December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Microsoft Statement
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text X-Authentication-Warning: www.ispo.cec.be: majordom set sender to owner-e-commerc(a)www.ispo.cec.be using -f Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 09:16:56 -0500 From: Freddie Dawkins <freddied(a)compuserve.com> Subject: Microsoft Statement To: CEC E-commerce list <E-commerc(a)www.ispo.cec.be> MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-e-commerc(a)www.ispo.cec.be Precedence: bulk Reply-To: Freddie Dawkins <freddied(a)compuserve.com> All here - I thought you might like to see this. It was published at the ICX London conference on October 19. Rgds Freddie Dawkins ICX - Building Trust in E-commerce ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Statement of Microsoft on UK Department of Trade and Industry Proposals for Encryption on Digital Signatures October 1998 Microsoft welcomes this opportunity to respond to recent DTI proposals on encryption and digital signatures. As a leading developer of business software applications, on-line tools and operating systems, Microsoft strongly supports the growth of electronic commerce in Europe. 1. UK legislation should eliminate all key escrow and key recovery requirements. The UK should not make the use of encryption subject to mandatory key escrow. The DTI's Secure Electronic Commerce Statement of April 1998 contemplates authorising law enforcement to obtain access to private encryption keys on request. This could effectively require users or encryption service providers to "escrow" their private keys, which would depart from the Statement's rejection of mandatory key escrow and make the use of encryption more costly and burdensome. Many users would also view the obligation to store copies of their private keys as compromising the security of their on-line messages, thus deterring them from fully exploiting electronic commerce. Mandatory key escrow does not serve any legitimate law enforcement goals. Key escrow serves no legitimate law enforcement goals because criminals and terrorists are unlikely to store their private keys or provide them to police on request. Law enforcement's needs in this area could be fully met by requiring users to produce the plain text of any message to which police require access. 2. The proposed legislation should extend legal recognition to all digital signatures. Legal recognition should extend to all electronic signatures, not just those issued by licensed certification authorities (CAs). The secure Electronic Commerce Statement would limit legal recognition to certificates issued by licensed CAs. Because virtually all users will want to rely on the legal validity of their electronic signatures, this would effectively require the use of licensed CAs. Such a rule would impose unnecessary costs on electronic commerce and would place UK law in conflict with the proposed EU Electronic Signatures Directive, which extends legal recognition to both licensed and unlicensed electronic signatures. UK law should extend legal recognition to closed-system and limited-use certificates and affirm parties' freedom of contract. Electronic signatures are used in a variety of closed systems and for a broad range of specific uses, such as on-line banking and credit card systems. Because closed-system and limited-use certificates will play a crucial role in the development of on-line applications, the law should expressly extend legal recognition to such certificates. UK legislation should also treat electronic and paper transactions the same in terms of freedom of contract, so that private parties have the same flexibility to structure their electronic transactions as they do for traditional forms of commerce. The proposed legislation should not require licensed CAs to escrow encryption keys. Many users of electronic signatures will refuse to allow their private encryption keys to be escrowed, and will therefore refuse to use licensed CAs if they must also hand over their private encryption keys. Such a result would undermine the use of electronic signatures and would threaten the development of electronic commerce in the UK. Thus, UK law should allow licensed CAs to provide encryption services without maintaining a key escrow or key recovery system. 3. DTI should abandon plans to extend existing export controls to "intangible" transfers. Applying existing export controls to intangible transfers of encryption is unworkable and impractical. In its recent white paper on Strategic Export Controls (July 1998), DTI announced plans to extend existing export controls to intangible transfers. However, strong encryption is widely available on the Internet from servers located outside the UK. Thus, the proposed restrictions would not prevent criminals from using strong encryption, but would impose added costs and burdens on lawful manufacturers and distributors of encryption products. The proposed export controls will harm UK firms. UK businesses already face a competitive disadvantage to foreign competitors due to restrictions on exporting encryption in tangible form. To extend this to intangible transfers will make it even more difficult for UK firms to compete globally. The UK should loosen, rather than tighten, existing export controls on encryption. Export restrictions on encryption make it much more expensive for UK firms to compete globally, without having any real impact on crime. Rather than act unilaterally on this issue, the UK should adhere to the European-wide standards set forth in the EU Regulation on Dual-Use Goods. /ends # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # To leave the list, send email to Majordomo(a)www.ispo.cec.be saying unsubscribe E-commerc your(a)email.address as the first line of your message (*not* as the subject) # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # # --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

Re: TEMPEST laptops (fwd)
by Michael Motyka 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim, *** True, the point I'm trying to make to you folks is that it *ISN'T* the absolute level of the signal that you are necessarily concerned with but rather the dynamic range in that signal. Simply knowing there's a 3mV signal out there won't do you a damn bit of good unless you have enough signal range to decode the contents. In actuality you could be emitting GW's of signal and if there was only say 1uV of signal range you'd never get anything off it. *** The distinction you are trying to express is that not all signals have equal information content and that it is the levels of the high-content ones that matter. Fine, but shielding is indiscriminate so shield away. And run your Tesla coil and some Ramones music to increase the ambient noise while you're doing sensitive computing. BTW - Aren't most receivers sensitive to RF field strengths in the 1 uV/m range? With cryogenically cooled front ends the nV/m range is probably usable. Look for MIB carrying Dewars in your neighborhood! How cold do Peltier junctions get? Probably good enough for a sidewinder or a low-noise rcvr. Mike Gabba-gabba hey!

1 0

Announcing Extensis Preflight Pro 2.1
by listmaster＠extensis.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Award-Winning, Preflighting Tool from Extensis Just Got Better. http://www.extensis.com/products/PreflightPro * New! Now inspect your Acrobat(r) PDF Files! * Inspect, correct and collect print jobs for perfect prepress delivery. * Advanced features include customizable inspection profiles, PDF creation, and AppleScript Automation. * FREE! 5 free copies of Collect Pro with each copy of Preflight Pro! Extensis Preflight Pro 2.1 answers all of your Preflight questions. Designed to save prepress professionals time and money, Preflight Pro inspects your documents and corrects problems to ensure they are error-free prior to printing. With an interface that mimics the traditional prepress workflow, Preflight Pro provides you with a familiar environment to review files prior to printing. Further, Preflight Pro now supports documents in all the major graphics applications including Adobe PageMaker, Illustrator, Photoshop, Acrobat, QuarkXPress, Macromedia FreeHand EPS, and Multi-Ad Creator2. What's New in Preflight Pro 2.1? Now you can inspect Acrobat PDF files, along with files from all the other major graphics applications. Preflight Pro 2.1 now examines PDF files using more than 40 different profile items, including document security settings, font subsetting and embedding, downsampling rates and compression types. Better yet, Preflight Pro also includes 5 free copies of Collect Pro 2.1. Give Collect Pro to any creative professional you work with to help them correctly collect a job for hand-off to the prepress house. Collect Pro eliminates the problems of missing files (e.g.: fonts and linked graphics) that can delay a job. Extensis Preflight Pro 2.1 will dramatically streamline your preflight workflow, saving you time, headaches and money. For more information, to order, or to download a FREE, 30-day demo of Extensis Preflight Pro, please visit: http://www.extensis.com/products/PreflightPro Or call your Extensis Preflight Specialist at (800) 796-9798 x.168 or (503) 274-2020 x.168 or email to: preflight(a)extensis.com . Already own Preflight Pro 2.0? NO PROBLEM! Visit http://www.extensis.com/products/PreflightPro and download Preflight Pro 2.1 for free (your Preflight Pro 2.0 serial number is required) Are you a FlightCheck(r) User? NO PROBLEM! Upgrade to Extensis Preflight Pro 2.1 for only $99.95 (SAVE $300!) Preflight Pro 2.1 and Collect Pro 2.1 are compatible with QuarkXPress 3.31 or later, including QuarkXPress 4.0, Adobe PageMaker 6.5 and later, Adobe Illustrator 5.5 and later, Adobe Photoshop 3.0.4 and later, Macromedia FreeHand 5.5 and later, and Multi-Ad Creator2 version 1.0. PS. We have made every effort to ensure this message is being sent only to people who have expressed interest in Extensis products. If we have sent this to you in error, please accept our apologies and reply with remove in the subject line for automatic exclusion from future communications. If you know someone who would like to be on our mailing list have them send an email to listmaster(a)extensis.com with ADD in the subject line and their email address in the body. P.P.S. This message is intended for customers in North America. If you are located outside of North America and have received this message, please visit www.extensis.com/purchase/ to find the nearest local distributor in your country.

1 0

Digicash in serious trouble
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text X-Sender: stalder(a)fis.fis.utoronto.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 12:03:10 -0500 To: micropay(a)ai.mit.edu From: Felix Stalder <stalder(a)fis.utoronto.ca> Subject: Digicash in serious trouble Sender: owner-micropay(a)ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: micropay(a)ai.mit.edu [bad news] http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,28360,00.html By Tim Clark Staff Writer, CNET News.com November 4, 1998, 6:05 p.m. PT Electronic-cash pioneer DigiCash said today it's filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection after shrinking its payroll to about six people from nearly 50 in February. The company, which has been running off a bridge loan from its venture capital investors since June, is seeking new investors from established financial institutions or a buyer for its software technology. The company's operations in the Netherlands, where it was founded, were liquidated in September. "To really launch and brand something like this in the Internet space is likely to take a fair amount more capital," said Scott Loftesness, DigiCash's interim CEO since August. "It's more appropriate for strategic investors, corporate players or banks themselves as a consortium model." Electronic-cash schemes have found difficult sledding recently. First Virtual Holdings, which had a form of e-cash, exited the business in July. CyberCash's CyberCoin offering hasn't really caught on. Digital Equipment, now part of Compaq Computer is testing its Millicent electronic cash, and IBM is in early trials for a product called Minipay. Under bankruptcy laws, DigiCash's Chapter 11 filing allows the company to continue operations, while keeping its creditors at bay as the company reorganizes. Most of DigiCash's $4 million in debt is owed to its initial venture capital financiers who extended the bridge loan, August Capital, Applied Technology, and Dutch investment firm Gilde Investment. DigiCash's eCash allows consumers to make anonymous payments of any amount--and anonymity differentiates eCash against other e-cash schemes. DigiCash's intellectual property assets include patents, protocols, and software systems that also could be used for applications, like online electronic voting or private scrip issued by a particular retailer. DigiCash suffered a setback in September when the only U.S. bank offering its scheme, Mark Twain Bank, dropped the offering. But a number of major banks in Europe and Australia offer or are testing DigiCash's electronic cash. Also in September, DigiCash closed its Dutch operations and liquidated its assets there. Loftesness said DigiCash has a list of 35-40 potential partners, and he has been talking to players like IBM for months. He expects to resolve DigiCash's status in the next five months. "Everybody feels anonymous e-cash is inevitable, but the existing situation was not going to get there from here," said Loftesness, who is frustrated by potential partners telling him, "This is absolutely strategic, but unfortunately it's not urgent." The company was founded by David Chaum and was well-known in the Internet's earliest days. MIT Media Labs' Nicholas Negroponte is a director of DigiCash. --- # distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo(a)desk.nl and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: nettime-owner(a)desk.nl -----|||||---||||----|||||--------||||---- Les faits sont faits. http://www.fis.utoronto.ca/~stalder --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

Re: How to test *your* microwave oven distribution pattern.
by Michael Motyka 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim, you said... ***** If you do decide to stake your laptop as refered above there are a few things to know.... - Make sure the stake is in suitable ground without lots of quartz and other similar peizo-electric materials. - The stake should extend at least 3ft. into the ground. - When the stake is driven in, the ground should be thoroughly wetted which usualy means quite a bit of water (30 gals or so should do it), if possible wet it over a 24 hour period prior to staking. - Make sure the stake and the cable leading to the laptop are copper (or silver if you're rich) - You don't want to be close to phone, power, and other sorts of underground utilities. **** Please explain to me why it matters that the box be grounded! Radiated energy from chips and traces is independent of your mongo ground strap to the mother ship. All the strap does is alter the DC potential. Shield your box well but design out the leg irons and the geological requirements. Mike

2 1

Re: TEMPEST laptops (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 09:28:06 -0800 > From: Michael Motyka <mmotyka(a)lsil.com> > Subject: Re: TEMPEST laptops (fwd) > The distinction you are trying to express is that not all signals have > equal information content and that it is the levels of the high-content > ones that matter. Nope. What I am saying is the absolute magnitude of the carrier wave is irrelevant, it's the modulation that matters and that modulation if small and it's riding on a big carrier is hard to get at because you swamp your front-ends because of dynamic range. > Fine, but shielding is indiscriminate so shield away. Shielding will attenuate all parts of the signal so it is a Good Thing (TM). > And run your Tesla coil and some Ramones music to increase the ambient > noise while you're doing sensitive computing. Gabba gabba hey hey...thought I don't run my Tesla Coil when my computers are on, they object to the 4ft sparks. > Look for MIB carrying Dewars in your neighborhood! > How cold do Peltier junctions get? > Probably good enough for a sidewinder or a low-noise rcvr. Peltier devices are for thermal transport by binding the thermal photons and transporting them to a different environ where they may be emitted. Hence the original environ is cooled. You're talking about Josephson Junctions I suspect and they're useless for signal detection, they're a switch. SQUIDS are what are used for truly small level signals. The KKK took my baby away.... ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: How to test *your* microwave oven distribution pattern. (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 11:42:41 -0800 > From: Michael Motyka <mmotyka(a)lsil.com> > Subject: Re: How to test *your* microwave oven distribution pattern. > Please explain to me why it matters that the box be grounded! Electricity runs from a high-potential point to ground. If it isn't grounded it radiates away into space where it can be detected. If the Faraday Cage isn't grounded it simply acts as a parasitic oscillator and re-emits the signal from inside, though at a lower amplitude. Remember, charge rests on the *OUTSIDE* of a object so that any charge picked up internaly gets passed to the outside surface. Which raises another point. Since sharp corners radiate better because they hold larger charges one should probably avoid sharp angles or corners. Though you might be able to use that to advantage by having a caged needle that radiates the majority away into the grounded cage. Probably the ideal 'laptop' would be a metal ball with a grounding wire and a single large mil-spec connector that drives a HMD. Something like the Rock City by Archistrat but round instead of cubical. > Radiated energy from chips and traces is independent of your mongo > ground strap to the mother ship. Not if the ground plane on the pcb is built right. The amount of free-space radiation can be minimized because the capacitive coupling between the emitting source and the local ground is less than the capacitive coupling to Earth through the atmosphere. Since the signal path impedence to the local ground plain is lower it will carry, proportionaly, the majority of the signal. > All the strap does is alter the DC > potential. Shield your box well but design out the leg irons and the > geological requirements. Actualy it is much more complex than that, it effects the AC signal path impedence as well - which is exactly what one wants. As I said above, don't ground the box and it simply acts as a secondary emitter. This is analogous to those parasitic oscillators they put in books and such that ring an alarm if you walk between the poles at the store. I'm at work right now so I can't get too specific but there is a book that I have at home that is called 'Digital Black Magic' (I believe). It covers a lot of these sorts of issues. When I'm home later I'll post a pointer to the correct title, author, and ISBN. The 1st rule of electrons: They always take the shortest path to ground. Corollary: If they can't get to ground they radiate their excess energy away as photons. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: TEMPEST laptops
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:45 PM 11/4/98 -0800, Tim May wrote: >>The other question is how hard, given a _specific_ machine would it be to >>create a "RF" jammer? Sort of an active defense versus the passive defense >>of a Tempest sheild. build a device that measures the RF coming off a Well dang Tim, if you're gonna work inside a Faraday cage you may as well run a Tesla coil outside it... --Lace Aliens Slide on my Rugs

2 1

Re: TEMPEST laptops (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1998 11:56:20 -0500 > From: Petro <petro(a)playboy.com> > Subject: Re: TEMPEST laptops (fwd) > >It depends on the frequency. Last time I checked a laser or a maser (both > >are radio waves strictly speaking) travel LOS. The scattering comes from > >beam divergence and incidental refractions and reflections from the > >molecules in the air and supported detritus. > > And both Lasers and Masers scatter under certain conditions. If you > can see the laser, it is scattering a bit of [energy light photons] All EM radiation scatters *IF* the wavelength of the signal is comparable to the wavelength of the particulate. If the particulate is less than about 1/3 wavelength it won't significantly scatter. The reason that dust in the air scatters lasers (and masers don't have this problem because the wavelength is too long) is that the particles are significantly larger than the wavelenght of the signal. It is directly analogous to moon-shine. In astronomy this is related to something called the Poynting Effect. This is also the reason that IR radiation goes through smoke and fog while visible light won't. Raleigh Scattering is the reason that the fog appears white. In photography and radar mapping this is what limits the resolution of the bounced signal as well. You can build an experiment to demonstrate this with peg-board, pegs, and some rope. Lay the peg-board on a table. Place a peg on one edge and connect the rope. then along the line of the rope place other pegs at equal but different distances and try to get a transverse plane wave to travel down the rope. Note the relative wavelenght of the wave in the rope to the spacing of the pegs. It takes practice to get it to work correctly so don't give up to easy. > I was under the (apparently false) impression that things like > animal bodies, and ordinary building materials (like wood, Lathe & > plaster/drywall) wouldn't stop or significantly bounce the beams back the > way you didn't want them to go. Depends on the material, angle of incidence, water content, frequency of the signal, transmissivity of the material at that frequency, etc. In the 10cm radar (used by tanks and ground troops to find each other) even leaves will bounce a signal. > I was thinking more of controling the direction of the RF, rather > than trying to completely supress it. Exaclty. The issue then is what do we do with the signal once we've got it directed where we want it. For EM signals we want to get them to a ground plane so they go away and don't exist anymore. If it doesn't exist anymore you can't very well tap it. > We're not cooking Hotdogs here, and we aren't using (for the most > part) microwaves. Yes, you can heat a hotdog on a PII, but that is more > from heat radiation than RF. > > Microwave ovens also leak RF. True enough, but the physics are applicable. Don't confuse cause with effect. As to microwave ovens leaking, yes but they leak orders of magnitude less which makes them orders of magnitude harder to detect. That is the point to TEMPEST after all, take advantage of the 1/r^2 law so the mallet has to be sitting right in your lap to get a good field strength. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: How to test *your* microwave oven distribution pattern. (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 05 Nov 1998 13:09:09 -0800 > From: David Honig <honig(a)sprynet.com> > Subject: Re: How to test *your* microwave oven distribution pattern. > At 08:47 AM 11/5/98 -0600, Jim Choate wrote: > >Here's a simple way to test the bounce-pattern of your micro-wave oven: > > Simpler: stick a neon-bulb with the leads twisted off into the oven. > Watch the glow vary. Put a cup of water in there since you're not supposed > to run empty. Yes, but they don't give you as easily measured level of the incident radiation. with a neon bulb or a flourescent tube (what I prefer) you have a hard time mapping radiation level to brightness with commenly available photometers. Photo quality stuff isn't nearly accurate enough. > > - Make sure the stake is in suitable ground without lots of quartz > > and other similar peizo-electric materials. > > Not piezo (though quartz is), but non conductive. You have to > tap the groundwater table. Sand, granite don't conduct. Sand has lots of piezo. You don't want piezo because the ground pressure on the stake will cause excessive noise. As to non-conductive, you *WANT* it to be conductive otherwise the signals will form ground waves and propogate horizontaly. You can see this with radar signals from aircraft that bounce off the tarmac (I used to live next to the Austin airport and had access to a spectrum analyzer). If the ground plane isn't conductive it isn't a ground plane. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0