan Bostick 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What started this thread off was Lucky Green's observation of the beerkegs getting through the security checkpoints at the Oakland Airport. Just yesterday I flew from Seattle's Sea-Tac Airport to Oakland, on Southwest Airlines. My partner and I were (we thought) checking in just in time to be in the second boarding group. (Explanation of Southwest's lo-tech allocation of seat choice elided). An unacompanied woman was the next person ahead of us in the line. She presented the gate agent with *four* tickets and *four* IDs. "Where are these other people?" the agent asked. "They're parking the car," said the traveler. The agent gave her all four boarding passes; and my companion and I were bumped to the third boarding group. The woman in front of us was white and middle-class-looking, traveling with what appeared to be her family. One wonders what would have happened were she a swarthy man wearing robes and a burnoose. Or if she were just wearing shabby clothes. -- Alan Bostick | To achieve harmony in bad taste is the height mailto:abostick@netcom.com | of elegance. news:alt.grelb | Jean Genet http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~abostick

2 1

Re: Dedikend Cut's and such (fwd)
by Kent Crispin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate allegedly said: > > > Forwarded message: > > > > Did a little research, Dedekind Cut's and such use Integers to define a > > > SPECIFIC Real to a arbitrary BUT FIXED resolution. They do not define the > > > set of Reals. > > > > They do. The set of all numbers representable by a DC is precisely > > the set of reals. > > Then you are saying that using Dedekind Cut's it is possible to define the > ENTIRE set of Reals? I am assuming that entire includes all those Reals > which aren't representable by any algorithm and of which we can't even speak > (even though we are). > > Another pretty nifty trick. Yep. "Define" is not the same as "generate". Algorithms "generate". -- Kent Crispin "No reason to get excited", kent@songbird.com,kc@llnl.gov the thief he kindly spoke... PGP fingerprint: 5A 16 DA 04 31 33 40 1E 87 DA 29 02 97 A3 46 2F

1 0

Re: Take it to sci.math
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Blanc Weber wrote: > And as everyone on this list acutely knows, neither math, science, nor > politics has anything to do with crypto. I agree. Let's stick to discussions of crack-crypto Ebonics, and child-crypto PigLatin. Toto

1 0