December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

RE: Fighting the cybercensor
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What you're presented (included in its entirety below) is what I've come to call an "AP story problem." I've worked through many of those myself; their main problem is that they don't carefully describe why _each_ person in the "play" you've described would be motivated to do what it's claim he does, and why he DOES NOT do other things to fix the situation he's in. Remember, I'm not merely talking about the main character, but also the ones who are (apparently?) incidental. For just one example, you said: "conventional bodyguards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledgethat they will be buried with the tyrant." What motivates these people? Are they hostages? If they're hostages, then presumably that means they're motivated to seek the death of anyone who is holding them. What about their relatives; don't they have any sympathy for those who are taken? Why don't they donate to AP to see the lead guy dead? Etc. Etc. At 04:36 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Sean Roach wrote: >This may be true, but the example was to show how easy a defensive line >could be thrown up around the powerful. For example, conventional body >guards could be included, ones with no real pay but with the fore knowledge >that they will be buried with the tyrant. These body guards could be ten >children out of each local village. Merely a human shield. In an attack, >they would scatter, but the parents would know that the children would die >if a successful action were taken against the tyrant. Also, the tyrant >could put an open bounty on anyone caught trying to harm him. Just bring >the decapitated head of the assassin along with a VHS cassette of the >attempted action for a big reward. > >By layering the defenses, it becomes increasingly difficult for anyone to >get through. > >Obviously the castles walls are the first line of defense, so a reward is >given for anyone caught using any entrance to the fortress except those that >are provided. > >The household is told that their participation will result in the >extermination of their families. They are then told that if they know of an >impending action and fail to report it or attempt to stop it, they are >considered party it those actions. > >A human shield of innocents is "given the privaledge to live in the fortress >with our great leader" so that actions by concerned parties is limited further. >A standing bounty is placed on the head of the assassin, who so ever brings >in the head of the assassin and all children parented by that person after >the assination will be given a reward of some set sum. Probably 110%. > >A bounty is set on security breaches, this bounty would probably be 110% of >the death mark on the tyrant. > >A series of more conventional boobytraps are layed in normally inaccessable >areas, the layers of these either being prisoners who have unknowningly been >condemned to die, the tyrant himself, or some other disposable or trustable >deployment device. The most common of these would probably be a mine field >between the two outer most walls of the fortress, and maybe a funnel-gun >parimeter inside of that. > >An inner sanctum with self contained air, water, and food is maintained for >the tyrant and h[is/er] closest relatives/advisors. This sanctum would be >accessed by biometrics and only used in a percieved emergency. > >All dissent is declared illegal with capitol punishment for the mere >discussion of the impending death of the tyrant, exceptions to this would be >persons in the direct company of the tyrant with the tyrants full awareness, >and permission. > > > > Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: RC5-12/32/5 contest solved
by A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Bell rote: >Assuming it's possible to build a chip which tests solutions in a >massively-pipelined mode, the 400,000 or so solutions per second tried (for >what is probably a $2000 machine) would probably increase to 100 million per >second per chip (at a cost of maybe $100 per chip, if implemented in >parallel). That's 5000 times more economical, which would translate to a >find in 2-3 days if the same dollars in hardware were invested. Hi Jim, still on your list 8*) Funny thing is that 3 1/2 hours for a 40 bit search is the "real world" number I was using two years ago (can look it up in various archives) so is interesting that the first real test came out exactly the same. Is why I said 40 bits should not protect anything worth more than U$250.00 Have good reason to believe your estimate for a purpose built machine this year (expect 600,000,000 to 1,000,000,000 kps per sieve - these will not be cheap chips but will be commecially available). Expect 400 arrays would be required to do DES in a day (average) but is a lot more achievable than the 65k postulated by the gang of nine. Still would not be too concerned about using DES so long as every message encrypted (including orders for a tuna on rye) and each uses a different key - is "security by obscurity" in a way but am comfortable with it. Besides, if really concerned will just superencrypt. Warmly, Padgett "I love it when a plan comes together."

1 0

[IMPORTANT] Man in the Middle
by anonymous＠miron.vip.best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dense Venomous will fuck anything that moves, but he'd rather be fucking his own daughter's prepubescent body. |\_/| (0_0) Dense Venomous ==(Y)== ---(u)---(u)---

1 0

Re: Dr. Denning
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dogfucker L<ubricant> Vinegar K<ock>OfTheMoment is so vile because rancid semen is dripping from all of his orifices. /~~~\ {-O^O-} Dogfucker L<ubricant> Vinegar K<ock>OfTheMoment \ o / (-)

1 0

Clarification on The Politics of Export Restrictions
by Rick Hornbeck 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am submitting the following a second time as the first one did not seem to get posted. ============== I agree the strategy would have to be hijack-proof. Something like Gore experiencing a convenient "change of heart" towards the end of this current term and convincing Clinton and the administration to soften crypto export restrictions which would make Gore look like a hero to the high-tech community just in time for the election. Naturally this would have to be carefully scripted but the objective would be to keep the democrats in power. Just a theory. >>Return-Path: <owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com> >>Date: Wed, 29 Jan 1997 23:43:43 -0800 >>From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles(a)netbox.com> >>To: Rick Hornbeck <rnh2(a)ix.netcom.com> >>Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >>Subject: Re: The Politics of Export Restrictions >>Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >> >>At 09:44 PM 1/29/97 -0800, Rick Hornbeck wrote: >> >>>Is it possible the unreasonable crypto export restrictions are simply being >>>imposed at this time for the purpose of making Al Gore look good when he >>>runs for President in 2000? >> >>I suppose it's plausible, but it's an opportunity open to both candidates, >>and more plausibly (because of lack of collaboration) to the Republicans - >>e.g., Dan Quayle and the "Crypto Freedom For Americans" platform, promising >>to rescue Silicon Valley from those evil regulatory Democrats. >> >>If I were an evil politician trying to set up a trick like you suggest, I >>think I'd want a scheme that my opponent(s) couldn't hijack and use against >>me. >> >>-- >>Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: >>gbroiles(a)netbox.com | >>http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. >> | >> >> >>

2 1

Counterproductive Dorothy Denning Flames
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Warning: if you fuck a Dr.Decoy Vomit K<reep> Of The Moment in the ass, a tapeworm might bite your penis. /\ /\ + \______/ + / . . \ < / > Dr.Decoy Vomit K<reep> Of The Moment \ \--/ / ------

1 0

Re: Info please!
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dickhead L[axative] Vagina K[arcass] Of The Moment's abysmal grammer, atrocious spelling and feeble responses clearly identify him as a product of the American education system. ,_, *-._W_,-* Dr.Dickhead L[axative] Vagina K[arcass] Of The Moment `-;-;-' " "

1 0

Re: [CRYPTO] ElGamal
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here, Dimwit Vandal K[arcass] Of The Moment descends into total inanity. He should have a cold shower and/or a Turkish coffee. ^-^-^-@@-^-^-^ (..) Dimwit Vandal K[arcass] Of The Moment

1 0

Security alert!!!
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

WARNING: There's a rogue trojan horse out there on the internet known as the "stronghold web server". It's actually a hacked-up version of Apache with a backdoor, which allows hackers (or whoever knows the backdoor) to steal credit card numbers and other confidentil information on the Internet. Be careful! Always use encryption. Do not send confidential information 9such as passwords and credit card numbers) to any site running the trojan horse "stronghold". In general, beware of "snake oil" security products and hacked-up versions of free software. Please repost this warning to all relevant computer security forums. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

ad.doubleclick.net (fwd)
by Mark M. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Date: Thu, 23 Jan 1997 14:15:38 -0800 From: Caveh Frank Jalali <caveh(a)Eng.Sun.COM> Subject: URL filtering, Re: ad.doubleclick.net (RISKS-18.78) The obvious defense against hostile or undesirable web sites is to not visit them in the first place. This process can in fact be automated in netscape's browser. This saves bandwidth and your time! The basic premise is that the browser may optionally execute a function on every URL before it is accessed to determine whether a direct connection should be made or a proxy should be used in the process. This affords the opportunity to [mis]direct the browser to fetch the document from an invalid source. this is a good approximation of not getting the document at all. We sit behind a fire wall, so all WWW access has to funnel through a proxy. If I tell netscape to fetch an external document using a direct connection, the connection attempt will fail, and the document will not be accessed. Netscape will put a broken image icon in its place. Here are the nuts and bolts to do it, but some assembly is required: Under options/network preferences/proxies, select "automatic proxy config" and tell it which file to use. Call it something like "file:///HOMEDIR/.netscape/proxy.pac", replacing HOMEDIR with your home directory; the actual code is included below. Next, go to options/general preferences/helpers and create an application helper of type "application/x-ns-proxy-autoconfig" for suffix "pac", handled by "navigator". Install this java-script code to do the actual filtering. call it "file:///HOMEDIR/.netscape/proxy.pac", as mentioned before. ================ function FindProxyForURL(url, host) { if ( isResolvable(host) && ! shExpMatch(host, "[0-9]*") ) return "DIRECT" ; else if (host == "advertising.quote.com") return "DIRECT" ; else if (host == "ad.doubleclick.net") return "DIRECT" ; else if (shExpMatch(url, "*:*/ads/*")) return "DIRECT" ; else return "PROXY webcache:8080; "; }

1 0