- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Privacy with clipper
by Mikolaj Habryn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I seem to remember someone once writing that with the proposed clipper laws, you are allowed to encrypt messages before piping them through the clip chip, but the output must be left unaltered. The problem to this is that then whoever does the audits knows who's being sneaky. (Or something like that - i don't remember precisely.) Seems to me, if one is talking about videophone type devices, they are transmitting quite a great deal of info, and stegging in a message is quite feasible, is it not? You don't even have to do much of a hardware modification. Do something like having an HF carrier tone in the background, that anyone listening to it can't detect without the knowing what they're listenong for. Or insert a microburst transmission - it'll look like static. This is not to say, that the clip chip isn't worth fighting against, just that, as always, someone's going to come with a way around it. It's human nature, really. * * Mikolaj J. Habryn dichro(a)tartarus.uwa.edu.au * "Life begins at '040." PGP Public key available by finger * "Spaghetti code means job security!"

1 0

Clipper in Sunday Times
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Page 5 of the Business section of the Sunday New York Times has a Clipper article by Peter H. Lewis. All the usual suspects. DCF "They are planning to smuggle automatic weapons a... move the plastic explosives in boxes disguised as in... keep secret from the authorities the identity of the p..." -- Either 1) The cleartext of the decrypted message in the "box" showing how Clipper works in the above article or 2) Governor Clinton personally directing weapons shipments to the Contras from the hidden CIA airfield near Mena Arkansas in 1986. --- WinQwk 2.0b#1165

1 0

Re: cryptophone ideas
by jamiel＠sybase.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:38 PM 04/21/94 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote: >Peter Wayner says: >> How hard is it to reprogram the DSP that comes with a cellular >> phone right now? I've never opened one up. Can you just unsolder >> a rom, read it, insert your own code for DH key exchange, add >> some encryption, burn a new ROM and have a secure phone? > >You would also have to open up the base station for the cell, unsolder >its roms, read them, insert your own code for DH key exchange, add >some encryption, and put it back, and I suspect that the cellular >vendor would get mad at you. > >Perry Aha. here is where you can enlist the hacker community's experience. Various phreaker types have been reprogramming thier cellulars for quite a while- usually to do free calls instead of encrypted calls, but the same ideas apply. I don't know if anyone has done anything with the DSPs, but there are various files floating around with the codes to break into debug-mode and such for a while. Check yer local underground BBS...

3 2

Crypto toolkit
by Hal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Peter Murphy <pkm(a)maths.uq.oz.au> > I was most > taken by the idea of a "Crypto Toolkit". I think it would be understand- > able to write the code in plain, vanilla C (as opposed to C++). One > good reason is the widespread availability of C compilers, especially > with UNIX. Additionally, C++ compilers do take up more space (although > this would be more of an issue with PCs. I think Tim had in mind something that was accessible more from a higher- level language than C or C++; ideally, something interpreted so you could sit down and type in a few commands to get something useful. Perl and TCL are two languages which Tim mentioned and which have been discussed here in the past. Smalltalk might do, although it is not as "freely" avail- able. If you want a C toolkit, a good example already exists: the PGPTOOLS package by Pr0duct Cypher. It is available by ftp from csn.org in /pub/mpj to US citizens, and probably from some European crypto sites as well. This has a bignum package as well as interfaces to IDEA and RSA encryption. It also supports processing of PGP message formats and key rings. The latest version has code for Diffie-Hellman key exchange. Hal

3 2

Today's Dumb Question?
by David Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've got what may turn out to be Today's Dumb Question.... What Happens If, instead of using prime numbers or logarithms for the basis for a public-key crypto system, we instead generated out public key thus: 1> pick an arbitrary bit stream (large [pseudo?]random number, binary representation of selected chunk of text or data file, etc). 1024 bits or more (in 256 bit chunks?) 2> enter a passphrase 3> XOR the bit stream with the binary representation of the passphrase, cycling the passphrase as necessary. This makes the 'large' component of our public key. 4> hash the passphrase to 128 or more (in blocks of 64?) bits. This makes the 'small' component of the public key. 5> We then use these components as in normal public-key algorithms. Conceptually (to me), this would seem to work, and have the advantage of not being dependent on the factorability of any number; that is, the numbers could be extended as necessary fairly simply. It would also seem to depend on the entry of a passphrase that would be securely 'locked' inside someone's mind :-) Too, it wouldn't seem to be subject to any kind of patents. Finally, if the arbitrary bit stream were taken from something like a section of text in a file, a sequence of bytes in a data file, or even absolute track/sector reads from a floppy/hard disk, the entire thing could be rendered useless by the user by simply erasing/wiping a single file or track/sector. Would something like this work, or am I missing one of the trees because of the forest? Dave Merriman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 'That's odd.... the computer model didn't do that....'

1 0

Re: Today's Dumb Question
by Matt Thomlinson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

David Merriman <merriman(a)metronet.com> writes: What Happens If, instead of using prime numbers or logarithms for the basis for a public-key crypto system, we instead generated out public key thus: 1> pick an arbitrary bit stream (large [pseudo?]random number, binary representation of selected chunk of text or data file, etc). 1024 bits or more (in 256 bit chunks?) 2> enter a passphrase 3> XOR the bit stream with the binary representation of the passphrase, cycling the passphrase as necessary. This makes the 'large' component of our public key. 4> hash the passphrase to 128 or more (in blocks of 64?) bits. This makes the 'small' component of the public key. 5> We then use these components as in normal public-key algorithms. ---------- (matt says:) Okay, you're forgetting one thing. In public key systems, the two numbers you have are related -- the algorithm you use needs a pair of numbers that create a function and inverse function pair. The pair you suggest above [((random #) xor (passphrase)), hash(passphrase)] have nothing in common. Good, as you point out, since you can't create one from the other, but also bad for a public key system, since you can't use one to decrypt what the other encrypted (they're not inverses)! mt Matt Thomlinson University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. phone: (206) 548-9804 Check my home page -- ftp://ftp.u.washington.edu/public/phantom/home.html PGP 2.2 key available via email, or finger phantom(a)hardy.u.washington.edu

1 0

chip-0.1 / driver for MARALU chip-card-reader/writer v1.0
by schulte＠thp.uni-koeln.de 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have placed chip-0.1.tgz on ftp.thp.uni-koeln.de(134.95.64.1):/pub/linux/chip/chip-0.1.tgz It contains an alpha version of a rudimentary loadable device driver and a sample application (get information out of the telephone cards used by the German Telekom) to be used with MARALU's chip-card-reader/writer. In principal, the reader/writer should be able to access all types of I2C-cards and other formats. I'll try to provide more functionality if there's interest in the net. Please mail comments, suggestions and questions to chip(a)thp.uni-koeln.de. If you don't have ftp-access, drop me a note and I'll mail the code to you (in uuencoded form (about 8k), if nothing different is specified). Martin PLEASE NOTE, THAT NEITHER I NOR MARALU TAKE ANY RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE FUNCTIONALITY OR RELIABILITY OF THE PROVIDED CODE AND INFORMATION. -- -- Mail submissions for comp.os.linux.announce to: linux-announce(a)tc.cornell.edu Be sure to include Keywords: and a short description of your software. Ed Carp, N7EKG/VE3 ecarp(a)netcom.com 519/824-3307 an88744(a)anon.penet.fi If you want magic, let go of your armor. Magic is so much stronger than steel! -- Richard Bach, "The Bridge Across Forever"

1 0

warrentless searches
by dwomack＠runner.utsa.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Adam appears to be of the opinion that we are a democracy...technically, we are a representative republic. A minor quibble, perhaps, but it leads to larger issues. The entire purpose of the structure of our government (seperation of powers, varied election schedules, powers reserved to the states, the bill of rights and so forth) is to prevent the suppression of the rights of a minority by the majority. At least, that is the ideal! Guarantees of freedom are not required for popular positions. Is freedom of the press required for journals extolling the "lovely weather here in our most perfect of all possible worlds!"? Hardly. Such things could be safely written in the most authoritarian society. The majority of the people in the projects wants warrantless searches....it seems so very reasonable to say, ok, the gangs are out of control, the majority wants these searches, lets just go ahead! But, remember, you still have a minority of people who *_don't_* want these searches and seizures. Are we, in the name of expediency, to abandon the rights of this minority? A minority neither of race nor of money, but of opinion? If the majority of people decide that ownership of firearms is counter to the interests of society, will we take away this option? If the majority feels that safety will be enhanced, are we to be required to carry "papers" everywhere? This is a slippery path...if the same majority decides that decent people don't need privacy, then the days of the Clipper debates will remind us of what we have lost. Let's really bring this home...if society decides that "old people", say those over 75, cost too much to keep alive, will we let the same majority invoke forced euthanasia? Why not, the *_majority_* is all for it! No Adam, I'm not accusing you of anything, save the most terrible action of all...the willing subordination of liberty for an elusive safety that probably won't come anyway. Keep in mind that there are antisocial acts even in totalitarian states. And, if the North Koreas of the world have less gang violence...are we ready for such a trade? Again, the elimination of hard won freedoms is a terrible price. I predict that within a decade we will all regret the first step we take toward abolishing the rights our founders willingly gave their all to win. regards....

1 0

the #freedom channel
by Gary Jeffers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I spoke in an earlier post of the #freedom channel on the Internet chat. A brief description of #freedom. They interactively send messages to each other in code. The code is fast & they seem to be talking fluently to each other. This would seem to be an interesting matter to Cypherpunks. I have been asked for more info. on the #freedom channel. I don't know anymore than I've already talked about except that they are not a hidden or invite only channel. Of course, when you talk to them you are ignored. Apparently, they ignore other people because their machines "decrypt" our plaintext to "crypt-like" text. For anyone who would like to join the #freedom channel or acquire their encrypt/decrypt "on the fly" software, I have the following sug- gestions: 1. get on the Internet Chat system. 2. do a " /channel #freedom " command. that will get you into their channel. Immediately after getting on their channel, you will get a list of the nicknames of the users already on the channel. 3. IMMEDIATELY record on paper, the nicknames. - they may scroll off your screen quickly. 4. do a " /whois nick " on several of their nicks. This will get you their Internet email addresses. 5. Mail some of them requests for what you want. Since the channel name is "#freedom", I would suppose they are political & may want to share info. with you. If you are interested in their "on the fly" crypt/decrypt message software & you manage to get it - THEN BRING IT BACK TO CYPHERPUNKS! The stuff would make a good post on a Cypherpunk ftp site for freedom software. Note: it is possible that they may not be sophisticated with cryptography & might not want to give out their encrypt/decrypt algorithm. In which case, please try to get them in touch with one of the more experienced Cypherpunks. Cypherpunks should be able to demonstrate the uselessness of secret algorithms & in such a case give them stronger algorithms. Yours Truly, Gary Jeffers PUSH EM BACK! PUSH EM BACK! WWWAAAYYY BBBAAACCCKKK! BBBEEEAAATTTT STATE!

1 0

Re: licence plates seen
by mdbomber＠w6yx.stanford.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> >> Another one on a car I've seen many times is >> >> >> >> 68 ASCII >As Tim May pointed out, the letter D if 68d is read and the letter 'h' if >68h is read. Its a joke. > >Get it? h if its read in hex, and D if its read in Decimal. I knew it probably was a joke of some kind, but I didn't get it. Thanks for enlightening me. :-) Internet: mdbomber(a)w6yx.stanford.edu Matt Bartley GPS: 33 49' 117 48' PGP keys on finger and servers

1 0