- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: CyberAngels
by tcmay＠got.net 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

At 5:30 AM 2/15/96, Medea wrote: > I bet if you use the word "cryptology" in a sentence, the CyberAsses >would have no idea what you were taking about. "Cripology?" "Oh, yeah, dat be da study of da Crips, one of da gangs we be protectin' da peeples against." --Curtis Sliwa E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > > >>My, my. For a group of people so uspet at taxes you certainly have faith in >>the ability of private individuals to generate the capital for things like >>the Manhattan Project and high-cost nuke delivery systems! > >Unfortunately, neither of these would take that much. A university with >competent physics, engineering, and chemistry departments could do the first; >smuggling could do the second. >-Allen Actually, I have enough background in all these areas, to the point where I think if I were given a plutonium "pit," I could probably implement the bomb in about 6 months of part-time tinkering. The main engineering problem would be finding/producing two different homogeneous explosives with reliably defined/measured detonation velocities, and calculating the shape of the "lenses" required to cover the pit, and then machining or casting the parts. (I'd probably also want to simulate the mechanical "impedance match" of the chemical explosive to the (dense) plutonium; and as I understand it they use the mechanical equivalent of a transformer to do the matching. Sorry, but I think in terms of electronics, not mechanics. Sue me.) BTW, I think I've already solved the problem of producing a few dozen absolutely simultaneous trigger explosions (+/- 100 nanoseconds) around the periphery at the lens foci, without using multiple electronic detonators. (in fact, a single blasting cap would do nicely.) "But the margins of this book are too small to contain it" Heh heh! Jim Bell

1 0

Re: CyberAngels
by tcmay＠got.net 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

At 5:30 AM 2/15/96, Medea wrote: > I bet if you use the word "cryptology" in a sentence, the CyberAsses >would have no idea what you were taking about. "Cripology?" "Oh, yeah, dat be da study of da Crips, one of da gangs we be protectin' da peeples against." --Curtis Sliwa E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > > >>My, my. For a group of people so uspet at taxes you certainly have faith in >>the ability of private individuals to generate the capital for things like >>the Manhattan Project and high-cost nuke delivery systems! > >Unfortunately, neither of these would take that much. A university with >competent physics, engineering, and chemistry departments could do the first; >smuggling could do the second. >-Allen Actually, I have enough background in all these areas, to the point where I think if I were given a plutonium "pit," I could probably implement the bomb in about 6 months of part-time tinkering. The main engineering problem would be finding/producing two different homogeneous explosives with reliably defined/measured detonation velocities, and calculating the shape of the "lenses" required to cover the pit, and then machining or casting the parts. (I'd probably also want to simulate the mechanical "impedance match" of the chemical explosive to the (dense) plutonium; and as I understand it they use the mechanical equivalent of a transformer to do the matching. Sorry, but I think in terms of electronics, not mechanics. Sue me.) BTW, I think I've already solved the problem of producing a few dozen absolutely simultaneous trigger explosions (+/- 100 nanoseconds) around the periphery at the lens foci, without using multiple electronic detonators. (in fact, a single blasting cap would do nicely.) "But the margins of this book are too small to contain it" Heh heh! Jim Bell

1 0

Re: CyberAngels
by tcmay＠got.net 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

At 5:30 AM 2/15/96, Medea wrote: > I bet if you use the word "cryptology" in a sentence, the CyberAsses >would have no idea what you were taking about. "Cripology?" "Oh, yeah, dat be da study of da Crips, one of da gangs we be protectin' da peeples against." --Curtis Sliwa E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > > >>My, my. For a group of people so uspet at taxes you certainly have faith in >>the ability of private individuals to generate the capital for things like >>the Manhattan Project and high-cost nuke delivery systems! > >Unfortunately, neither of these would take that much. A university with >competent physics, engineering, and chemistry departments could do the first; >smuggling could do the second. >-Allen Actually, I have enough background in all these areas, to the point where I think if I were given a plutonium "pit," I could probably implement the bomb in about 6 months of part-time tinkering. The main engineering problem would be finding/producing two different homogeneous explosives with reliably defined/measured detonation velocities, and calculating the shape of the "lenses" required to cover the pit, and then machining or casting the parts. (I'd probably also want to simulate the mechanical "impedance match" of the chemical explosive to the (dense) plutonium; and as I understand it they use the mechanical equivalent of a transformer to do the matching. Sorry, but I think in terms of electronics, not mechanics. Sue me.) BTW, I think I've already solved the problem of producing a few dozen absolutely simultaneous trigger explosions (+/- 100 nanoseconds) around the periphery at the lens foci, without using multiple electronic detonators. (in fact, a single blasting cap would do nicely.) "But the margins of this book are too small to contain it" Heh heh! Jim Bell

1 0

Re: CyberAngels
by tcmay＠got.net 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

At 5:30 AM 2/15/96, Medea wrote: > I bet if you use the word "cryptology" in a sentence, the CyberAsses >would have no idea what you were taking about. "Cripology?" "Oh, yeah, dat be da study of da Crips, one of da gangs we be protectin' da peeples against." --Curtis Sliwa E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > > >>My, my. For a group of people so uspet at taxes you certainly have faith in >>the ability of private individuals to generate the capital for things like >>the Manhattan Project and high-cost nuke delivery systems! > >Unfortunately, neither of these would take that much. A university with >competent physics, engineering, and chemistry departments could do the first; >smuggling could do the second. >-Allen Actually, I have enough background in all these areas, to the point where I think if I were given a plutonium "pit," I could probably implement the bomb in about 6 months of part-time tinkering. The main engineering problem would be finding/producing two different homogeneous explosives with reliably defined/measured detonation velocities, and calculating the shape of the "lenses" required to cover the pit, and then machining or casting the parts. (I'd probably also want to simulate the mechanical "impedance match" of the chemical explosive to the (dense) plutonium; and as I understand it they use the mechanical equivalent of a transformer to do the matching. Sorry, but I think in terms of electronics, not mechanics. Sue me.) BTW, I think I've already solved the problem of producing a few dozen absolutely simultaneous trigger explosions (+/- 100 nanoseconds) around the periphery at the lens foci, without using multiple electronic detonators. (in fact, a single blasting cap would do nicely.) "But the margins of this book are too small to contain it" Heh heh! Jim Bell

1 0

Re: CyberAngels
by tcmay＠got.net 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

At 5:30 AM 2/15/96, Medea wrote: > I bet if you use the word "cryptology" in a sentence, the CyberAsses >would have no idea what you were taking about. "Cripology?" "Oh, yeah, dat be da study of da Crips, one of da gangs we be protectin' da peeples against." --Curtis Sliwa E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > > >>My, my. For a group of people so uspet at taxes you certainly have faith in >>the ability of private individuals to generate the capital for things like >>the Manhattan Project and high-cost nuke delivery systems! > >Unfortunately, neither of these would take that much. A university with >competent physics, engineering, and chemistry departments could do the first; >smuggling could do the second. >-Allen Actually, I have enough background in all these areas, to the point where I think if I were given a plutonium "pit," I could probably implement the bomb in about 6 months of part-time tinkering. The main engineering problem would be finding/producing two different homogeneous explosives with reliably defined/measured detonation velocities, and calculating the shape of the "lenses" required to cover the pit, and then machining or casting the parts. (I'd probably also want to simulate the mechanical "impedance match" of the chemical explosive to the (dense) plutonium; and as I understand it they use the mechanical equivalent of a transformer to do the matching. Sorry, but I think in terms of electronics, not mechanics. Sue me.) BTW, I think I've already solved the problem of producing a few dozen absolutely simultaneous trigger explosions (+/- 100 nanoseconds) around the periphery at the lens foci, without using multiple electronic detonators. (in fact, a single blasting cap would do nicely.) "But the margins of this book are too small to contain it" Heh heh! Jim Bell

1 0

[Freedombox-discuss] Processors without visual serial numbers exist
by freebirds＠hushmail.com 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tim Schmidt wrote: "The Ben Nanonote uses a CPU designed and made in China. For which there's not terribly much documentation. Just saying..." True but not for long. When AMD or Google buy out MIPS, there will be a global monopoly on processors. I need to purchase a MIPS as soon as possible! See: "AMD and Google in Race to Buy Out MIPS" http://www.techpowerup.com/164394/AMD-and-Google-in-Race-to-Buy-Out- MIPS.html?cp=2 Tim Schmidt, I think the entire Ben Nanonote is manufactured in China, not just the Ingenic JZ4720 processor. You are correct there is not much documentation from Ingenic. Ingenic has not responded to my two emails. The Qi forum is practically dead. No responses to my posts. There is another open hardware project I just read about today, OpenHardware.org. I will check them out. There are a few SoC without a visual processor serial number. Great news: DreamPlug is one of them. ARM Forum answered: "The ARM CPU itself doesn't have a unique identifier, although someone building an SoC using an ARM CPU could add one at the system level." http://forums.arm.com Yuri at Freescale technical support, support(a)freescale.com, answered that devices of i.MXS or i.MXL series do not have PSN. http://www.freescale.com/webapp/sps/site/overview. jsp?code=IMXS_FAMILY > On June 29, 2012, Globalscale Technologies answered my question whether the DreamPlug has a visual PSN. Sales(a)globalscaletechnologies.com wrote: "For our current production, we do not burn device ID in OTP memory, this ID is not visible to the internet." I just Globalscale whether DreamPlug has ARM FreeZone or out of band monitoring. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Charset: UTF8 Version: Hush 3.0 Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify wsBcBAEBAgAGBQJP7gqvAAoJEMry4TZLOfxmyDQH/RDO2soFV7r4hYR3M2v3A68g63vm 8w6TTdCiaXo2iTrCxAyAOLkYEpH9UqqMhZTDrnuGcvFrUDmojhq5dJdmWKxjHR87dKYa ymdKdBjCzwazsdINzS/picd9Kvn/3Fyj2wnBc8iC4rqfn6ZuNVZdxwJuZ8Ec10Dh7Q1a Qd5NENCrvZEbyMxfiriw0yOrXvqHCcWBGSmGyBKSkFiHRicDuwFn1Bu3HkEkU8YKnwed /BHiP5zQA66LciSDwEuH3fenLxgPehNTGtOwJ0K+URhDd0sgymNyUkUbMWg5Wh/aZ9VY mNdbqIW3soGm/Bv1Pu73XzeGKWxPKMphJE/BMGehdrw= =5Inm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list Freedombox-discuss(a)lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

Re: CyberAngels
by tcmay＠got.net 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

At 5:30 AM 2/15/96, Medea wrote: > I bet if you use the word "cryptology" in a sentence, the CyberAsses >would have no idea what you were taking about. "Cripology?" "Oh, yeah, dat be da study of da Crips, one of da gangs we be protectin' da peeples against." --Curtis Sliwa E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > > >>My, my. For a group of people so uspet at taxes you certainly have faith in >>the ability of private individuals to generate the capital for things like >>the Manhattan Project and high-cost nuke delivery systems! > >Unfortunately, neither of these would take that much. A university with >competent physics, engineering, and chemistry departments could do the first; >smuggling could do the second. >-Allen Actually, I have enough background in all these areas, to the point where I think if I were given a plutonium "pit," I could probably implement the bomb in about 6 months of part-time tinkering. The main engineering problem would be finding/producing two different homogeneous explosives with reliably defined/measured detonation velocities, and calculating the shape of the "lenses" required to cover the pit, and then machining or casting the parts. (I'd probably also want to simulate the mechanical "impedance match" of the chemical explosive to the (dense) plutonium; and as I understand it they use the mechanical equivalent of a transformer to do the matching. Sorry, but I think in terms of electronics, not mechanics. Sue me.) BTW, I think I've already solved the problem of producing a few dozen absolutely simultaneous trigger explosions (+/- 100 nanoseconds) around the periphery at the lens foci, without using multiple electronic detonators. (in fact, a single blasting cap would do nicely.) "But the margins of this book are too small to contain it" Heh heh! Jim Bell

1 0

Re: [p2p-hackers] Distributed identity, chat, publishing, and sharing
by Tony Arcieri 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Sean Lynch <seanl(a)literati.org> wrote: > Very interesting. "Cryptosphere" is a good name for such a system, > though from what you describe there the project seems more concerned > about identifying content than people, whereas my idea centers around > identifying people, with content being secondary. > It's all equally important, although I intend to identify nodes or peers rather than people (who may operate many nodes). Can you elaborate on this? By metadata I was thinking of things like > filename, content description, ratings, etc. > I was thinking of a log of how much data was transferred and the transfer rate. The type of metadata you're describing is kept secret in my system. > Given that the part that needs to be small is the public key, what's the > benefit of using the same private key? Once you have an Ed25519 public > key, you can always do an authenticated Diffie-Hellman exchange with an > ephemeral session key, which gives you perfect forward security if any > individual session private key is compromised. > The point of doing this is so both ends can authenticate the other party as the same party who signed data they're interested in. CurveCP still uses DH to generate an ephemeral session key. I was to CodesInChaos earlier on about this approach on the CurveCP and he said he looked into it before and thought it seemed sound. I ran across CurveCP before and had forgotten about it. Embedding and > congestion control are primary requirements for me, and libutp fits the > bill, even allowing the user to provide a callback for sending and > receiving data, which is where I'd apply the encryption. Yeah, uTP is definitely nice in that it has the congestion part licked (perhaps too well). It would be neat to try to take the CurveCP encryption protocol design and sort of layer it on top of uTP. > All of the applications could even be written in Javascript and > distributed through the network itself, signed by their authors. They > could run as web workers using a particular protocol to talk to the main > app if the network runs in a browser, or in QtScript if it's a native Qt > app. I have no idea how to securely run untrusted JS in Java, though. > Yeah, this is definitely something else I am extremely interested in. I have been looking at a friend's capabilities-based JavaScript wrapper around <iframe sandbox> which seemed like it'd be an interesting way to sandbox web applications being loaded from a system like the Cryptosphere. They could talk back to a parent iframe via postMessages and request various services from the system. See: https://github.com/tildeio/oasis.js -- Tony Arcieri _______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list p2p-hackers(a)lists.zooko.com http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

Re: <nettime> The Monetary Future: How Bitcoin Is Being Destroyed
by Eugen Leitl 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:46:36AM +0200, John Haltiwanger wrote: > > It doesn't rely on processing cycles for maintaining the log of > > transactions. It needs some processing for the distributed mint, > > but adaptively so (difficulty goes down if mining rate goes down) > > and processing cycles are fundamentally egalitarian. > > > > How can something that inherently favors those with pre-existing capital to > invest in computing architecture be "fundamentally egalitarian" ? You need a cheap online computer to transfer BTC. You will need a bigger online computer to make BTC. You don't need to be a central bank to issue BTC. You don't even need a banking license, and a connection to SWIFT in order to transfer. All you need in a lousy smartphone. I think that levels the playing field quite a bit. > Those with the money to invest in the most hardware get the most bitcoins. > Hardly seems like an equal opportunity cost to me. I'm pretty sure that if you're trying to find a hair in the soup hard enough, eventually you will. However, I find this dish palatable enough as is. Your mileage might vary. > > You were late to the party, and by that time you probably needed > > GPU clients (which will be soon useless, since ASIC miner rigs > > are ante portas) participation in a mining pool. > > > > I should have clarified that the mining client speculated that it would > take two years. I immediately shut it down in disgust. When I'm trying to form an opinion about something, I try to research it first. In general I did not care about minting other than a means to obtain play money to test transactions. I find this curious that so many are focusing on the most irrelevant aspect of a P2P monetary system, the distributed mint, and expect a personal, handsome profit from seigniorage. There's a reason that difficulty is adaptive. The system is supposed to homeostate so that the rate of production is limited. This is by design. > > This is a currency based on scarcity, just like gold or cowry shells. > > If you intended to become rich by mining, you should have been a year > > or two sooner to the party. > > > > I downloaded the client within months of the launch of Bitcoin. And what You obviously did something wrong, then. > you are saying proves my point about the stupidity of building a currency > on scarcity: it's not going to lead us to anywhere new I understand when inventors and patent holders of cryptocurrencies scoffed at the first cryptocurrency to succeed wildly, by solving the issue of double spending without resorting to centralism, and hence a single point of failure. A simple case of sour grapes. What is your track record, so far? > or 'revolutionary'. If you figure out a tamper-proof way of measuring underlying economy and a tamper-proof way of issuing a matching volume without any single point of failures, feel free to publish. It will make quite a splash, I assure you. > You have to 'get there first' and 'mine harder/smarter'. What stupid > advice, "oh you should have been there earlier". Look, I just pointed out the problem with where you focus and your approach. If you think that issuing P2P currency with the intent to make a personal profit is stupid, I agree. > > > > > The value of bitcoin is ability to do P2P transactions in real time without > > requiring a third party, using a naturally deflationary monetary system > > which however is highly frangible. > > > > That by itself is of obvious enough utility. > > > > That is about the only interesting thing about it, yes. But the ability to > engage in P2P transactions is hardly a result of the means of the Why are you so focused on production? > currency's production, nor is it a feature unique to bitcoin itself. As compared to which successful digicash system, exactly? > Also "naturally deflationary" in the scope of something that is more Deflationary in the sense is that the total amount is limited, and will be approached asymptotically. > hoarded than traded seems like a misnomer to me. Since there are a limited If you want the currency to be useful, you need to grow the underlying economy, so people are more incited to spend than to be unable to spend. So what kind of business that is accepting BTC are you running, personally? > number of bitcoins, there is a "natural" tendency to hold on to as many of > them as possible. That way when the pie is all spoken for, one's slices Nobody prevents you from designing a P2P cryptocurrency with built-in demurrage. You're hating on an experiment. As I understand the designer was unhappy with the rate of adoption, it would be indeed been much better if the minting craze didn't happen. I don't think that flaw needs to be fatal. > will increase in value as demand becomes satiable solely through trade. ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

Traffic analysis reveals spy satellite details
by Udhay Shankar N 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/05/science/space/05spotters.html When the government announced last month that a top-secret spy satellite would, in the next few months, come falling out of the sky, American officials said there was little risk to people because satellites fall out of orbit fairly frequently and much of the planet is covered by oceans. But they said precious little about the satellite itself. Such information came instead from Ted Molczan, a hobbyist who tracks satellites from his apartment balcony in Toronto, and fellow satellite spotters around the world. They have grudgingly become accustomed to being seen as b propeller-headed geeksb who b poke their finger in the eyeb of the governmentbs satellite spymasters, Mr. Molczan said, taking no offense. b I have a sense of humor,b he said. Mr. Molczan, a private energy conservation consultant, is the best known of the satellite spotters who, needing little more than a pair of binoculars, a stop watch and star charts, uncover some of the deepest of the governmentbs expensive secrets and share them on the Internet. <snip> -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com)) --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo(a)metzdowd.com ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0