- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: "This is not Coderpunks--we don't need no steenking cryptography!"
by Bruce Baugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:11 PM 2/21/96 -0800, tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) wrote: >* Coderpunks -- number theory, DES, Haval, C/C++/Java, IETF and TCP/IP >stuff, digital signatures, crypto libraries and APIs, Diffie-Hellman, >BSAFE, RSAREF, etc. > >* Cypherpunks -- nuclear bomb triggers, why women are more free under the >will of Allah than in Western decadent societies, movie reviews, SS >Obergruppenfuhrer Zimmermann, Zambian newspapers, alien bases in >Antarctica, Himalayan treks, etc. Pretty much, yep. The only part of this that really annoys me is that there isn't currently any real place to talk about actual crypto matters from a user's point of view. Sure, I can carve out space for myself on my own Web pages to talk about the things that interest/concern me - and I have - but it's tough to find anyplace to _learn_ in any way except random experimentation. And sure, if I could read C well enough to puzzle through the remailer code and had the UNIX knowledge necessary to compile and run one myself, for instance, I could answer all my questions about remailer operation. But I don't. And I wish I didn't have to. Unfortunately, there seems to be a huge gap between the tiny handful of people who create the stuff and the bulk of us who are merely interested in using it. At this point, I acknowledge that I'm reinventing Alan's screed about how "cypherpunks teach" should be as true as "cypherpunks write code". If more people don't work on bridging the aforementioned gap, smart people of good will who happen to be occupied enough with other things not to be able (or interested) to become themselves good programmers and cryptographers are SOL. -- Bruce Baugh bruce(a)aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~bruce

1 0

No Subject
by owner-cypherpunks＠toad.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:04 PM 2/14/96, Robert Hettinga wrote: >Perry and Tim, > >Why don't you two have sex already? The tension around here is getting >unbearable... And why don't you stop cluttering up the list with supposedly cute stuff like this? The couple of fairly short messages I've written in response to comments by Perry are *as nothing* compared to the tons of verbiage in the Jim Bell flame wars, the VZNUri/Detweiler flames, and even the Black Unicorn vs. Netscape battle. (If anyone can point to examples where I have engaged in protracted--more than a couple of short messages--flames, please send me pointers to these examples in private mail. I claim no especial morality, but I do think I've stayed out of ongoing flame wars. I haven't even commented on "assassination politics," even though it's just a watered-down and poorly-thought-out version of what I wrote about in 1988...easier to just delete the ramblings.) And yet people like Bob and Uni feel compelled to throw their two cents in about what a spectacle this is. Get real. --Tim May Boycott espionage-enabled software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.)
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

IPG Sales <ipgsales(a)cyberstation.net> wrote: > See my reply to Tim Phillip - it is checked extensively > > If the algorithm sucks, prove it - please read the messages back and See my comment below. [..] > > [..] > > > In general, you will find the kernel of the propgations consists of 64 > > > equation sets of the form: > > > > > > Bi=(Bi+Ci MOD Di) Mod 256 Large prime numbers > > > ENCRYPTEXTi=OTP[Bi] XOR PLAINTEXTi Encryption > > > OTP[Bi]=ENCRYPTEXTi Makes the OTP Dynamic > > > > Bah. Looks to me like simple garbling, only using a large stream. > > > > Encrypt a stream of zeros with that method, and you'll get repeated > > strings of OTP[Bi]'s. An unsophisticated high school student could > > crack that.

1 0

Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.)
by stevenw＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Perry: > >"Stubborness and dogmatism are the surest signs of stupidity - is there > anything more resolute and disdainful than an ass!" Montaigne > >You have an yellow streak down your back infinitely wide - you may or >may not be a physical coward but you are certainly an intellectual coward >- you have the opportunity to save human lives, as you asserted and you >just brushed that asside - [etc. elided] My personal theory is that Perry has developed a particularly nasty form of multiple personality disorder and it is causing him to voraciously troll himself on this list. It's not going to be pretty, folks. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steven Weller | "The Internet, of course, is more | than just a place to find pictures | of people having sex with dogs." stevenw(a)best.com | -- Time Magazine, 3 July 1995

1 0

Portland Cypherpunks Get-Together
by Bruce Baugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I just wanted to remind y'all that this Saturday is the second quasi-monthly Portland (OR) cypherpunks MST3K fest, key-signing, and general social event. E-mail for further information. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEQAwUBMSwOAn3AXR8sjiylAQHoHAfRAZ0NJpB/pzmKwwRtJJygkQfE4vLQxrO3 f51RlzysBE3u7OFGnNYmy8QLXzsaclppN0ssfbFkxs13vwgiztudl9D3LkGrdw44 HgRAAV+FTuuR+nzehOc3DHQDDnPLoXh7NrS+bYfYGHv2GB8OZYpFXD5VEirJFmEj uq7dEV4wy8+ml7BsMXxxZNwhP1ISRXvH9ODKLZnWx/6ngkFbzJBw1cvyHiuqjwRg 5HM31+HKSe5qi+Xx9ZlEfLY5d3U6HiN9cgKL+Jo301VGsZmEvIPyK0Yjyt4EUzgN 6vawqU6Kvzj76tOMe1lnUs3eSR4rUmNlaYXNRZuxy7FObqc= =uaR5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Bruce Baugh bruce(a)aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~bruce

1 0

RE: "consent of the governed"
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Vladimir Z. Nuri I was musing over this phrase, "a government rules by consent of the governed" [.......] does it mean, "majority of the governed?" how exactly is consent expressed? ....................................................................................... . How exactly is consent extractedH^H^H^H^H^H^ requested? . When exactly is consent identified? . How exactly is government applied to the consentees? (caning, jailing, fines, etc.) . How exactly do consentors change methodologies when they suddenly realize that they, too, can be subject to their own device? . Why should non-consenting citizens live with governing methods which in fact conflict with the pursuit of those three human virtues: life, liberty, happiness? Supposedly, government is devised for ruling the "unruly"; a matter for definition and (dis)agreement which can provide endless hours of amusement for authoritarians, especially in court. I hear tell that many who are no longer amused are now learning the many uses of encryption. Thus the list. (end of my comments) .. Blanc

1 0

Re: IPG hoax?
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:32 PM 2/21/96 -0800, Wink Junior wrote: >I must admit that after the first day I've been wondering if this whole >IPG thing isn't some kind of deep troll or early April Fool's joke. It is part of the "Trolling Cryptographers Protocol Internet Protocol". The "TCP/IP" is a secret government project to keep cryptographers busy by posting trolls to various newsgroups where they hang out. (Sometimes they cross post to various groups using the same technique. This is known as a "Troll Bridge".) It is a followup to the evil and ancient "Asyncronous Protocols of the Elders of Zion. (Also known as IPv1.) The next upcoming plot is when they Imminatize the Eschaton with the most evil plot of all... IPv666! (Thankfully it only works under Windows 95 so far.) | Remember: Life is not always champagne. Sometimes it is REAL pain. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ | alano(a)teleport.com |

1 0

OECD Canberra Papers
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Papers from the Australian/OECD Conference in Canberra are starting to appear, though none are specifically identified as coming from the restricted Group of Experts meeting on February 9: _________________________________________________________________ http://www.nla.gov.au/gii/papers.html Joint Australian/OECD Conference on Security, Privacy and Intellectual Property Protection in the Global Information Infrastructure Canberra, 7 - 8 February 1996 _________________________________________________________________ The one by Shane Simpson thoughtfully examines the way technology is affecting the sharing of information once considered to be proprietary or secret or private. Among other topics, it also explores the release of government information, prying by Big Bro in the "public interest" and other long-standing practices being re-shaped by technology. Some mention of the spread of cryptography and the consequent power disputes. _________________________________________________________________ http://www.nla.gov.au/gii/simpson.html Managing Risks in the Global Information Infrastructure Professor Shane Simpson Founder and Director, Technology Risk Management Centre, Faculty of Law, University of Wollongong

1 0

Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.)
by olbon＠dynetics.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:10 AM 2/21/96, lmccarth(a)cs.umass.edu wrote: >Clay writes: >> Given that N is the length of the message in bits. The number of >> possible combinations of bits is 2^N. For any message length N > 1, >> 2^N < N^256. > >Uh, nope. 2^N grows asymptotically faster than N^256. Actually, for any >constants A and B, A^N grows asymptotically faster than N^B. For A=2, B=256, >the crossover happens somewhere before N=4096. >2^4096 = 2^(16*256) > 2^(12*256) = (2^12)^256 = (4096)^256 > >If the IPG people are using N=5600 (weird choice) then certainly >2^5600 > 5600^256, for what little that's worth. > >(Ah, my computer science B.S. pays off ;) > >-Lewis "You're always disappointed, nothing seems to keep you high -- drive > your bargains, push your papers, win your medals, fuck your strangers; > don't it leave you on the empty side ?" (Joni Mitchell, 1972) Oops. Thanks for pointing this out. I should probably just shut up about this, but snake-oil salesmen really get under my skin. Of course, being wrong hasn't kept me from opening my mouth in the past so ... Clay --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Clay Olbon II | olbon(a)dynetics.com Systems Engineer | ph: (810) 589-9930 fax 9934 Dynetics, Inc., Ste 302 | http://www.msen.com/~olbon/olbon.html 550 Stephenson Hwy | PGP262 public key: finger olbon(a)mgr.dynetics.com Troy, MI 48083-1109 | pgp print: B97397AD50233C77523FD058BD1BB7C0 "To escape the evil curse, you must quote a bible verse; thou shalt not ... Doooh" - Homer (Simpson, not the other one) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.)
by IPG Sales 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I find less and less disagreeement with your comments - with one major exception - for a given message length - say 10 to the 500th power, a OTP seeded algorithm, a better term would be to call it an OTP driven algorithm, can produce the exact same effect as an OTP of that length - that is, the encrypted text can be any possible message of that length, and it is not possible to predict in way what the RNG generated stream is - We can prove that to your or anyone eleses satisfaction - It obviously fails to do that somewhat short of infinity, but not short of what is needed to prove system integrity for practical limits. If all the paricles in the Universe, 10 to the 80th, were Cray T3Es, and they had been calculating since the big bang, according to my rough calculations, it would still take over 10 to the 370th power years to just generate the message possibilities -for a 10 to the 500th power message length possibilities - we assert that if it can do that, and it can, it functions like a OTP of that length - and is unbreakable We also have a light, but only a slight disagreement, about whether the the key is truly symmetrical - we assert that because of the aprticlaur data feedback system employed it is not symmetrical, but that is entirely beside the point, we believe 10 to the 500th, or whatever should be sufficient Appreciatively, Ralph

6 5