December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: radio net (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 22:28:02 -0400 > From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> > Subject: Re: radio net > Someone here already said it, but nobody else got it, so I'll repeat it: > SSB, or Single Sideband. It's commercial ham radio, if you will, and all > the ships use it. I expect that you can shove anything down an SSB set that > you want, including encrypted traffic. > > Ham radio is a government nerd subsidy, and as such, doesn't do much but > make more government funded/sactioned/approved/whatever nerds. :-). > > SSB would do just fine. It's an international standard, after all, and > probably not under the control of any one government, even.e Single-sideband (SSB) isn't an international standard, it's a physical effect. See: The Art of Electronics Horowitz, Hill ISBN 0-521-37095-7 pp. 897 ____________________________________________________________________ The seeker is a finder. Ancient Persian Proverb The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Found this: http://offshorehaven.nu/banking/index.html no idea whether a trap or a jewel.

2 1

Re: Impossible Analysis Paper at Crypto98
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> There's talk of a paper given at Crypto98 on "Impossible > Differential Analysis" which got the NSA people scribbling > like mad taking notes as though this was something that > had never come up at the agency and they'd better get > right on it. > > Roughly, as I heard it (and I may be way off), the premise is > that instead of using differential analysis for finding weaknesses > in a cipher, to flip that to determine what could not possibly be > a weakness in a cipher and build one with just those attributes. > > Is this report correct, and is there a source for that paper? This was presented at the rump session and apparently there is no paper writeup yet. Biham's home page at http://www.cs.technion.ac.il/~biham/ has a place you can register to be notified when new material comes out. With conventional differential cryptanalysis, you look for pairs of inputs which have differences (xors usually) such that after a certain number of rounds, the ciphertexts have certain differences with excess probability. With "impossible" differential cryptanalysis, you look for inputs with differences which lead to ciphertext differences that are "impossible", or at least have reduced probability. It's the same basic idea but you look for diminution rather than enhancement of the probability of later differences. Because of the reversal of the effect, the techniques for identifying differentials, exploiting them, and designing against them are rather different. As a result ciphers which were designed to resist differential cryptanalysis may be vulnerable to impossible differentials. This technique has apparently led to an improved attack on SkipJack, announced on Biham's web page above as "coming soon". There was also a moderate improvement in attacks on reduced-round IDEA (not effective against the full number of rounds though). At Crypto everyone was scurrying off to see if any of the AES candidates could be knocked out by the new technique.

1 0

Bulk emailing service
by bman offer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

<HTML><PRE><BODY BGCOLOR="#000000"><FONT COLOR="#00FFFF" SIZE=3> Bulkman Direct Email Promotion Bulkman --> Call (336) 214-0344 for ordering information,custom orders, and Website information. Bulkman Services offers professional, effective direct email advertising to promote your business or website. With our service you will reach thousands of people who are interested in what you have to offer. We can send up to 500,000 emails out for you with your own sales letter. The email addresses that we use are freshly extracted daily from people actually online either chatting or surfing! Plus, the people who receive your email aren't overloaded with other offers. We also offer targeted emailing using a target audience that you specify, for example - music lovers, single mothers, college students, etc. We use up to date, high quality programs to effectively extract fresh addresses and successfully mail your message. This is why our service is more effective than others. Bulkman will give the sales boost you've been looking for. Try out our services and you will be overloaded with response and sales!!! We accept any questions and phone orders - Call --> (336) 214-0344 - Anytime - --> please leave a voicemail message and you will be contacted shortly </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3>

1 0

Writing skills
by s9812127＠postino.up.ac.za 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

YoU wR1t3 l1K3 tH1s aGa1N & 1'll f1@m3 you, dickhead... > From: Jrjeffro(a)aol.com > Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 19:27:05 -0700 (PDT) > Bcc: > HaCkaZ OnlY Da EliTeHelLO YaLL DiS is Da MaDD AAOOLL HaCka Ima startin a GreWp fOR HaCs Only So In OthA WerDS yA gOttA KnOw The WAreZ anD HoW toO UsEr FaTe AnD AOL So MaIl Or Im Me FoR Da TeTaIls f > YeR LeeTo K Pe@CE FrOmE The LeeTs HacKJeFFrO) > > > -/"Those who desire to give up freedom in -/exchange for security will not have, -/nor do they deserve, either one." - Thomas Jefferson -/ Crayven. -/"Those who desire to give up freedom in -/exchange for security will not have, -/nor do they deserve, either one." - Thomas Jefferson -/ Crayven.

1 0

No Subject
by s9813117＠postino.up.ac.za 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Impossible Analysis Paper at Crypto98
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There's talk of a paper given at Crypto98 on "Impossible Differential Analysis" which got the NSA people scribbling like mad taking notes as though this was something that had never come up at the agency and they'd better get right on it. Roughly, as I heard it (and I may be way off), the premise is that instead of using differential analysis for finding weaknesses in a cipher, to flip that to determine what could not possibly be a weakness in a cipher and build one with just those attributes. Is this report correct, and is there a source for that paper?

2 1

SNET: [FP] Alaska: Nearly 93% of new parents choose Enumeration At Birth (EAB)
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: "ScanThisNews" <mcdonalds(a)airnet.net> (by way of jeremy.compton(a)stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jeremy Compton)) Subject: SNET: [FP] Alaska: Nearly 93% of new parents choose Enumeration At Birth (EAB) Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 01:37:30 +1200 To: snetnews(a)world.std.com -> SNETNEWS Mailing List ====================================================================== SCAN THIS NEWS 9/10/98 This article actually ran in '96, but it is worth reviewing. ====================================================================== Press release from Alaska's Department of Health and Social Services found at: http://health.hss.state.ak.us/htmlstuf/com/pr/media.htm Electronic Birth Certificates and Social Security Cards at Birth Make Life Easier For Parents Februrary 6, 1966 (sic) The Alaska Department of Health and Social Services Bureau of Vital Statistics reports that the Electronic Birth Certificates (EBC) have been installed in all but three of Alaska's hospitals. In a little over a two year time period, the Bureau has gone from no electronic birth certificates to nearly 99% of all Alaska hospital births coming to the Bureau in electronic format. "Innumerable man-hours have been saved at both ends of the registration process," said Al Zangri, Chief of the Bureau. In addition, in cooperation with state-wide hospitals, the Bureau has implemented the Social Security Administration's Enumeration At Birth (EAB) program statewide during 1995. The Enumeration at Birth program allows parents to request a social security number for their newborn through the birth registration process. This program has proven to be so popular with new parents that nearly 93% of all births transmitted to the Bureau request a social security number. ======================================================================= -----Original Message----- From: Katherine A. Sent: Thursday, Sep. 10, 1998 ======================================================================= Reply to: <fingerprint(a)networkusa.org> ======================================================================= To subscribe to the free Scan This News newsletter, send a message to <majordomo(a)efga.org> and type "subscribe scan" in the BODY. Or, to be removed type "unsubscribe scan" in the message BODY. For additional instructions see www.efga.org/about/maillist.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "Scan This News" is Sponsored by S.C.A.N. Host of the "FIGHT THE FINGERPRINT!" web page: www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml ======================================================================= -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com -> Posted by: "ScanThisNews" <mcdonalds(a)airnet.net> (by way of jeremy.compton(a)stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jeremy Compton))

2 1

IP: The big blackout?
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: "Douglas E. Renz" <dougr(a)zlink.net> Subject: IP: The big blackout? Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 15:50:53 -0400 To: "'Chris Ball'" <1stlight(a)mail.tds.net>, "'En_Agape'" <en_agape(a)prodigy.net>, "'Kim/Jr'" <jrandkim(a)juno.com>, "'Kristen'" <kristen_renz(a)juno.com>, "'Steve Cortese'" <Sccortese(a)juno.com>, "'Tom Young'" <tayoung(a)cottagesoft.com> September 7, 1998 The big blackout? Regardless of your own Y2K preparedness, the slow-moving electrical industry could leave you in the dark By Blaise Zerega Companies scrambling to bring their computer systems into year-2000 compliance may discover that their time and effort will be for naught. A lack of preparedness by North America's electrical industry may pull the plug on many companies' transition plans. Although many electric companies have already begun addressing year-2000 compliance, some have not. It was only in June that the first industrywide efforts got under way, which may not leave enough time for testing and contingency planning, according to experts. "I can't tell you overall how we stand. Based on the information we receive, we'll build contingency plans off that," said Jon Arnold, chief technology officer of the Edison Electric Institute (EEI), a trade organization in Washington that represents companies supplying roughly 75 percent of North America's electricity. The North American Electric Reliability Council (NERC) will present the first industry report on year-2000 readiness to the Department of Energy (DOE) on Sept. 14, with public release slated for Sept. 17. Until the publication of this report, serious questions about the capability of power companies to generate, transmit, and distribute electric power -- and the consequences for IT system and business disruptions -- will abound. Industry experts point to the electric system's interconnectedness as the potential source of most problems. North America is divided into three interconnected power grids, which are made up of electric generating, transmitting, and distribution companies. These thousands of companies compose a high-level network that is only as strong as its weakest segment. "If you have a failure in one place, it can affect the power delivery in many places," said Stephanie Moore, an analyst at the Giga Information Group, a research company in Westport, Conn. The risk posed by interconnectedness is made worse by deregulation. For example, a California company purchasing power from a Tennessee company may not receive it because of a transmission problem in Kansas. Unfortunately, companies have very few alternative power options, analysts say. Large companies should investigate on-site power generation, largely from generators, while small companies with limited resources might resort to candles and a return to paper -- until power is restored and IT systems brought back up. "The truth is, I don't have any good advice," said Rick Cowles, director of industry year-2000 solutions at Tava Technologies, in Penn's Grove, N.J. Many companies have been slow to tackle the year-2000 risks of their power supply, concentrating instead on their internal computing systems, analysts said. A large Fortune 200 manufacturer in the Midwest is taking this risk seriously, but has yet to cement a plan to manage the risk. The manufacturer has more than 50 worldwide locations and is urging its local facilities to contact their electricity suppliers immediately. "As we start to develop insight to what those providers are capable of, we'll draw that into business continuity and contingency planning," the manufacturer's year-2000 project leader said. Other companies such as credit card provider Household International will use in-house resources to meet the possibility of power disruption. "All our major facilities are being prepared to handle any external or internal failure, [by] having back-up generator and back-up diesel capability," said Thomas Wilkie, Household International's director of risk management, in Prospect Heights, Ill. For now, companies have to wait while the electric power industry as a whole undertakes the critical steps of gaining and sharing information. "We can't answer questions on preparedness at this point," said Gene Gorzelnik, director of communications at NERC, in Princeton, N.J. NERC is compiling results of questionnaires sent in June to the 200 largest North American power companies, and to four trade associations representing 3,000 distribution companies. Results will be included in the industry report delivered to the DOE in September. NERC will follow the report with a coordination of preparedness plans and scenario analysis ending in July 1999, and a coordination of precautionary operations during the year-2000 transition. Although NERC and the EEI expect the September DOE report to be positive generally, it is not clear whether "mom and pop" distributors or large electric utilities -- generally thought to be more vulnerable -- present a greater risk. "In a lot of cases, you can't make the assumption that mom and pops are going to be the problem, because the larger companies tend to have a lot of automation," the EEI's Arnold said. Another risk in need of assessment is the nuclear power industry. According to the Nuclear Energy Institute, a trade organization in Washington, the United States depends on nuclear power to generate 22 percent of its electricity. "You can't talk about [year 2000] and electricity without including the nuclear power industry," Cowles said. In June, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) sent a letter the 108 U.S. nuclear power plants advising the industry of year-2000 risks and requesting a detailed written statement of readiness by July 1, 1999. Much like the NERC effort, the NRC information-gathering is a good first step, but one that leaves companies considering contingency plans in limbo. "My advice is wait for the [industry] reports and strike up a dialogue with your utility at the local level," Arnold said. ********************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address ********************************************** www.telepath.com/believer **********************************************

1 0

IP: [FP] Smart Cards -- Public Acceptance?
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: "ScanThisNews" <mcdonalds(a)airnet.net> Subject: IP: [FP] Smart Cards -- Public Acceptance? Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 22:07:48 -0500 To: ignition-point(a)majordomo.pobox.com ====================================================================== SCAN THIS NEWS 9/9/98 ======================================================================= New Poll: 76% Indicate Interest in Smart Cards SAN FRANCISCO--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Sept. 9, 1998-- Smart Card Forum research study seeks keys to market success, ways to bridge the gap between early adopters and the mainstream consumer market The Smart Card Forum (SCF), a multi-industry organization working to accelerate the widespread acceptance of smart card technology, today announced some initial top-line poll results of a qualitative and quantitative research study it has commissioned. A detailed analysis of the comprehensive study will be finalized in tandem with the Forum's Work Group meetings this November in Florida. The Forum is attempting to better understand what North American consumers would like in a smart card that they could carry around with them that stores information or value (or both) from various applications (e.g., health care, insurance, banking, loyalty programs). These applications are just some of what a smart card can do (the technology has many more applications), but a study of how consumers perceive them will help the industry better understand the potential size and shape of the future market for smart card technology. "The smart card is a very exciting and powerful emerging technology," says Forum President William J. Barr. "To extend its promise into the mainstream commercial marketplace means understanding and then delivering what consumers want. After all, it's a basic marketing premise that you have to understand the public's needs before you can deliver a solution that will win their support and loyalty. Previous Forum market research has shown consumer interest in our industry; this next wave of research is designed to provide us with more specific information that we can apply to the task of introducing smart cards to the broadest possible consumer audience." FIND/SVP, a nationally known New York-based research and consulting firm, was asked by the Forum to design the research study to capture consumer perceptions of smart cards and the keys to their acceptance and use. To do this, they designed a qualitative (14 focus groups) and quantitative (telephone survey of 2,400) research study(a) conducted in the United States and Canada. It was tightly focused to determine certain attributes of smart cards, which applications would be supported and why, plus servicing, branding, and pricing issues. For the purposes of the research, a very specific "smart card concept" was developed and tested. It was described as a "card-sized unit with a memory that can hold just about any kind of information but requires some sort of reader to input or output data." Among the research findings: - three quarters of those polled (76%) said they were "extremely," "very" or "somewhat" interested in the smart card concept; about one-third (31%) were "very" or "extremely" interested - of the 31% "very" or "extremely" interested, the majority said that they would "definitely want" smart cards for applications such as med-alert information (74%); health insurance ID (62%); ATM and related bank access (59%); drivers licenses (56%); and credit cards (53%) - the most interested group were, in general, willing to pay up to $50 to obtain a smart card, and a $25 annual fee to maintain the card - that same group carried far more cards in their wallets than those not interested (6.3 cards vs. 3.9 cards) - those most interested fit the profile of early technology adopters: younger, higher income, own a PC, etc. - convenience and security were seen as key motivating factors for adoption "These initial results reveal a number of interesting things we didn't know before," says Barr. "First, smart cards -- as they were conservatively described in the research -- have a potential core early-adopter constituency to start with of about a third of the population. Second, some of the applications a smart card can enable are easily understood and appreciated by that segment of the population. That's good news for the industry, because it is the use of smart cards for each of these individual things that will collectively increase the momentum towards multiple-application smart card interoperability and ubiquity." Interest in smart cards. All focus group respondents expressed interest in the "smart card concept." It should be noted that these groups were pre-screened to eliminate "technophobes," and participants developed concepts themselves, so higher levels of enthusiasm for smart card technology were to be expected. However, approximately three-quarters of those polled in the telephone survey said they were either "somewhat," "very" or "extremely" interested in the smart card concept. About a quarter were not interested. Who are most interested in the idea of smart cards? The research discovered that those interested in smart cards - compared to those "not interested" in the concept -- are: - much more likely to have PCs, cell phones, or other high-tech devices (98% vs. 68%) - much more likely to look forward to new technology (44% vs. 18%) - younger (38 vs. 48 years old) - have higher incomes ($54,000 vs. $45,000) - already carrying more cards than those not interested (6.3 vs. 3.9) "Those numbers tell us that as an industry, we must extend our efforts beyond the classic early adopter community and connect with the majority of consumers who need to be educated about the many benefits to them of smart card technology," says Barr. "Our ability to bridge that gap will determine the future success of our industry." One card to replace many. As designed by the focus groups, "Such a (smart) card would replace most of what they now carried in their pockets and do other things as well. It would not be used in addition to the cards in the wallets, but instead of those cards." Of those interested in having a smart card (N=741): *T Would want only one smart card 35% Would want two smart cards 30 Would want three smart cards 27 Would want four or more cards 6 *T One card that does many things. Within the qualitative phase, people were able to easily generate potential uses for a smart card. More than 100 plausible application ideas were generated, both for personal and for business use. These included: replacing money and credit cards, replacing many of the cards in one's wallet, storing records, and managing daily events. Of those interested the smart cards, respondents said that they would "definitely want" them for: Med-Alert information 74%, Health insurance ID 62, ATM and related bank access 59, Drivers license 56, Credit cards 53, Prescription card 51, Car information 50, Money for small purchases 48, Medical records 44, "Other" ID 39, Discount shopping cards 39, Money for larger purchases 36, Frequent flyer information 34, "Other" membership cards 26. According to Barr, "we are pleased by these findings on applications, because that's what smart cards are supposed to be all about. Smart cards are supposed to perform lots of diverse functions, and we're pleased that those surveyed could identify so many of them. Multi-application interoperability is both the objective of the Smart Card Forum and the key to unlocking the business potential of our industry." The ideal way to distribute and control smart cards. A consensus emerged among those most interested in the concept about how one would/should get and maintain a smart card: - consumers would obtain a "starter" smart card from one of many sources, either free or for a small fee - they would "build" onto it by adding identification and licenses, personal data, and credit data (among others), either free or for a small fee - users would pay an independent service an annual fee to help maintain and protect the card - individual smart card-holders would allow different organizations different levels of access to the card Respondents disliked the idea of a single authority having access to all their smart card key data. They accepted that in the absence of such an authority, problems with maintaining the card, replacing it, canceling it, etc. would become overwhelming. Accordingly, their plausible solution was "distributed," allowing for widespread sale of smart cards at a very low price, with the cards supported by an individual choice of one of many independent "bonding agencies" paid monthly or annual fees for their services. It was thought that data might also be backed up by this agency (in encrypted form), or saved by the card's owner who would have two versions of his/her card made. Mild preference for adding data oneself 61%, Mild preference for having one company to call for problems 59%, Mild preference for many suppliers 58%. Pricing. In general, the research discovered that of those most interested in the smart card concept, respondents were willing to pay up to $50 to obtain a card, and approximately a $25 annual fee to maintain the card. Potential smart card users rarely envisioned a single-use card that would be used in addition to the cards in their wallets. Rather, they were interested in a card that would put multiple uses on a single device. The key reasons for embracing the card thus focused heavily on convenience: fewer things in one's wallet, fewer things to remember to carry. Another initial motivator might be security. A smart card can be made significantly more secure than a normal magnetic stripe card, and when introduced to that information, survey participants indicated that smart cards might, by "electronically storing receipts in some way," provide additional reassurance. The use of electronic fingerprinting (biometrics) as proof of identity was also seen as a way to protect the security of information stored on smart cards. "Security" was also interpreted as meaning medical safety and physical well being. Accordingly, a smart card with emergency information accessible by physicians and paramedics was also considered desirable. Other ways to encourage initial smart card use focused on having a smart card doing certain things better than its "dumb" predecessor (e.g. a "faster" or "less expensive" card). Using the card as an electronic key, to which other applications might be added later, was also seen as a possible benefit. The bottom-line. "Using a very precise and narrow definition of a smart card, we have discovered useful new information that we can apply as the full spectrum of smart card applications emerges into the mainstream commercial environment," says Barr. "This is just the beginning of our industry's efforts to learn about how we can connect with and educate consumers whose interest in smart card technology increases in relation to the information they have about it." The Smart Card Forum (www.smartcardforum.org) is a non-profit, multi- industry organization of 200 members working to accelerate the widespread acceptance of multiple application smart card technology by bringing together, in an open forum, leading users and technologists from both the public and private sectors. NOTES: - The "qualitative" aspect of this study comprised a set of 14 focus groups that were conducted in four US cities (New York City, NY; Chicago, IL; San Francisco, CA; and Jacksonville, FL), and two Canadian cities (Guelph and Toronto, ON). - The "quantitative" aspect comprised a much larger and more "projectable" sample of 2,400 American and English-speaking Canadian citizens aged 18 and over who completed a structured telephone interview. Respondents were capable of using a smart card (e.g., had some other form of "plastic" card or checking accounts) but otherwise were randomly selected. CONTACT: Megan McDonnell Environics Communications 1 (203) 325-8772, #14 mmcdonnell(a)environics-usa.com or Karen Silberman Smart Card Forum 1 (703) 610-9023 help(a)smartcardforum.org ======================================================================= [forwarded from F.D. Bowden] ======================================================================= Reply to: <fingerprint(a)networkusa.org> ======================================================================= To subscribe to the free Scan This News newsletter, send a message to <majordomo(a)efga.org> and type "subscribe scan" in the BODY. Or, to be removed type "unsubscribe scan" in the message BODY. For additional instructions see www.efga.org/about/maillist.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "Scan This News" is Sponsored by S.C.A.N. Host of the "FIGHT THE FINGERPRINT!" web page: www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml ======================================================================= ********************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address ********************************************** www.telepath.com/believer **********************************************

1 0