August 2004 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Al-Q targeting NY corporations?
by Tyler Durden 03 Aug '04

03 Aug '04

"Machiavelli, ur bandit apologist" Very amusing turn of phrase. >From: John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> >To: cypherpunks(a)al-qaeda.net >Subject: Re: Al-Q targeting NY corporations? >Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 09:20:46 -0700 > >Indeed, this is the way of US founding fathers, as with today's >corporations and citizenry enjoying global predation. > >Rebellion against authority using its tools and resources is the >only rebellion that works. And the only one feared by authorities, >knowing at they do from their own practice, stealing the money >from where it is, is banking 101, Dillinger a pennyante banker >like Osama. > >Now, if you were enjoying your stolen wealth wouldn't you >demonize and kill those who tried to do the same? > >Machiavelli, ur bandit apologist, studied avidly at .mil academies >and ever more war think tanks. > >-- > >At 08:25 AM 8/3/2004 -0400, you wrote: > > > >> Read the Fatwa. Best summarized by a line from a 'Floyd song, > >> get your filthy hands off my desert. > > > >Heh. So they can go back to being goatherders? trust-fund osama > >complaining about the evil west while taking its money is rich irony. > > _________________________________________________________________ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/

1 0

Re: Al-Q targeting NY corporations?
by Major Variola (ret) 03 Aug '04

03 Aug '04

At 12:58 PM 8/1/04 -0400, Sunder wrote: >You Al-Qaeda types >hate us for having freedom, right? You're not taken in by that mularky, are you? Read the Fatwa. Best summarized by a line from a 'Floyd song, get your filthy hands off my desert. Go for the Baltimore/Maryland prep schools. Soft targets, creamy centers. ------ Get your war on: http://www.mnftiu.cc/mnftiu.cc/war.html check the later ones...

4 3

Re: [Politech] A close look at John Kerry's *real* tech agenda [ip]
by Bill Stewart 03 Aug '04

03 Aug '04

At 08:35 AM 8/2/2004, Declan wrote: >http://news.com.com/2010-1028-5291476.html John Kerry is not our friend on this issue. If you've read Alexander Cockburn's article on Kerry's Vietnam record, he's not good on peace issues either. On the other hand, he's not Bush. While he and Edwards both like PATRIOT, he's not as aggressive about it as Bush, and while he did murder people in Vietnam, he was doing it retail-level, while Bush does it wholesale. It's definitely a lesser-of-two-evils game, and it's more like Cthulhu vs. Hastur rather than Cthulhu vs. Bambi or even Godzilla. Fortunately, here in California, Bush looks like he's way behind, so it's safe to vote Libertarian (or Green, or Naderite, or other parties), but nationwide it's "Go, Hastur! Hastur! Hastur! aaarghff..." Meanwhile, Tom Ridge has raised the National Fearmongering Level from "wolf wolf wolf" to "wolf wolf wolf wolf" for NYC, DC, and NJ.

3 2

On what the NSA does with its tech
by Major Variola (ret) 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

At 02:39 PM 8/2/04 -0400, John Kelsey wrote: >This is silly. They have black budgets, but not infinite ones. Given their budget (whatever it is), they want to buy the most processing bang for their buck. Yes. They can't break a 128 bit key. That's obvious. ("if all the atoms in the universe were computers..." goes the argument). What they can do is implement an advanced dictionary search that includes the kind of mnemonic tricks and regexps that folks typically use when coming up with "tough" passphrases. Cracking Italian anarchist PGP-equipt PDAs in their possession, things like that. If your keys are random 128, no dice (no pun intended). But if your keys are deterministically derived from something in your head, they can blaze. As well as the SIGINT stuff that takes a lot of DSP cycles. But agreed, and worth repeating, long keys can't be exhaustively searched, if they are truly random. As for WEP, GSM, etc cracking, voice recognition, etc, well, that is suitcase sized / real time stuff for them, if they want it. I imagine that the social network panopticon --eg who'se ever called whom-- might take some serious exabyte datacrunching too, something the bioinformaticists would envy. I don't think I overestimate the adversary when I suggest that he has plenty of uses for fast hardware, and that his hardware can be more than a decade faster thanks to cost being less of a concern, even if his transistors are no smaller/faster than TMSC's or IBM's. ----- I had never met a mathematician before. He had a good sense of humor, but no matter what you said to him, he was unimpressed. -Knuth

1 0

Re: Giesecke & Devrient
by Major Variola (ret) 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

At 05:17 PM 8/2/04 +0200, Eugen Leitl wrote: >Assuming I generate a key on a RSA smart card made by G&D, what kind of >prestige >track do these people have? > >They seem to be pretty secretive, that's not a good sign. FWIW: They make the SIMs for T-Mobile (ie Deutsche Telecom AG) so they are part of the telco world which is a fully 0wn3d subsidiary of the Beast.

1 0

Re: Al-Q targeting NY corporations...ah well.
by Major Variola (ret) 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

At 09:53 PM 8/1/04 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote: >the following statements are officially* fairly cypherpunkinsh: >* Fuck you Variola...I just had a couple of dark Spatens ON TAP. I therefore >declare that any Cypherpunk is officially authorized to make an official >Cypherpunk statement, particularly if it a) Gets them some poontang Wouldn't that be cypherpinkish, then? Ok, Tyler, you're our official spokesman. We'll be sure to give your name when getting the no lawyers no charges no rights no shit treatment... ----- A few more Halliburton well loggers missing and we'll have enough for a crude urchin initiator... ------ "Can you hear me now?" -UBL

1 0

RE: On how the NSA can be generations ahead
by Major Variola (ret) 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

At 05:23 PM 8/1/04 -0400, Tyler Durden wrote: > >No, the NSA is probably generations ahead in some areas, but their fabs >aren't much better than what's available commercially. Yes, upon consideration I agreed, re critical dimensions. That's why I brought up uneconomically sized chips, and the tech of thinned wafers. The point being (yes, if you can cool them) that small = fast. 1 foot per nanosecond, remember? And some of the neato-analog stuff one can do does *better* with big honkin' micron sized features, albeit on exotic materials, and the large-area/thinned argument still holds. ---- M. Atta: an army of one.

1 0

Re: Email tapping by ISPs, forwarder addresses, and crypto proxies
by John Kelsey 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

-----Original Message----- From: "Major Variola (ret)" <mv(a)cdc.gov> Sent: Jul 30, 2004 10:25 PM To: "cypherpunks(a)al-qaeda.net" <cypherpunks(a)al-qaeda.net> Subject: Re: Email tapping by ISPs, forwarder addresses, and crypto proxies The "profitably" part is a non-issue when you have black budgets, ie $400 toilet seats. This is silly. They have black budgets, but not infinite ones. Given their budget (whatever it is), they want to buy the most processing bang for their buck. I doubt they can do that substantially better than anyone else. I'd expect them to be really clever at finding tricks to optimize keysearch of various kinds, but not to have better microprocessor technology than the rest of the world. Bottom line: they're not ahead in tech, but they can make things that private-co engineeers only dream of. DesCrack is a suitcase, get it? So, then they can break 3-key 3DES with moderate numbers of texts as soon as they can build 2^{56} such suitcases, right? And power them, and get rid of their waste heat.... I'll let you speculate on AESCrack :-) Do the math, and you'll see how implausible 128-bit keysearch is. Maybe there are better attacks on AES (the algebraic stuff doesn't seem to have gone anywhere, but it still might), but if keysearch is all we have to worry about, and nontrivial quantum computers remain impractical to build, then 128-bit keys are as secure as we're ever likely to need, and 256-bit keys more or less eliminate keysearch of any kind from the list of things we need ever worry about again. --John

1 0

Giesecke & Devrient
by Eugen Leitl 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

Assuming I generate a key on a RSA smart card made by G&D, what kind of prestige track do these people have? They seem to be pretty secretive, that's not a good sign. -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07078, 11.61144 http://www.leitl.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE http://moleculardevices.org http://nanomachines.net [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature]

2 4

Anonymizer outsourcing customer data?
by Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer 02 Aug '04

02 Aug '04

Recently I received the Anonymizer "PrivacyShield Alert", as an Anonymizer user, and was distressed to note that it appears Anonymizer has now outsourced its mail and marketing infrastructure. Partial headers from new mail system:

2 1