- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Export rules
by Jim Ray 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 02:05 AM 8/15/97 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: ... >Well, Raph Levien applied for an export permit for the RSA-in-4-lines-of-PERL >shirt several years ago, and the export thugs stalled on it and never >responded positively or negatively, in spite of their publicly stated >policies that they "will" respond in some small number of days. ... I wonder if it's possible/practical to do a FOIA request on Raph's old permit request and why it didn't merit action. As I recall, he even sent them a couple of the shirts. Then the export thugs could never- respond to the FOIA request, I guess. Someday, the news media might even notice that it's an interesting (and humorous) story. JMR -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Freedom isn't Freeh. iQEPAwUBM/YiLzUhsGSn1j2pAQHXTwfQ4Iwltxah6RzMhQ7T0ttNejtpwLYMdX/R nqzHvgvB/OrOpElnX7BBSUlt3kj8Evj39EaRAKbvRcXU7YagmQaRbMrZW7MD5cdT gMNBujRqEiNezi6iF3obxlQb7ZUDaCdFEscGSVq1pWacAVtJkZWUvUeKsuIs1374 X0DgdXAVMmw20JjS1An0ME17IwDyUnVsWAhgijUQmlWUMeS6WZnvfOmzClEJWTGn N919pcLzyWmL0ZGfjo5c8i2+eWCgTfY/oMBPa2TwChqAOIDuip1O1v3vHWgFpoJ7 ffXmwXOTw2yWZO5b511jQ3TLgY9UmZXYuvljndsYi1zxPA== =uVHt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: (Fwd) FWD: Texas Driver's License database on the web
by miner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >>From: Brent Heustess <heustess(a)mail.utexas.edu> >> >> This is a really spooky web site <http://www.publiclink.com>. You can >>search 17 million Texas drivers by name, driver's license number or >>license plate number. When you find a person, you can then find everyone >>at that address with a license. You can even find everyone with the same >>9-digit zip code. The record does not have a GIF of the photo, but it >>has everything else on the license. > >Those who tell the government the actual address where they sleep at night >have no expectation of privacy. Most governments don't care if you >substitute an accomodation address. If you find a government that does >care, shop around until you find another that doesn't. I've been turned >down exactly once in my career when I attempted to use an accomodation >address for DMV purposes. I went elsewhere. > >DCF > There was an article in the WSJ about this recently, TX has passed a law that goes into effect Sept. 1ST that will make publiclink illegal, they said they would continue to run the site and see what happens in court. Don't remember the date of the article.

3 2

HI THERE
by ezx45542＠cttl.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Are you looking for a low cost advertising tool to reach out to MILLIONS of potential customers? Bulk E-mail is the ad tool of the 21st century. Its quick, easy, and inexpensive. Bulk E-mail makes it possible for even a small business to compete on the world market. Imagine getting your message out to a million people in a single day, and at a cost less than the price of a newspaper ad that may only reach a few thousand. The best part is, we do the work for you. Simply fill out the order form below, and mail it to us, and we take care of the rest. We will even mail/e-mail a report to you on how many, and to which domains your mail was sent. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ORDER FORM: (if you don't have a printer, simply copy the necessary information on a blank paper.) Quantity to be e-mailed: _______X 100,000 @ $20.00 ea..........___________ _______X 1,000,000 @ $150.00 ea.......___________ 10,000,000 @ $750.00................... ___________ Total Order...........................................................$____________ Mail check or money order to: KVC Marketing 5120 Overland Rd suite c-206 Boise, Id 83705 Credit Card orders: Name on card____________________________________ Account number_________________________________ Expiration Date______________ Authorized Signature______________________________ Send Bulk Mail confirmation? No_____ Yes____ To: either E-mail Address ____________@_______________ Or to: Name _________________________________ Address__________________________________ City_______________St_______Zip____________ ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Desired Text: _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ _________________________________________________________________ If specific domains are preferred, enter choices below. (i.e. aol.com, juno.com, etc) _________________________________________________________________ If you would like a clickable link to your website, enter URL here: http://____________________________________________________________

1 0

re: Just in case...
by Abstruse 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ok..i don't know how many of you saw this, and..given my short time recently, it may have even passed through this list..so, if it's a re-post, i apologive..if not, enjoy..but i figure with all the other side threads that come through here..this will be my fuck up if it's a re-post, ok?! well, enough of that, onto the post! ***************************from the BoS list****************** In a development that is probably sending Louis Freeh into coniptions and may represent a fatal blow to the administration's efforts to control encryption exports, the source code for Pretty Good Privacy's PGP 5.0 encryption program was posted Monday on a web site at the University of Oslo. So how did it get there, what with prohibitions on the export of 128-bit encryption encryption software? Right out the front door, that's how -- in the form of a 6,000-page book (remember them?), a format that is not covered by the law. A group of enterprising hackers set about scanning all 6,000 pages of the source code and then painstakingly double-checked for errors, a two-month process whose final fruits were unveiled in Unix format Monday, with Mac and Windows versions forthcoming. PGP says it had nothing to do with the whole thing, but was happy to have its product vetted free by a group of experts, whose trouble-shooting showed that the code is secure and contains no back doors for government visitors. More info at http://www5.zdnet.com/zdnn/content/zdnn/0812/zdnn0006.html

1 0

Re: SSL search attack
by monty.harder＠famend.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

D > > The odds can be improved somewhat by scaling the granularity of the D > >sweep to the size of the sweep. (Align larger chunks on large-chunk D > >boundaries, eliminating the chance of overlap with other large chunks.) D > D > Some kind of step (ie, round-down) function performed on the random (I More like deciding ahead of time that if you are going to take 1/n of the keyspace, you should take a chunk aligned on a 1/n boundary. That way, you don't have two people take chunks right next to each other, just missing the key, or take chunks that overlap each other massively, duplicating effort. If a random protocol were to be used, each person would roll up an appropriate starting spot, and then simply search sequentially thereafter, so that he would not double up on his =own= previous efforts. The point of scaling the starting point is basically the theory that says: "I will generate a random number of the form xxxxxx0000, because if I trust that a person has scanned any given number, I also trust that he has scanned the next FFFF keys, so it would be counterproductive for me to start anywhere not so aligned." And the number of 0s is based on my pathetic amount of computing power being estimated as 2**(-24) of the total effort. For those who made the Big Boys list, a few more zeros are in order. D > is searching an X segment area around where the dart hit. In order to D > get any kind of boundry, you have to scale the allowed segment blocks, by D > powers of two, for example, or something, so everyone knows where the D > borders are. Its a nice thought but I don't see that it's necessary. It should improve the odds just a bit. Instead of throwing darts at 2**40 targets, we are only throwing them at 2**24 small ones, and people with large darts to throw can worry about, say, 2**16 or even 2**12 targets to hit. * You always carry weapons, 'cause you always carry cash. -Glenn Frey. --- * Monster(a)FAmend.Com *

1 0

cypherpunks lite?
by will＠thinkmedia.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can someone provide me with the address of cypherpunks lite? Thanks. -Will S. Johnston ______________________________________________________________________________ Opinion is a flitting thing, Real Time Media But Truth, outlasts the Sun-- Thinking Media Research If then we cannot own them both-- will(a)thinkmedia.com Possess the oldest one-- (408) 423-3720 -Emily Dickinson http://www.thinkmedia.com

1 0

Missed a PGP version?
by David Downey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The version numbers of PGP floated from PGP 2.63i to PGP 5.0i. Did I miss a version or was this done to reflect the start of the break from the RSALIB algorythm? Also, does PGP 5.0 still support the MPLIB? Was it used in it's design? ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

2 1

Hmmm.. (fwd)
by Bryan Strawser 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a previous message, Jamie Rishaw said... This was from one of the discussion groups concerning InterNIC's operation of the whois services, registration services, etc. I found it quite interesting that they were logging this sort of information. Bryan > From owner-rs-talk(a)internic.net Fri Sep 1 00:47:14 1995 > Message-Id: <m0soE5J-001dv0C(a)sauron.multiverse.com> > From: jamie(a)sauron.multiverse.com (Jamie Rishaw) > Subject: Hmmm.. > To: rs-talk(a)internic.net > Date: Thu, 31 Aug 1995 14:11:28 -0400 (EDT) > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Content-Length: 343 > Sender: owner-rs-talk(a)internic.net > > What's this? > > melkor% whois seaway.com ~/nic > crt0: no /usr/lib/ld.so > > Could not open log file [/home/guest/guest/logs/whoisrv.log] > > > Does NIC log all the WHOIS requests? Why? > > > -- > jamie rishaw (jamie(a)multiverse.net) > > "Hey! Who took the cork off my lunch??!" > -- W. C. Fields > -- Bryan Strawser, Gondolin Technologies, Bloomington, IN USA Remember Waco feanor(a)gondolin.org Live free or die

1 0

Re: SSL search attack
by rkw＠dataplex.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:25 AM 9/1/95, Daniel R. Oelke wrote: >> >> I see nothing wrong with the concept of being allocated an initial chunk >> and having the scan software attempt to ACK it when 50% of it has been >> searched. A successful ACK would allow the releasing of a new chunk (in >> response) equal in size to the returned chunk. A failure of the Server to >> accept the ACK would trigger a retry at set intervals (such as 75% and 100% >> or 60/70/80/90/100%) until the Server responds. Thus the scanner is always >> in possession of a Full Sized Chuck to scan (so long as the Server accepts >> an ACK before the 100% done mark) and temporary failures will not stop the >> process of a scanner as currently happens. >> > >The only way this can work is if the server is told it is a 50%/75%/etc >size ACK, and then latter the server is ACKed for the full 100%. > >Why? Because what happens if the client dies immediately after doing >the ACK - maybe only 51% of that space has been searched, yet >the server has already seen an ACK for it. You NEVER claim to have searched space until you have actually done so. >IMO - a % ACK is to much complexity and extra work on the server, >which is already having trouble keeping up. No. The claim is that the server has no problem keeping up with acks. Besides, if it does, we simply insert a layer of "managers" to buffer the top management from being "bothered" too often. You are making the "ACK" too complicated. Assuming that you are multi-threaded--- Simply run two "workers" on the same machine. If there are delays in getting keys assigned, the two will soon get out of phase and keep the cpu busy. ---- Richard Wackerbarth rkw(a)dataplex.net

1 0

Re: O.J. ObCrypto: Fuhrman's Folly Fans Fakery Fears...
by Robert A. Rosenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 23:50 8/30/95, MONTY HARDER wrote: >I recommend that anyone who will be using escrowed keys generate two >pairs: First, the signature key, including in the userid some kind of >[sig use] identifier (we should settle on a standard abbreviation for >this) follower by the encryption key. This way, when a person gets your >pubkeys, they get the encryption key =last=, which gets it searched >first whenever they PGP -e... something. > > Whatever arrangements are made for escrowing my encryption key, >=nobody= gets my signature key. If I am fired, quit, become brain >damaged or dead, my key can never be used by anyone to implicate me in >any criminal activity. > > > > Please don't mention to anyone the fact that my signature key can be >used to send me something that even the escrow agents can't read.... I do not think that PGP 2.x can easily (ie: Automatically) use one key for Signing and another for Encrypting a Message (it does both at the same time if you ask). If I "Clear Sign" a message and then Encrypt it, then I get the result but I'm not sure if doing the decrypt on such a message will automatically spot the signature and verify it (as would occur with a E+S pass). PGP3 is supposed to have the ability to have keysets that contain two keys for this purpose (ie: When you generate a key set you can ask it to generate separate Sign and Encrypt keys so that separate keys get used for each function).

2 1