- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Moderation, Tim, Sandy, me, etc. * Strong crypto == DES?!
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Tim, the Cypherpunks have chosen to follow Sandy's lead for this > month. I'll admit I made it easy for them, but the results are > conclusive. There are 1311 addresses in the cypherpunks list today; > 42 in the unedited list; and 19 in the flames list. Forty people > cared enough to read every posting; the other thousand either wanted > to try the experiment -- or didn't care enough to send an email > message. Which, as we all know, is a very low threshold. As I, and a number of other list members, have said: Why did you not rename the lists so that cypherpunks(a)toad.com was uncensored??? You and I know perfectly well that probably 1250 of those addresses are people who don`t know the censorship is taking place, don`t read the list (defunct accounts), don`t know how to change their subscription, are too lazy to care either way etc... I would guess there are less than 100 that have considered the issues and decided to subscribe to the censored list. > If I was a social scientist I might want to run the experiment both > ways, or six different ways. Name it this, or name it that. I'm not; > all I want is something that works. The cypherpunks list was unusable > for this kind of discussion, only a month ago. It's usable now. No, it was usable to those with time and patience or the rather rudimentary knowledge necessary to set up filters. Now all we are doing is relegating a list that was once subscribed to by intelligent and well educated people into a playground for the inept. I`m not being elitist but if we can`t expect a member of this list who actually uses it for discussion to know how to set up filters then he might as well unsubscribe. > Perhaps at that point I should have shut down the list, as Lucky is > now suggesting. "Asking the list what to do" was clearly not a useful > option. Sandy cared enough about the community to make some concrete > suggestions to me about how to get the list back on track. They > involved a lot more work than the previous setup. I told him if he > was willing to do the work, we could try it. As Dale suggests, I > wasn't about to waste my time reading the whole list in real time and > passing judgement on the postings. Sandy was, for a month. You should indeed have shut down the list. The problem being not that you choose to run a censored list but that you have associated the name cypherpunks with it and in doing so you have destroyed the reputation that the name cypherpunks once had. > Unpaid labor for a peanut gallery of spoiled children isn't very > gratifying. Paternalism is the root of all statism. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

1 0

Re: Deloitte-Touche?
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mark <mark(a)infolawalert.com> writes: > I'm almost certain that Murray is a consultant rather than > or in addition to an accountant. He's been saying these things William Murray used to post frequently to sci.crypt, alt.security.pgp, etc when I read those forums. He also I think wrote the forword for one of the books on using PGP. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

2 1

No Subject
by steve 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have been trying to get off this list for nearly a week now. The instructions given in the welcome message don't work. Get me off this list now.! I joined to learn about cryptography, not listen to some socially retarded juveniles argue over who's got the biggest dick. -----Original Message----- From: Majordomo(a)toad.com [SMTP:Majordomo@toad.com] Sent: 06 February 1997 19:43 To: steve Subject: Your Majordomo request results -- Your request of Majordomo was: >>>> ------ =_NextPart_000_01BC1463.B5C5FAE0 END OF COMMANDS

1 0

WANTED: Tolerant, anonymity-friendly news admins
by lcs Remailer Administrator 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Because of recent attacks on the remailer network and mail2news gateways, I may loose access to at least one of the news servers I currently feed news to from my mail2news gateway. If you are a news administrator, believe in free speech and anonymity, and you would like to help the cause, please consider giving transfer (aka "IHAVE" or "hosts.nntp") privileges to this machine. You will not be the only server, and so do not need to worry about being the point of entrance of mail2news articles to Usenet. Please contact me if you can help. Thank you. For those who oppose the existence of mail2news gateways, you should know that we are taking steps to limit the abuse. However, doing so without in any way limiting articles that abide by the usage policy is tricky, and must be done carefully. Please be patient.

4 5

[ANNOUNCEMENT] Secure checksums
by lucifer Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timothy C[reep] May sits at his terminal dressed in five-inch stiletto heels, fishnet stockings, a gold-lame mini-skirt, a purple halter with girdle underneath to keep in his flabby gut, a Fredericks of Hollywood padded bra also underneath the halter, a cheap Naomi Sims pink afro wig, waiting to yank his crank whenever a black man responds to one of his inane rants. __ ___|[]| Timothy C[reep] May \__|______| /-(o_o_o_o)

1 0

M-Net Express
by guyh＠att.net.hk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

WELCOME TO M-NET'S CUT-PRICE TELEPHONE SERVICE We supply worldwide the SAME lines and services that one can buy from local phone companies and providers, BUT FOR LESS! We have purchased millions of minutes from AT&T, Sprint, MCI, British Telecom, and 20 other companies. Call from any country! NO MINIMUM CHARGE! 100% SATISFACTION GUARANTEED! For full details; mailto:guyh@att.net.hk?subject=MNET a BLANK message.

1 0

anonymous remailers
by Charley Musselman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

C'punks -- When I told a friend about the alt.drugs.pot cultivation newsgroup and suggested that he use an anonymous remailer to post to the group, he laughed and said, "Who do you suppose runs the remailers? ATF, FBI, DEA, that's who!" Gee, it makes sense to this paranoid. Does anyone know the answer? Specifically, how can we choose a trusted remailer? Cheers (?), Charley

3 2

WANTED: Tolerant, anonymity-friendly news admins
by lcs Remailer Administrator 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Because of recent attacks on the remailer network and mail2news gateways, I may loose access to at least one of the news servers I currently feed news to from my mail2news gateway. If you are a news administrator, believe in free speech and anonymity, and you would like to help the cause, please consider giving transfer (aka "IHAVE" or "hosts.nntp") privileges to this machine. You will not be the only server, and so do not need to worry about being the point of entrance of mail2news articles to Usenet. Please contact me if you can help. Thank you. For those who oppose the existence of mail2news gateways, you should know that we are taking steps to limit the abuse. However, doing so without in any way limiting articles that abide by the usage policy is tricky, and must be done carefully. Please be patient.

1 0

Re: Blessing in Disguise? (H.R. 98, the "Consumer Internet Privacy Protection Act of 1997")
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:27 PM 2/6/97 -0500, Robert Hettinga wrote: > >This attempted legislation (see forward, below) is a blessing in disguise. > >It's just more proof that book-entry commerce isn't going to work on the >net in the long run. [deleted] >+ SET, Cybercash/coin, SSL, and other encrypted-channel book entry >methods, is a derigeble. You're flying, but you're using minimally strong >crypto like little aerodynamic fins to push the giant gas bag of book-entry >settlement around. Now, is that a helium or a HYDROGEN dirigible?!? Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

40-bit RC5 crack meaningless??
by Vin McLellan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(A gem off sci.crypt. Schwartau's mailing list is turning into the most amazing source of misinformation or disinformation about cryptography on the Net. And he's probably got the most influential audience in Washington re crypto policy. Go figure;-) ---------------- Subject: 40-bit RC5 crack meaningless?? Date: 6 Feb 1997 11:43:58 -0500 From: nobody(a)REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) Organization: Replay and Company UnLimited Newsgroups: sci.crypt Strassmann, the author of this denunciation of RSADS and Ian Goldberg, is the former Director of Defense Information (i.e., CIO,) of the Bush DoD and an often-insightful commentator on business culture and computing. Strange is the logic that channels the mind of the American Defense Intellectual... or, maybe he just doesn't know squat about cryptography??? (Reposted from Infowar Digest, Winn Schwartau's moderated mailing list <mail to: infowar(a)infowar.com> without permission.) >Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 20:10:36 -0500 >To: "Wright Larry" <Wright_Larry(a)bah.com> >From: "Paul A. Strassmann" <paul(a)strassmann.com> >Subject: Further to Goldberg's Cracking Accomplishments >Gentlemen: > >As I suspected (see earlier private comment), the >highly promoted RSA cracking contest offered >a number of clues that ordinarly would not be >volunteered by info-terrorists or info-criminals to >IW Defense teams. > >These clues made the cracking significantly easier, >because it made it possible to eliminate an enormous >range of possible searches. > >The following was extracted verbatim from the ><The RSA Data Security Secret-Key Challenge> >posted on <http://www.rsa.com/rsalabs/97challenge/>: > >Clue #1: > > " ...all the RC5 contests posted as part of the RSA Secret-Key Challenge >will use 12-round RC5 with a 32-bit word size. " > >Clue #2: > > " ...The first RC5 contest will consist of some unknown plaintext >encrypted using a 40-bit key;." > >Clue #3: (a giveway!) > > " ... For each contest, the unknown plaintext message is preceded by three > known blocks of text that contain the 24-character phrase "The > unknown message is: .....". > >In summary: The claim of exportable cryptography being totally >insecure, because it can be cracked in 3.5 hours is not >realistic. The three clues announced in the contest >would not apply under infowar conditions. > >What other clues may have been provided to Goldberg >to support private agendas and gain shrill headlines >is also a matter of speculation, but I rest my case. > >I certainly cannot assert that a 40 bit key cannot be decyphered. >However, I do not think that the RSA unqualified claims >offer full and appropriate disclosure. > >Paul > >At 10:21 AM -0500 1/30/97, Wright Larry wrote: >>Following provided for your information. >> >> >>EXPORTABLE CRYPTOGRAPHY TOTALLY INSECURE: CHALLENGE >>CIPHER BROKEN IMMEDIATELY >> >>January 28, 1997 - Ian Goldberg, a UC Berkeley graduate >>student, announced today that he had successfully >>cracked RSA Data Security Inc.'s 40-bit challenge cipher >>in just under 3.5 hours. >> >>RSA challenged scientists to break their encryption >>technology, offering a $1000 award for breaking the >>weakest version of the code. Their offering was >>designed to stimulate research and practical experience >>with the security of today's codes. >> >>The number of bits in a cipher is an indication of the >>maximum level of security the cipher can provide. Each >>additional bit doubles the potential security level of >>the cipher. A recent panel of experts recommended >>using 90-bit ciphers, and 128-bit ciphers are commonly >>used throughout the world, but US government regulations >>restrict exportable US products to a mere 40 bits. >> >>Goldberg's announcement, which came just three and a >>half hours after RSA started their contest, provides >>very strong evidence that 40-bit ciphers are totally >>unsuitable for practical security. "This is the >>final proof of what we've known for years: 40-bit >>encryption technology is obsolete," Goldberg said. <...Rest of the nnouncement from UC Berkeley snipped> >Paul A. Strassmann >55 Talmadge Hill Road, New Canaan, CT. 06840 >Telephone: 203-966-5505; Fax: 203-966-5506 >INTERNET: paul(a)strassmann.com >WorldwideWeb: http://www.strassmann.com >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >

2 2