- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: wired & batch file
by tcmay＠netcom.com 12 Feb '93

12 Feb '93

Karl Barrus writes: > Finally, crypto is mentioned in WIRED magazine! It's on the >"HYPE LIST" behind Object Oriented, Post-Modern, Raves, and ahead of >Smart Drugs. Here is the paragraph on it (bottom of page 87): And I'm sure you all know "Wired" is preparing a major article on the Cypherpunks and crypto. I've seen the Steven Levy rough draft and it looks good. >So, fellow rabid defenders freedom, who is Ted Nelson?? :-) I guess >I'm too young... You _must_ be young! Lucky you. Ted Nelson is the chief popularizer (and early architect, to be fair) of "hypertext," or nonlinear, linked writing. As in being able to click on this word, "hypertext," and see lots of threads taking you off to various other places, articles, sidebars, and so on. Hypertexts thus transcend the simple linear writing style enforced on us by paper and books. Nelson wrote an extremely influential book called "Computer Lib," circa 1975, which described hypertext and accurately predicted many of today's most important trends. Microsoft Press reprinted it, with corrections and addditions, a few years back. Definitely recommended! His project, known as "Xanadu," has been developing for close to 30 years. About 10 or so years a team of programmers nucleated around Xanadu to commercialize it. Known as the Xanadu Operating Company, it was funded by Autodesk (maker of Autocad) from 1988 until just a few months ago, when Autodesk decided to reorient its efforts. XOC may still be seeking alternative funding. Our own Dean Tribble is centrally involved, and other participants included Mark Miller, Roger Gregory, and various others (some of whom show up on this list, or at the physical Cypherpunks meetings). Apple's "HyperCard" was a poor imitation, in the sense that full bidirectional links were not supported (and some other limitations, though in fairness to Bill Atkinson and Apple, the original product, codenamed "WildCard," was not intended to be full hypertext.) (I use a true hypertext writing system called "StorySpace," for the Mac. Other platforms have their own such programs. Nothing as grand as Xanadu, though. And there's a newsgroup called alt.hypertext if you're interested.) Ted Nelson is living in the Bay Area, working on various projects. He's shown some interest in crypto things, and talked to some of us at a recent Hackers Conference about the implications. Hypertext is definitely a good idea, but the commercialization has been slow in coming. -Tim May > >/-----------------------------------\ >| Karl L. Barrus | >| elee9sf(a)menudo.uh.edu | <- preferred address >| barrus(a)tree.egr.uh.edu (NeXTMail) | >\-----------------------------------/

1 0

Re: Compressed/Encrypted Voice using Modems
by Phil Karn 12 Feb '93

12 Feb '93

At 11:41 2/10/93 -0500, Murdering Thug wrote: >The best solution, as suggested by Miron is to use forward error correction. >There is plenty of bandwidth in a 19.2/21.6/24.0/28.8 kbps connection to >send CELP nybbles or bytes each along with their own ECC code. But modern high speed modems already do quite a bit of FEC. I really don't think more is really necessary. As long as the decryptor and voice decoder automatically resynchronize after an error, there's no real problem with letting a few through. It's certainly preferable to adding long (or variable) delay. The sychronization problem seems to occur in "real" (government) secure phones too. They take a second or two to unmute following loss of clock synchronization. But not every bit error causes loss of clock synch; only a really bad line will do that. Phil

1 0

wired & batch file
by Karl Barrus 12 Feb '93

12 Feb '93

Cypherpunks, Douglas Sinclair has notified me of a slight bug/irritation with the anonmail.bat script for MSDOS. When run with no parameters, file errors are reported since the batch file attempts to delete nonexistent files. So I fixed that and have submitted the revised version to the ftp site. Also, in unix I can redirect stderr to /dev/null ( 2> /dev/null). Is there a way to do this in MSDOS (I can't seem to find a way). This would make the hopmail.bat batch file (similar to hop.mail) easier to use since the PGP output will be suppressed. Finally, crypto is mentioned in WIRED magazine! It's on the "HYPE LIST" behind Object Oriented, Post-Modern, Raves, and ahead of Smart Drugs. Here is the paragraph on it (bottom of page 87): Forty years ago cryptography wasn't even popular with mathematicians. Now it's the hot topic on the net. You've got the export issue, always popular since it the [sic] NSA is the villain. There's the public key issue - RSA Inc. expressing concern over the public good, not their profit margins. Yeah right. Now we have the key-registration debate: Should PKC users have to register their keys? OK, it's a bad idea, but probably a government conspiracy to eliminate cash, as some rabid defenders of freedom are claiming. Then there's David Chaum, the Ted Nelson of the 90's, promoting his ingenious and impractical crypto-schemes. Since everyone wants to believe in nice techno solutions to messy socio-policital problems, expect this issue to continue its rise up the list. So, fellow rabid defenders freedom, who is Ted Nelson?? :-) I guess I'm too young... /-----------------------------------\ | Karl L. Barrus | | elee9sf(a)menudo.uh.edu | <- preferred address | barrus(a)tree.egr.uh.edu (NeXTMail) | \-----------------------------------/

1 0

pardon me, but it's been deathly quiet
by richard_mezirka＠askinc.ask.com 11 Feb '93

11 Feb '93

regrets about the perhaps poor use of scarce bandwidth: sci.crypt has disappeared from my news server I haven't seen a cypherpunks mail item for some time... I used to see something daily, some very interesting/some just valuable to me for awareness raising value is anyone there or did all the things we're concerned about come true? Rich

1 0

Re: E Plurbis Doodah
by pete＠cirrus.com 11 Feb '93

11 Feb '93

> from: john.nieder(a)f33.n125.z1.fidonet.org > > There is a _bright side_ to this, however: Would such an > indifferent administration spend resources trying to break our codes > when it doesn't care what we have to say anyway? 8-) > JN Ah, if only it were so... Apparently you haven't heard about the new nomination for attorney general. A prosecutor from Florida with a "get-tough" reputation. Undoubtedly an anti-drug warrior. And since "everyone knows" that the only reason to hide information from our "great benevolent government" is to "cover-up illegal activites", I'm not quite so hopeful. "Don't blame me, I voted Libertarian" Pete Carpenter pete(a)cirrus.com Talk about your plenty, talk about your ills, One man gathers what another man spills. - Robert Hunter

1 0

E PLURIBUS DOODAH
by John.Nieder＠f33.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG 11 Feb '93

11 Feb '93

from: john.nieder(a)f33.n125.z1.fidonet.org * Reply to msg originally in Cypherpunks BK> Currently, Jock Gill is BK> working in an office located in the Old Executive Office Building BK> across the street from the White House. At this point, he is BK> working alone, without a staff. This week's news indicates to me this will probably not improve. BK> The White House itself employs a large BK> staff to handle snail mail. According to Monday night's news, this is from where these vaunted "symbolic" 25% White House staff cuts will come. BK> All things in their time. Once the BK> E-mail address was circulated together with the heading the "White BK> House", everyone understandably believed a real system was up and BK> running. Yes, silly us...to say nothing of the "CLINTON" AOL address BK> SUGGESTION: Use the compuserve address you have judiciously, BK> reserving it for absolutely vital contacts. Oh, yes, _certainly_! The _vital_ stuff should go into a nonexistant system. Naturally! BK> Until such time that a BK> real public access White house E-mail system is operational, BK> consider relying on the traditional means of contacting the BK> administration. Given what they had to start with from the BK> previous administration (scratch), I have every reason to expect BK> that Jeff Eller and Jock Gill will work well--and as quickly as BK> possible--to get an interactive system up and running. But it will BK> take time and patience. Can anyone say, "VAPORWARE"? BK> We can all help them achieve that effort BK> best if we refrain from acting as if that non-existent system were BK> already in place. PLEASE HELP RELAY THIS CONTEXT AND SUGGESTION TO BK> OTHER NETWORKS AND INDIVIDUALS. Thanks. Pass it around? You bet. It's f*cking _hilarious_! My guess is that this gaffe will (or at least ought to) get Gill fired, assuming he survives this "symbolic" staff downsizing. I might add that nothing could be more "symbolic" than the announcement that the cuts will come from those who actually respond to public input. This "go away & don't bother us" move on the part of the Clinton administration indicates that it obviously doesn't care _what_ America thinks. . There is a _bright side_ to this, however: Would such an indifferent administration spend resources trying to break our codes when it doesn't care what we have to say anyway? 8-) JN ... We want information./You won't get it!/By hook or by crook, we _will_! -- John Nieder - via FidoNet node 1:125/555 UUCP - ...!uunet!hoptoad!kumr!fidogate!33!John.Nieder INTERNET - John.Nieder(a)f33.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG

1 0

E Pluribus Doodah
by John.Nieder＠f33.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG 11 Feb '93

11 Feb '93

from: john.nieder(a)f33.n125.z1.fidonet.org * Reply to msg originally in Cypherpunks BK> Currently, Jock Gill is BK> working in an office located in the Old Executive Office Building BK> across the street from the White House. At this point, he is BK> working alone, without a staff. This week's news indicates to me this will probably not improve. BK> The White House itself employs a large BK> staff to handle snail mail. According to Monday night's news, this is from where these vaunted "symbolic" 25% White House staff cuts will come. BK> All things in their time. Once the BK> E-mail address was circulated together with the heading the "White BK> House", everyone understandably believed a real system was up and BK> running. Yes, silly us. BK> SUGGESTION: Use the compuserve address you have judiciously, BK> reserving it for absolutely vital contacts. Oh, yes, _certainly_! The _vital_ stuff should go into a nonexistant system. Naturally! BK> Until such time that a BK> real public access White house E-mail system is operational, BK> consider relying on the traditional means of contacting the BK> administration. Given what they had to start with from the BK> previous administration (scratch), I have every reason to expect BK> that Jeff Eller and Jock Gill will work well--and as quickly as BK> possible--to get an interactive system up and running. But it will BK> take time and patience. Can anyone say, "VAPORWARE"? BK> We can all help them achieve that effort BK> best if we refrain from acting as if that non-existent system were BK> already in place. PLEASE HELP RELAY THIS CONTEXT AND SUGGESTION TO BK> OTHER NETWORKS AND INDIVIDUALS. Thanks. Pass it around? You bet. It's f*cking _hilarious_! My guess is that this gaffe will (or at least ought to) get Gill fired, assuming he survives this "symbolic" staff downsizing. I might add that nothing could be more "symbolic" than the announcement that the cuts will come from those who actually respond to public input. This "go away & don't bother us" move on the part of the Clinton administration indicates that it obviously doesn't care _what_ America thinks. . There is a _bright side_ to this, however: Would such an indifferent administration spend resources trying to break our codes when it doesn't care what we have to say anyway? 8-) JN ... We want information./You won't get it!/By hook or by crook, we _will_! --- Blue Wave/Opus v2.12 [NR] -- John Nieder - via FidoNet node 1:125/555 UUCP - ...!uunet!hoptoad!kumr!fidogate!33!John.Nieder INTERNET - John.Nieder(a)f33.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG

1 0

Viral encryption
by fergp＠sytex.com 11 Feb '93

11 Feb '93

Greetings, gentlemen and ladies. Having just subscribed to this mailing list, I have several interesting questions to pose, not exactly knowing which end of the candle to light first. First off, my background does include some cryptological overtones. As a non-comissioned officer in the US Army, I was a COMSEC systems integrator and a COMSEC account custodian. (Anyone who may be familiar with the job knows the complexities of involvement.) I now earn my keep as a network systems integration consultant (great buzzwords) for a highly respected (and major) computer consultant firm based in the Washington, DC area -- far removed from the crypto-analytical sciences that you folks have an active interest. This job keeps me in the New York city area four days a week (What personal life?). Secondly, my professional area of expertise is networking (granted, it _does_ pat the bills). My personal area of expertise (and enjoyment), is DOS based computer virus "research". I was weened in IBM system 360/370 assembler (once upon a time) and am quite adept in the INTEL 80x86 assembler set. (Ralf Brown is one of my heros.) I "de-program" for hobby; taking things (viruses) apart to study their possible "interaction" and ability to cause major problems (sometimes they really do). You're probably telling yourself at this point, "Gee, I wish this guy would cut to the chase!" On that note -- I shall. ;-) In the past year, the DOS world has been confronted with several (two, significantly -- the MtE and more recently the TPE) encryption "engines" which are being used as "envelopes" for existing viruses. (Stay with me, now.) They are being called "polymorphs" by those "in-the-know"; more specifically, polymorphic viruses. The encryption is weak, compared to DES or RSA comparisons, but they do pose a major problem to the computer community because of the technological weaknesses of the antivirus product developers. Algorithmic development is not exactly their bag of tricks, in most cases. Most are reliant on pattern matching and have fits when presented with code that is _totally_ static. Although (I realize that) this conference newsgroup seems dedicated to privacy and ciphering-related issues, I'm just curious as to what exposure some of you may have with this type of problem. (I used to have Kelly Goen to bounce ideas off of, but he seems to have dropped out of the public eye a few years ago, but yet I see his name mentioned in the PGP docs.) Any serious responses are quite welcomed at fergp(a)systex.com. Public interest responses (I'd hope) will suffice in this area. Cheers from Manhattan. Paul Ferguson | Network Integration Consultant | "All of life's answers are Alexandria, Virginia USA | on TV." fergp(a)sytex.com (Internet) | -- Homer Simpson sytex.com!fergp (UUNet) | 1:109/229 (FidoNet) | PGP public encryption key available upon request. --- fergp(a)sytex.com (Paul Ferguson) Sytex Systems Communications, Arlington VA, 1-703-358-9022

1 0

Re: Tagging copyrighted text
by Marc.Ringuette＠GS80.SP.CS.CMU.EDU 11 Feb '93

11 Feb '93

I've been thinking more about how Dow Jones can catch customers which leak its data. Let's assume that I, as the thief, get 20 subscriptions, and that Dow Jones tries twiddling the value of various bits of its output with some probability, differently for each customer, to catch who's leaking its data. My strategy as the thief is, whenever the newswire doesn't agree between all of my subscriptions, they take a majority vote. How many bits of random tag must Dow Jones add to its newsfeed to catch a clique of size 20 out of its 10,000 customers? I think I've narrowed the answer down to between 437 bits and 250 Gbits. <sigh> -- Marc Ringuette (mnr(a)cs.cmu.edu)

1 0

Re: Tagging copyrighted text
by tcmay＠netcom.com 11 Feb '93

11 Feb '93

ld231782(a)longs.lance.colostate.edu (I'd use his real name, but this is all I can find here....why don't people sign their messages?) writes, commenting on some stuff by Marc Ringuette: >>Tim May and many of us argue that copyrights will become unenforceable >>as copying bits becomes cheaper and crypto privacy and anonymity becomes >>more widely available. This will mean that any static collection of >>bits will just be FREE. Musicians will have to make money on live >>performances, because they couldn't sell many recordings. Etc. > >Er, I'd say this is another instance of cypherpunk extremism: ``The Er, Marc R. didn't say the world as we know it is about to collapse, nor did I. (BTW, for you cypherpunks, most of this debate about intellectual property rights took place recently over on the Extropians list.) But I certainly think some big changes are coming. >world as we know it is about to collapse.'' Yes, information will >probably be much freer over the nets, and copyright violations probably >more difficult to pursue and punish. But think about this: with the >speed and ubiquity of networks, it now becomes possible for every >author or creative artist to keep the only copies of his work. Then, he >could post "links" to it anywhere in the world. When people pass around >the work, they wouldn't pass around the work itself, they'd pass the >"link". Whenever someone wants to view the work, the link points to >the unchanging address for instantaneous downloading. A very small With music, art, text, or executable code, once it is available for listening, viewing, reading, or running on the customer's system, it is also available for copying. This is the whole point--if you can read the text, you can keep a copy of it. You mention this, but dismiss it as inconvenient. Well, a popular song may be simultaneously requested by tens of thousands of listeners....it is hard to imagine the 14 Gigabits per second (10,000 x CD-quality sound) coming out of someone's home or business to supply this need! The situation is vastly worse with video, naturally. (I suppose some "servers," like ftp sites, could be set up to deal with especially popular movies and music...cumbersome, though. And, yes, fiber optics can in theory support very high bandwidths, but still not enough to supply the video rental biz. And this traffic will clog the nets and cause lots of problems, I would think.) >transaction charge is billed to the receiver by the sender. (Of course, >people could write stuff that would actually grab and store the text or >whatever instead of just "play" it. But I'll bet that most people will >eventually say, "why bother?" The direct access will be more convenient >and the charge so minimal.) Links could be embedded wherever there is >information, like in bibliographies or references or compilations or whatever. I agree that hypertext-like embeddings offer some hope, for things like text especially, as a reader is essentially buying the total package of texts and links, rather than just some specific text. (But any specific text becomes vulnerable to "snagging.") >Hey, consider that programmers are artists too. I write some hot >program, but I don't distribute it: I run it on one of my systems as a >sort of network pipe. People anywhere in the world pipe in their data >and get it back with a small transaction fee to me. In fact, what I'm ..... Even with much faster networks, remotely running programs introduces lags and inconveniences, not to mention security problems (e.g., "Now you can use _our_ word processor at _our_ site to write your love letters!"). If nothing else, speed of light delays will become very irksome. But I do agree that "knowledge servers" may be a way for corporate knowledge to remain bottled up in corporations (for example). -Tim -- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: MailSafe and PGP available.

1 0