December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Rivest's Wheat & Chaff - A crypto alternative
by Dave Emery 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There are two bills before Congress. One (HR2369) concerns radio signal privacy and restrictions on scanners and receiving radio signals without authority, the other (HR2460 and S493) concerns use of scanners to capture ESNs for the purposes of cloning cellphones. Both passed the House, and the anti-cloning bill also passed the Senate. On Mon, Mar 30, 1998 at 09:36:55AM -0800, David Wagner wrote: > > A bill banning mere ownership (and modification, sale, and so on; no need > for prosecutors to show any ill intent) of cellular capable scanners has > passed the House by a vote of 414-1. A very similar version also passed the > Senate easily, and the two are being reconciled. There's no opposition; > this is fasttrack noncontroversial stuff, on the Hill. I'm told the bill is > as good as signed. > That is not my information. HR2369 (the Tauzin bill) does not ban mere possession of cell capable scanners. It bans manufacture, assembly, sale, import, export, or distribution of *any* radio equipment (not just cellphone capable scanners) "intended" for the unauthorized receipt, interception, or divulgance of communications in violation of the amended section 605 (which bans interception or divulgance rather than the previous *and* divulgance). This very clearly does not ban possession, and also very clearly speaks to intent. What this draconian language means with respect to a wide band radio receiver such as a scanner that can tune in certain signals it is not legal to listen to is not clear at the moment, as it turns on what "intended" means. Penalties for violation of this are 5 years in jail and $500,000 fine per sale... (the law was basicly expanded from one forbidding the sale of satellite TV piracy gear - and similar language has been the law since 1988, but less clear). According to Thomas and my other sources, HR2369 is still in the Senate Commerce Committee and has not been marked up - apparently Sen Hollings of SC has put a hold on it for further study. There is a bill (S493) which establishes 15 years in prison for "knowingly and with *intent to defraud* uses, produces, traffics in, has control or custody of, or possess" a scanning receiver "to intercept an electronic serial number, mobile identification number or other identifier of any telecommunications service, equipment or instrument. This later bill clearly concerns ESN theft for purposes of cloning, but it is broad enough so it conceivably might be applied to possession of radio receivers capable of capturing any kind of identifying information for any radio signal - but I think it is probably true that there would have to be a specific demonstrable intent to defraud demonstrated before a conviction under this language could happen. This bill is tough, however, and does provide for "forfeiture of any personal property used or intended to be used to commit the offense". S493 does make it illegal to merely possess "hardware or software, knowing it has been configured to insert or modify telecommunications identifying information associated with or contained in a telecommunications instrument so that such instrument may be used to obtain telecommunications service without authorization". No requirement of intent to defraud need be demonstrated here, but there is an affirmative defense "(which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence) that the conduct charged was engaged in for research or development in connection with a lawful purpose." This bill, is one of the first I know of to outlaw mere *possession* of software. And they can take seize your computer, your car, and Lord knows what else if they find the illegal software on your laptop hard drive. They need not prove you had any intention of using it to clone cellphones, just that you knew it was configured for illegal ESN alteration and you did not have it for "research and development in connection with a lawful purpose." To quote the Committee report on the bill... [S493} amends section 1029 of Title 18 of the United States Code, relating to fraud and related activity in connection with access devices. The bill amends subsection (a)(8) of section 1029 by deleting the `intent to defraud' requirement which exists under current law in order to prove a violation of that section. This section relates to persons who knowingly use, produce, traffic in, have custody or control of, or possess hardware or software which has been configured for altering or modifying a telecommunications instrument. As a result of the amendments made by the bill, in order to prove a violation of section 1029, law enforcement officials will no longer have to prove that a defendant possessing such hardware or software did so with the intent to defraud another person. The amendment to the statute is being made because law enforcement officials occasionally have been thwarted in proving true violations of the statute by the `intent to defraud' requirement. But as the hardware and software in question can be used only for the purpose of altering or modifying telecommunications instruments, persons other than those working in the telecommunications industry have no legitimate reason to possess the equipment. Therefore, requiring the government to prove an `intent to defraud' in order to prove a violation of the section for possessing this equipment is not necessary. By eliminating this requirement from existing law this bill will make it easier to obtain convictions against criminals who possess this equipment before they actually use it for illegal purposes. ............................. The statute, as amended, also does not prohibit persons from simply possessing equipment that only intercepts electronic serial numbers or wireless telephone numbers (defined as `scanning receivers' under section 1029, as amended by the bill). For example, companies which produce technology to sell to carriers or state and local governments that ascertains the location of wireless telephones as part of enhanced 911 services do not violate section 1029 by their actions. Under new subsection (a)(8), however, it will continue to be illegal to use, produce, traffic in, have custody or control of, or possess a scanning receiver if such act was done with the intent to defraud another person. This also is current law, and it remains unchanged by the bill. > > The law enforcement industry couldn't care less whether the cellphone > airlinks are private. All wiretaps are done at the base station or > inside the network, where no scanners are needed. > Sadly, this is only true of *legal* wiretaps by authorized *US* entities. Ask any of the dealers and manufacturers of cellphone interception gear and high end scanners who buys this stuff (with cell phone band enabled). Lots of LEA types have this gear, some of which is specialized enough so it could have no other purpose. > I suspect the cellphone industry wants these laws primarily because they find > them useful at fighting fraud. When you broadcast a reusable "password" > (the MIN/ESN pair) over the air in the clear (as analog phones do), devices > to snoop on conversations start to look very much like devices to steal those > valuable "passwords". Of course. They could care less about privacy (or they would have encrypted years ago), but fraud costs them big money. > > Of course, we all know that these laws are pretty ineffective at protecting > privacy, though they are effective at making it easier to snow the public into > thinking their cellphones are secure. (This is only, what, the fourth such > law? It just gets worse and worse.) -- Dave Emery N1PRE, die(a)die.com DIE Consulting, Weston, Mass. PGP fingerprint = 2047/4D7B08D1 DE 6E E1 CC 1F 1D 96 E2 5D 27 BD B0 24 88 C3 18

1 0

S-909 Revised
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We've received from anonymous a copy of Senators McCain and Kerrey's draft revisions to S.909, The Secure Public Networks Act, as announced in early March: http://jya.com/s909-rev.htm (60K) This is encryption legislation due to be introduced in May and is now being circulated among government agencies and industry for comment. It draws heavily on the FBI "technical assistance draft" of last year which made recommendations for modifying the original bill. See links to both from this draft. Page 2 of the draft was not provided. Anybody with a copy of the page we'd appreciate getting it, digitized if convenient, faxed if not: 212-799-4003.

1 0

pals
by bill payne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Monday 3/30/98 3:21 PM John Young The information contained in http://www.research.att.com/~smb/nsam-160/pal.html appears from my knowledge accurate. One must consider possible malfunction when With the CAT B, it is also possible to check the code, relock the weapon, or rekey it. and limited-try feature disables the bomb if too many incorrect keys are entered. Most references omit the CAT C. It may just be a later model of the CAT B. The new keys loaded were occasionally not the ones intended to be loaded. Back to Pantex for disassembly was the fix. The bubble memory of the T1563 was one of the problems in rekeying reliability, I was told.. Bugs in the about 112,000 lines of rca 1802 assembler code was also a problem. Kent Parsons asked me to look at the code and make a recommendation about what to do. Later bill

1 0

foiling any lock
by bill payne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Monday 3/30/98 6:34 PM wolit & smb Your statement at http://www.jya.com/pal-nukes.htm http://www.research.att.com/~smb/nsam-160/pal.html There are two basic means of foiling any lock, from an automobile ignition switch to a PAL: the first is to pick it, and the second is to bypass it. perhaps contains SEVERAL PRACTICAL oversights. ONE is spike it! http://caq.com/CAQ/caq63/caq63madsen.html http://www.aci.net/kalliste/speccoll.htm http://jya.com/whpfiles.htm And, of course, Pantex can always get in. Then there are OTHER ways of getting the key Two terrorist agents of the clerical regime, both high-ranking officials in Tehran's Evin Prison who have been directly involved in the torture and execution of numerous political prisoners in recent years, are currently in Austria on a secret assignment as special guests of the Iranian embassy in Vienna. One of the two is Ruhollah, the notorious interrogator in Evin Prison's Branch 6. I read It is reasonably probable that public key cryptography is not used directly. No known public key cryptosystem uses keys as short as 6 or 12 digits. I was told that public key was. Here is the name and e-mail address of the fellow who told me pubic key was used in the nuclear weapons ... and was being removed. KULJU,RONALD J. (505)845-8860 RJKULJU (505)844-9478 0519 RJKULJU(a)sandia.gov The supervisor of M Kent Parsons who told me it cost $300,000 each to recall the nuke to Pantex to remove Sandia's FAILING CHIPS [unspecified] is ALLEN,DOUGLAS J. (505)845-9624 DJALLEN (505)844-7593 1201 DJALLEN(a)sandia.gov The guy, at 2300 department manager M Kent Parson's request who showed me the about 112,000 lines of 1802 T1563 code is DENMAN,THOMAS A. (505)844-2819 TADENMA (505)844-9524 0487 TADENMA(a)sandia.gov I frequently see Denman when Morales and I meet at Taco Bell. Let's ALL try to get the true story OUT THERE. Best bill

1 0

And the way this relates to cryptomony is...uuhhh.......
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There is an amusing discussion of metaphor and metonymy in David Lodge's novel, Nice Work. A typical instance of this was the furious argument they had about the Silk Cut advertisement... Every few miles, it seemed, they passed the same huge poster on roadside hoardings, a photographic depiction of a rippling expanse of purple silk in which there was a single slit, as if the material had been slashed with a razor. There were no words in the advertisement, except for the Government Health Warning about smoking. This ubiquitous image, flashing past at regular intervals, both irritiated and intrigued Robyn, and she began to do her semiotic stuff on the deep structure hidden beneath its bland surface. It was in the first instance a kind of riddle. That is to say, in order to decode it, you had to know that there was a brand of cigarettes called Silk Cut. The poster was the iconic representation of a missing name, like a rebus. But the icon was also a metaphor. The shimmering silk, with its voluptous curves and sensuous texture, obviously symbolized the female body, and the elliptical slit, foregrounded by a lighter colour showing through, was still more obviously a vagina. The advert thus appealed to both senual and sadistic impulses, the desire to mutilate as well as penetrate the female body. Vic Wilcox spluttered with outraged derision as she expounded this interpretation. He smoked a different brand himself, but it wasas if he felt his whole philosophy of life was threatened by Robyn's analysis of the advert. 'You must have a twisted mind to see all that in a perfectly harmless bit of cloth,' he said. 'What's the point of it, then?' Robyn challenged him. 'Why use cloth to advertise cigarettes?' 'Well, that's the name of 'em, isn't it? Silk Cut. It's a picture of the name. Nothing more or less.' 'Suppose they'd used a picture of a roll of silk cut in half - would that do just as well?' 'I suppose so. Yes, why not?' 'Because it would look like a penis cut in half, that's why.' He forced a laugh to cover his embarrassment. 'Why can't you people take things at their face value?' 'What people are you refering to?' 'Highbrows. Intellectuals. You're always trying to find hidden meanings in things. Why? A cigarette is a cigarette. A piece of silk is a piece of silk. Why not leave it at that? 'When they're represented they acquire additional meanings,' said Robyn. 'Signs are never innocent. Semiotics teaches us that.' 'Semi-what?' 'Semiotics. The study of signs.' 'It teaches us to have dirty minds, if you ask me.' 'Why do you think the wretched cigarettes were called Silk Cut in the first place?' 'I dunno. It's just a name, as good as any other.' "Cut" has something to do with the tobacco, doesnt it? The way the tobacco leaf is cut. Like "Player's Navy Cut" - my uncle Walter used to smoke them.' 'Well, what if it does?' Vic said warily. 'But silk has nothing to do with tobacco. It's a metaphor, a metaphor that means something like, "smooth as silk". Somebody in an advertising agency dreamt up the name "Silk Cut" to suggest a cigarette that would'nt give you a sore throat or a hacking cough or lung cancer. But after a while the public got used to the name, the word "Silk" ceased to signify, so they decided to have an advertising campaign to give the brand a high profile again. Some bright spark in the agency came up with the idea of rippling silk with a cut in it. The original metaphor is now represented literally. Whether they conciously intended or not doesn't really matter. It's a good example of the perpetual sliding of the signified under a signifier, actually.' Wilcox chewed on this for a while, then said, 'Why do women smoke them, then, eh?' his triumphant expression showed that he thought this was a knock-down argument. 'If smoking Silk Cut is a form of aggravated rape, as you try to make out, how come women smoke 'em too?' 'Many women are masochistic by temperament,' said Robyn. 'They've learnt what's expected of them in a patriarchical society.' 'Ha!' Wilcox exclaimed, tossing back his head. 'I might have known you'd have some daft answer.' 'I don't know why you're so worked up,' Said Robyn. 'It's not as if you smoke Silk Cut yourself.' 'No, I smoke Marlboros. Funnily enough, I smoke them because I like the taste.' 'They're the ones that have the lone cowboy ads, aren't they?' 'I suppose that makes me a repressed homosexual, does it?' 'No, it's a very straightforward metonymic message.' 'Metawhat?' 'Metonymic. One of the fundamental tools of semiotics is the distinction between metaphor and metonymy. D'you want me to explain it to you?' 'It'll pass the time,' he said. 'Metaphor is a figure of speech based on similarity, whereas metonymy is based on contiguity. In metaphor you substitute something like the thing you mean for the thing itself, whereas in metonymy you substitute some attribute or cause or effect of the thing for the thing itself'. 'I don't understand a word you're saying.' 'Well, take one of your moulds. The bottom bit is called the drag because it's dragged across the floor and the top bit is called the cope because it covers the bottom bit.' 'I told you that.' 'Yes, I know. What you didn't tell me was that "drag" is a metonymy and "cope" is a metaphor.' Vic grunted. 'What difference does it make?' 'It's just a question of understanding how language works. I thought you were interested in how things work.' 'I don't see what it's got to do with cigarettes.' 'In the case of the Silk Cut poster, the picture signifies the female body metaphorically: the slit in the silk is like a vagina -' Vic flinched at the word. 'So you say.' 'All holes, hollow places, fissures and folds represent the female genitals.' 'Prove it.' 'Freud proved it, by his successful analysis of dreams,' said Robyn. 'But the Marlboro ads don't use any metaphors. That's probably why you smoke them, actually.' 'What d'you mean?' he said suspiciously. 'You don't have any sympathy with the metaphorical way of looking at things. A cigarette is a cigarette as far as you are concerned.' 'Right.' 'The Marlboro ad doesn't disturb that naive faith in the stability of the signified. It establishes a metonymic connection - completely spurious of course, but realistically plausible - between smoking that particular brand and the healthy, heroic, outdoor life of the cowboy. Buy the cigarette and you buy the lifestyle, or the fantasy of living it.' 'Rubbish!' said Wilcox. 'I hate the country and the open air. I'm scared to go into a field with a cow in it.' 'Well then, maybe it's the solitariness of the cowboy in the ads that appeals to you. Self-reliant, independent, very macho.' 'I've never heard such a lot of balls in all my life,' said Vic Wilcox, which was strong language coming from him. 'Balls - now that's an interesting expression...' Robyn mused. 'Oh no!' he groaned. 'When you say a man "has balls", approvingly, it's a metonymy, whereas if you say something is a "lot of balls", or "a balls-up", it's a sort of metaphor. The metonymy attributes value to the testicles whereas the metaphor uses them to degrade something else.' 'I can't take any more of this,' said Vic. 'D'you mind if I smoke? Just a plain, ordinary cigarette?'

1 0

Hi I want to meet you im a model!
by BUTCHER56 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To: BUTCHER56(a)aol.com Subject: Hi I want to meet you im a model! From: BUTCHER56 <BUTCHER56(a)aol.com> Date: Mon, 30 Mar 1998 22:21:48 EST Organization: AOL (http://www.aol.com) Come to my home and get inside and you will seem! click here

1 0

Quit Smoking in 7 Days Guaranteed! -QEVR
by Smoke-Away 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear cypherpunks, Quit Smoking in Just 7 Days Guaranteed!!! Flush nicotine cravings from your body naturally with SMOKE-AWAY! Safely, easily and successfully, with No Cravings, Withdrawal or Weight gain! Free yourself or someone you love from nicotine addiction with this incredible all herbal program. ORDER NOW! The complete SMOKE-AWAY program is now ONLY $49.95! Call 1-800-611-5930 Ext.3395 for VISA OR MASTER CARD ORDERS. No risk, Money Back Guarantee. To order by mail, print out this page, and send in the completed form below: _________________________________________________________________________ Enclosed is $49.95 plus $5.00 shipping and handling for each kit ordered. I understand that Smoke-Away comes With a No Risk, Money Back Guarantee. Mail Check or Money Order to: Behavioral Research Center Dept: 3395 5051 Castello Drive, Suite 235 Naples, Florida 34103 NAME ________________________________________________________________ ADDRESS _____________________________________________________________ CITY_________________________________ STATE___________ ZIP ____________ __MASTERCARD __VISA CREDIT CARD NUMBER __________________________________________________ EXPIRATION DATE ______________________________________________________ SIGNATURE ____________________________________________________________

1 0

Returned mail: User unknown
by Mail Delivery Subsystem 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The original message was received at Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:41:11 -0500 (EST) from camel7.mindspring.com [207.69.200.57] ** This is an automatic message to inform you that your email was not forwarded through iName's server. The iName email address that you tried to send mail to may not be active. Reasons for the failed delivery attempt could include: 1. The iName customer has selected a new personalized iName email address rendering their old iName email address inactive. 2. The iName customer may have signed up for one of iName's free offers and then not validated their forwarding address. 3 The address may simply be typed incorrectly. Please check that you typed the email address correctly. iName provides email users with a permanent, personalized and secure email address that is independent of how one accesses the Internet. iName acts as a global forwarding service. All email sent to a permanent iName address is automatically forwarded to a user specified destination email address. Please visit iName's Online Support Area at http://www.iname.com/info/intro/index.html for further information. ** ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com (expanded from: <cheapdentalplan(a)writeme.com>) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mta2.mailexcite.com.: >>> RCPT To:<debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com> <<< 550 [SMTPD]: This account has temporarily exceeded its incoming quota 550 debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com... User unknown Reporting-MTA: dns; mx04.globecomm.net Received-From-MTA: DNS; camel7.mindspring.com Arrival-Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:41:11 -0500 (EST) Final-Recipient: RFC822; <cheapdentalplan(a)writeme.com> X-Actual-Recipient: RFC822; debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Remote-MTA: DNS; mta2.mailexcite.com Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 [SMTPD]: This account has temporarily exceeded its incoming quota Last-Attempt-Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:41:12 -0500 (EST) Subject: Some spam From: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:37:32 -0500 (EST) Here is the information on the $9 dental plan we talked about. I apologise for the delay in getting the information to you but I have been swamped for request. Please fax me if you want more information or wish to sign up. I don't know what you're talking about; thought I'd let you know. Your buddy

1 0

Returned mail: User unknown
by Mail Delivery Subsystem 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The original message was received at Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:34:28 -0500 (EST) from camel7.mindspring.com [207.69.200.57] ** This is an automatic message to inform you that your email was not forwarded through iName's server. The iName email address that you tried to send mail to may not be active. Reasons for the failed delivery attempt could include: 1. The iName customer has selected a new personalized iName email address rendering their old iName email address inactive. 2. The iName customer may have signed up for one of iName's free offers and then not validated their forwarding address. 3 The address may simply be typed incorrectly. Please check that you typed the email address correctly. iName provides email users with a permanent, personalized and secure email address that is independent of how one accesses the Internet. iName acts as a global forwarding service. All email sent to a permanent iName address is automatically forwarded to a user specified destination email address. Please visit iName's Online Support Area at http://www.iname.com/info/intro/index.html for further information. ** ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com (expanded from: <cheapdentalplan(a)writeme.com>) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mta3.mailexcite.com.: >>> RCPT To:<debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com> <<< 550 [SMTPD]: This account has temporarily exceeded its incoming quota 550 debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com... User unknown Reporting-MTA: dns; mx02.globecomm.net Received-From-MTA: DNS; camel7.mindspring.com Arrival-Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:34:28 -0500 (EST) Final-Recipient: RFC822; <cheapdentalplan(a)writeme.com> X-Actual-Recipient: RFC822; debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Remote-MTA: DNS; mta3.mailexcite.com Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 [SMTPD]: This account has temporarily exceeded its incoming quota Last-Attempt-Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:34:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: Some spam From: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:37:33 -0500 (EST) Here is the information on the $9 dental plan we talked about. I apologise for the delay in getting the information to you but I have been swamped for request. Please fax me if you want more information or wish to sign up. I don't know what you're talking about; thought I'd let you know. Your buddy

1 0

Returned mail: User unknown
by Mail Delivery Subsystem 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The original message was received at Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:34:34 -0500 (EST) from camel7.mindspring.com [207.69.200.57] ** This is an automatic message to inform you that your email was not forwarded through iName's server. The iName email address that you tried to send mail to may not be active. Reasons for the failed delivery attempt could include: 1. The iName customer has selected a new personalized iName email address rendering their old iName email address inactive. 2. The iName customer may have signed up for one of iName's free offers and then not validated their forwarding address. 3 The address may simply be typed incorrectly. Please check that you typed the email address correctly. iName provides email users with a permanent, personalized and secure email address that is independent of how one accesses the Internet. iName acts as a global forwarding service. All email sent to a permanent iName address is automatically forwarded to a user specified destination email address. Please visit iName's Online Support Area at http://www.iname.com/info/intro/index.html for further information. ** ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com (expanded from: <cheapdentalplan(a)writeme.com>) ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to mta1.mailexcite.com.: >>> RCPT To:<debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com> <<< 550 [SMTPD]: This account has temporarily exceeded its incoming quota 550 debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com... User unknown Reporting-MTA: dns; mx02.globecomm.net Received-From-MTA: DNS; camel7.mindspring.com Arrival-Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:34:34 -0500 (EST) Final-Recipient: RFC822; <cheapdentalplan(a)writeme.com> X-Actual-Recipient: RFC822; debtzapper(a)mailexcite.com Action: failed Status: 5.1.1 Remote-MTA: DNS; mta1.mailexcite.com Diagnostic-Code: SMTP; 550 [SMTPD]: This account has temporarily exceeded its incoming quota Last-Attempt-Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:34:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: Some spam From: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Tue, 31 Mar 1998 07:37:40 -0500 (EST) Here is the information on the $9 dental plan we talked about. I apologise for the delay in getting the information to you but I have been swamped for request. Please fax me if you want more information or wish to sign up. I don't know what you're talking about; thought I'd let you know. Your buddy

1 0