- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: denial of service and government rights
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:25 PM 11/30/96 -0500, Tired.Fighter(a)dhp.com wrote: >On 30 Nov 96 at 13:10, Black Unicorn wrote: > >> On Fri, 29 Nov 1996, Greg Broiles wrote: > >> [...] >> >> > I don't see any reason why this wouldn't be true for a >> > computer. Fed.Rul.Crim.Pro. 41(b)(1) allows the seizure >> > (but seizure is not forfeiture) of "property that >> > constitutes evidence of the commission of a >> > criminal offense". >> >> It is true of computers. >> Take the case of Ripco (the Chicago BBS raided in the >> SunDevil raids back when). >> >> I don't think "Dr. Ripco" has yet gotten his equipment >> back. I don't know for sure, but what I do know is >> that 5 years after the raid, he still had certainly >> not gotten anything back. Unicorn has a long history of reciting government abuses, but then failing to provide any sort of answer to them. My solution (AP: "Assassination Politics") would make such abuse fatal. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

Re: denial of service and government rights
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:24 PM 12/1/96 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: >So what you're saying is I (or we) can testify in front of Congress on >essentially any topic, telling a blatant lie (that we know is false, and >which they will subsequently prove is false), and totally get away with >it. You and I can do that, is that what you're saying? This is idiotic. I suspect it's deliberately idiotic, but I can't see what anyone gains by it. If you've got a point to make, would you please just say what you're thinking and move on? There's a big difference between something being punishable and someone being punished. The false testimony was given on behalf of a friendly government, and in favor of a cause which met with widespread national support and was the focus of much (literal) flag-waving and patriotic speechifying. In general, you face very few risks if you lie in a way which helps a very popular cause, and the people you're lying to want to do the thing that your lies are purportedly justifying. Your risks are much greater if you're saying something unpopular or if you are an unpopular person. I'm not talking about law, I'm talking about politics. And the fact that laws are sometimes enforced in a political matter shouldn't be news to anyone. (I'm not saying that's good, but I think it's attributable to and a result of to the general fallibility of human beings, myself included, so I'm skeptical about easy answers. Real-world solutions tend to fall short of theoretical perfection. Doh.) >If that is true, then my original contention that things are far worse >than the person I originally responded to was imagining, stands as >correct. Things are bad indeed. I'd sure appreciate it if you'd just say what you're thinking (if it's on-topic) instead of playing stupid "Is X true? Is Y true? Wow! I've just discovered something new!" games. Your comments suggest to me that what you're dancing around is, essentially, that the government is morally wrong because it (eliding distinctions between governments and branches of governments) enforces laws in an erratic or discriminatory or political fashion. That's what I'm extracting from your messages. If there's something more to what you're saying, I think I'd have a better chance of extracting it if you devoted less energy to tricky rhetorical strategies. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. |

2 1

Phrack, where can i find it?
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

where can i find latest (and old) phrack issues?

3 2

RSA key generation in 13 lines of Perl
by Steve Reid 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I've completed my Perl/dc RSA key generation program. The compacted 13-line version is below. A commented version can be found at http://www.edmweb.com/steve/rsagen.txt #!/usr/local/bin/perl $k=768;$e=sprintf'%X',65537;print"Please enter a LOT of random junk.\n" ;$a=<STDIN>;print"Working. This may take a while.\n";for(1..(length($a)- 1)){$b[$_&31]^=unpack('C',substr($a,$_,1));$b[$_&31]=(($b[$_&31]<<5)|($b [$_&31]>>3))&255;}for(0..255){$c[$_]=$_;}$a=$d=$f=0;for(0..255){$a=($a+ $c[$_]+$b[$a&31])&255;($c[$_],$c[$a])=($c[$a],$c[$_]);}open(F,'|dc'); select F;print"16dio[$e+]sa";for(1..50){for(1..$k/32){printf'%02X',&g;} print"Sr";}for(1,2){printf'%02X',&g|128;for(2..$k/16){printf'%02X',&g;} print"d$e%-2+d2%0=aSP";}print"[d2%SA2/d0<X+d*LA1=ZlP%0]sX[lR*]sZ[1+Q]sQ[ la1+sa0sc]sA[lAxlb1+sb]sB[ld1+sdLrddSssR1lP1-2/lXx+1+lP%99scd0=A2=Bclcla +32>C]sC[LsSrld1-dsd0<D]sD[le1+se0ddsasbsdlCxlDxlP2 $e*+sPlc99=Elb32=ElP 2 $e*-led1>QQ]sE_1selExsq_1seLPlExsp[p=]Plpp[q=]Plqp[n=]P*p[e=]P$e p1-lp 1-lq1-**1+$e/[d=]Pp\n";close(F);sub g{$d=($d+1)&255;$f=($f+$c[$d])&255;( $c[$d],$c[$f])=($c[$f],$c[$d]);return($c[($c[$d]+$c[$f])&255]);} I'm sure this can be compacted further. I haven't put a lot of work into compacting it; I really just want to get it out. Run the program, type in a LOT of random gibberish (several lines at least) and press enter. Then wait. Eventually it will output your p, q, n, e and d in hexadecimal. p and q: Prime numbers, congruent to 2 mod e. They can usually be discarded, but they should never be revealed. n: Your public modulus e: Your public encryption exponent (usually 10001 hex) d: Your private decryption exponent By default the program generates a 768-bit public modulus and a public exponent of 10001 hex (65537 decimal). These can be changed by adjusting the numbers in the first line. A 1024-bit modulus would be better, but for some reason generation takes a LOT longer than a 768-bit modulus. Fortunately key generation doesn't need to be done very often. Timings on a 100 MHz Pentium running FreeBSD: Size of n Time 512-bit: 4-5 minutes 768-bit: 8-9 minutes 1024-bit: 35-80 minutes (ack!) I've had some difficulty generating 1024-bit keys, but it seems to be working now. Let me know if you see any problems generating large keys other than the obvious problem with the time spent. Disclaimer: This program seems to work, but your milage may vary. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMqID5dtVWdufMXJpAQE14AgApqOI2MMPe0V74cKI0vc3bDw8hfDW723c QKqVleH0MTIv4F792bf7ItekM81RbQiaB+AhSigFFFb679ZgdCV7XpPOwhkE3SD4 vJy1xU4HdZ6TbSrfzzZn8Peqd5K5zZdY7CpXbxW30TZWFNX5lqdDAAbvM77h36QC h/jwK1nWMzrTDupbhBwemkpZKaFmk5uAms5Y94Ckezh66+sOcWmvf7smyn8RJg4q zad6OVrclso22NBp/Pa0nf2+IdgFnhEfHgHxsI0t+awSokfr6WlZ8WAScxv40kJO KfcdBX1DXg4spl8kXgoQOrrA3VIUJKWXFfpnTt2nAKr/P4XfbpyFQw== =CY5F -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Secure Memory Deletion
by Mark Rosen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know any papers on secure deletion of things from memory? That is one thing that most people are oblivious to, though, if a program leaves your unencrypted passkey laying in memory or a buffer of your plaintext, then all the encryption in the world won't help. Should I overwrite the 32 times specified for hard drives, or are RAM chips easier to clear? Thanks.

2 1

No Subject
by vitamin＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I apologize if this is off topic. I received free one month trial in July from Netcom and in mid July I canceled my account with Netcom due to lousy customer service. When I called I was treated rudely because of canceling netcom. I called again the next day and the person who answered the phone apologized me for the behaviour of the previous employee and I was told my account will be canceled. Low and behold come July I got my credit card statement and netcom had billed me. I promtly called them and was assured that my account would be cancelled. Come September I was billed again for August and September. Once again I called and she assured me it would be cancelled. Again, it was not. Come October they still billed me. In my November statement they are still billing me. I prefer L.A. Better Business Bureau and District Attorney emails and physical addresses. Someone please help me!!!!! Thank You

2 1

Re: Strong-crypto smart cards in Singapore and Germany
by pgut001＠cs.auckland.ac.nz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

whgiii(a)amaranth.com ("William H. Geiger III") writes: ><sigh> Big Brother comming to a bank near you. > >Does anyone understand the implications of a society moving to an >electroinc cash based system?? > >All trasactions will be recorded, moitored, tracked & analysed. This is >not just the government that one has to worry about but corporations also. Actually the German system contains some fairly elaborate safeguards to make it pretty challenging to automatically track transactions (Germans have historical reasons for being uneasy about government monitoring). However given other German laws like the Fernmeldeanlagenueberwachungsverordnung (yes, that's one word), which make the CALEA look like a picnic, I'm not sure how long these safeguards will remain in place. Given that the standard has been created by a collaboration of all German banks, who are big enough to tell the government to take a hike if they demand access to the data, it may be safe (certainly the people involved in the project that I've spoken to are confident that they can keep the data private, however I'm not so sure how it'll work out in the long run). As for the Singapore solution, the Singpore government knows whats best for you, so it isn't any of your business to question their judgement. Anyone thinking otherwise gets 25 strokes of the rattan. Peter.

1 0

Re: Phrack, where can i find it?
by Lyghte 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>where can i find latest (and old) phrack issues? > You can browse the old ones online at the phrack homepage (http://freeside.com/phrack.html) _\ /_ / \ __ ___ __ | \ / | _ |_| | |_ THE |__ | |__| | | | |__ "It may roundly be asserted that human ingenuity cannot concoct a cipher which human ingenuity cannot resolve." Edgar Allan Poe

1 0

pseudonymous servers
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Which pseudonymous servers are currently active?

1 0

Re: A quick discussion of Mersenne Numbers
by Scottauge＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a message dated 96-12-01 16:17:01 EST, you write: > On Sun, 1 Dec 1996 Scottauge(a)aol.com wrote: > > > I wake of the latest find announcement, some people maybe wondering what > the > > heck is this?!! > > > > A mercenne number is of the type: > > > > M(p) = 2**p -1 results in a prime when p is a prime. > > > > Hopefully this will lead the way to see the pattern of prime numbers and > > being able to compute prime numbers in a far more efficient manner (after > all > > a function that when given a prime number results in a prime number would > be > > quite a kicker now wouldn't it!) > > It doesn't. If q is a Mercenne prime, then p is prime if q = 2^p-1. It > doesn't work the other way around. If it did, then it would be very easy to > find out if a number is a Mercenne prime: just add 1 and find the base 2 > logarithm and if the result is prime, then the original number is prime. It' > s > much more difficult than that. It would also be possible to find an > infinite > number of Mercenne primes using a deterministic algorithm. > > > Mark I agree, my discussion was toooooo quick and the statement: > > M(p) = 2**p -1 results in a prime when p is a prime. is misleading. I was thinking the second paragraph when I was writing the statement statement above. A case of the mind working faster than the fingers?

1 0