- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Random Numbers Boxes and Cypher Processers
by George A. Gleason 18 Nov '92

18 Nov '92

Why do encryption in the modem instead of the host cpu? Because then you have a product which will work with any computer, and all you need is software to make it adapt to whatever you're using. Might make it easier to encrypt and decrypt on the fly also, though this point is of debatable merit. -gg

1 0

re:
by Tom.Jennings＠f111.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG 18 Nov '92

18 Nov '92

U> From: huntting(a)glarp.com (Brad Huntting) U> two public PGP keys if your interested: Why did you sign your key? --- ReadMail * Origin: tomj(a)fidosw.fidonet.org / World Power Systems (1:125/111) -- Tom Jennings - via FidoNet node 1:125/555 UUCP - ...!uunet!hoptoad!kumr!fidogate!111!Tom.Jennings INTERNET - Tom.Jennings(a)f111.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG

1 0

No Subject
by Brad Huntting 18 Nov '92

18 Nov '92

Please add me to the cypherpunks mailing lists. Here are my two public PGP keys if your interested: brad -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.0 mQBNAir99E4AAAECALCo19KN/eLnMKicKH9NK9uY3gpaNAZ3vMPpiIAOH5sWOfxK t0bv/T0NnUC0kGr+kJsYAx7dTGc4C/Rx3rZuO/8ABRG0JkJyYWQgSHVudHRpbmcg PGh1bnR0aW5nLjUxMkBnbGFycC5jb20+iQBFAgUQKv32PjNoJjtQO7sNAQHQPAF/ TK1mO9Bpm0JCtxqYvCilvMEYohlDmC6pTl6XPxViil8WXOs04nkq+vy26+QCrgd4 =T+VL -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.0 mQA9Air9nn0AAAEBgNK6vPMg3KFzZxuB4llRoKEOxJvlO/TE0NNObgpRFs+px45+ 3z4YQbgzaCY7UDu7DQAFEbQiQnJhZCBIdW50dGluZyA8aHVudHRpbmdAZ2xhcnAu Y29tPokAVQIFECr99nML9HHetm47/wEB6OMCAK82O/iSxEK6PzUd4Y0FXvfoJRKD F/h+6NvbIf2tt0b7IARoLL2e/fw0AaR0TY2U+47s3NBWEAL1Iy+5AV16qyc= =cpUM -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

Re: Rander box and other stuff
by George A. Gleason 18 Nov '92

18 Nov '92

Eric (Hollander; my last post was to Eric Hughes)- Your "small laptop with (goodies)" was EXACTLY what we were trying to go for in 1983/84. This was the "Cryptex CS-3" project. Remember that there was no such thing as a laptop at the time. What I was proposing was a self-contained portable encryption terminal. It would have measured about a foot wide by 10" long by about 2-3" thick, had an LCD for about six to eight lines of text at a time, two 3-1/2" FDDs, a pair of sockets for "Codepacks" (hardware key storage devices which would have been tamper-resistant and password protected), a good quality keyboard, a modem with modular jack and optional acoustic couplers (for payphones: low-tech anonymity)... the Tempest feature would have been achieved by putting 100dB of white noise on the metal housing, which would have been imperfect but decent enough. There was no plan for a hard drive; the operating software would have been a simple line editor and the crypto routines, all burned into ROM and part of the main processor board. No plans for thermite linings at the time either, though we did have a password routine with a duress option, which would have erased anything on the FDDs or the Codepacks. My first intended market for this thing was the political dissident community, where communication has always suffered to a small but noticeable degree by the "we can't talk on the phone" factor. It never got going because the market was too small. Now it would seem the time has definitely come... though whatever ultimately arises out of the cypherpunk scene will be many many times more sophisticated and versatile. -gg

4 3

a patently false rumor
by erodenbeck 17 Nov '92

17 Nov '92

all right so i got it from MONDO. accepting that the world has already been taken over and that if its not on tv it doesn't happen I submit and propose to you that it is for the taking but of course you already know that

1 0

Any suggestions on what to do with this junk?
by O'Hara Walter 17 Nov '92

17 Nov '92

Hi, I'm new to this list so pardon my ignorance/naivete I'm a systems admin type who is upgrading a bunch of desktop computers next month. As a consequence, about half a dozen computers of the XT vintage will fall under my wing with instructions to "find something useful to do with them." Are there any good suggestions out there about what I could do with old 8-bit technology vis-a-vis crypto? Thanks, Walt

1 0

Re: Random Numbers Boxes and Cypher Processers
by tcmay＠netcom.com 17 Nov '92

17 Nov '92

Hugh Daniel writes about converting used Telebit modems for crypto use: > Folks had been talking about doing some crypto things in custom > hardware about the size of a Telebit. Telebits are just computers > with ROM's in them and since Telebits are falling behind the tide of > telecommunications I thought it might be nice to reporgram them as > remote processers. The DSP's are quite fast and might give us very > nice random numbers, the box has buffers and a CPU that can do flat > out UUCP 'g' with compression so is likely more processer then most of > the Fido systems out there currently. > All around a nice box sitting there wasting, waiting to do something > usefull. Great idea! Figuring out how to rewire and reprogram a Telebit modem and then writing a port of PGP for it seems like a real service to the half-dozen or so people in the world who have these Telebits and who want what you describe. I hope my good friend Hugh is not angered by my mocking tone! A serious issue is economics, the allocation of scarce resources. Eric Hughes keeps pounding on this. A cheap RNG might be useful, but not for most people. And I can't imagine many people trying to scrounge old Telebits so as to get good random numbers (this assumes someone actually writes the RNG code, tests it for statistical properties, and submits it for "breaking" by others). More important is getting easy to use software out there. Modifying relatively scarce hardware (which Telbitw are, outside our circle of friends :-}) goes against this "populist crypto" philosophy. Zimmerman's really important contribution was to actually get RSA out to anyone with a PC or vanilla UNIX. Finally, why focus on the Telebit? I have an old Processor Technology "Sol" computer that could be similary reprogrammed for RNG use. Any takers? (Just kidding.) --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 | PGP Public Key: awaiting Macintosh version. -- .......................................................................... 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 | PGP Public Key: awaiting Macintosh version.

1 0

Re: Hackers, Crackers
by fnerd＠smds.com 17 Nov '92

17 Nov '92

>Let's cut out this elitist "crackers" crap altogether. Well, I don't know about this guy, but there's something similar that occurred to me during the hackers conference. Some of the people on this list heard me express it badly, and I wanted to clarify. We always used to distinguish hackers from crackers. But cracking reveals the cracks in a way that nothing else does. It makes them real, sometimes laughably or painfully so. Electronic privacy is currently a joke. It's bad. You need to know what kinds of attacks you're trying to defend against. I used to think those arguments were rationalizations. Now I'm glad there are people who know this stuff, who are actually doing it. Some of "them" are on what I think of as the good side, and "we" need that kind of knowledge, if only as an occasional splash of cold water, a spur (to switch metaphorical, er, horses in mid, um, stream). -fnerd quote me fnerd(a)smds.com (FutureNerd Steve Witham)

1 0

re: Re: Rander box and other stuff
by Tom.Jennings＠f111.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG 17 Nov '92

17 Nov '92

U> In fact, now that we've dropped the hard drive and the U> keyboard, it might as well just be a dedicated U> crytosystem, make it about 10cmX10cmX1cm and give it an U> ether port, an rs232 port, a pcmcia port and an rj11 port. U> It's doable and would provide the ultimate security. And if all this is a real consideration, it might be better to use a tool that lets you use a completely non-physical key -- one you can remember in your head. Fit the tool to the job... --- ReadMail * Origin: tomj(a)fidosw.fidonet.org / World Power Systems (1:125/111) -- Tom Jennings - via FidoNet node 1:125/555 UUCP - ...!uunet!hoptoad!kumr!fidogate!111!Tom.Jennings INTERNET - Tom.Jennings(a)f111.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG

3 3

Re: The Dining Cryptographers Protocol
by Marc.Ringuette＠GS80.SP.CS.CMU.EDU 17 Nov '92

17 Nov '92

My spin on the Dining Cryptographers Protocol is, it's nifty and theoretically strong, but in practice mixes are better for almost all uses. If you have N people in a DC-net, you must exchange N bits of traffic per bit of anonymous message transmitted. If you use mixes and send each message on M hops, you exchange M bits of traffic per bit of anonymous message transmitted. N is typically 100-10000, and M is typically 2-10. Mixes are more efficient. One advantage of DC-nets is that they're instant; with mixes there must be some delays in order to accumulate enough cover messages to defeat traffic analysis. -- Marc Ringuette (mnr(a)cs.cmu.edu)

2 1