December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: 40-bit RC5 crack meaningless??
by Vin McLellan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The alway-informed Prof. Froomkin <froomkin(a)law.miami.edu> asked: >This would be the same Strassmann who stated in public at Harvard early in >1995 that most remailers were run by intelligence agencies such as the >KGB, then denied saying it when asked for substantiation? And cut it >from his paper? Don't know that one, but it seems feasible. Strassmann had the status to speak at Harvard; probably the K school. (He's also an interesting author, really worth a read; despite this recent balderdash.) I kept a clip from an interview with him for years: after the bomb attack on the World Trade Tower he proclaimed that a "Electronic Pearl Harbor" attack on the US was inevitable. The only question, he said, was when. Not if. (It was a usefully overheated hook for some article on compsec, but I don't think I ever used it. Reminded me too much of warnings that someone was bound to someday taint the city water reservoir with LSD;-) As I recall, that piece also quoted him as saying that he knew of an incident where some group had held a major banking institution ransom with a threat to destroy their data files somehow. He refused to identify the institution or otherwise give any further details about the incident. Came to mind a few months back, when Winn Schwartau was firing off (also overheated) missives from Europe reporting, with scant detail, that several UK or European banking institutions had paid off millions when subjected to similar blackmail. > {...} there is some debate about the extent to which in >*intelligence gathering* as opposed to, say, trying to crack a banking >protocol, one can reasonably count on a known plaintext. And much debate >about the processing costs of not having one, especially when one doesn't >know what kind of document is being encrypted (e.g. is it ASCII plaintext? >a spreadsheet? a jpeg? etc.). I think that's his (misdirected) point. The latter is a interesting debate -- but, as you note, not really relevant in this case, where Strassmann proclaims: >>In summary: The claim of exportable cryptography being totally >>insecure, because it can be cracked in 3.5 hours is not >>realistic. The three clues announced in the contest >>would not apply under infowar conditions. Now, an international institution which buys and bets the bank upon US-exportable (40-bit) cryptography probably deserves what it has bought: espionage-enabled software designed for fast and cheap decryption by spooks and sundry college kids with access to a handful of machines. The original annoucement of the RSA Secret Key Challenge declared forthrightly that even 56-bit keys -- whatever the algorithm! -- offer only "minimal" security. (What Goldberg did in hours, many could do in a days or weeks with much less equipment. A 40-bit key length offers a universe of about, what? a trillion possible keys.) And while there might be debate as to how hard it is to attack cyphertext when the attacker doesn't know _anything_ about the message (not its data format; not the language being used; nothing!) there is really none about the fact that -- with virtually any piece of that puzzle -- the attack becomes relatively straightforward. A big job for a little machine, but conceivable: grab a key, decrypt, and then match for the right stats. Rare indeed is the commercial message, or even the typical government transmission, where its original digital format is not easily guessed -- if not known for certain. That is the contemporary, real-world, infowar/infocrime environment. To a machine -- which is, after all, looking for a statistical pattern in the results, not "meaning" -- knowing that the message is in English (and/or coded in ASCII) is functionally equivalent to an old-fashioned human codebreaker being given a matched plaintext/cyphertext sample. Given that much, the computer doesn't need the plaintext! It's counterintuitive to the layman, but one would expect a savvy systems guy like Strassmann to know this cold. Even my son, at 4, understands that a computer manipulates the fodder fed it only in terms of ones and zeros. Statistics, not the "plaintext" clue, reveal who dun it... to the machine. Clue #3 -- "the giveaway." Lord help us! Paul Strassmann has probably taught a generation of the DC InfoWar accolytes how to think about this stuff!!! Hopefully their kids can re-educate them. Suerte, _Vin Vin McLellan + The Privacy Guild + <vin(a)shore.net> 53 Nichols St., Chelsea, MA 02150 USA <617> 884-5548

2 1

The Konformist: The Chamish Files - Bibi Part One
by Robalini＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subj: ARTICLE: Netanyahu-Part One Date: 97-01-31 13:06:05 EST From: chamish(a)netmedia.net.il (Chamish Barry) >WHO IS BINYAMIN NETANYAHU? (Part One Of Two) > >By; Barry Chamish* > >Two Fridays after Israel's new Prime Minister was elected, the >newspapers were filled with bios of the new leader. The most indepth >research was undertaken by Orly Azula-Katz, Anat Meidan and Rami Tal of >Yediot Ahronot who produced a balanced portrait and Biranit Goren of >Kol Ha'ir whose story was a snow job. > >Nonetheless, both reports agreed in most details, if not >interpretations. These two reports, combined with other public >knowledge create a most disturbing and mysterious caricature of >Israel's leader for students of secret diplomacy. > >The Conventional Story > >The prevailing myth about Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is that he >grew up in a highly politicized, right wing household. Responsibility >for the presumption lies with his father Bar Tzion, a dedicated >revisionist who was a pallbearer at the funeral of Zeev Jabotinsky. > >The facts are different. Netanyahu recalls," My father did not want me >to enter politics. We were very non-political." The founding families >of Zionism's revisionist wing which produced two generations of leaders >like Menachem and Benny Begin and Yaacov and Dan Meridor, barely knew >of the Netanyahus. > >What Binyamin inherited from his father was an obsession with learning. >His grades in junior high were all above average but he excelled in >only one subject: music. > >When Binyamin moved to America at age fourteen after his father >accepted a teaching post in Philadelphia, his hero became JFK. >Netanyahu felt very alienated being away from Israel and took waitering >jobs to earn the money to spend his summers back home. There his >greatest pleasure was working on left-wing kibbutzim with his pals from >Jerusalem. They recall that he would always try to outwork them, even >when he had an injured knee. > >Returning to high school in Philadelphia, Netanyahu shared close >friendship with only those students as imbued with love for Israel as >he was. He was a straight A student who graduated fourth in his class >at Cheltenham High School, one of the most academically competitive >schools in America. But he didn't attend his graduation ceremony. War >broke out on June 5, 1967, and Netanyahu flew to Israel to volunteer >for the army. > >A high school buddy, Ari Bintener recalls,"No one was surprised. It was >obvious his place was in Israel. I was pleased that he found a way to >help his country." > >Bob Trimble, Netanyahu's soccer coach remembers,"Bibi was the best >player on the team, except for his brother Yoni who could have played >professionally if he had wanted to. The only problem with Ben was that >his political views were so far to the left of the other players." > >As a soldier, Binyamin rose to the rank of captain in the most secret >combat unit of all, the fighting arm of military intelligence. He took >part in a good number of legendary operations and was wounded while >fighting highjackers holding a Sabena passenger plane. On the Suez, he >almost drowned trying to swim with his heavy automatic rifle under >Egyptian fire. He became known as "the lousy swimmer from Jerusalem." > >Soldiers recall him as a cool but "square" officer who lost his temper >only once. That was when he found his men had been taking "souvenirs" >from operations in Lebanon. He put a quick end to what he viewed as >looting. > >After five years of soldiering Netanyahu returned to America to study >architecture at either Harvard or MIT. He chose the latter because it >permitted him to begin an MA course load, as his academic advisor Prof >Leon Garviser remembers. "I told him that no one could handle the load >but he insisted that he had to make up for time lost while serving his >country. I agreed to add one extra course in the first semester and >when he passed all his courses I added another one. In the end he >finished his MA in two and a half years. Don't ask me how. No one did >it before him or since." > >Once again, Netanyahu interrupted his studies only once. In October of >1973, war broke out in Israel and he flew back to fight in the Sinai. >When he returned, he became a student activist on behalf of Israel, a >fact that was noted by the Israeli consul of Boston, Collette Avital. >In one of the many ironies in his life, it was Avital, the dovish >consul of New York during the Rabin/Peres administration who arranged >Netanyahu's first television appearance, a debate with PLO activist >Prof Edward Said. > >The loss of his brother Yoni during the Entebbe raid put a stop to >Binyamin's plans to become an architect. Instead he settled for an MA >in business administration and took a post at the Boston Consulting >Group. His boss was Ira Magaziner, the man who later was the >intellectual force behind the Clinton administration's failed health >reform package. > >As Moshe Arens notes, "Bibi is only the second prime minister who ever >had a real job outside the army or politics. Shamir was the first. He >once worked as an accountant in a glue factory." > >While working at Boston Consulting, Binyamin received his first >diplomatic assignment: he was sent to Sweden to advise the government >on efficient administration of public companies. > >Already earning $100,000 and with a splendid career before him, >Netanyahu decided to give it all up and return to Israel to act as the >marketing manager of a furniture concern. As his colleague Barbara >Maclogan notes,"Anyone who claims Bibi planned to live in America >doesn't know what he's talking about. He gave up the opportunity of his >life in Boston to earn a quarter of his salary in Israel." > >In 1979, Netanyahu organized an anti-terrorism conference in Jerusalem, >dedicated to his fallen brother. Somehow, he managed to attract the >likes of George Bush, George Shultz, and Richard Perle (President's >Reagan's chief arms negotiator) to the meeting and was thrust briefly >onto the world stage. But when the conference ended, it was back to >work at the furniture factory. > >That all changed in 1982, when Israel's Washington Ambassador Moshe >Arens invited Netanyahu to be his deputy. This unprecedented career >rise has been a subject of much speculation. Many people have noted >that Bar Tzion Netanyahu was one of the few guests invited to Arens' >wedding and he was repaying an old friend. But Arens has a different >explanation. "People got a good laugh when they heard I phoned a >furniture factory to find a deputy. What sold me on Bibi was his >organization of the anti-terror conference and the strong impression he >made on American leaders who participated." > >In 1984, after two visibly successful years as Arens' deputy, Bibi was >named Israel's ambassador to the UN. In another of those ironies that >follow him, he was appointed to the post by Shimon Peres against the >objections of Yitzhak Shamir. Once again, it was a leader of the Labour >Party who promoted his early career. > >This was the true turning point in his quest to become prime minister. >Netanyahu's good looks, fluent English and controversial opinions made >him a media star. He became a frequent presence on Ted Koppel's >Nightline and Larry King Live. As King observes,"Whenever he appeared, >the phones wouldn't stop ringing. He especially made an impression on >women viewers. As a guest I'd rate him 8. If he had a sense of humor to >go with everything else, he'd have been a 10." > >During this period, Netanyahu wrote his book, Terror-How The West Can >Win. The book made a tremendous impression on the Reagan >administration. In fact, whenever George Bush visited New York, and >that was often, he would call on Netanyahu. > >By 1988, Netanyahu had made powerful allies in the American media. He >received strong support from Charles Krauthammer of the Washington >Post, Abe Rosenthal of the New York Times, and Ellie Weymouth, daughter >of Katherine Graham, the publisher of Newsweek. When he returned to >Israel, he was too powerful a figure to be ignored and was appointed, >first Deputy Foreign Minister and later the Prime Minister's spokesman. >In this capacity, CNN made Netanyahu an international media star during >the Persian Gulf War. > >Netanyahu was ready to challenge the Old Guard of the Likud. The >combination of youth, determination and powerful allies abroad led to a >resounding victory in the Likud primaries of 1993 and in the general >elections of 1996. >-------------------------------------------- >Sent by Barry Chamish - Israeli journalist. >Phone/Fax : (972)-2-9914936 >E-Mail : chamish(a)netmedia.net.il >--------------------------------------------

1 0

The Konformist: The Chamish Files - Bibi Part Two
by Robalini＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subj: ESSAY: [2/2] Natanyahu Date: 97-01-31 12:51:08 EST From: chamish(a)netmedia.net.il (Chamish Barry) >From: Chamish Barry <chamish(a)netmedia.net.il> > >The Secret Life Of Binyamin Netanyahu > >Even within the conventional story, it is clear that Netanyahu was >groomed for leadership by the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR) in New >York. In 1979, twenty-seven year old Netanyahu called a conference on >terrorism and the ruling elite of the CFR, Bush, Shultz and Perle >answered to his summons. One word will suffice: why? > >Yoni Netanyahu was undoubtedly a martyr but far from the only one in >Israel. He was not such a powerful symbol that the CFR would send a >delegation of its biggest guns, including CIA director Bush to his >unknown brother's get-together. > >Netanyahu's decision to quit his lucrative Boston job is almost >inexplcable. Netanyahu sought a highpaying job at a prestigious >consulting firm yet not two months later, he gave it up to fly back to >Israel and sell sofas. He was barely settled in back home when he >decided to organize an anti-terrorism conference and invite the most >powerful people in Washington to attend. > >It is possible that Netanyahu was told to quit his job, return to >Israel and arrange the conference. Perhaps there is a connection to the >fact that a year later Shultz later made fighting terrorism a first >priority of the Reagan administration and that Vice-President Bush was >appointed to head a front for illegal covert activities called The >Anti-Terror Task Force. > >Arens' offer of a deputy ambassadorship to salesman Netanyahu >made no political sense. Israeli diplomatic aides and deputies >typically rise slowly through the Foreign Ministry bureaucracy. They >are not thrust into the second highest position at the most vital >embassy in the world. It is far from impossible that Arens was >directed to bring in Netanyahu by the very people in the Reagan >administration who attended his conference three years earlier. > >Once in New York in 1984, CFR-affiliated media such as CNN, the New >York Times, Washington Post, Newsweek and CFR members Koppel and King >turned Netanyahu into a major political figure; so much so that George >Shultz became a close friend. We again ask the succinct question: why? >What did Shultz, twenty years Netanyahu's senior, find so amusing about >the Israeli UN Ambassador that he had to pay him a courtesy call every >time he flew to New York? In 1985, Shultz chaired another Netanyahu- >organized conference on terrorism, this time in Washington. The >resulting publicity and prestige was a significant factor in >Netanyahu's fast-rising political career. Clearly, the secretary-of- >state had a major stake in Netanyahu's future. Which means, so did >George Bush. > >All that can be concluded from the conventional story. What then do we >make of Bibi's secret life? > >In 1987, Netanyahu applied for credit using his American social >security number 020364537. With that number, he or someone else made >the application under a phony name, John Sullivan, living at a false >address in Northern California. > >Netanyahu used Sullivan's name to borrow money during 1987-88. John >Sullivan does not exist, nor does Netanyahu's credit file. Israeli and >American reporters who tried to dig into Netanyahu's past using his >social security number discovered two other phony names used to apply >for credit in 1987-88 but were perplexed to find that his credit >records were completely removed. Only someone very high up in the >American government could have authorized the erasing of the file. > >We return to the all-purpose question: why? Again, no one who knows is >talking. What is nearly certain is that while Netanyahu was the UN >Ambassador, he was either defrauding a credit company or on an >assignment involving money that required three identity changes. > >Then there is Netanyahu's close relationship with Congressman Ben >Gillman, head of the House Committee On International Relations. The >problem here is that Gillman was also a close associate of Shabtai >Kalmonovitch and shared business deals with him in Africa. Kalmonovitch >was, not long after, imprisoned in Israel as a KGB spy. This is not to >imply that Netanyahu was involved in spying, only that his closest ally >in Congress has mighty strange intelligence ties to Israel. > >And what to make of the mystery of Netanyahu's housing?. Before he was >even the leader of the Likud, two foreign businessmen, Jack Mandel of >Australia and Sandy Eisenstadt of the US each paid about $750,000 to >buy Netanyahu luxury apartments in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. Again, no >one has a clue why. There is speculation that part of the reason may be >Eisenstadt's stake in an Israeli oil exploration company, a shady and >hidden business, but no concrete connection has been discovered by the >Israeli media. > >Netanyahu's penchant for secrecy is not subtle. It is well-known among >the Israeli media that he had conducted a number of secret meetings >with the Jordanian royal family in London and Amman before he became >prime minister. Even the conventional Jerusalem Post reported in mid- >June that six secret meetings were held in the past two years. But when >Inside Israel just before the elections asked Netanyahu to comment on >the meetings, he denied they had ever taken place. > >Perhaps the most secret and worrying ties concern what is supposedly a >high-tech services company. Yediot Ahronot relates how Netanyahu wooed >a local Likud leader. "He was invited by Netanyahu to a meeting in his >office at Systematics in Ramat Gan. The head of the company, Oded >Levental is a candidate for a financial post in the new government." > >Systematics is at the core of serious research by American alternative >publications, including the usually reliable Media Bypass. In short, >the allegations are that the National Security Agency had handed >Systematics stolen software called Promis that opened a trap door to >the world's secret banking transactions. About 250 Americans, mostly >politicians, had their illegal foreign accounts emptied of over $3.5 >billion in the operation. It is claimed that Colin Powell dropped out >of the presidential race after his account electronically vanished. >Leading figures in the operation included George Bush, Caspar >Weinberger and two Arkansas attorneys, Vince Foster Jr. and Hillary >Rodham Clinton on behalf of Clinton financier Jackson Stephens. The >research invariably concludes that Foster was murdered because he knew >too much about the scam. > >A leading investigative writer, Sherman Skolnick, writes: > >"Some contend Systematics is an NSA proprietary and spies on banks >overseas. Can Systematics rightfully deny spying actually done by >buffers or cut-outs between Systematics and NSA? Systematics, through a >spokesperson, vigorously denies Foster assisted it in any spying on >foreign banks but remains apparently silent on whether Hillary Rodham >Clinton assisted Systematics in some nefarious activities." > >Is it fair to ask why Systematics provided Netanyahu office space and >if this was the sum total of its involvement with him? > >Since taking office, Netanyahu has fueled fears of international >control by his actions within Israel's tiny anti-NWO community. They >were most intrigued by his refusal to give Ariel Sharon a sensitive >cabinet post. One possible reason is fear of Sharon's own intelligence >arm in the US. Then for those people who fervently hoped that he would >rid himself of any connections to the Arye Deri scandal, with all its >implications of money laundering and perhaps murder, Netanyahu >appointed as his Justice Minister, Yaacov Neeman, a lawyer who is >currently being investigated for intimidating a key witness against >Deri in a London trial. > >But the topper was Netanyahu's decision to allow Yaacov Frenkel to run >the country's economy single-handedly. Frenkel worked for the World >Bank between 1971-1990. After nineteen years away from "home" Frenkel >was unexplainedly appointed head of the Bank of Israel. > >His policies mirrored the world-wide debt program of his previous >employer documented by numerous researchers. The plan involves raising >interest rates beyond what the public or industry can afford, and >forcing the government to borrow lots of money from American banks to >keep the populace pacified. When the debts have to be repaid from an >empty treasury, the International Monetary Fund bails out the country >with schemes guaranteed to impoverish the people. > >Frenkel was a proponent of Israel borrowing $10 billion in loans >guaranteed by the American government and he kept his interest rates as >high as he could in the face of opposition from then-Finance Minister >Avraham Shohat who suspected Frenkel, "was playing politics with the >Bank of Israel." > >Binyamin Netanyahu, the man who Inside Israel hoped would save Israel >from the NWO puppet regime of Peres, appointed Yaacov Frenkel to be his >Minister of Finance. The only thing that prevented the disaster was >party opposition to an appointee who had never publicly supported the >Likud. > >Dan Meridor got the post instead. But as the Maariv headline read: >"Meridor Will Act, Frenkel Will Lead." On his first day in office >Meridor announced that his policy would be to lower the standard of >living in Israel. Not a week later, Frenkel raised the interest rates >by a whopping 1.5% with Meridor's "approval." > >Something is going on behind the scenes at the CFR. While Secretary of >State Warren Christopher must appear to be opposing Likud government >policies to keep the Arabs in line, the former CFR director is playing >some kind of double game with Netanyahu. > >King Hussein made his accommodation with Netanyahu well before the >elections and refused to support Peres during the campaign. Netanyahu's >victory clearly delighted him and on the surface, why not? The last >thing he would want is a PLO state on his border with control of the >Moslem holy sites. In time, it will become clearer what Netanyahu >promised the King during the secret London meetings. Included, most >assuredly, will be Jordanian hegemony over the Temple Mount. > >There has been a transformation in Israel but the CFR is still running >the latest prime minister. And that is a good reason for intense fear >about Israel's future. >---------- >Barry Chamish is the editor of Inside Israel, an investigative report >on Israeli affairs. For a free sample copy and subscription >information, write: > >INSIDE ISRAEL >POB 579 >Swindon, Wiltshire >ENGLAND SN4 OTA >Fax: 44-793-790722 >EMAIL:merkava@tcp.co.uk >-------------------------------------------- >Sent by Barry Chamish - Israeli journalist. >Phone/Fax : (972)-2-9914936 >E-Mail : chamish(a)netmedia.net.il >--------------------------------------------

1 0

Skipjack uses Elliptic curve? (was Re: Moderation [Tim,Sandy])
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> wrote: > [...]. How many of you remember the anonymous message posted to this > list revealing that Skipjack is an elliptic curve cipher? [One of the most > respected names in cryptography confirmed this to me in private > conversation. No, the person was not privy to the secret specs. The person > didn't need to be. :-] What aspect of Skipjack family is Elliptic curve? Skipjack itself I thought was a symmetric key block cipher, with 80 bit keys and 64 bit block size. The key escrow designs (clipper chip and family) included several additions: 1. check sum to prevent LEAF (Law Enforcement Access Field) forgery (16 bits, which is not enough as Matt Blaze demonstrated) 2. government access copy of chip's serial number encrypted with LE family key in LEAF 3. copy of session key encrypted with unit's escrow key in LEAF (the escrow key is the key that is stored in the government database indexed by chip serial number - the database which is split between the two escrow agents). 4. hardware random number key generation 5. undisclosed key exchange mechanism 6. are DSS signatures used? Presumably the Elliptic curve is for key exchange? Is there something about the design which implies Ellitpic curve must be the key exchange mechanism used? Another possible area for public key, if they had it on chip, would be to use public key encryption for the encryption of the serial number. Otherwise, when the chip is reverse engineered the LE family key would allow traffic analysis of all clipper traffic. Public key would prevent this. (According to Ross Anderson's paper on tamper proof hardware, at least one chip manufacturer has reverse engineered the clipper chip) > If nobody cares about the leaks, why do we need to provide a forum for > them? Besides, there are other fora that could be used. sci.crypt or > Coderpunks are both good places to post "found" code. It is true that sci.crypt and coderpunks do make alternative fora. Somebody else pointed out that rc4.c was posted to sci.crypt first. I think they are correct, and in fact if I remember, it was forged as from David Sterndark <david(a)sterndark.com> or some other play on David Sternlight's email address. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

1 0

Re: 40-bit RC5 crack meaningless??
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Over on sci.crypt, Paul C. Kocker <pck(a)netcom.com> gave a clear and confident response to a query about the statistical difference between a brute force attack on a known Russian or English text, versus a similar attack on cyphertext with a known-plaintext sample (Strassmann's tell-tale Clue #3.) Said Kocher: The difference is negligable. With English text encrypted under a 64-bit block cipher, you know that the most significant bit of each of the 8 bytes in the block should be zero. For a wrong key, there is a 255/256 probability that at least one of these bits will be nonzero, allowing immediate rejection of the key. Keys which do produce all zero bits get tested on additional blocks until the key is either deemed correct or rejected. The extra overhead per wrong key is the sum from i=1 to infinity of i*(1/256^i), or under 0.4 percent. In practice, the slowdown is actually a couple of percent, since it complicates the skip-the-last-Fiestel-round optimization. Also, the 1/256 case requires running extra code, which can fill the microprocessor's cache with code which isn't part of the main loop, slowing things down a bit when the computer goes back to the main search. Cheers, Paul ____________________________________ http://www.cryptography.com Paul Kocher (pck(a)netcom.com) | Voicemail: +1-(415)-354-8004 Crypto consultant | FAX: +1-(415)-321-1483

1 0

ISPs vs Bells - Email FCC
by Derrick Storren 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Baby Bells want us to pay by the minute. An opportunity to tell the FCC what we think via email at isp(a)fcc.gov -- article follows. ***************************************** By Michelle V. Rafter LOS ANGELES - Regional phone companies and Internet service providers are waging a war of words over Internet traffic on the nation's local telephone network and who should pay for upgrades as the online boom continues. As a drama, the phone companies vs. Internet providers contest is dry, complicated stuff, lacking the sex appeal of, say, the power struggle between Netscape and Microsoft for control of the personal computer desktop. Even so, analysts and other industry watchers counsel consumers and businesses to take heed of the tug of war because it could affect how much they pay to use the Internet, and ultimately, how they connect to it. In one corner, Pacific Bell, Bell Atlantic and other regional phone carriers say the growth of Internet traffic is pushing local telephone networks to the breaking point. Pacific Bell, for example, says Internet surfers use its phone lines an average of 45 minutes a day -- more than twice the amount the network was built to handle. Heavy Internet use in Silicon Valley led to brief service outages in that area earlier this year, the company said. Pacific Bell and other local phone companies say they've poured millions of dollars into hardware improvements as a result of Internet traffic, improvements they claim would otherwise have been unnecessary. To help defray costs, phone companies think providers should pay for service on a per-minute basis, the way long-distance companies do, rather than by the line, like other business phone customers. Internet providers have been exempt from paying so-called access fees under a 1983 federal ruling meant to foster growth of compute data networks. On the other side, Internet service providers say phone companies have it all wrong. A recent report sponsored by the Internet Access Coalition, an industry lobby group, maintains computer traffic poses no threat to local phone networks and that earlier phone-company studies identifying trouble spots were based on theoretical claims and a few areas with engineering and planning problems that could easily be rectified. If Internet traffic was such a threat, phone companies wouldn't be exacerbating the problem by jumping into the Internet access business themselves, providers say. Rather than hurting phone companies, Internet traffic has been a windfall, according to the coalition. In 1995, local phone companies spent a total of $245 million adding 6 million residential phone lines used primarily for Internet access, but reaped $1.4 billion in revenue on those lines, the group said. If providers are required to pay access fees, they'll have no choice but to raise their rates, which could stifle Internet growth just as it's taking off, they say. Internet providers and phone companies are arguing their respective positions in Washington, where the Federal Communications Commission is considering the access-fee issue. As part of ongoing telecommunication industry reform, the FCC said in late December it would cut access fees levied on long-distance carriers and is investigating options for doing that. But the agency held off making a decision affecting Internet use to allow time for parties with an interest in the issue to present their cases. The FCC took the unusual step of setting up an e-mail address -- isp(a)fcc.gov -- consumers and others can use to send their thoughts. Internet providers and phone companies have until Feb. 21 to submit formal comments, and the agency is expected to make a ruling later this year. Even if the FCC levies access fees on providers and companies raise rates accordingly, it won't dampen consumers' love affair with the Internet, some analysts said. If, for example, Internet providers passed through an access fee of 1 cent a minute, a subscriber spending 10 hours online a month would pay an extra $6 -- hardly a deterrent, said David Goodtree, an analyst with Forrester Research in Cambridge, Mass. "Cable TV rates have doubled in the last three or four years, we got nothing more for it, but cable subscribership didn't go down because of it," Goodtree said. On one point everyone agrees -- the nation's current analog telephone network eventually will not be able to handle demand from Internet users, and must be supplanted by a digital system better suited to transmitting computer data. Both phone companies and Internet providers have begun working on solutions. Phone carriers that have offered digital ISDN (integrated services digital network) lines are stepping up their marketing efforts. Phone companies and Internet providers are investigating a new technology called digital subscriber line, or DSL, which routes Internet phone traffic around analog phone-company switches into all-digital networks. But inevitably, discussion of DSL and other new technologies circles back to who'll pay for upgrades. Sky Dayton, president of Internet provider Earthlink Networks in Pasadena, Calif., believes it is in phone companies' best interests to spend on digital upgrades because of the profit potential from selling them to companies such as his. But why should phone companies pick up all the costs when Internet service providers will benefit, too, says Pacific Bell spokesman Bob Deward. (Michelle V. Rafter writes about cyberspace and technology from Los Angeles. Reach her at mvrafter(a)deltanet.com. Opinions expressed in this column are her own.) Copyright, Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved

1 0

Re: Govt & cyberspace
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan McCullagh wrote: > I find your "distributed democracy" interesting, except that it would > allow scant time for deliberation. Think of it this way: don't you > think the majority of Americans would have voted to pass the CDA? > Or worse? Or restrictions on domestic crypto? Or worse? > Democracy generally means majoritarian rule. The Bill of Rights is an > anti-majoritarian document. It protects the rights of political or > religious minorities. I fear that electronic "click here to vote" > democracy would undermine the Bill of Rights even more. You spoke a key phrase when you said "scant time". When I was in the Perot camp, I saw some direct "democracy" in action, and it was pitiful how the little folks could be herded into voting this way and that. OTOH, this subject deserves more in-depth analysis, and a good starting point could be the California referendums (Prop. 209, etc.), followed on by Supreme Court decisions saying OK, not OK, and so on. That system provides a good mix of people having input and proper Constitutional judicial review. One of the good factors is the pamphlets the state sends out to voters prior to the election, with a decent analysis of the issues from opposing points of view. Not perfect to be sure, but a good start. > Dale Thorn writes: > I wish for once and for all someone would delineate this "democracy" > thing from a true, distributed democracy, where every individual is > required to participate equally, and no narrow interests can co-opt > the vote the way they do in the kind of "democracy" Declan mentions.

1 0

Appointment Verification
by inc＠jps.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Suck_My_Big_Juicy_Cock, We would like to ask for your help with a survey for a service bureau we are considering developing software for in voice communications. This software will be used to remind patients of their upcoming appointments, allow them to confirm or reschedule. After confirming which patients will not be able to make their appointment the system will contact all individuals that are on a waiting list to schedule them for open time slots..... For assisting us we will mail you a FREE certificate for 100 rolls of Kodak film and a 35 mm camera. NO ONE WIll CALL YOU! 1. Do you feel doctors would use a service which calls patients for them using a personalized Voice system reminding them of their appointments? ____yes ____NO 2. How important do you feel it is to doctors to eliminate the drudgery of staff calling patients reminding them of appointments. not important ______ somewhat important ______ Very important ______ 3. What's do you feel would be a fair price or doctors would be willing to pay for such a service? 100-$200 per month _____ 200-$300 per month _____ 300- $400 per month _____ Other ____________ Please email your answers to advance(a)ns.net If you have any suggestions on any additional automated voice service you would like to see someone develop please let us know. Thanks again for your participation.

1 0

Re: 40-bit RC5 crack meaningless??
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Over on sci.crypt, Paul C. Kocker <pck(a)netcom.com> gave a clear and confident response to a query about the statistical difference between a brute force attack on a known Russian or English text, versus a similar attack on cyphertext with a known-plaintext sample (Strassmann's tell-tale Clue #3.) Said Kocher: The difference is negligable. With English text encrypted under a 64-bit block cipher, you know that the most significant bit of each of the 8 bytes in the block should be zero. For a wrong key, there is a 255/256 probability that at least one of these bits will be nonzero, allowing immediate rejection of the key. Keys which do produce all zero bits get tested on additional blocks until the key is either deemed correct or rejected. The extra overhead per wrong key is the sum from i=1 to infinity of i*(1/256^i), or under 0.4 percent. In practice, the slowdown is actually a couple of percent, since it complicates the skip-the-last-Fiestel-round optimization. Also, the 1/256 case requires running extra code, which can fill the microprocessor's cache with code which isn't part of the main loop, slowing things down a bit when the computer goes back to the main search. Cheers, Paul ____________________________________ http://www.cryptography.com Paul Kocher (pck(a)netcom.com) | Voicemail: +1-(415)-354-8004 Crypto consultant | FAX: +1-(415)-321-1483

1 0

Re: Moderation, Tim, Sandy, me, etc. * Strong crypto == DES?!
by C Matthew Curtin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Barber <jeffb(a)issl.atl.hp.com> writes: John> Tim, the Cypherpunks have chosen to follow Sandy's lead for this John> month. I'll admit I made it easy for them, but the results are John> conclusive. There are 1311 addresses in the cypherpunks list John> today; 42 in the unedited list; and 19 in the flames list. Jeff> "Conclusively" this has shown only that most folks are willing Jeff> to go along with an experiment -- especially if it requires them Jeff> to do exactly nothing. This is precisely the category into which I fall. It is a pain to unsubscribe from a list, since my "From_" header doesn't agree with my "From:" header (the former has a specific host included, the latter only a zone), and this often triggers a message to the list owner for processing. In any case, I am willing to go along with the experiment. But a NoCeM-style approach to killing the noise is much more preferable. Failing that, an individual filter (such as procmail) is good. In any event, the responsibility of what to post and what to read should be in the hands of each reder individually. - -- Matt Curtin Chief Scientist Megasoft, Inc. cmcurtin(a)research.megasoft.com http://www.research.megasoft.com/people/cmcurtin/ I speak only for myself Hacker Security Firewall Crypto PGP Privacy Unix Perl Java Internet Intranet -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Have you encrypted your data today? iQEVAwUBMvtGmH6R34u/f3zNAQFQbwf9HYoT51vkHSjSJOnzXcphD7WLoOEq8WV1 rj33PUweZiibTyZg1JADdbS09QVgl80TE90YDJGQ/c77wwBuMKiJTVAz8jaixjCK kUJ6IiQ4Ul3Q1LfyM5iC/kphQc/ILld0PHpaZl104pLoJ13rK6FCzMaQd+MZpWoJ ZLWxrKaebFF5IH0dW9avJ3Vb5Kp+6OSGmpBwooFiq+nhuUCaeAZtOAwmutDM5d1g oDTXGmdFuDLzjAuLcQnNAwc/nRd0bBLj3b3KFYkOzNjnl3BjOw3s4XVMF4sELOCX aOnxZE/u7lP3HkAQtJ+PxHgthUbODE0ixDU0iuWSrDVm8gRAe4Xm0A== =78/T -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0