December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

tell me what you think of this RC2 C++ source code
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

tell me what you think of this RC2 C++ source code #include <string.h> #include <assert.h> void RC2Keyschedule::schedule( unsigned short K[64], const unsigned char L[128], unsigned T8, unsigned TM ) { unsigned char x; unsigned i; static const unsigned char PITABLE[256] = { 217,120,249,196, 25,221,181,237, 40,233,253,121, 74,160,216,157, 198,126, 55,131, 43,118, 83,142, 98, 76,100,136, 68,139,251,162, 23,154, 89,245,135,179, 79, 19, 97, 69,109,141, 9,129,125, 50, 189,143, 64,235,134,183,123, 11,240,149, 33, 34, 92,107, 78,130, 84,214,101,147,206, 96,178, 28,115, 86,192, 20,167,140,241,220, 18,117,202, 31, 59,190,228,209, 66, 61,212, 48,163, 60,182, 38, 111,191, 14,218, 70,105, 7, 87, 39,242, 29,155,188,148, 67, 3, 248, 17,199,246,144,239, 62,231, 6,195,213, 47,200,102, 30,215, 8,232,234,222,128, 82,238,247,132,170,114,172, 53, 77,106, 42, 150, 26,210,113, 90, 21, 73,116, 75,159,208, 94, 4, 24,164,236, 194,224, 65,110, 15, 81,203,204, 36,145,175, 80,161,244,112, 57, 153,124, 58,133, 35,184,180,122,252, 2, 54, 91, 37, 85,151, 49, 45, 93,250,152,227,138,146,174, 5,223, 41, 16,103,108,186,201, 211, 0,230,207,225,158,168, 44, 99, 22, 1, 63, 88,226,137,169, 13, 56, 52, 27,171, 51,255,176,187, 72, 12, 95,185,177,205, 46, 197,243,219, 71,229,165,156,119, 10,166, 32,104,254,127,193,173 }; assert(len > 0 && len <= 128); assert(bits <= 1024); if (!bits) bits = 1024; memcpy(xkey, key, len); for (i = 0; i < 128; i++) { L[i] = PITABLE[L[i-1] + L[i-T]]; } T8 = (T1+7) >> 3; TM = 255 MOD 2^(8 + T1 - 8*T8); L[128-T8] = PITABLE[L[128-T8] & TM]; for (i = 0; i < 127-T8; i++) { L[i] = PITABLE[L[i+1] XOR L[i+T8]]; }; i = 63; K[i] = L[2*i] + 256*L[2*i+1]; }; void RC2Encryption::ProcessBlock( const unsigned short K[64], ) { unsigned R3, R2, R1, R0, i; for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) { R0 += (R1 & ~R3) + (R2 & R3) + K[4*i+0]; R0 = R0 << 1; R1 += (R2 & ~R0) + (R3 & R0) + K[4*i+1]; R1 = R1 << 2; R2 += (R3 & ~R1) + (R0 & R1) + K[4*i+2]; R2 = R2 << 3; R3 += (R0 & ~R2) + (R1 & R2) + K[4*i+3]; R3 = R3 << 5; if (i == 4 || i == 10) { R0 += K[R3 & 63]; R1 += K[R0 & 63]; R2 += K[R1 & 63]; R3 += K[R2 & 63]; } } void RC2Decryption::ProcessBlock( const unsigned short K[64], ) { unsigned R3, R2, R1, R0, i; for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) { R3 = R3 << 5; R3 += (R0 & ~R2) + (R1 & R2) + K[4*i-3]; R2 = R2 << 3; R2 += (R3 & ~R1) + (R0 & R1) + K[4*i-2]; R1 = R1 << 2; R1 += (R2 & ~R0) + (R3 & R0) + K[4*i-1]; R0 = R0 << 1; R0 += (R1 & ~R3) + (R2 & R3) + K[4*i-0]; if (i == 4 || i == 10) { R3 -= K[R2 & 63]; R2 -= KR1 & 63]; R1 -= K[R0 & 63]; R0 -= K[R3 & 63]; } }

1 0

Re: Latest smartcard software
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>They'll say hey, you've already surrendered your biometric number >during fingerprinting for driver's licenses. > >It will be too late. > >The high-tech American Leviathan will be in place. Sounds like Microsoft. No, really. I'm dead serious. Like it or not, people have to use Mickeysoft crap sooner or later. Want to read that document? Read that email? Run that program? Purchase things (software which runs)? It's garbage. I know it's garbage. Many of us here know it's garbage. But we have to use it anyway. Compare this to the smartcard as proposed like this: I know it's garbage. Many of us here know it's garbage. But we have to use it anyway. Want to read that document? Read that email? Access that computer system? Drive your car? Get in your house? Get through a toll booth? Enter or leave the country? Better make sure your papers are in order. The high-tech American Leviathan is already in place. The problem is that it'll just get worse because the sheeple are, by definition, naked, stupid, and blind.

2 1

Re: SC rules 1st doesn't cover lies [CNN] (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 23:47:05 -0500 > From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> > Subject: Re: SC rules 1st doesn't cover lies [CNN] > Reply-To: austin-cpunks(a)ssz.com > > Clarification on the Subject: line -- the court's ruling, at least as > described below, applies only to government employees. It is the > state-as-employer, not the state-as-sovereign, role the court is discussing. > > In other words, we're still free to lie, cheat, and steal[1]. > >> "A citizen may decline to answer the question, or answer it > >> honestly, but he cannot with impunity knowingly and willfully answer > >> with a falsehood," Rehnquist said. So you have to be an employee of the government to be a citizen? ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ 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: Misty??? (fwd)
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anonymous wrote: |Adam Back wrote: Well, for the record, that was me, not Mr. Back, but who can tell the difference? |> Tim May wrote: |> | I wouldn't call Misty "snake oil." But it's also been thoroughly taken |> | apart and shown to be weak. Importantly, it was submitted by Mitsubishi for |> | peer review. |> |> Could you provide a pointer to the analysis paper? | |Adam, you should know better than to ask. Everyone knows you can't |trust a bigot to do cryptography. Tim "Chop Chop" May's opinions about |Misty are based not on the strength of the cipher, but on the ethnicity |of the creator. Its clear to me that Nobuki baits Tim, and Tim baits Nobuki. Its not as entertaining as the Detwieler days (where we would have gotten the claimn that Tim and Nobuki were the same), but hey.. I'm perfectly happy to let bigots do my cryptanalysis for me. As long as they get positive results, hey, I'm more secure. Not believing that the Americans could break German engineering was one of the failures of the Enigma team. Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Your e-mail sent to me by mistake
by trump7＠foursssst.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Did you know that as many as 70% of all Americans have negative or incorrect information on their credit report and that one in five complaints to the Federal Trade Commission is against Credit Bureaus. ARE YOU ONE OF THE MILLIONS OF AMERICANS REJECTED FOR CREDIT? If so, we have the information you need: >Remove negative and incorrect information from your credit report< * Bankruptcies - REMOVED * Repossessions - REMOVED * Tax Liens - REMOVED * Judgments - REMOVED * Charge Offs - REMOVED * Late Payments - REMOVED >>Get all of the credit cards you want<< >>Obtain a Home mortgage<< >>Qualify for a car loan<< Everyone is entitled to a better lifestyle for themselves and their family and especially such a basic need as a house, a car, or credit cards. Imagine the thrill of driving home for the first time in a new car and showing it to your friends, relatives and neighbors, or the convenience of having a credit card for making purchases, or fulfilling the American dream of owning a Home. NOW IT IS POSSIBLE! All of the information you need is contained in our confidential report; =========================================== "Insider's Guide to Credit Repair Secrets." =========================================== Best of all, you can have this report RIGHT NOW, delivered directly to your e-mail inbox in a matter of minutes. Read on for further details. The "Insider's Guide to Credit Repair Secrets" contains everything you need in order to repair your own credit report. In addition, as the title implies, we include some of the industries best kept and guarded secrets, things the Credit Bureaus and Banks don't want you to know. Don't pay hundreds or perhaps thousands of dollars to a credit repair agency. You can do it yourself for FREE, with equal or better results. ===> BONUS OFFER <=== The "Insider's Guide to Credit Repair Secrets" normally sells for $19.95 and is worth every penny. However, through a special arraignment with the author, we are able to offer the report to you for only $9.95. This is a limited time offer so YOU MUST ACT NOW. If you order immediately, we will also include the following two valuable BONUS SECTIONS absolutely FREE: BONUS SECTION #1 HOW TO GET A CREDIT CARD OR BANK LOAN * Shaping your application to improve your chances of being approved * How creditors rate an application * Hot tips on how you can stack the odds in your favor * How to use a co-signer * How to establish AAA credit in 30 days BONUS SECTION #2 TOP 10 WEB SITES FOR FREE CREDIT REPAIR & CREDIT CARD INFO These 10 Web sites are the best of the best. All of them are absolutely FREE. They contain additional credit repair information, tips on obtaining credit cards and loans, databases of hundreds upon hundreds of credit card issuers, consumer help on overcoming debt, etc... BUT THERE'S MORE............. If you order within 48 hours of receiving this e-mail, we will also include absolutely FREE with your purchase, a complete copy of the "Fair Credit Reporting Act", word-for-word as written by the Federal Trade Commission. Understanding the "Fair Credit Reporting Act" is the key to enforcing your rights with regard to negative entries on your credit file. HOW TO ORDER!!! To order the "Insider's Guide to Credit Repair Secrets" plus both BONUS SECTIONS, plus a complete copy of the "Fair Credit Reporting Act" all delivered IMMEDIATELY to your e-mail inbox, all you need to do is follow these simple steps; 1) Get a pen and piece of paper ready to write down an important e-mail address. 2) Call 1-900-448-8901. (Your phone bill will be charged $9.95 for this call. If you are under 18 years of age, you must receive parental permission before calling) 3) Listen to the 900 number recording and write down the e-mail address given. 4) Send any e-mail message to the address given on the recording and within minutes, the report, along with both BONUS SECTIONS and the "Fair Credit Reporting Act" will be electronically delivered to your e-mail inbox. Isn't $9.95 a small price to pay for the convenience of a clean credit record and all of the advantages that go along with it. Order the "Insider's Guide to Credit Repair Secrets" plus the two FREE BONUS SECTIONS and the "Fair Credit Reporting Act" today and start enjoying the credit you deserve. CALL 1-900-448-8901 NOW. You will be glad you did!!! The information supplied in the "Insiders Guide to Credit Repair Secrets" is applicable only to United States residents. If you have received this e-mail solicitation and live outside the United States of America, please accept our apology and disregard this message. Thank you.

1 0

Free Hot Talk
by n＠n.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Want to talk with HOT, WET, SEXY, young girls right now? They are waiting for your call right now, and they want to MAKE YOU CUM! ARE YOU: Horney? Lonely? Out of town? Bored? Just need someone to talk to??? WELL THEN CALL, AMBER'S HOT SEX TALK AT: 1-473-407-9374 You will be able to talk to girls 1 ON 1! RIGHT NOW! **ABSOLUTELY FREE!** **ABSOLUTELY FREE!** All you pay is long distance fees! NEVER RUN-AROUNDS! NO TRANSFERS TO 1-900 NUMBERS, OR ANY OTHER NUMBERS TO CALL! NO NEED FOR CREDIT CARDS! TRY US OUT YOU'LL LOVE IT! 1-473-407-9374 1-473-407-9374 1-473-407-9374 1-473-407-9374 1-473-407-9374 1-473-407-9374 1-473-407-9374 1-473-407-9374 1-473-407-9374 *GAY? WANT TO TALK TO HOT HUNG MEN RIGHT NOW? CALL: 011-678-75628* 18+ Years old to call. /////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// If you wish to be removed from this advertiser's future mailings, please reply to: remove(a)polbox.com with the subject "Remove" and this software will automatically block you from their future mailings. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

1 0

Candidate Blacknet Customer :-)
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.newsmait.com has a section called the "Newspaper Intelligence Page", which has anonymized comments from newspaper reporters about what their (current or former) newspaper working environments are like. Aside from the usual issues that any site for griping about work offers, this site provides a lot of insight into the media business - how much freedom do writers have, what kinds of topics get squashed, what the biases of the editors and management are like. The folks who run the site have some obvious concerns about lawsuits. Looks like a good candidate for a Blacknet-style web site... Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, bill.stewart(a)pobox.com PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639

1 0

Re: (eternity) Eternity as a secure filesystem/backup medium
by John Kelsey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [ To: cypherpunks ## Date: 01/21/98 ## Subject: Re: (eternity) Eternity as a secure filesystem/backup medium ] >Subject: Re: (eternity) Eternity as a secure filesystem/backup medium >From: Adam Back <aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk> >Date: 1998/01/18 >1. communications crypto used by the author in submitting > the document is broken This is only a threat if the authorities have a good idea who submitted the data, and want to prove it. Otherwise, you end up with billions of encrypted documents, each encrypted with a moderately weak cipher. (Even assuming that the cipher turns out to have only 40 bits of strength, this is too expensive to do for more than a handful of documents.) >2. the eternity architecture contains encrypted documents to > frustrate attempts to locate documents, and to hide the > contents of documents from individual servers Again, this won't be too economical unless the eternity service is rarely used. >3. communications crypto used to request and deliver > documents is broken thus revealing the readers identity >So it is useful to design upgrade paths for ciphers into the >protocols where possible. Definitely--this is always a good idea, right? >Other approaches we could take are to use very conservative >cipher key sizes and protocols combining multiple ciphers in >ways which gives us the security of the best of the ciphers. >For example: > R = random, C = 5DES( R ) || blowfish-484( M xor R ) >Where 5DES is say E-D-E-D-E with 5 independent DES keys. >Constructs to combine in strong ways hash functions, macs, >symmetric and asymmetric ciphers would be useful. Is there >much research in this area? Yes. Massey and Maurer did a Journal of Cryptography paper titled ``The Importance of Being First,'' which says that in any chain of encryptions with different ciphers and independent keys, such as E_1(E_2(E_3(data))), the whole thing is provably as strong as the first cipher used on the data (E_3, in my example above). This is really obvious, when you reflect that an attacker can always try to break data encrypted with E_3 by superencrypting it with E_1 and E_2, and then mounting his attack on E_1(E_2(E_3(data))). Of course, if keys aren't independent among the three ciphers, then you don't get any guarantee of this kind. The other thing to note is that if you're just generating keystream sequences, as you would with RC4 or SEAL, then all ciphers are ``first.'' Rivest and Sherman also did some work on randomized encryption, of the kind you discuss, in the Crypto '82 proceedings. Your construction is very similar to one of theirs. Let M = message and R = a message-sized random number, then in E_1(R), E_2(R XOR M) both E_1 and E_2 must be broken to learn M. (Imagine this isn't the case, then either E_1 or E_2 wasn't broken. If you didn't break E_2 but broke E_1, then you only learn R, which is useless to you--it's random and uncorrelated with M. If you broke E_2 but not E_1, you would have a message encrypted with a one-time pad.) This generalizes nicely to E_1(R1), E_2(R2), ..., E_N(RN), E_{N+1}(R1 XOR R2 XOR ... XOR M). If those random numbers are really random, then if any one of those ciphers resists your attacks, the message can't be recovered. Now, you can also do this with things that approximate random functions, which they also discuss. Thus, you might use: f_1(),f_2(), ..., f_n() are N independently-keyed different cryptographic functions that approximate random functions. The funny thing is, if you instantiate this intelligently, you get a message encrypted by N different stream ciphers, perhaps with a random parameter per message thrown in during keying of those ciphers. Thus, suppose s_1(K1) = RC4(K1) s_2(K2) = 3DES-OFB(K2) s_3(K3) = SHA1-Counter-Mode(K3) s_4(K4) = Blowfish-OFB(K4) s_5(K5) = SAFER-SK128(K5). and that these keys are different per message and are all independent. Then, you get the result that M XOR s_1(K1) XOR S_2(k2) XOR ... XOR s_5(k5). leaves no way to recover M unless all five s_i() can be guessed. Note that, in practice, this isn't likely to be useful unless you've done the same kind of thing for symmetric key distribution, random number generation, etc. Otherwise, your attacker in 2050 will bypass the symmetric encryption entirely and factor your RSA modulus, or guess all the entropy sources used for your PRNG, or whatever else you can think of. The good news, though, is that active attacks (like chosen input attacks) and many side-channel attacks (e.g., timing attacks) turn out not to be possible if you are trying to mount them after the encryption has been carried out. >Adam - --John Kelsey, kelsey(a)counterpane.com / kelsey(a)plnet.net NEW PGP print = 5D91 6F57 2646 83F9 6D7F 9C87 886D 88AF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNMeCqSZv+/Ry/LrBAQGxpgQAloxNjdZMf6l/7U520ZSIVuk7lFZcu0+J 5tUyQgHtS4EAplC1OBnYc8B3pzCir6VCXinmNbClgalXhrRFfmV7vTQLZySaVv/+ 0T44TFkJ0Ldu4cTsA2ertL0jcCXiBp38mhVK2IFbPtN+04B+een8jrUYtzx/qIj5 ztBpBb4yil8= =wBTR -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3

Hi !!!
by hoilu46＠concentric.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi baby, I'm Christy. Cum join my girlfriends and I for some Live Erotic Chat!! We we're so naughty they banned us from the U.S.A!!!! We're so hot and horny we can't wait to get it on with you!! Call us at, 011-378-656-346. That's 011-378-656-346!! We'll be waiting ....... International rates apply. You be 18 or older to use this service.

1 0

Re: On the LAM--Local Area Mixes (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 22 Jan 1998 10:30:26 -0800 > Original-From: Bill Stewart <bill.stewart(a)pobox.com> > Subject: Re: On the LAM--Local Area Mixes > the year before the Supreme Court issued the Exclusionary Rule, > the New York City police didn't bother getting any search warrants, > because the Constitutional requirement that they do so didn't have > any real enforcement mechanism. Are police considered an extension of the judicial or the executive arm of the government? ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1