December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Definition of AP?
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From: jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> >Subject: Definition of AP? >Reply-To: jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> >To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >>Anonymous wrote: >> Can you give me a definition/description of AP in a few concise lines? >Probably. > >Ideally, it would capture the theory/purpose/methodology in terms that >those unfamiliar with the concept could immediately understand. > >AP, considered generically, is a system which allows individuals and groups >of people to anonymously defend themselves from all types of agression, most >peculiarly including agression tolerated or even done by governments. Dear Mr. Bell: We have been both pleased and relieved to note that over the past several months you have used the troublesome initials "AP" much less frequently than has been your habit. This measurable improvement in your attitude has considerably reduced the influx of damaging materials into your files. Today, however, it has been brought to our attention that you took the opportunity to launch into an explanation (relatively controlled, we hasten to say) of the basic theory you have been propounding regarding AP. More troublesome is the evidence that you, yourself, posted the supposedly anonymous question to which you responded. We sincerely hope that such felonious manipulation of e-mail traffic and information does not indicate a return to your previous unacceptable outbursts. Knowing you have been attempting to "moderate" your posts, we are certain you will accept our offer of 5 sessions of Deep Tissue--Relaxation Therapy at the therapist of your choice -- with whom we have been in contact. Always hoping for the best, we remain, The Bell Team secserv(a)whitehouse.gov

1 0

Re: The Balloon is Going Up....criminalization of noncompliant crypto
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jeff Barber wrote: > The real problem is, as Hal notes, that CAs registered under the act > can only create certificates if the corresponding private key is lodged > with a registered KRA. > > This proposal is a bald attempt to make a totally artificial linkage > between a concept for which there is a good [or at least perceived good] > business case -- officially registered CAs -- and one which the > government desires but which has *no* business case: officially > registered KRAs. It's trying to make it seem that key recovery/escrow > has something to do with key signing/certification when it patently > does not. Do the words 'Gun Control' ring a bell? It seems that every time government announces its intention to restrict 'criminals' use of an item, it is not long before everyone using that item is considered a criminal. In the case of encryption, it will still be legal, but not if you use real bullets. Perhaps if enough people manage to circumvent forced key escrow in the future, the government will pass a law requiring all crypto products to force everybody to use the same password. (I can hardly wait to see what reasoning they use to explain to us that it is for our own protection.) -- Toto "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix/xenbody.html

1 0

[NOISE] labelling requirement in EDSA 1997
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cypherpunks, One of the more disturbing pieces of the Electronic Data Security Act of 1997 is the requirement that encryption software be labelled as to whether it uses Key Recovery Agents. While most cypherpunk-friendly software will be proud to label itself as non-GAKked, it seems to me to be fairly ominous, and is an important step towards banning non-GAK crypto altogether. I think it would be cool to combine the labelling requirement with a public relations campaign, not unlike the blue ribbon of last year. My proposal for the "no GAK" logo: a yellow star. To me, the symbolism is pointed and poignant, but on the other hand it may come dangerously close to invoking Godwin's law. If anyone else has any ideas for a logo that would get the point across equally well but be a little less controversial, I'd like to hear them. Raph P.S. My work on distributed key publication for the Internet is progressing very well. I'll give an update at the next bay area meeting, and there will be some UC Berkeley tech reports soon too. If my ideas fly, they will make Key Recovery Agents moot for a lot of people.

2 1

Re: hi-tech ROT-13
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Andy Dustman wrote: > > The main problem I see with the various key-passing schemes is that they > aren't useful if the receipient is cryptographically-challenged, which is > why I'm presently inclined to stick with just the magic cookie exchange > without crypto (unless the recipient can supply a PGP public key). Andy seems to realize something that many people don't, which is that all of the cypherpunk discussions as to security, privacy and anonymity are just preaching to the converted unless the end result is a program that the average joe can actually use. I am personally GUI-challenged, but that is what most people know and can actually work with. Even then, the average user doesn't know enough about his or her system and software to do anything remotely exotic to install it. What you or I might consider simplistic (e.g. changes to a config.sys file), might be a journey onto dangerous ground for someone who may have to pay someone $50.00/hr or more in order to get their machine running again if something gets screwed up. The bottom line is that people want something that they halfway recognize and feel comfortable with, and is written to be self- installable by someone who actually knows what the hell all those things inside their computer do. I used to tell people, "I invented a pill that cures Alzheimer's, but it doesn't do any good, because nobody remembers to take it." If the goal is to make anonymous remailers available to those who need them, then one must also consider the computer knowledge and capabilities of those who have a genuine need for anonymity for safety reasons. Assholes and the spammers will always take the time to learn what they need to know to spread their bullshit, but what about people who have a one or two-time legitimate need to pass information along in saftey? Even though unencoded, direct use of an anonymous remailer is not that complicated, many people today think that a command line is "Sit, Rover, sit!" and if you ask them about syntax they look at you funny and say they think they paid it when they bought the condoms. Raph Levien's list of remailers is great, but he fails to give simple instructions as to how to get remailer help/instructions from different remailers. And some of the remailers autobot help replies are rather vague even to those who know computers well. The Anonymous Nymserver <anon(a)anon.nymserver.com> was a great, easy to use GUI interface that Jane Average could use, but it seemed to be some kind of interesting programming project to its author, who folded at the first hint of trouble, expressing great surprise that there are assholes in the world. After folding, his great concern seemed to be to find somebody to buy his software, which he had just finished explaining would cause a great deal of grief to anyone who chose to run it. (And if you act now, we'll stab you with the Amazing Ginzu knives!) Actually, however, he is still providing services for people who pay a slight sum ($20/yr ??), so he is actually furthering the spread of anonymous remailers, even if he is limiting them in some ways. (I had no problem with him wanting some reimbursement for his efforts in writing the software. It's just that he sounded like he wanted someone to pay premium dollars for his learning curve in order to buy his software so that they could run it as a free service to others.) If remailers are to survive, then programs have to be written that address the capabilities and morals of a new breed of user. Although I appreciate the efforts of many cypherpunks who originally had a hand in developing the remailer system, I am not so naieve as to think it was all done merely for humanitarian reasons, etc. The question is, now that many of the cypherpunks have moved on to busier lives, and the programming details that were once "fun" are now "work," are there still those who have a committment to advance the development of the remailers, at least partially as a public service, or to encourage and help those who may not have the expertise, but who are willing to learn? I have read complaints about the thanklessness of providing a service that provides an avenue for abuse, with little indication of actually providing essential privacy needs for those in genuine need of security in anonymous communications. Yet those most in need of this type of service for legitimate anonymity may only be a one-time user, and computer illiterate, unable to use anything other than a GUI. If the cypherpunks want to wax eloquently about good intentions then we must change the technology to enable those intentions to come to fruitation in today's Net climate, or remailers will go the way of the dinosaurs, being of use only to a few elite and a plethora of assholes. Although I have little expertise in the technical area surrounding remailers, I do not take lightly my call for the remailer theorists to actually walk their talk, and produce a product suitable for general use. I have risked my physical freedom in the past in order to bring information and knowledge to those in oppression, and will likely do so again in the future. (As a matter of fact, one of the items which I risked life and limb carrying into a fascist state was a cypherpunk product. Spooks who get caught doing this get 'traded' back to the home team, but ordinary citizens do not.) TruthMonger

4 3

PC Shopping Planet - Tech Info-Letter
by newsletter＠shoppingplanet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

TECH INFO-LETTER A Subscription-Only PC Upgrade Update PC Shopping Planet http://www.shoppingplanet.com March 25, 1997 <-Expand your screen to make a single line for best viewing-> xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx If you no longer want to receive the SP Newsletter, send this email or reply to this address: unsubscribe(a)shoppingplanet.com Your email address is: cypherpunks(a)toad.com xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx In this week's issue: 1. MMX Watch 2. A River Runs Through "IT" 3. Buy Me A River 4. Hot Deals xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.shoppingplanet.com 1-800-779-8461 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 1. MMX Watch Intel Pentium MMX ---> Available Now! AMD K6 MMX ---> April Intel Pentium Pro MMX (Pentium II/Klamath) ---> May Cyrix M2 180 & 200 MHz MMX ---> July Please remember that supplies will be very tight immediately after release. If you have an application now, don't wait! Purchase the chip you need today and upgrade to MMX later (especially when prices come down). xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.shoppingplanet.com 1-800-779-8461 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2. A RIVER RUNS THROUGH "IT" The Pentium Pro has been the processor of choice for networked desktop computers running Windows NT. But Intel is now about to flood the Information Technology (IT) market with a river of new processors. Each of these chips provides a growth path for the Pentium Pro and guarantees many years of technical improvement. However, the Intel upgrade path requires - at a minumum - a Pentium Pro motherboard or, preferably, a new "SEC" motherboard. Interestingly, all the new chips have been given the same names as rivers in Oregon: Klamath, Tillamook, Deschutes, Katmai, Willamette and Merced. Why has Intel done this? The new chips are a joint design project involving Intel's Hillsboro, Oregon facility, along with the Santa Clara, CA headquarters. And the river that joins the Oregon/California border is... the Klamath! Since everything starts with the Pentium Pro, a quick note about the existing microprocessor approach. The current Pentium Pro uses a dual-chip design that couples the CPU (with its built-in L1 Cache) and the 256K secondary L2 cache chip on a single die that plugs into a socket on the system motherboard. However, the new designs split the components and places them on a single cartridge that plugs directly into a motherboard. KLAMATH This is the Pentium Pro with MMX Technology, also known as the "Pentium II". This processor is the first of the P6 (too advanced to be called a 686) generation of CPUs. The Klamath/Pentium II creates a major break with existing chip and motherboard designs. It incorporates all the basic features of MMX: a larger Level 1 cache for fast data access, plus the 57 new multimedia extensions. Using a 0.35-micron CMOS process, a larger die size is produced, but with lower power consumption. Accordingly, the motherboard voltage has to be reduced. Most importantly, the Klamath/Pentium Pro MMX design is quite different than the previous Pentium Pro. The separate CPU (with built-in L1 Cache), and the L2 cache chip sits in a metal and plastic encased card called a Single Edge Contact (SEC) Cartridge. The cartridge will plug into a slot on the klamath-compatible motherboard. Intel says future processor upgrades will become simpler because of the separation of the components and ability to configure individual CPU/L2 combinations into cartridges. The Pentium MMX was only supposed to run at 166 MHz and 200 MHz. But, in response to Cyrix's announcement of one of their MMX compatible M2 chips running at 225 MHz, Intel decided to make a faster 233 MHz Pentium MMX version. However, the Pentium Pro MMX was supposed to run at the higher 233 MHz speed. So Intel will release the Klamath/Pentium II MMX at 233 MHz, 266 MHz and 300 MHz. Intel will release a Klamath motherboard at the same time as the chip. And many of the independent motherboard makers are working on Klamath-compatible designs that will be released the same time as Intel's board. Because of design changes, current Pentium Pro motherboards will not be able to accept the new cartridges directly. However, it is expected that Intel -and others- will release a connector that will allow the SEC cards to fit on existing Pentium-Pro motherboards. TILLAMOOK This is the notebook version of the Pentium Pro MMX scheduled for the Fall of this year. The cartridge design will require an overhaul of all portable motherboards, so this is Intel's opportunity to attempt to corner the notebook motherboard market. The Intel motherboard "module" will consist of the board, the MMX procesor, high-speed cache memory, a power supply, and circuitry for controlling the PCI bus and memory. In effect, with a prebuilt module, Intel will provide almost everything necessary for computer manufacturers to produce high-end notebooks. DESCHUTES To be introduced by the end of 1997 or early 1998, this is the "shrink" notebook version of the Pentium Pro MMX. The chip will be manufactured with a new 0.25-micron process (about one four-hundredth of a human hair) so that the chip will run faster (higher clock rates of 300 MHz to 333 MHz) but at a lower voltage resulting in less heat. Deschutes, will be Intel's first chip to support a 100MHz CPU bus and 1MB cache. That would be a measurable improvement over bus speeds on current processors that peak at 66MHz. KATAMI Multi-Media Extensions have just been introduced, but Intel is already planning an enhanced instruction set and better support for 3D graphics in this Spring 1998 version of the Pentium Pro MMX. Using the 0.25-micron process, Intel has demonstrated a chip running at 451 megahertz. The desktop cartridge will also have a larger cache. WILLAMETTE A further improvement scheduled for late 1998, this Pentium Pro MMX cartridge will offer more execution units and run on a faster 100 MHz bus. It will have a larger die size, but will offer up to a 50% performance boost over Klamath. MERCED Developed in conjunction with Hewlett-Packard, this cartridge won't be released until 1999. It will be the first P7-family microprocessor with 64-bit architecture. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.shoppingplanet.com 1-800-779-8461 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 3. BUY ME A RIVER The Klamath is actually available now. But the chip has to be placed in a Single Edge Contact (SEC) Cartridge. The cartridge then plugs into a special slot on the motherboard. Does your motherboard have a SEC slot? If not, you may have to buy a new motherboard to follow Intel's growth path. However, do you have a Pentium Pro motherboard? Intel says that they are planning to release a special connector that will permit the SEC to fit existing Pentium Pro motherboards. Our suggestion... Take a look at our Pentium Pro motherboards that provide an excellent platform for future upgrades. Then, when the SEC connector is released, you'll be able to move on to the Intel Klamath/Pentium II. We strongly recommend the M Technology R622 motherboard. It has the Intel Natoma chipset, and it is a AT Form Facator. Check it out at: http://www.shoppingplanet.com/Compu/Moth/48134.htm xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.shoppingplanet.com 1-800-779-8461 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx If you want to subscribe a friend to the Upgrade Update, send an email to subscribe(a)shoppingplanet.com with the subject line containing the new email address. Or, simply visit our site and enter the email address on our home page. xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.shoppingplanet.com 1-800-779-8461 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 4. HOT DEALS! These are today's prices. As we immediately pass any price reductions on to our customers, please check our web site for the latest prices (in US dollars). NEW PRODUCTS - DIAMOND Supra Video Phone kit 3000_____________$ 303.00 A complete Plug and Play Kit that provides videoconferenceing over regular phone lines. Video Camera, built-in micro, a 33.6 Supra modem, Diamond Video Capture Card and software. - Texas Instrument TM5025________________________$1245.00 Pentium 75 Mhz, 16 MB, 810 MB hard drive, Active Matrix, 1 year warranty (refurbished) Check out this computer system from Texas Instruments! It has everything you need at a price you can afford! - Kit #9 Upgrade motherboard Kit_________________$ 249.00 A full upgrade Kit, easy to assemble and fully tested. AMD K5 PR-75 MHz, 16 MB memory, 1 MB Video Card, Sound Card, high performance motherboard, cooling fan and instructions - Kit #6 Upgrade Motherboard Kit________________$ 390.00 Get your computer up to full Speed!! Performing the fastest CPU: Cyrix P200+ CPU and the fastest motherboard available: The M technology Mustang R534. Try it and love it. - Kit #12 Upgrade Motherboard Kit________________$ 440.00 Pentium PRO 150 MHz, and AT Pentium Pro motherboard. Jump to the next generation but keep your current cards, drives and case. - 32 MB 168-pin 10ns SDRAM memory chip___________$ 229.00 Need more speed in your system? Get this 10 ns SDRAM module. Your computer will fly. - AMD K5 PR-166 MHz______________________________$ 170.20 The latest CPU released by AMD. It runs at 166MHz!! The BEST PERFORMANCE for an incredible LOW PRICE. - M TECHNOLOGY R557 motherboard__________________$ 175.50 Performing the latest Intel Chipset: 430 TX Great Performance!! - SOLAR Bare Bone System MID-133 Elite___________$ 445.30 Intel Pentium 133MHz 256 Pipeline Cache Med Tower Case All you need to upgrade your old system (case, motherboard, floppy drive, CPU, cooling fan and power supply) Assembled and Tested. MODEMS: ***** Note: US ROBOTICS $40.00 rebate ends on 03/31/97 ***** - US Robotics Sportster Winmodem 14.4 internal___$ 26.10 A GREAT price for a modem - US Robotics Sportster Winmodem 28.8 (free upgrade to 33.6 from US Robotics) internal, upgradeable to 56K____________________________$ 111.70 (Price BEFORE $40 mail-in rebate from US Robotics) - US Robotics Sportster 33.6, w/speakerphone & voicemail: (Upgradeable to 56K) external_______________________________________$ 217.80 internal_______________________________________$ 160.19 (Prices BEFORE $40 mail-in rebate from US Robotics) MEMORY: - 4 MB, 72 pin, 70 ns, non-parity________________$ 24.00 - 8 MB, 72 pin, 70 ns, non-parity________________$ 45.00 - 16 MB, 72 pin, 70 ns, non-parity_______________$ 91.00 - 4 MB, 30 pin, 70 ns, parity____________________$ 34.00 CPUs: - IBM P-200+___________________________________$ 221.80 - Intel Pentium 120 Mhz__________________________________$ 110.90 133 Mhz__________________________________$ 146.10 166 Mhz__________________________________$ 288.10 166 Mhz MMX______________________________$ 388.10 200 Mhz__________________________________$ 496.70 200 Mhz MMX______________________________$ 589.10 - Cyrix P-150+___________________________________$ 115.00 P-166+___________________________________$ 149.19 - AMD PR-75 MHz________________________________$ 40.50 PR-100 MHz_______________________________$ 78.30 PR-120 MHz_______________________________$ 92.90 PR-133 MHz_______________________________$ 92.00 PR-166 MHz_______________________________$ 170.20 HARD DRIVES: - Western Digital 1.6 Gb___________________________________$ 213.30 2.1 Gb___________________________________$ 233.30 3.1 Gb___________________________________$ 293.30 4.0 Gb___________________________________$ 373.30 - Seagate 1.08 Gb__________________________________$ 174.20 2.5 Gb___________________________________$ 239.80 TAPE DRIVES: - HP Colorado T1000 internal_____________________$ 122.60 - HP COLORADO T3000 Internal 3.2 Gb______________$ 187.00 - Iomega Jaz 1 Gb internal_______________________$ 364.90 - Seagate TapeStore 800 internal,800 MB tape_____$ 109.50 - Iomega Zip 100mb internal SCSI_________________$ 197.80 - Iomega Zip 100mb external SCSI_________________$ 198.70 VIDEO CARDS: - DIAMOND 3D 2000, 2 MB EDO______________________$ 99.90 4 MB EDO______________________$ 132.30 - DIAMOND 3D 3000, 2 MB VRAM_____________________$ 162.50 4 MB VRAM_____________________$ 219.60 - MATROX Millennium 2 Mb WRAM PCI________________$ 182.30 - CREATIVE LABS 3D Blaster, PCI, 4 MB EDO________$ 191.60 MONITORS: - Digiview, 15", 0.28 mm, digital control________$ 284.90 - Digiview, 17", 0.25 mm, on screen control______$ 725.00 - Viewsonic Optiquest 1769 DC, 17" 0.28 mm, digital control________________________________$ 522.70 MULTIMEDIA: - US Robotics BigPicture Video Kit_______________$ 368.50 Digital Camera, Video Card, Modem, Software and much more. - Diamond 12X CD-ROM Multimedia Kit______________$ 339.20 (12X CD-ROM, 16-bit PnP, Wavetable, 9 titles, speakers) Titles Included: Myst, Magic Carpet, Compton's Interctive Encyclopedia '96, Comix Zone, Corel Draw Virtua Fighter. - Creative Labs SoundBlaster 8X Multimedia Kit___$ 293.20 (8X CD-Rom, SoundBlaster 32bit,speakers,and 11 software titles) - GoldStar 16X CD ROM (up to 2.4 Mb/sec)_________$ 169.00 - Mitsumi 8X CD-Rom (1200 Kbps tranfer rate)_____$ 105.60 - NEC 6X4 (holds up to 4 CD ROMs! runs at 6X!)___$ 104.50 - SoundBlaster AWE64 IDE PnP PC__________________$ 175.80 - SoundBlaster 16 IDE PC_________________________$ 62.00 Please visit our site for our complete catalog and company information. http://www.shoppingplanet.com Or give us a call at 1-800-779-8461 xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx If you no longer want to receive the SP Newsletter, simply reply to this address: unsubscribe(a)shoppingplanet.com with the subject "unsubscribe". xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

1 0

Re: Sabotaging Big Brother Inside Corporate Complicity
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Kent Crispin wrote: > Owners of a business have the right to control the documents > associated with their business as they see fit, including using key > escrow and mandating it for all keys used by employees in the > business. Other companies see this as an opportunity to supply a > service or a product that facilitates this management. Both classes > of companies are pursuing completely legitimate ends. Therefore, > your call to sabatoge is doomed to failure in the long run, and > probably in the short run as well. And owners of a body and mind have a right to control the physical and mental environment that they live in, including using any means necessary to protect natural human rights that have been stolen by governments and profited from by companies who will help promote this theft for the right price. Tim's call to sabatoge is not doomed to failure as long as there are still individuals who have a conscience (and know how to use it.) People asked to build a potential Nazi death camp should always avail themselves of an option to build in a backdoor, in case the need should ever arise to use it. Or build a timebomb in a tank that can be activated if it is needed to destroy an advancing army of oppressors. Like it or not, we live in a predatorial universe, where the biggest carnivors make the 'rules' so that they get the lion's share of the meat, and thus remain the largest in the pack. Each organism, however, has their own strengths and their own methods of survival. Anyone who helps build the road to their own destruction, without availing themselves of every opportunity to sabatoge construction of that road, is a fool. The fact that a slave owner keeps his slaves well-fed and comfortable enough to cause him little trouble does not negate the fact that, when it better suits his purpose, he will use the whip to keep others in subjection to him. The time to make preparations for safety and flight is not after you are thrown in chains. The time is alwasy _now_. The fact is, there are many ways of preparing for future action which infringe little or none on the rights of others to act in their own best interest. Arming oneself to defend against possible threats doesn't infringe on others rights to defend themselves.. Armed groups passing laws to prevent others from being able to defend themselves does. No matter what lengths the government goes to to infringe on basic human rights, there will always be individuals and corporations fighting over who gets to profit from the actions, all the while claiming, "We don't put them in the ovens, we just turn on the gas." Do corporations have more rights than the citizens? That depends entirely on the citizens. TruthMonger "We have met the enemy, and he is Kent."

2 3

Re: Analysis of proposed UK ban on use of non-escrowed crypto.
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Kent Crispin dribbled syphlyrically: > Like it or not, businesses like -- no, *need* -- key escrow -- company > secrets can't go down the drain because someone gets hit by a truck. An exact quote from some of your earlier posts. Are you working from a cheat-sheet? Is someone _telling_ you what to say? Are they holding your kids hostage and _making_ you say this? Is it time for Big Brother to hire some fresh writers? TruthMonger

5 4

Re: Book-entry settlement mechanism
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Sender: e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Tue, 1 Apr 1997 17:27:59 -0500 From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> To: Multiple recipients of <e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com> Subject: Re: Book-entry settlement mechanism At 2:23 am -0500 on 4/1/97, Somebody wrote: > I may have misunderstood some of your points but here goes.. I doubt you're misunderstanding anything, as I'm usually making this up as I go along, anyway. :-). So, let's see what we have, here... > Your model assumes distributed settlement facilities provided by > underwriters, issuers or transaction agents v the centralised model we have > today. Yes. > One of the problems with today's model is that there are too many > centralised agencies ie euroclear, dtc, local clearing systems which are > proprietary, complicating global settlement processes unnecessarily. Is > distributed processing efficient? *I* think so, if they all use the same cryptographic transaction protocols, which is what I've been talking about all along, here. If a cryptographic protocol breaks, the trade doesn't clear. I expect that settlement protocols, like internet protocols, will be open and standardized. That way, it doesn't matter who you're settling with, as long as long as their reputation is good. That reputation can be a distributed one, with a "reputation club", just like it is now. NASD membership, for instance, is a good present example. In the model we're talking about, if your key is signed by the club (association, syndicate, whatever) and not revoked, you're a member in good standing, so you're trustworthy for various kinds of transactions. > If I am a hedge fund buying a global > portfolio of stocks I do not want to have to settle individually with the > underwriter/issuer of each stock I purchase. See above. You get your information from different web sites, now, right? No difference, to my mind. > As you say, the underwriter > may well want to farm out this secondary market processing but I don't > think transaction agents will offer that service for nothing. In my example, they're selling the exaust, the pricing information they collect. New information is always more important than old information in a geodesic market, right? I say that secondary market transaction costs are still inconsiderable, for the most part. > Also because > no one has critical mass for a clearing service I the investor end up > paying over the top. I think that you're looking at a world where there are economies of scale, here. As I said elsewhere, that "critical mass" continues to get smaller and smaller, particular in "switching" activities like trade clearing. One of my many groundless claims about all this is that the transfer price inside operating units of larger entities converges toward the market price between small independant entities. Exactly the opposite of what happens in industrial communications networks. Cf. all my various rants on Moore's Law and geodesic networks. The upshot is that organazitions map to their communication structures, and hierarchical, economies-of-scale markets and organizations don't work in that kind of world. > I also don't think it's more efficient for investors > to pay transaction agents for the resulting price information - again if I > am a global investor I don't want to pay for hundreds of different price > feeds. Again you can see information agents entering the market but this > is simply what we have today. Yes, but the information is ubiquitous, and, of course, it's distributed geodesically. Anybody with a reasonably fast machine can purchase pricing from all those places, or even a reasonable statistical sample, and "publish" that information. More to the point, people with new pricing information will probably auction it off on a non-exclusive basis. Remember Cronk's geodesic information auction talk during the rump session in Anguilla? People with the most to gain from the newest information, pay the most for it, usually because they resell it to others, but also because they might need it to trade with. > 'the operating costs of exchanging certificates for the secondary market is > minimal'. Certainly it could be cheaper than it is today but minimal costs > rely on the counterparties applying simultaneously and there being no > hitches on the authentication. Of course. "Assume a frictionless surface", and all that. However, just because the mathematics of the situation varies slightly from reality, doesn't mean that it's wrong. Physics versus Engineering. Frankly, I think that "no hitches in the authentication", being the most important business necessity for the underwriter, will have to be be the *first* thing to work. :-). Fortunately, that's not too difficult a problem with these cryptographic protocols. In addition, the operative clause in your sentence above is "certainly it could be cheaper than it is today". If it's "cheap" enough, and that is yet another unsubstantiated claim of mine requiring actual data :-), then it's good enough to use. H1 replaces H0, in statistical parlance. > How could investors sell short? Same way they do now. By borrowing certificates from somebody, and paying the lender back with others. If the borrower doesn't pay those certificates back, it's reputation "capital punishment". > How would > the clearer cope with back to back trades? How can we ensure that this > technology is standard so that investors don't have to deal differently > with each clearer? See above. With a standard protocol. The internet is one big standard protocol, right? > I don't think your argument about seven years of audit trails etc is > focused on net v book entry settlement but rather on the structure of the > industry as it stands. The seven years of audit trails could stand equally > in the new world since regulators might demand it (say they want to > investigate a fraud) and you want some minimal regulation (do you worry > about market manipulation for example?). See <http://www.braintennis.com/> Suppose you could punish someone without needing the physical force of a nation state to do it. Reputation is orthogonal to identity in cypherspace. The ultimate sanction in a geodesic market is the loss of one's reputation. It's equivalent to capital punishment, because no one will ever trade with you again. And, the most important point, that reputation adheres to your digital signature, not your physical person. Biometric identity, audit trails, etc., are no longer necessary. So, if you can have non-repudiation through cryptographic protocol (to keep the trades from breaking, and, more to the point, to make them settle instantly) and reputation (to keep people from defrauding you), *what* exactly do you need market "regulation" for? > You could certainly simplify the > current structure ie eliminate custodians, eliminate brokers, merge > exchange and clearinghouse. But even with this new technology you would > need to be able to reconcile your holdings against the underwriter (human > error doesn't go away) and the underwriter has to keep an account of the > holdings for dividend/coupon purposes. Not if the coupons are actual certificates. For a bond and its coupons, you just issue a bundle of bearer certificates comprising the coupons and the principal. You could even "strip" them apart and sell them idividually in a secondary market, if you can find someone to buy them. :-). At redemption time, it would be just as if someone mailed in the little coupon they clipped off a paper bearer bond, only I send them digital cash, instead of a check. Don't need to know, or care, who they are. It's cheaper that way. For dividends, there are lots of different zero-knowlege cryptographic proofs that you can run using a digital bearer stock certificate, as the "information" that you want to prove you have. (See Bruce Schneier's "Applied Cryptography", 2nd ed., for this.) I call a dividend, people send me a hash (or something) of the certificate to prove they have it, and I send them digital cash in a message encrypted to them alone. Dividend paid, all on a bearer basis. You can do the same kind of thing for proxies, too. Yes, there are anonymous voting schemes. Welcome through the looking glass, Alice. > Finally, I'd like to understand how the investor gets best execution > (agreed that he isn't getting it at the moment). How does your investor > know he is getting best price? Because he's picking the seller out of the equivalent of an open-outcry market. > How much structure will you impose? The market imposes structure on itself. Economic reality is not optional. Reality dictates politics, not the other way around. > What is > a more efficient way of providing price information and price history? The most "efficient" way is the market's way. You know that. The more information you put into a market, the more efficient it is, modulo psychology, like motl^h^h^h^h greater fool theories, which we really can't do anything about, anyway. > PS I've been reading The House of Morgan (history of JP Morgan, Morgan > Grenfell, Morgan Stanley etc) over the weekend. Although it is difficult > to find the right balance, it is a useful reminder of the dangers and costs > of unrestrained, unregulated capital and how we ended up with the today's > regulatory structures. I used to be a clerk at Morgan Stanley. My first job out of college. I read HOM about 5(?) years ago, after it came out. I read the book the same way you did, until I discovered this financial cryptography / geodesic market stuff. Now I see all that stuff completely differently. Morgan was "integrative", because that's the way communications technology was organizing things, into larger and larger hierarchies. I consider myself "disintegrative", because that's the way communications technology is organizing things, "surfacting" them into smaller and smaller entities on a ubiquitous geodesic market-network. By the way, my favorite J. Pierpont Morgan story is at the front of the book, where they haul him in front of Congress, after saving the US economy three(?) times and filling the mint twice(?), primarily because he has more money and financial power than God. :-). They ask him what is the most important thing to have to be a banker. His answer: Character. Something like, "Character. I wouldn't buy anything from a man with no character if he offered me all the bonds in Christendom." That's why we didn't need regulation in the original paper-based, instant-settled bearer certificate financial markets, the buttonwood tree on Wall Street, or the coffeehouse called Lloyd's, or a bunch of merchants in the City. Reputation ("Character") was good enough. It was a financial actor's most precious asset. Things changed from that, to the hierarchical, book-entry world we have today, because we needed to communicate long distances and had only humans to switch the information around. The technology you saw in Anguilla is about to change all that. I'll make one or my famous wild-eyed claims here, and say that the *only* reason we need market "regulation" is because our industrial communications technology required us to use book-entry settlement, which in turn required the force of nation-states to ensure non-repudiation. We don't need information hierarchies, much less book-entry settlement, anymore. Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA Lesley Stahl: "You mean *anyone* can set up a web site and compete with the New York Times?" Andrew Kantor: "Yes." Stahl: "Isn't that dangerous?" The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ ---------- The e$ lists are brought to you by: Intertrader Ltd - Commerce Solutions in the UK Visit <http://www.intertrader.com/> for details ... Where people, networks and money come together: Consult Hyperion http://www.hyperion.co.uk info(a)hyperion.co.uk Like e$? Help pay for it! See <http://www.shipwright.com/rah.html> Or, for e$/e$pam sponsorship, see <http://www.shipwright.com/rah/> Thanks to the e$ e$lves: Of Counsel: Vinnie Moscaritolo <mailto:vinnie@webstuff.apple.com> (Majordomo)^2: Rachel Willmer<mailto:rachel@intertrader.com> Commermeister: Anthony Templer <mailto:anthony@atanda.com> Interturge: Rodney Thayer <mailto:rodney@sabletech.com> --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA Lesley Stahl: "You mean *anyone* can set up a web site and compete with the New York Times?" Andrew Kantor: "Yes." Stahl: "Isn't that dangerous?" The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/

1 0

[URGENT] Zero-knowledge commit
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timmy May prefers to have sex with little kids because his own penis is like that of a three-year-old. ! ! - - * * Timmy May ( < ) o

2 1

Key Recovery Agent Non-use Logo
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The proposed crypto law that the Administration is trying to foist on CONgress includes the following wonderful provision: > TITLE V -- OTHER KEY RECOVERY PROVISIONS >SEC. 501. LABELING OF ENCRYPTION PRODUCTS. >(A) Any person engaged in manufacturing, importing, packaging, >distributing or labeling of encryption products for purposes of sale or >distribution in the United States shall package and label them so as to >inform the user whether the products use Key Recovery Agents registered >under this Act for storage of recovery information, and whether such >products are authorized for use in transactions with the United States >Government, as specified in regulations promulgated by the Secretary. Yes, that's right, if you're selling crypto products in the US, if they talk Congress into passing this law, even if you're not participating in the Key Recovery Agent program, you'll be required to label your software to indicate whether or not you are. To simplify this process, I've designed a logo* for non-users of the Key Recovery Agency Program to put on their software. [*Ok, actually I ripped it off from Intel, but the Supreme Court says artistic parodies are legal :-) If a Real Artist wants to improve it, thanks! ] The text of the proposal and the CDT's analysis can be found at: http://www.cdt.org/crypto/admin_397_draft.html nokrap.gif # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

1 0