- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Errors-To: for cypherpunks
by droelke＠rdxsunhost.aud.alcatel.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Hi, > > Whoever is in charge of maintaining this mailnig list, PLEASE > add header > > Errors-To: cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com > > I am flooded by stupid "Mailbox is full" messages from Banyan and > CC-mail gateways. > > - Igor. > While an Errors-To: field can't hurt, it shouldn't be needed. The problem is *broken* gateways. There are plenty of properly set up and running Banyan and CC-mail gateways, we just need to harass the admins into running the broken ones properly. Let me quote from "scripture" (RFC-822) below in a typical message I send to such idiots. This particular person had neither the use Sender: set up correctly, or a postmaster address. <sigh> ----- included message ---- Your SMTP to Banyan gateway is broken and missing a postmaster address. I sent a message to cypherpunks(a)toad.com, to which someone at your site is apparently subscribed. The listserver at toad.com correctly puts a "Sender:" field in the header of all outgoing messages, and according to RFC-822 all SMTP handleing agents must send any bounces to that address. RFC-822 specifically states (starting at line #1430 in rfc-822.txt) 4.4.4. AUTOMATIC USE OF FROM / SENDER / REPLY-TO For systems which automatically generate address lists for replies to messages, the following recommendations are made: o The "Sender" field mailbox should be sent notices of any problems in transport or delivery of the original messages. If there is no "Sender" field, then the "From" field mailbox should be used. Also, RFC-822 states that you must have an address of postmaster that people can send email to (starting at line #2046 in rfc-822.txt) 6.3. RESERVED ADDRESS It often is necessary to send mail to a site, without know- ing any of its valid addresses. For example, there may be mail system dysfunctions, or a user may wish to find out a person's correct address, at that site. This standard specifies a single, reserved mailbox address (local-part) which is to be valid at each site. Mail sent to that address is to be routed to a person responsible for the site's mail system or to a person with responsibility for general site operation. The name of the reserved local-part address is: Postmaster so that "Postmaster@domain" is required to be valid. Note: This reserved local-part must be matched without sensi- tivity to alphabetic case, so that "POSTMASTER", "postmas- ter", and even "poStmASteR" is to be accepted. So, please fix your gateway, or contact Banyan on how to correctly configure it. Thank-you, ----- end included message ---- ------------------------------------------------------------------ Dan Oelke Alcatel Network Systems droelke(a)aud.alcatel.com Richardson, TX

1 0

Reprogramming Beepers?
by William F. Towey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know how to reprogram a beeper to a new number. Please Help Brendan

1 0

Re: Selling your sole to DOJ ...err, devil Zimmermann?
by Marc J. Wohler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:20 AM 8/30/96 GMT, attila(a)primenet.com ranted: > > Zimmermann is a political flake, a warmed over 60s > liberal. > <snip> > I would find it difficult, despite his apparent altruism > and left-over 60s need for redress, to believe that > Zimmermann's coding of PGP was other than a commercial > stepping stone (judging from both his prior and later > actions); and, > I guess that according to the Code of Attila, us left over 60's liberals are prohibited from any commercial commerce. mjw

1 0

Re: Why I Pay Too Much in Taxes
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Better late than never: At 08:43 AM 5/7/96 -0400, Clay Olbon II wrote: >There are a couple of main reasons that the poor spend more than their >reported income. First, many of the elderly are included in the "poorest >20%", since this is based on income alone and not net worth. Many of the >elderly are spending down their retirement savings. Also students living on loans, grants, and gifts. Also members of the retail pharmaceutical trade living on their markup. >Another factor, of >course, is that welfare, food stamps, free/subsidized housing and other >transfer payments are not included in income calculations. I have seen >reports that show that in many states, this is equivalent to a full-time >job paying ~$9/hr. The Cato Institute Study. AFDC+Food Stamps+Housing Assistance+Medicaid+WIC = a fair chunk of change when compared to the taxed earnings from work. Equivalent to the take-home pay from a $16/hour job in NYC (mostly because of health insurance). The commies complained that the study didn't account for the fact that the working poor can also get food stamps and Earned Income Tax Credit. Of course, if you just establish the value of welfare benefits, you are doing a lot. >Not showing these as income helps keep the "official" >poverty rate high. I'm not sure if social security is included in income >calculations for "poverty rate" purposes, anyone know? The poverty rate calculations (how many people below the poverty level?) do not include SS or welfare cash or non-cash benefits. Thus people are not as poor as claimed even ignoring unreported income from legal and illegal employment. Adding everything up, we find that poor households spend twice what they officially report taking in. Hardly surprising since if one has a low income, one unreported job in the household can double that income. It is also likely that a higher proportion of the income and assets of the poor are not recorded (as against the rich) because most of the assets are personalty rather than realty and they are less likely to be audited, etc. So the level of income and asset inequality in America is less than you will have heard. DCF

1 0

Re: Intel to rule the basic crypto engine market?
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:27 PM 8/29/96 -0800, jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> wrote: >The one kind of standardization in the crypto market that we truly need, >NOW, is a standard format/protocol so that crypto telephones from all >manufacturers can talk to each other. The last thing we need is a >tower-of-Babel situation, which would be even worse than the VHS/Beta wars >of 20-10 years ago. I think it'll be a while before we're at that point - there's too much experimenting to do, and too many different options of crypto and voice compression that are useful in different situations. Simple issues like Internet vs. modem vs. frame relay vs. cellphone make a radical difference in performance. A standardized _option_negotiation_ method would be valuable; that would at least let systems figure out if they can talk as well as exchanging keys. You can use PGPtalk if you want a single standard program that will often work - for now the best approach for non-hardware-based systems is probably to have several popular encrypted phone programs, and negotiate by voice which ones to use :-) The non-crypto-internet-phone business has been in a similar bind, but Intel's announcement that H.323 shall be the One True Standard may get enough support to cut through that. Is there some hook in their system that could make it easy to add encryption, or do we need to design Internet-Crypto-Phones that recycle the H.323 from Intel but add several layers of wrapper around them? (ITU standards being what they are, I haven't yet found an on-line source of the document, and the ITU itself has a badly organized web site that lets you order paper copies of the documents by mailing paper Swiss Francs to them, which is annoying. (It could at least do SSL web forms and Visa cards or something.) And Intel's free reference implementation needs Win95, which I'm not running.) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Reassign Authority!

1 0

Re: Encryption (shuffling proposal)
by peter.allan＠aeat.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> DALE THORN ON CRYPTOGRAPHY: (edited for brevity) > It appears to me that PGP encryption et al is really 1940's technology, > albeit fancied up by 1990's computers. Why use keys and cyphers when > all you should have to do is maximize the randomization of bits in a > script? > Algorithm: Select bit-groups of random length from the file until the file is > completely processed. Shuffle the bits in each group randomly and > save each group back to the file. Repeat if needed using different > key-strings for each successive encryption, for increased security. > "Due to the nature of compounded bit-shuffling, no algorithm ever developed > or proposed could 'crack' multi-pass encoding with a single decryption pass. You are producing a permutation table. Repeat passes just get you a new table, no different in principle. > [Time calc for 12kb file....] > "One of the difficulties in breaking this type of encryption (other than the > numerical time factors) is the fact that you might have to deal with several > unknown random number generators from different compiled executable programs. > Add to this another factor, the 'Intelligent User' who adds their own tweaks > to the source code. The tweak is added, the program is compiled, the file(s) > are encrypted, and then the modified source code is destroyed along with the > executable file. But the internet worm of 1988 was captured, decompiled and analysed in days. Self-modifying viruses get analysed (by single stepping). Your programs will go the same way as soon as there is (financial ?) motivation. So the users have to know the algorithms, including "tweaks" in order to communicate ? Not the most convenient key. > EXAMPLE when_it_rains_it's_a_bath (least significant bit at left): > 11101110000101101010011001110110111110101001011000 > 10111011111010010011101000011010010110011101101100 > 11101111101010010110001011101110010011001110111110 > 10100001101111101001000110100001100010111000010110 becomes > 01011100010110101100011110101000011101101111101011 > 00101101100011111010010101111001011001000100000101 > 00111101010101011011000011101111001111110101001011 > 11101000001101101110101011000100111111000010111001 >From this known plaintext-cyphertext pair the enemy can list all the possible sources and destinations of each bit. EG first bit of plaintext (position 0, value 1) can move to 1,3,4,5,....,199 second bit of plaintext (position 1, value 1) can move to 1,3,4,5,....,199 Given a number of pairs of the same length, produced with the same key details each of these lists of possibilities shrinks by around half. Your 12kb file is well on the way to being cracked after 4+10+3=17 pairs are discovered. If the intention is never to reuse keys, then this scheme gets you nothing you couldn't have with a normal stream cipher. And they, don't reveal the number of 1-bits and 0-bits in the message. Different messages will be recognisable different. A chosen plaintext attack (where these are possible) becomes a breeze. > b. Passwords/phrases, algorithms, code routines, and even whole programs > might change from step to step, thereby invalidating any 'single-pass' > decryption scheme that's likely to be proposed. How are the above remarks invalidated ? I don't want to stifle creativity. If you keep thinking you may come up with a good idea. But this isn't it. I encourage you to read about existing systems. There have been bright people before, and things are done (or not done) for a reason. -- Peter Allan peter.allan(a)aeat.co.uk

1 0

Re: Encryption
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:40 PM 8/30/96 +0200, Germano Caronni <caronni(a)tik.ee.ethz.ch> wrote: >Dale Thorn wrote: >> Algorithm: Select bit-groups of random length from the file until the file is >> completely processed. Shuffle the bits in each group randomly and >> save each group back to the file. Repeat if needed using different >> key-strings for each successive encryption, for increased security. >Very nice. There are just two little issues: >a) How do you generate the random bytes? >b) How do you transmit them to the other side, without having a secure channel? I agree. This method can be looked at as two parts: 1) Generate a stream of random numbers 2) Use the stream to transform the plaintext into cyphertext by shuffling. Generating a stream of random numbers can be done by cryptographically strong methods, or by physical methods such as throwing dice or counting gamma rays, or by cryptographically weak methods such as using the RANDOM function provided by your BASIC compiler. If you're using strong crypto, the method is strong if the transform is strong. If you're using physical randomness, that's also true, and you'll definitely need to use agents with briefcases handcuffed to their arms to haul the randoms around, which doesn't gain you much operational security, since the random stream needs to be longer than the plaintext. If you're using weak crypto, we can use those fast computers you're so impressed with to try all 32767 or 2**32 random streams on your input to see what works - brute force isn't that hard when you've got a small keyspace, even if you don't take advantage of the special forms (e.g. there are good methods for reversing linear congruential multiplicative generators.) How long a stream of random numbers do you need to do the transform? And how secure _is_ the transform? For a simple XOR, you know that each bit in the stream will diddle one bit in the plaintext, so you're fine (as long as you only use the random stream once.) But for your shuffling method, you'd have to shuffle much longer to make sure that the "random" selection of bitgroups hits all the bits, and hits them often enough that adjacent bits will be separated. For instance, if your message is a 3000-word set of instructions to your fellow plotters, you need to be sure that the phrases "gunpowder", "Parliament", and "November 5th" get shredded, not merely moved to different places in the document. This takes much longer than deterministic methods, and risks not being as good. There are some advantages with the shuffling method - assuming you've cranked the system long enough to really shred everything, it's hard to take cyphertext and reconstruct plaintext, and brute force is a bit more work than with a deterministic method that uses one pass. But you can get that effect by using stronger methods, such as the des | tran | des | tran | des where "tran" is a simple key-or-input-driven shuffle that doesn't need to be totally strong. (Is Carl Ellison the person who proposed this? I've forgotten.) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Reassign Authority!

1 0

Helsingius shuts down anon.penet.fi server in Finland (fwd)
by Z.B. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This just came over the fight-censorship list. --- Zach Babayco zachb(a)netcom.com <----- finger for PGP public key ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 13:11:56 -0500 From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Cc: azeem(a)dial.pipex.com, jseiger(a)cdt.org Subject: Helsingius shuts down anon.penet.fi server in Finland This is a sad day in the history of the Net. Hundreds of thousands of people had accounts on Julf's pseudonmyous server and many netizens relied on it daily to preserve their privacy online. (Unlike cypherpunk remailers, it's not truly anonymous since Julf keeps records of what anon id maps to what email address.) From Azeem's report and the press release below, Julf's move seems to be in response to a Finnish court's preliminary decision that the privacy remailers could be violated by court order -- something the Scientologists have been pushing. Still, I'd be surprised if Julf's decision wasn't prompted in part by the hideous London Observer article that falsely accused him of being a middleman in the distribution of child porn -- check out a scan of the Sunday cover at: http://scallywag.com/ -Declan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 17:11:51 +0100 From: Azeem Azhar <azeem(a)dial.pipex.com> To: azeem(a)ivision.co.uk Subject: [ALERT] Penet is dead Hello all, I just got off the phone with Johann Helsingius who runs the anon.penet.fi anonymous e-mail service. 1. He has decided to close the service. 2. This is not related to the article in The Observer. It is, in fact, due to a decision of a lower Finnish court on petition from the Church of Scientology. Penet went to court last week and made the decision today. The implication of the decision is that e-mail over the Internet is not protect by the usual Finnish privacy laws. 3. The server is currently down while Julf re-writes the software. Once it runs again, it will be phased out for private use, but groups such as the Samaritans and human rights agencies should be able to use it. 4. They are appealing against the decision. 5. Julf expects that revisions in Finnish law to provide a safe legal status for anonymous remailers will be in place at the earliest in Spring next year. 6. Once again: this is unrelated to The Observer's scandalous reporting. Your faithful furry friend, Azeem ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 30 Aug 1996 17:15:41 +0100 From: Azeem Azhar <azeem(a)dial.pipex.com> To: azeem(a)ivision.co.uk Subject: [ALERT} Penet is dead (correction) Sorry . . . a slight error: > 2. This is not related to the article in The Observer. It is, in fact, > due to a decision of a lower Finnish court on petition from the Church > of Scientology. Penet went to court last week and made the decision > today. The implication of the decision is that e-mail over the Internet > is not protect by the usual Finnish privacy laws. The implication of the court's decision (rather than Penet's to shut the server) is that e-mail over the Internet is not protected by the usual Finnish privacy laws. Sorry! -- [Julf's press release. -Declan] PRESS RELEASE 30.8.1996 Johan Helsingius closes his Internet remailer Johan Helsingius from Helsinki has decided to close his Internet remailer. The so-called anonymous remailer is the most popular remailer in the world, with over half a million users. "I will close down the remailer for the time being because the legal issues governing the whole Internet in Finland are yet undefined. The legal protection of the users needs to be clarified. At the moment the privacy of Internet messages is judicially unclear." The idea of an anonymous remailer is to protect the confidentiality of itís usersí identity. The remailer itself does not store messages but serves as a channel for message transmission. The remailer forwards messages without the identity of the original sender. Finland is one of the leading countries in Internet usage. Therefore all decisions and changes made in Finland arouse wide international interest. "I have developed and maintained the remailer in my free time for over three years now. It has taken up a lot of time and energy. Internet has changed a lot in these three years - now there are dozens of remailers in the world, which offer similar services." "I have also personally been a target because of the remailer for three years. Unjustified accusations affect both my job and my private life" says Johan Helsingius. He surmises that the closing of the remailer will raise a lot of discussion among the Internet community. "These remailers have made it possible for people to discuss very sensitive matters, such as domestic violence, school bullying or human rights issues anonymously and confidentially on the Internet. To them the closing of the remailer is a serious problem", says Helsingius. Child porn claims proven false Last Sunday¥s issue of the English newspaper Observer claimed that the remailer has been used for transmitting child pornography pictures. The claims have been investigated by the Finnish police. Observer¥s claims have been found groundless. Police sergeant Kaj Malmberg from the Helsinki Police Crime Squad is specialized in investigating computer crimes. He confirms that already a year ago Johan Helsingius restricted the operations of his remailer so that it cannot transmit pictures. "The true amount of child pornography in Internet is difficult to assess, but one thing is clear: We have not found any cases where child porn pictures were transmitted from Finland", Kaj Malmberg says. Ground rules need to be clarified There are several large network projects going on in Finland at the moment, such as the TIVEKE project run by the Ministry of Communications and the Information Society Forum project run by the Ministry of Finance. Johan Helsingius is participating the work of these projects. Projects assess the political and social issues of networks and the impact of these issues in the long run. These projects also need the support of daily, practical work to help short-term decision-making. Johan Helsingius is now taking an initiative in the development of the daily network rules. He wants to set up a task force to discuss the practical problems related to ethical and civil rights issues in connection with the Internet. "I will try to set up a task force which will include Internet experts together with representatives of civic organizations and authorities. The task force could take a stand on issues such as the network¥s practical operation methods and the misuse of the network. I hope that the results of this task force will support the development of the network", he says. For further information, please contact Johan Helsingius Oy Penetic Ab tel. +358 0400 2605 e-mail: julf(a)penet.fi

2 1

Re: PGP & Default
by apteryx＠super.zippo.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Fri, 30 Aug 1996 01:13:23 -0400 (EDT), lcs Remailer Administrator <mix-admin(a)nym.alias.net> wrote: [snip] >to the file $HOME/.pgp/config.txt. (Or wherever the equivalent is >under DOS. Perhaps someone can tell me where the config.txt file >lives under DOS and I will add that to the help file.) It's in the same directory as PGP, which will be the directory referenced by the SET PGPPATH statement in the autoexec.bat file if PGP is installed and configured correctly. At least with version 2.6.2. You can use MyName="any string of characters that is specific enough to identify one and only one key". I have mine set as my name, so that no matter what e-mail address I use, PGP uses the right key. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMicvtN36bir1/qfZAQFnzgMAxTk55pldFWgysbjOj1Tqt/KAfB4Ty2WA EmTLRMziw8QglZSDzRxKcfvU3XjefNM7kA8YYPaKcgOlEhDiKB+Z9WDGMwwSJePk CFgTRPtuZS4kpjGsTZIvQN31ZqB5Ko0f =kSuW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ----------------------------------------------------------------- Mark Heaney finger snipe(a)starburst.cbl.cees.edu for public key PGP Fingerprint= BB D8 9B 07 51 87 05 AC 47 7B F2 4F A6 AB 1A CD ----------------------------------------------------------------- You keep using that word, I dunna think it means what you think it means.

1 0

~~ Bankers' Secrets ~~
by ~~ SECRETS ~~ 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

=======> BANKING SECRETS REVEALED!! <======= ====> SAVE $100,000 & EARN 7% to 10% INTEREST <==== Dear Friend, Did you know that you can save up to $100,000 on the biggest investment in your life? For MANY Americans they have a dream to one day own their home. When that dream is reached, they spend the rest of their life paying that dream off. You are being ripped off everyday by Banks, Financing Companies, Mortgage Companies etc. Did you know that by the time you pay off your home you will pay FIVE TIMES what it is worth? Is that fair to you and your dream? We don't think so and we bet you don't either. That's why we are going to show you how to save up to $100,000 and pay off your home up to 7 years faster! Sound too good to be true? Believe us, we will show you step by step how the mortgage game is played with the Banks, Financing Companies and Mortgage Companies and how to beat them at their own game. Everything we show you is 100% LEGAL and anybody can do it. It's just very few people know about it. These are very LOW-KEY SECRETS that you will learn. The reason the Banks never tell you is because if everyone knew the Banks' secrets they would be put out of business. If you ever heard someone say " My Bank is getting rich off my money, " they are absolutely RIGHT! Banks do get rich off your money because they lend it to other people and charge them 9% interest and only pay you up to 3% interest, if you're lucky! So that means Banks are getting 6% interest on YOUR MONEY! Many Mortgage Companies are being and have been sued for OVERCHARGING homeowners. This is your chance to become Financially Independent. Can you imagine if you saved $80 or $50 THOUSAND DOLLARS and made that American Dream come true by paying your house off 7 years faster? What could you do with that extra money? We're sure you could think of something, RIGHT? Maybe a family vacation or a new car? There are other companies charging $250 to $500 DOLLARS to show you everything that we are going to. But, we are not even asking a fraction of that cost. For the COMPLETE 25 page step-by- step manual, we are only asking $24.95. Plus, we are going to give 2 SPECIAL BONUSES to the next 50 people who order our great package and are determined to make a change. Our first SPECIAL BONUS to you is called a " MORTGAGE & LOAN CALCULATOR. " This is a Windows Based program that will keep track of every Loan and Mortgage that you have! You won't ever have to worry about being OVERCHARGED because you will have all your personal information right at your fingertips and you can keep track of all your Loans and Mortgages! Our SECOND SPECIAL BONUS is: "HOW TO EARN 7 TO 10% INTEREST ON YOUR MONEY." This is too good of a deal to just pass by, and we don't think there is anybody in the industry who will ever offer an opportunity like this! You will have everything you need to put your financial life right on track with your dreams. We all have dreams and this is your chance to make yours come true. You owe it to yourself and your family to take FULL advantage of this unique opportunity. Look at it this way, you go to work day in and day out, just to pay off your home. With our program, it will be up to 7 years LESS that you have to work to pay off your home and up to $100,000 MORE into your bank account instead of giving it to the BANK! The BEST part is you don't even have to refinance! You can even use this as a business opportunity. You can easily place ads in your local newspapers offering to save people money using the SECRETS you will know. You can even save your family members THOUSANDS off their mortgage. We look forward to getting you this tremendous package right away. Here's how you can place you order: Program is $21.95 + $3.05 Shipping & Handling a Total of $25.00 Send Check or Money Order made payable to: Creative Financial Alternatives Creative Financial Alternatives Banking Secrets 14837 Detroit Ave. Suite 135 Lakewood, Ohio 44107 ** For Faster Processing you can FAX your check to: 1-216-226-3225 How this works is pretty simple, just tape your check to a piece of paper and fax it. After faxing your check simply void it out and keep it for your own records. Please do not mail it to us if you fax it. Sincerely, Creative Financial Alternatives ( c ) Copyrighted 1996 Under no circumstances may any of this material be reproduced in any form without the author's written permission.

1 0