December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Thanks for signing up!
by The Dilbert Trivia Game 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi from Yoyodyne! This message is to let you know that you're signed up for The Dilbert Trivia Game. Welcome! You'll get questions e-mailed to you on Tuesdays, your answers are due back by 11 p.m. Eastern Time on Sundays, and you'll get your scoring messages on Mondays. It's that simple. When your questions come, you'll be asked to send your answers to dogbert(a)yoyo.com in this format: * Make sure your Player ID -- which looks like this (123456di) -- is on the Subject line of the message you send back with your answers. * Each answer must be preceded by one of these symbols # and each answer must be on its own line. * Each answer must be the letter of the multiple choice answer you like best. Let's repeat. The answer is the letter of the multiple choice selection you like best. It works like this: If one of the questions asks for the name of the evil human resources director, we'll say: "What is the name of the evil human resources director?" Then we'll list these choices: A -- Catbert B -- Ratbert C -- Dogbert You know that Catbert is the evil human resources director, so you'll send back e-mail with your Player ID in the Subject line, and a multiple choice selection in the body of the message that look like this: # A That's pretty much all there is to it. For all the fine print on how to play, the schedule, etc., e-mail these addresses for the autoreply of your choice: How to Play -- dogberthow(a)yoyo.com Official Rules -- dogbertrules(a)yoyo.com FAQ -- dogbertfaq(a)yoyo.com Talk to you soon! P.S. We promised you an answer to this sample question when you signed up: * * * Dilbert is worried that if head count is reduced by 50 percent, all the smart people will leave The boss says: A -- Would that be a bad thing? B -- If only half the people go, how could that be all the smart people? C -- Could you organize a goodbye potluck lunch for them The correct answer is #C. --- Yoyodyne Entertainment "Where the future begins...tomorrow." win(a)yoyo.com

1 0

http:--www.cnn.com-TECH-9705-04-web.libel.ap-
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CNN logo navigation Infoseek/Big Yellow Pathfinder/Warner Bros Tech banner Puzzled about doing real business on the Web? rule CAUTION: ANYTHING YOU POST MAY BE USED AGAINST YOU Libel May 4, 1997 Web posted at: 9:51 p.m. EDT (0151 GMT) In this story: * When slander becomes libel * Privacy issues * E-mail can make it a federal issue * The wrath of large corporations (AP) -- When the Founding Fathers wrote the First Amendment protectingfreedom of the press, they never imagined millions of Americanswould someday have their own version of one sitting in their backrooms. But with the advent of the World Wide Web, that's exactly whathas happened. And from this revolution has emerged a new legalquandary: Just what standards are private individuals to be held towhen it comes to what they "publish" on the millions of Web pagesand other online forums that serve as the world's soapbox? To a great extent, the answer thus far is this: No one knows.With the Web revolution less than 3 years old, a body of case lawhasn't yet been built up. But lawyers who study online issues dohave some observations -- and advice. When slander becomes libel First off, they note, the line between slander, once the realmof individuals, and libel, the bane of publishers, has beenblurred. It used to be that spreading malicious gossip aboutsomeone down at the barbershop could lead to charges of slander.But slander, by definition spoken, was hard to prove and generallydidn't reach enough people to do any major harm. Post that same information where it can be read by millionsonline, however, and you've suddenly entered the realm of libel --governed by stricter laws originally written to cover printpublications. "Let's face it," says Mark Rasch, director of informationsecurity law and policy at the Center for Information Protection atScience Applications International Corp. in McLean, Virginia. "If I wereto print up a handbill saying bad things about my neighbor thatwere false, at most I could distribute a couple of hundred of them.With the Web, I can now damage his reputation worldwide." The law is clear: Libel consists of publishing a false anddefamatory statement about an identifiable person, causing injuryto the subject's reputation. Often tied to it is the legal notionof defamation, defined as that which exposes a person to hatred,ridicule or contempt, causing them to be shunned or injuring theirbusiness or calling. Truth is always a defense against libel, so if your Web pagesays someone has two heads and they do, you're fine. But saythey're a murderer and you can expect someone to come asking forsome proof -- and possibly a bill for damages if you don't have any. Privacy issues Then, there's invasion of privacy. It's one thing to pass alonga juicy bit of gossip to a friend. It's quite another to post it tothe Web. "Let's say, for instance, you disclose some private fact aboutsomebody -- say, their medical records. Or you snuck into theirhouse and took a nudie photo of them and put it up on the Net. Thatwould be a no-no under civil law and they could sue for damages,"says David Banisar, staff counsel for the Electronic PrivacyInformation Center in Washington, D.C. Although few of these cases have actually gone to court, lawyersoften are called in when things get ugly. "I know of a few cases where the ex-husband and ex-wife havegone after each other on the Net," Banisar says. "In oneinstance, the ex-wife put up a diatribe page on what a scumbag hewas and how he wasn't paying his child support -- and gave out hisphone number so suitably angry women could take it up with him." Remember, too, that the Internet's reach magnifies everything inthe eyes of the law. E-mail can make it a federal issue Shouting "You jerk, I'm gonna belt you one!" at a carelessdriver who runs over your mailbox won't get you into trouble. Butposting the threat on the Internet is dangerous. It's all aquestion of reach: Anything done over a telecommunications deviceis automatically an interstate communication. "This suddenly makes it a federal issue if you e-mail,"Banisar warns. State statutes vary, but when federal laws come into effect, anycommunication containing a threat to kidnap or injure a personcarries with it the possibility of imprisonment up to five years ora fine of up to $1,000. And an entirely different level of concern pops up when theobject of the threat is an elected official. Like the "no jokes"signs posted by airport metal detectors, the FBI has no sense ofhumor when it comes to threatening officeholders. "We can't forget all those idiots arrested for sending threatsto the president. So don't send threats to the president overe-mail. It's a federal crime," Banisar says. Fraud is another sticking point. It's illegal everywhere, ofcourse. But the Federal Trade Commission has taken an especiallyhard line against fraud on the Net. Send a snail-mail chain letterasking for money and you might get a call from postal authorities.Try it on the Web, however, and you'll be investigated by the FTCforces who track online scammers. The wrath of large corporations But in the end, the biggest vulnerability of any self-publisheron the Web is probably the wrath of large corporations. You can say their logos are ugly and their presidents are jerksand they don't flinch. But try using any variety of a heavilytrademarked name or image on your site and watch the injunctionsflow. Generally speaking, it's other businesses who get into trouble.But, once in a while, an individual will set out to make a point --and get a legally phrased e-mail in response. Several cases haveresulted in Web sites' being taken down, including individuals whoposted statements against Kmart and McDonald's. Overall, remember that putting words or pictures up on your Webpage is just like publishing them in the newspaper. Use Rasch's simple test: "What you should avoid putting on theWeb is the same stuff you'd avoid putting on leaflets and handingout on the street." Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. rule Related sites and stories: * The Communications Decency Act: Related sites and stories - June 12, 1996 External sites are not endorsed by CNN Interactive. rule Watch these shows on CNN for more sci-tech stories: CNN Computer Connection | Future Watch | Science & Technology Week rule Message Boards Sound off on our message boards Tell us what you think! You said it... [INLINE] Puzzled about doing real business on the Web? rule To the top © 1997 Cable News Network, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you.

1 0

Re: Full Strength Stronghold 2.0 Released Worldwide
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tom Weinstein wrote on cryptography(a)c2.net: {With Perry dripping Sameer's sperm from his mouth as his C2Nut Jackboots soiled the message with the following:} [I felt I had to let this go through, but I would advise that those involved restrict themselves to calmer comments from here on... --perry] > sameer wrote: > > > > In a recent announcement, Netscape Communications announced plans to > > include government back doors in their products. "By implementing this > > so-called 'key recovery', Netscape is getting a small increase in key > > length in exchange for putting your keys in the hands of the > > government," said Parekh. "This the same government that hired Aldrich > > Ames, the same goverment that has IRS employees surfing taxpayer > > databases at will. What do you think is going to happen to your keys?" > > This is utter crap, and I'm sure you know it. All we're going to do is > provide an OPTIONAL (and I mean really optional, not the way the feds > use it) way for administrators to recover private keys. This is not > GAK. I will never work on a product that includes GAK. > > Oh, but I guess saying that Netscape is responding to customer > requirements by including support for corporate key recovery wouldn't > make such good press release spam. Crap seems to be such a violent, obscene word when used to describe C2Nut's bullshit. Good thing that the cryptography list has Perry to protect the list subscribers from StrangleHold's competition defending themselves from Sameer's self-serving denigration of their products. Too bad C2Nut doesn't have a StrangleHold on the cypherpunks list, as well. Then they could use censorship threats to make us all be good little boys and girls, too. I expect all PR statements to have a modicum of bullshit in them and I resent any lame-fuck-would-be-Hitler trying to put a lid on the response to that bullshit. The fact that StrangleHold seems to have so many things to hide and such a strong need to control discussion of its product indicates to me that perhaps their product cannot stand up to the light of public scrutiny and criticsm. C2Nut's bottle-fed cryptography list may be fine for those who are afraid to know too much about StrangleHold, but anyone who owns a wetsuit needs to subscribe to the cypherpunks list for the good, old-fashioned pissing contests that send the pretenders home with their tails between their legs. (Anyone hear from DataERetch lately?) PissMonger

1 0

List of reliable remailers
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = "<remail(a)miron.vip.best.com> cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"mix"} = "<mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = "<remailer(a)replay.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = "<remailer(a)remailer.nl.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"haystack"} = "<haystack(a)holy.cow.net> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = "<lucifer(a)dhp.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = "<remailer(a)cypherpunks.ca> cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = "<winsock(a)rigel.cyberpass.net> cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord"; $remailer{'nym'} = '<config(a)nym.alias.net> newnym pgp'; $remailer{"balls"} = "<remailer(a)huge.cajones.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"squirrel"} = "<mix(a)squirrel.owl.de> cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"middle"} = "<middleman(a)jpunix.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek reord"; $remailer{'cyber'} = '<alias(a)alias.cyberpass.net> alpha pgp'; $remailer{"dustbin"} = "<dustman(a)athensnet.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle"; $remailer{'weasel'} = '<config(a)weasel.owl.de> newnym pgp'; $remailer{"reno"} = "<middleman(a)cyberpass.net> cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{"wazoo"} = "<remailer(a)wazoo.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"shaman"} = "<remailer(a)lycaeum.org> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"hidden"} = "<remailer(a)hidden.net> cpunk pgp hash latent cut"; catalyst(a)netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura(a)replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer(a)crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix) (weasel squirrel) The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers. The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems for incoming mail. The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only. 403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now. The penet remailer is closed. Last update: Mon 5 May 97 6:45:39 PDT remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- nym config(a)nym.alias.net *+*#+#+++**# 3:30 99.99% cyber alias(a)alias.cyberpass.net ++++*-++***# 19:39 99.98% balls remailer(a)huge.cajones.com *####*####*# 1:52 99.97% squirrel mix(a)squirrel.owl.de +-++++++++- 1:54:28 99.94% weasel config(a)weasel.owl.de +-++-+++++- 1:57:01 99.90% lucifer lucifer(a)dhp.com ++++++++++++ 35:18 99.90% mix mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com ++.-.-.---.- 8:18:24 99.87% replay remailer(a)replay.com ***++- * -* 54:35 98.34% jam remailer(a)cypherpunks.ca ******* *** 8:52 97.43% winsock winsock(a)rigel.cyberpass.net -------..- 5:58:48 97.30% hidden remailer(a)hidden.net #+#**#+# + 5:34:09 95.94% reno middleman(a)cyberpass.net -+.--+-.+ 1:19:01 90.79% dustbin dustman(a)athensnet.com -..-- 3:59:41 78.48% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien

1 0

Problems with posts
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hmmmm I seem to be having some problems with getting my messages posted to the list (at least they are not showing up back here). :( This is just a test so please ignore. Thanks, - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii(a)amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: Win3.1? For fast relief call 800-3-IBM-OS2. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Registered User E-Secure v1.1 ES000000 iQCVAwUBM24DHo9Co1n+aLhhAQFQAwP+L3AXu9AbQsCuaNroI3UfuyAKGO70MiMM MD4bxRENaBwRc4A1aU6QsZosbuyRZfOZqCQ67ANI7Ecowfij9rc92wOvl+ePhYjS ObvDdDoDRpDqBDQ8oVimDkIwXJ8z79xxK6s3F0uevSb4pSlz3MZHrf+BoDxc5L1u mA403n2n+W8= =cAdA -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Win up to $4,950.00 Instantly with Cyber Casino
by Service＠iBase.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Win up to $4,950.00 Instantly with Cyber Casino, found at http://www.iBase.net/InternetCasino. See you there! "Because face it......MONEY MATTERS!" /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// If you wish to be removed from this advertiser's future mailings, please reply with the subject "Remove" and this software will automatically block you from their future mailings. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

1 0

Fast Cheap Unreviewed Stream Cipher
by Bill Frantz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I received this code from another friend. Here's a FAST somewhat cryptographically secure pseudo-random generator written by a friend of mine that wishes to remain anonymous. He has given permission for the following code to be placed in the public domain, and to be sent to cypherpunks and others for review. Alas, I have never gotten around to doing so. As it states, on a PowerPC it'll produce bits fast enough to be a pseudo-one-time pad / stream cipher for good digitized video on a LAN (the purpose for which he originally sent it to me) and hence should do point-to-point audio without even breathing hard. For those who haven't heard, the scenario is for point-to-point audio to use an affordable (weak) stream cipher, but to be changing keys frequently using our strongly secure SSL channel. Each costly break would only compromise a few seconds or so of audio. The following code may serve as the affordable (but maybe better than weak) stream cipher. /******************************************************/ /** (c) 1823 Millard Fillmore, all rights expired **/ /** Full words of pseudorandom bits at video speed **/ /******************************************************/ #include <stdlib.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <time.h> #include <sioux.h> #define WORD_SIZE 32 unsigned long shiftRand(); static void refillShiftRand(); void seedShiftRand(unsigned long seed); static unsigned long shiftRandArray[31] = { }; // to hold internal state values static unsigned long * arrayPtr = shiftRandArray; // incremented as state values are consumed static unsigned long * const end = shiftRandArray + 31; // marks end (and need to refill array) // Initializes shiftRandArray to pseudorandom contents using a seed value and the system rand function, // which is assumed to produce 16 bits per call. Low rand bits are obscured by xoring with high bits from other // calls, and all product bits depend on two or more calls to rand. The resulting values are themselves obscured, // not simply revealed at the output, hence this is probably overkill. The seed acts as a key. void seedShiftRand(unsigned long seed) { srand(seed); long cyclesPerWord = ((WORD_SIZE + 7) >> 3) - 1; // will add a net of 8 bits per call to rand unsigned long * arrPtr = shiftRandArray; for (; arrPtr < end; arrPtr++) { unsigned long rand1 = rand(); // wrap this value around word boundary: unsigned long element = (rand1 >> 8) | (rand1 << (WORD_SIZE - 8)); for (long i = 0; i < cyclesPerWord; i++) { element ^= rand() << (8 * i); //previous 8 high bits obscure 8 new low bits } *arrPtr = element; } } // Low-order bits in the following act as an xor-based linear feedback shift register (with moving taps // and stationary data); the repeat period equals (1 << 31) - 1. Higher-order bits have similar // "intrinsic" behavior, but the state of each is determined by additional xoring with a sequence // of carry bits from below, causing repeated period-doubling across the width of the word. // // The choice of 31 and 13 corresponds to a primitive polynomial mod 2; Applied Cryptography has // typos in polynomial coefficients, but the repeat period was tested directly. This code avoids a // shift-direction mistake in Applied Cryptography, and hence follows Numerical Recipes. // static void refillShiftRand() { unsigned long * tap0 = shiftRandArray + 0; unsigned long * tap13 = shiftRandArray + 13; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13 = shiftRandArray; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; tap0++; tap13++; *tap0 = *tap0 + *tap13; return; } // sum at 10 million iterations = 1344076334 /* // Slightly faster than the above on a 604, provided CodeWarrior's instruction-scheduling "optimization" is OFF. static void refillShiftRand() { unsigned long * tap0a = shiftRandArray + 0; unsigned long * tap0b = shiftRandArray + 1; // uses more registers unsigned long * tap13a = shiftRandArray + 13; unsigned long * tap13b = shiftRandArray + 14; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a = shiftRandArray; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b = (shiftRandArray + 1); *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; tap0b += 2; tap13b += 2; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; tap0a += 2; tap13a += 2; *tap0b = *tap0b + *tap13b; *tap0a = *tap0a + *tap13a; return; } // sum at 10 million iterations = 1344076334 */ // The array-filling mechanism above provides an information-conserving mechanism for producing // pseudorandom numbers with an effectively unlimited repeat period, fast, but based on a large number of // internal state bits, and having a bit of a given order eventually depend on all bits of the same or // lower order in all words in the array. // Rare, transient states having almost all zeros in the low bits will show strong correlations, // since the restoration of normal bit statistics will take several cycles. (The all-zero state // is inaccessible unless it is the starting condition -- one might test for this.) Correlations // in the frequency of low-order zero bits in sequentially generated array elements are eliminated // in the output by xoring high bits with the low bits; adding a preceding squaring operation // adds the effect of making any given output consistent with a large number of array element states, // making inferences regarding the internal state of the system relatively difficult. inline unsigned long shiftRand() { ((arrayPtr == end) ? // '?:' instead of 'if' to enable inlining by CW compiler (refillShiftRand(), arrayPtr = shiftRandArray, 0) : 0); unsigned long output = *arrayPtr++; unsigned long square = output * output; // this multiplication seems free on a 605 return(square + (output >> (WORD_SIZE / 2))); } // With multiplication (above) and summing of output to prevent bogus optimizations, 16.5 clocks per word. // Test code for CodeWarrier environment. void main () { SIOUXSettings.asktosaveonclose = FALSE; unsigned long sum = 0; seedShiftRand(12345); // easily guessed seed long start = clock(); for (long i = 0; i < 2000000; i++) { sum += shiftRand(); sum += shiftRand(); sum += shiftRand(); sum += shiftRand(); sum += shiftRand(); } unsigned long end = clock(); printf("\n sum = %u", sum); printf("\n\n time = %d \n", (int)(1000.0 * ((float)(end - start) / (float)CLOCKS_PER_SEC))); }

1 0

(Fwd) Extropia dead
by Alec 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Mailing-List: contact pgp-users-help(a)joshua.rivertown.net; run by ezmlm >Reply-To: pgp-users(a)joshua.rivertown.net >Comments: Authenticated sender is <fredr(a)[204.141.41.5]> >From: "Fred B. Ringel" <fredr(a)[204.141.41.5]> >Organization: Rivertown.Net >To: pgp-users(a)joshua.rivertown.net >Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 12:52:57 -0500 >Subject: (Fwd) Extropia dead >Priority: normal > >Hi all- > > Thought I'd pass this *bad* news along. :-(( > > Fred >------------------------------------------ >Date: Mon, 5 May 1997 00:39:36 -0700 (PDT) >From: Miron <miron(a)best.com> > >Due to best.com (Best Internet) policies >remail(a)miron.vip.best.com has been shut down. >You will only received one notice.

1 0

Re: Firewalls
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Date: Sun, 4 May 1997 From: Graham-John Bullers <real(a)freenet.edmonton.ab.ca> Subject: Re: Firewalls Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net Reply-To: Graham-John Bullers <real(a)freenet.edmonton.ab.ca> On Sun, 4 May 1997, Anonymous wrote: Vulis does you wife no you write this? > Timmy Mayo the self-admitted child molester > possesses a rudimentary dick less than one > inch long, half the size of Graham-John Bullers' > clitoris, that barely makes a fistful. Thereby > hangs the root of this Jew-hating sissy's sick > fixation on little boys and Usenet forgeries. > > \|||/ > (o o) > -ooO-(_)-Ooo- Timmy Mayo > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Graham-John Bullers Modulator of alt.2600.modulated ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ email : real(a)freenet.edmonton.ab.ca : ab756(a)freenet.toronto.on.ca ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ http://www.freenet.edmonton.ab.ca/~real/index.html ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

2 1

Re: XS4ALL censored pages (fwd)
by root 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

As we guessed XS4ALL don`t even have the guts to send us a copy of the pages they censored. Check this out... >Dear Paul, >>Postmaster, >> >>Please send me a copy of your current pricing for web space. >> >>Also, please send me a copy of the marajuana pages you recently removed >>from your web server. > >Hearby you recieve information about all services from xs4all. > >We don't know anything about marajuana pages so we can't send you a copy of >that. > >Kind regards, > <Much pricing information and rattling of the stick in the swill bucket cut> >XS4ALL Internet B.V. Sales afdeling: >Postbus 1848 Email: sales(a)xs4all.nl >1000 BV Amsterdam Http://www.xs4all.nl/business > >Tel: 020-6222885 Fax: 020-5352002 >Ma. t/m vrij. van 12.00u tot 20.00u

1 0