December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Microsoft Exploratorium, from The Netly News
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

********** http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1685,00.html The Netly News (http://netlynews.com/) January 13, 1998 Which Way the Windows by Declan McCullagh (declan(a)well.com) Looks like it's upgrade time not just for Microsoft Windows, but also for Microsoft's legal strategy. As engineers frantically debugged the Windows 98 beta last week, senior Microsoft executives roamed Washington, D.C., apologizing for their previous arrogance and saying they had been misunderstood. Call it Microsoft PR 2.0. "What we have not done is communicate" the way the software works, Robert Herbold, Microsoft chief operating officer, told The Netly News last Friday. But will Microsoft's new humility appease federal judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, who already issued a preliminary injunction against the Redmond firm? He's scheduled to hear from the company's lawyers and the Department of Justice this morning. Both have spent a good chunk of the last month complaining about each other: The government says Microsoft violated the judge's order, and Microsoft says the government is "poorly informed." As his attorneys argue the law, Bill Gates will be practicing politics -- a skill that will come in handy if Congress holds more antitrust hearings when it returns in late January. Pundits have made much of Gates's Democratic sympathies, another image he's trying to discard (or at least upgrade). Today Gates is scheduled to sit down for a private chat with technophilic House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Georgia), who will also tour the Microsoft campus. [...] *********** http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/afternoon/0,1012,1686,00.html The Netly News / Afternoon Line January 13, 1998 Microsoft Exploratorium The ugly guts of Microsoft Windows were on display today during a six-hour federal district court hearing in Washington, DC. Attorneys from Microsoft repeatedly pointed at a list of hundreds of .DLL and .EXE files and challenged the government to answer one deceptively simple query: Which files are part of Internet Explorer? The outcome of the case may well turn on the answer to that question, which lies at the heart of the Justice Department's beef with the software giant. Last month Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson ordered Microsoft to stop using its operating system's popularity to force-feed Internet Explorer to computer makers. But, again, which files belong to Internet Explorer? The government's witness ducked the question. "I can't go through your list and say which files are unique to Internet Explorer," replied author and computer consultant Glenn Weadock. "I don't think it's possible or even especially useful to define a list of files and say this is part of, or this is not a part of Internet Explorer." Which Microsoft has argued all along -- their browser is integrated into the operating system. Yanking it out, the company says, would be like amputating a leg: a person could only hobble along, at best. The government views this as a weak excuse, at best. "The court issued a very simple, broad order and Microsoft through its actions defied rather than complied with that order," said Justice Department trial attorney Phillip Malone. The government is asking Judge Jackson to hold Microsoft in contempt and levey a million-dollar-a-day fine. The hearing will continue tomorrow when Microsoft vice president David Cole testifies. - By Declan McCullagh/Washington -------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLITECH -- the moderated mailing list of politics and technology To subscribe: send a message to majordomo(a)vorlon.mit.edu with this text: subscribe politech More information is at http://www.well.com/~declan/politech/ --------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Should police knock before entering - SC to decide [CNN]
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > SUPREME COURT CASE: SHOULD POLICE KNOCK BEFORE ENTERING? > > SCOTUS graphic January 13, 1998 > Web posted at: 2:14 p.m. EST (1914 GMT) > > WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Supreme Court was being asked Tuesday to > decide whether law enforcement officers should ring the doorbell or > knock before entering a building if they sense danger. > > The case focuses on a 1994 incident in Oregon. Hernan Ramirez fired > his gun after police broke in his garage window after they received > a tip that a fugitive was in the Ramirez house. It was a tip that > turned out to be wrong. > > Ramirez fired his gun without knowing that those intruding were law > officers, and once he realized who the intruders were he > surrendered. > > "The police fire back a fusillade of fire, screaming 'police! > police!' -- this is the first time Mr. Ramirez realizes that the > police are there," said public defender Michael R. Levine. > > Even though Ramirez was not the fugitive that police had been > looking for, they still arrested Ramirez on weapons charges since, > as a convicted felon, he was not permitted to possess a gun. > > A federal judge later ruled that the police search had been > unconstitutional. The federal government then brought the case to > the Supreme Court, arguing that the increased danger in that > particular case had warranted the window-shattering no-knock entry > into the Ramirez building. [text deleted] ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Privacy & Anonymous service providers?
by William Knowles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm working on a web page that would include a list of Internet providers that either offer anonymous accounts or a better degree of privacy not usually seen by regular ISP's. Below is a list of providers that offers these services that I have been able to put together, I'm wondering if there are some that I am missing. To avoid noise on the list and I'm no longer a member of the cypherpunks list, please e-mail me privately. Paranoia http://wwww.paranoia.com Data Haven Project http://www.datahaven.com L0pht Heavy Industries http://www.l0pht.com Offshore Information Services http://www.offshore.ai Cyberpass http://www.cyberpass.net SkuzNet http://skuz.wanweb.net LOD Communications http://www.lod.com The Nymserver http://www.nymserver.com Sekurity.org http://www.sekurity.org Hotmail http://www.hotmail.com Thanks in advance! William Knowles erehwon(a)dis.org == The information standard is more draconian than the gold standard, because the government has lost control of the marketplace. -- Walter Wriston == http://www.dis.org/erehwon/

1 0

mobile agents paper
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Nelson Minar <nelson(a)media.mit.edu> pointed out in email to me the relevance of his thesis proposal and paper "Computational Media for Mobile Agents" to the discussion on autonomous agents as a means to deploying eternity servers and remailers etc. http://www.media.mit.edu/~nelson/ (Not read it yet). Adam

1 0

Plan 9's auth() function - partialy secure distributed computing
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: >From ravage(a)ssz.com Tue Jan 13 17:51:44 1998 Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 17:51:42 -0600 From: Jim Choate <ravage(a)ssz.com> Message-Id: <199801132351.RAA29535(a)einstein.ssz.com> X-within-URL: http://plan9.bell-labs.com/magic/man2html/6/auth To: ravage(a)einstein.ssz.com Subject: auth [search] [index] delim $$ define lbr ' roman "{" ' define rbr ' roman "}" ' NAME ticket - authentication service DESCRIPTION This manual page describes the protocols used to authorize connections, confirm the identities of users and machines, and maintain the associated databases. The machine that provides these services is called the authentication server (AS). The AS may be a stand-alone machine or a general-use machine such as a CPU server. The network database ndb(6) holds for each public machine, such as a CPU server or file server, the name of the authentication server that machine uses. Each machine contains three values important to authentication; a 56-bit DES key, a 28-byte authentication ID, and a 48-byte authentication domain name. The ID is a user name and identifies who is currently responsible for the kernel running on that machine. The domain name identifies the machines across which the ID is valid. Together, the ID and domain name identify the owner of a key. When a terminal boots, the user is prompted for user name and password. The user name becomes the terminal's authentication ID. The password is converted using passtokey (see auth(2)) into a 56-bit DES key and saved as the machine's key. The authentication domain is set to the null string. If possible, the terminal validates the key with the AS before saving it. For Internet machines the correct AS to ask is found using bootp(8). For Datakit machines the AS is a system called p9auth on the same Datakit node as the file server the terminal booted from. When a CPU or file server boots, it reads the key, ID, and domain name from non-volatile RAM. This allows servers to reboot without operator intervention. The details of any authentication are mixed with the semantics of the particular service they are authenticating so we describe them one case at a time. The following definitions will be used in the descriptions: $CH sub c$ an 8-byte random challenge from a client $CH sub s$ an 8-byte random challenge from a server $K sub s$ server's key $K sub c$ client's key $K sub n$ a nonce key created for a ticket $K lbr m rbr$ message $m$ encrypted with key $K$ $ID sub s$ server's ID $DN sub s$ server's authentication domain name $ID sub c$ client's ID $UID sub c$ user's name on the client $UID sub s$ user's name on the server A number of constants defined in auth.h are also used: AuthTreq, AuthChal, AuthOK, AuthErr, AuthTs, AuthTc, AuthAs, and AuthAc. File Service File service sessions are long-lived connections between a client host and a file server. Processes belonging to different users share the session. Whenever a user process on the client mounts a file server (see bind(2)), it must authenticate itself. There are four players in an authentication: the server, the client kernel, the user process on the client, and the authentication server. The goal of the authentication protocol is to convince the server that the client may validly speak for the user process. To reduce the number of messages for each authentication, common information is exchanged once at the beginning of the session within a session message (see attach(5)): Client->Server Tsession($CH sub c$) Server->Client Rsession(${CH sub s},~{ID sub s},~{DN sub s}$) Each time a user mounts a file server connection, an attach message is sent identifying/authenticating the user: Client->Server Tattach($K sub s lbr AuthTs, ~ {CH sub s},~{UID sub c}, ~ {UID sub s}, ~ K sub n rbr , ~ {K sub n} lbr AuthAc, ~ {CH sub s}, count rbr )$ Server->Client Rattach($ K sub n lbr AuthAs,~{CH sub c},~count rbr$) The part of the attach request encrypted with $Ksubs$ is called a ticket. Since it is encrypted in the server's secret key, this message is guaranteed to have originated on the AS. The part encrypted with the $K sub n$ found in the ticket is called an authenticator. The authenticator is generated by the client kernel and guarantees that the ticket was not stolen. The count is incremented with each mount to make every authenticator unique, thus foiling replay attacks. The server is itself authenticated by the authenticator it sends as a reply to the attach. Tickets are created by the AS at the request of a user process. The AS contains a database of which $ID sub c$'s may speak for which $UID sub c$'s. If the $ID sub c$ may speak for the $UID sub c$, two tickets are returned. UserProc->AS $AuthTreq, ~ CH sub s , ~ ID sub s , ~ DN sub s , ~ ID sub c , ~ UID sub c$ AS->UserProc $AuthOK, ~ K sub c lbr AuthTc, ~ CH sub s , ~ UID sub c , ~ UID sub s , ~ K sub n rbr , ~ K sub s lbr AuthTs, ~ CH sub s , ~ UID sub c , ~ UID sub s , ~ K sub n rbr$ Otherwise an error message is returned. AS->UserProc $AuthErr$, 64-byte error string The user passes both tickets to the client's kernel using the fauth system call (see fsession(2)). The kernel decrypts the ticket encrypted with $K sub c$. If $UID sub c$ matches the user's login ID, the tickets are remembered for any subsequent attaches by that user of that file server session. Otherwise, the ticket is assumed stolen and an error is returned. Remote Execution A number of applications require a process on one machine to start a process with the same user ID on a server machine. Examples are cpu(1), rx (see con(1)), and exportfs(4). The called process replies to the connection with a ticket request. Server->UserProc $AuthTreq, ~ CH sub s , ~ ID sub s , ~ DN sub s , ~ xxx, ~ xxx$ Here xxx indicates a field whose contents do not matter. The calling process adds its machine's $ID sub c$ and its $UID sub c$ to the request and follows the protocol outlined above to get two tickets from the AS. The process passes the $K sub s$ encrypted ticket plus an authenticator generated by /dev/authenticator from the $K sub c$ ticket to the remote server, which writes them to the kernel to set the user ID (see cons(3)). The server replies with its own authenticator which can be written to the kernel along with the $K sub c$ encrypted ticket to confirm the server's identity (see cons(3)). UserProc->Server $ K sub s lbr AuthTs, ~ CH sub s , ~ UID sub c , ~ UID sub s , ~ K sub n rbr , ~ K sub n lbr AuthAc, ~ CH sub s , ~ 0 rbr $ Server->UserProc $K sub n lbr AuthAs, ~ CH sub s , ~ 0 rbr$ Challenge Box A user may also start a process on a CPU server from a non Plan 9 machine using commands such as con, telnet, or ftp (see con(1) and ftpfs(4)). In these situations, the user can authenticate using a hand-held DES encryptor. The telnet or FTP daemon first sends a ticket request to the authentication server. If the AS has keys for both the $ID sub c$ and $UID sub c$ in the ticket request it returns a challenge as a hexadecimal number. Daemon->AS $AuthChal, ~ CH sub c , ~ ID sub c , ~ DN sub s , ~ ID sub c , ~ UID sub c $ AS->Daemon $AuthOK$, 16-byte ASCII challenge Otherwise, it returns a null-terminated 64-byte error string. AS->Daemon $AuthErr$, 64-byte error string The daemon relays the challenge to the calling program, which displays the challenge on the user's screen. The user encrypts it and types in the result, which is relayed back to the AS. The AS checks it against the expected response and returns either a ticket or an error. Daemon->AS 16-byte ASCII response AS->Daemon $AuthOK, ~ K sub c lbr AuthTs, ~ CH sub c , ~ UID sub c , ~ UID sub c , ~ K sub n rbr$ or AS->Daemon $AuthErr$, 64-byte error string Finally, the daemon passes the ticket to the kernel to set the user ID (see cons(3)). Password Change Any user can change the key stored for him or her on the AS. Once again we start by passing a ticket request to the AS. Only the user ID in the request is meaningful. The AS replies with a single ticket (or an error message) encrypted in the user's personal key. The user encrypts both the old and new keys with the $K sub n$ from the returned ticket and sends that back to the AS. The AS checks the reply for validity and replies with an AuthOK byte or an error message. UserProc->AS $AuthPass, ~ xxx, ~ xxx, ~ xxx, ~ xxx, ~ UID sub c$ AS->UserProc $AuthOK, ~ K sub c lbr AuthTc, ~ xxx, ~ xxx, ~ xxx, ~ K sub n rbr$ UserProc->AS $K sub u lbr AuthPass, ~ roman "old password", ~ roman "new password" rbr$ AS->UserProc $AuthOK$ or AS->UserProc $AuthErr$, 64-byte error string Data Base An ndb(2) database file exists for the authentication server. The attribute types used by the AS are hostid and uid. The value in the hostid is a client host's ID. The values in the uid pairs in the same entry list which users that host ID make speak for. A uid value of * means the host ID may speak for all users. A uid value of !user means the host ID may not speak for user. For example: hostid=bootes uid=!sys uid=!adm uid=* is interpreted as bootes may speak for any user except sys and adm. FILES /lib/ndb/auth database file /lib/ndb/auth.* hash files for /lib/ndb/auth SEE ALSO fsession(2), auth(2), cons(3), attach(5), auth(8) Copyright © 1995 Lucent Technologies. All rights reserved.

1 0

Plan 9 ordering info [rather expensive]
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If you're interested in getting Plan 9 in CD format: Harcourt Brace & Co. 800-782-4479 Plan 9 (full distribution on CD w/ source) ISBN 0-03-017143-1 $367.50 + 8% s/h + state tax (8.25% in Tx) Usualy takes 24 hours to setup an account with them. Apparently they don't ship this through retailers. When I called this morning for up to date info the #3 selection for individuals and professional didn't work. Just select the operator option and be done with it. I advised them their VRU didn't work correctly. If you talk to EJ tell her thanks again. If you just want to play then go to plan9.att.com and get the disk set they offer for playing around. It lacks all source but it will install a minimal system on an Intel box. Should work on most systems though I do suggest that you use a SCSI based system. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Don't shoot the messenger (Re: 1 Question to Dr. Froomkin...) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 18:38:43 GMT > From: Adam Back <aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk> > Subject: Don't shoot the messenger (Re: 1 Question to Dr. Froomkin...) > It appears to me that your comments to Michael are based on your views > on the undesirability of the way the US judicial system operates in > practice today. Michael is merely offering his expert opinion on how > various questions would likely be interpreted by the current legal > system. Ok. It's not just the US judicial system, include the executive and legislative branches as well. > Screams of "and you think this is a good idea?" and "but what about > the constitution" are misdirected; I strongly suspect each of the > three posters I mention above share your distaste for the redefinition > of meanings and blatant disregard for the fairly clear meanings of the > constitution. You propose speaking softly will resolve the issue? If so why speak at all since that is the softest speech of all. Your position seems to be that if a question is hard then it should be avoided because it might offend the sensibilities? You propose that justice would be better served if it were all masked in innuendo and euphamism? Perhaps, that is no reason not to take them to task when they expound a position using fallacious arguments. Further, Dr. Froomkin is a law professor who *trains* future lawyers. If anyone should be held to task for their actions and views it is those who are deciding what tomorrows world will look like and the people charged with those decisions. There is a fundamental ethical responsibility for conservatism and literalism in those enterprises that simply isn't present in most other 'jobs'. We aren't playing horseshoes or handgrenades - close enough is not good enough. There is a fundamental difference between Lawyers, Doctors, & Soldiers and the vast majority of other human endeavours. In short, they are given the lattitude to decide events that directly and immediatley impact human life. Engineers, Pilots, hamburger flippers, etc. are seldom in a position as a matter of course of their practicing their vocation to decide whether a person will live or die. Because of this exclusion from commen behavioral limitations they should receive *less* latitude and trust in their actions instead of more (which is what is happening today). Ulitmately, when a lawyer fails in their duty to use *every* legal recourse a person sits in a room and gets to listen to the hiss of cyanide drop into the acid. When these people make a mistake there is no 'fixing' it. Sometimes "I'm sorry" just doesn't cut it. It is entirely too important to be complacent or trust without verification (thanks to Pres. Reagan for that one). The road to hell is paved with good intentions. We'll just have to agree to disagree here. If they take the job they take the responsibility to answer for their actions to any and every citizen that asks for it. However inconvenient, uncomfortable, or rude the question may be posed because the *next* citizen they ask to trust them may be the one asking the question. Never forget that but by the grace of God there go you. If you want to trust your future to somebody who 'shuts down' because somebody says "spin doctor bullshit" or strenously defends their views be my guest. Me, I want a MUCH more mature and determined individual handling me and my decendants future. I want to experience that strength of conviction from them not a yellow streak. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

British Ministers Adopt Unbreakable Crypto
by Eric Cordian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The UK is replacing the traditional "red boxes" used by ministers to carry their work home with them with high tech laptops. They will use a signet ring and fingerprints to control access to the computer. There will be a "Duress Finger." :) ----- LONDON (AP) -- It's a briefcase even James Bond could love. Britain's more adventurous Cabinet ministers soon will be spiriting laptop computers inside their signature ``Red Box'' briefcases, complete with fingerprint recognition systems and silent alarms. The stacks of papers, briefing documents and constituency correspondence that now go home with each minister in lead-lined red briefcases will be replaced in a few months by a specially designed super-secure laptop -- capable of carrying infinitely more homework. At $4,000 each, the prototypes unveiled Tuesday are seen as a symbol of the modern Britain so often touted by the Labor Party and are being billed as a way to make government work more efficiently. They will not, however, be foisted on ministers who prefer the old-fashioned paper route -- but those holdouts will miss an electronic voice that chirps ``Good morning, minister'' each time the computer is turned on. Each computer, built into the briefcase, will come with a security system that uses a signet ring and fingerprints to control access to the computer. Ministers who eschew jewelry can have the signet ring's smart-card incorporated into another device, such as a keychain or pen. The fingerprint function also requires an alternate finger to be programmed in case the minister cuts the one designated, thereby corrupting the fingerprint. ``It has certainly been billed as very James Bond-ish and I suppose we are 'Q,' '' said Alan Rushworth, managing director of Rhea International, the company that designed the security system, likening himself to the 007 character who outfits James Bond with all his gadgets. ``There is even a duress finger,'' Rushworth said. ``That is for if a terrorist or gunman has a gun to the minister's head forcing him to open the computer. It will appear to function normally but doesn't, and sends a silent alarm to the Cabinet Office.'' No ``top secret'' documents will be loaded on the computers because such material is seldom transmitted electronically for security reasons, a government spokeswoman said. Even American security experts could not breach the computer's security system, Rushworth boasted. ``The Cabinet office has used its best government hackers for extensive penetration testing and they couldn't break it,'' he said. ``It has also been tried by our cousins on the other side of the Atlantic -- and they couldn't get in either.'' -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

1 0

plan 9 features (Re: autonomous agents (fwd)) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 14 Jan 1998 00:33:14 GMT > From: Adam Back <aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk> > Subject: plan 9 features (Re: autonomous agents (fwd)) > Sounds interesting. I am not familiar with plan 9 besides the > enthusings of a colleague reminiscing about the work done at York > Univ, UK with plan 9. > > Java has a lot going for it as a candidate due to portability and code > distribution support. I think the only thing missing from java is the > bidding and scheduling mechanisms. Your other forwarded message on > plan 9 looks interesting also. I have been working on a potential distributed data haven model using the Plan 9 architecture. I have finaly amassed enough machines where I can actualy dedicate the i/o, process, and file servers on seperate machines. The problem that I see for the immediate future is getting nodes that don't happen to reside on my premises for additional testing in about a year. I don't have a clue to how to get people to spend $400 bucks for the software (which the ATT license prohibits from commercial use) *and* dedicate several machines to the enterprise. But I'm not going to give up, maybe some folks will volunteer just to do it...:) I took the liberty of forwarding the man page for the auth() function to the cpunks list. It describes the 56-bit DES based authentication mechanism. I personaly don't care for DES so at some point I will be looking to replace that mechanism with an alternative. I also need to take some time and look at porting the Plan 9 file server adapter for Unix to Win95/NT. Either that or I mount the file systems to a suitably enhanced Linux box and then export from there. This would imply that the Win95/NT boxes need to be on the physical network of the Linux box or else excessive opportunities for MITM attacks are present. Not that simply being on the same network provides complete protection either. I hope that OpenNT will provide enough Unix-like features to minimize the port effort. The Plan 9 mechanism also needs to be enhanced in such a way that besides the access token involving encryption the actual transfer of packets are also content encrypted. This has potential compatibility problems with un-enhanced Plan 9 servers that I haven't had a chance to look at. Once I have a system up and running it will allow non-Plan 9 systems to access the resources by using what is called 'hand-held DES encryptors'. Unfortunately, there is not a real description of how this is to be accomplished in a real-world manner. My hope is to have something available sometime this summer that will allow folks to play with it at least in a limited way. If you get the chance and have the resources you should look into at least getting the Plan 9 documents. They're like $150 but call and verify that price since I didn't this morning. Also note, there are now two releases of Plan 9 floating around out there. The only distinction I am aware of is one is the 'old' release and the current is the 'new' release. Don't have a clue as to how to tell them apart or what compatibility problems will exist. My best estimate is that in about a month I will have the resources to install and begin developing the model. I am currently between employers (I don't work at Tivoli-IBM anymore) so I'm job hunting in the Austin area over the next few weeks. I'll make reports to the list on the results as I manage to get results. I don't know about Java on Plan 9, I'll look into it. Take care. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: (eternity) Automating BlackNet Services
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Scratch Monkey writes: > Here's a way to do an automated "high risk" server, using many of the > same methods as the eternity implementation but with longer delays and > more security for the server. This design ties in pretty well with what I understood Tim May's suggestion to be of using BlackNet to provide eternity services. I notice that you are assuming that all document delivery would be via digital dead-drop (alt.anonymous.messages). Depending on the usage pattern of this service it has the potential to be higher bandwidth than by Eternity USENET design. The BlackNet with dead-drop only scheme you propose will become more expensive in bandwidth than Eternity USENET at the point at which the volume of satisfied document requests being posted to USENET for different recipients exceeds the volume required to repost the traffic at the desired update rate. This is because you may have multiple requests for the same document, all of which must be posted to alt.anonymous.messages. One thing you could do to reduce this overhead would be to combine requests for the same document. To do this you could add an extra delay to satisfying requests to increase the chances of accumulating more requests for the same document. Alternatively, documents which were sent out within the last 24 hours or so could have just the bulk symmetric key encrypted for the subsequent recipients sent together with a message-id. (A separated multiple crypto recipient block). A more subtle problem you would probably want to address with this design is that you don't really want anonymous requested documents to be linkable, so you would need to do stealth encoding of the messages. This tends to be more complex for multiple recipients, but it is doable, and is made easier by standardising on public key size. In general I think I consider my Eternity USENET design more secure than your design and of similar overhead depending on whether the usage pattern results in lower bandwidth. I make this claim because users are offered better security with E-USENET because they are completely anonymous, and don't need to submit requests. They can passively read E-USENET, perhaps on a university campus, or with a satellite USENET feed. The readers are much harder to detect. This is significant because remailers are complex to use, and the users should be assumed to be less technically able (ie more likely to screw up remailer usage). Publisher anonymity is of basically the same security. A lower bandwidth alternative, to either E-USENET or what you have termed Automated BlackNet alternative is therefore to send messages via use-once mixmaster remailer reply blocks of the sort used by some nymservers. Clearly this is also lower security because the user must creating reply blocks which ultimately point back to himself. However the performance win is big. With this architecture BlackNet can win significantly over E-USENET because the volume is reduced to just indexes of available documents. Also I consider indexes are probably low enough risk for people to mirror on the web or cache on the web or whatever. My E-USENET prototype design has a separate index mechanism. (I understand there is some magic inside mixmaster which prevents packet replay, which helps avoid message flood attacks, though didn't locate the code fragment responsible for this functionality when I examined the sources.) Also I found your use of hashes and passwords so that the server does not necessarily know what it is serving interesting. I have similar functionality in my prototype E-USENET implementation. I mainly included the functionality because the prototype is also being used as an publically accessible eternity USENET proxy, to allow the operator to marginally reduce risks. I think this approach is of marginal value, in that the attacker will be easily able to compile an index from the same information as users. This is really a form of secret splitting: the key is one part, and the data the other part. The key can be considered to be part of the URL. > Both the client and server software should be trivial to write, and in > fact I am working on that now. The server is partially written, but I am > at a handicap because I do not have access to usenet at this time. If > anyone knows of some canned code (preferably sh or c, but perl would work) > that will perform functions such as "Retrieve list of articles in > newsgroup x" and "Retrieve article number y", a pointer would be nice. http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/eternity/ I have done most of the work already I think. What you are trying to do is so similar that you should be able to acheive what you want with some light hacking of my perl code. For testing purposes I am in the same position as you; dialup ppp connection and linux machine. What I did was to implement both newspool access code, and NNTP access code. For local testing I just create a dummy news-spool. The eternity distribution comes with a few documents in this dummy news spool. A real local news spool would work also. Then you can simulate everything you want offline. You can change the config file to switch to an open access NNTP news-server at any time for a live test. All the code to read USENET is there, and to scan chosen NNTP headers, etc. I would highly recommend perl as a rapid prototyping language. What you see took 3 days (long days, mind, motivation was at an all time high around then). Adam

1 0