- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Improved remailer reordering
by jdd＠aiki.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In message <9408072325.AA18643(a)ah.com> Eric Hughes writes: > Imagine a RemailerNet (v0.2) that maintained a fixed level of > traffic between gateways. > > This is exactly what I was talking about when I posted earlier about > link encryptors, and effective collapse of nodes for traffic analysis > purposes. Traffic analysis of mixes and remailers assumes, as an > abstraction, that all the messages going into and coming out of a > particular node are visible. As soon as you remove this condition, > the analytical situation changes completely. There is little difference between RemailNet v0.1 and v0.2 in this regard. Fragmenting messages into packets of fixed length, randomizing routing, and noise injection were all present in v0.1. > The problem with implementation of link encryption is, like everything > else, cost. Link encryption off the Internet requires dedicated > lines. I think that there is some confusion here. Time is defined in terms of steps, each one of which represents the dispatch of one packet. The packets can be received and dispatched in batches. > In general, the messages do not exist > as wholes along the lines connecting the gateways, so a discussion of > their reordering is a good way to waste time. > > You still have to worry about reordering in the network as a whole. > The system you've described has reassembly done at the endpoints, who > might not be the final receiver. I pass over the flaw of lack of > message quantization in the final sending of reassembled messages. > We may assume for discussion that they're all the same length. You need not pass over the 'flaw of lack of message quantization in the final sending'. Someone running a private high security gateway, an "empowered user", participates in the same way as the other RemailerNet gateways, and there is in fact no way to determine even whether he is sending or receiving, or in fact whether he is doing anything at all. He may be just sending and receiving noise packets. Users accessing the net using low security versions of the software do have less security, but that is a consequence of their use of low security software. > Now, you still need to calculate the likelihood that a particular > outgoing message is the same message as a particular incoming message. > These probabilities have to do with message reordering. You still > need to do the calculation. Some of the discussion here is at cross purposes. My focus has been on specifying a system which is itself very difficult to attack using cryptoanalytic techniques. An "empowered" user of RemailerNet v0.2 who sends messages via a system which acts as a gateway need not worry very much about traffic analysis. A user whose access to RemailerNet is via a low security system will be exposed to a higher level of risk. Which factors are the most important element in causing risk depend upon the nature of the traffic through the system and the size and geographic distribution of the network itself. A functioning RemailerNet with widely distributed gateways and at least a moderate level of traffic from at least a moderate number of widely distributed users is not easily subjected to what I might call external traffic analysis. Essentially, you make a model of the system which removes many of the features that defeat traffic analysis and then say, hey, this thing is easily subject to traffic analysis. Well, if you go far enough, sure. -- Jim Dixon

2 1

RE: Is the NSA competent?
by Michael Wilson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An anonymous author writes: > For all their vaunted competence, for all the mathematicians > they have been alleged to employ, despite having a cryptography > budget orders of magnitude larger than any other Western > crypto group, it looks like the NSA contribued to _none_ of > the major advances in cryptography that occured during its zenith. I think that this message betrays a serious misconception that a number of people likely share, and that has to do with the levels of security offered by commercial versus military methods. NSA has never portrayed themselves as having any role in the creation of commercial systems until recently (the last few years) when in-fighting developed between their organization and NBS now NIST (NSA wanted DES to remain the standard, NBS wanted to change). NSA-CSC will evaluate commercial security products to give them an Orange Book rating (a rating which was meaningless when it was created, thanks to viral/worm technology), but keep to themselves as an arm of the military. The cryptosystems that the anonymous author notes are all commercial level systems; NSA concentrates on cryptosystems that have greater requirements than the free market. It is widely rumoured that they had public key systems for secure key management before Diffie-Hellman. Their role in engineering the S-boxes for FDES is documented. The assistance they gave to commercial organizations to provide system integration style 'one shot' systems for military use created a number of companies, such as the Honeywell Secure Computing Technology Center, as well as a number of DARPA funded groups such as Cray and Thinking Machines. As the saying in the intelligence community goes, their successes are never known, but they will always be judged by their failures. Don't assume that you have probed the depths of the NSA's abilities by their unwillingness to play on the commercial playing field; underestimating an opponent will lead you into gross miscalculations. Michael Wilson Managing Director, The Nemesis Group [Today's Fun Math Problem: Given an exhaustive search method, how long would it take to discover the key of a standard DES financial transaction using four Connection Machines? There are more than that in the basement at Fort Meade, or at least they purchased that many during the time period they used the Maryland Procurement Office to buy them.]

1 0

Re: Is the NSA really competent?
by jamiel＠sybase.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:59 AM 06/27/94 -0700, catalyst-remailer(a)netcom.com wrote: >I think that this reply betrays a serious lack of reading competence. The >breakthroughs cited were the most important breakthroughs in the >science of cryptography, period. There are no branches of mathematics >called "military" and "commercial". The techniques have both There is no *inherent* branch split, just as there is no inherent split in knowledge of, say, what is in my pocket right now. If I choose to tell you, we both know. If not... and I have a lot more time devoted to 'researching' this question than you. See my point? You can't measure thier competence on crypto based on what they let you see. And if it is true that they really don't know shit about it, then so much the better for paranoid nutcases like me and you that assumed they were a much more formidable foe, right? :) >Thus they can claim to "contribute to American competitiveness" by >releasing Skipjack, an algorithm for which there is _not even >any evidence that it is stronger than DES_, much less state of Just curious, what is your reference for asserting it is similar to DES? >Let's face it, our awe of NSA stems entirely from their budget >and their ability to stamps their incompetence top secret. Yep. The NSA is a beaurocracy like any other. Probably has more than a fair share of imcompetence and waste. On the other hand, with a room full of connection machines, odds are they were brute forcing DES long before most other folks on the block. Add in a huge R&D budget and a few hundred mathematicians and odds are you are gonna find something neat now and then... -j

1 0

RE: NSA and competence
by Michael Wilson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An anonymous author comments on my comments... >> I think that this message betrays a serious misconception that a number of >> people likely share, and that has to do with the levels of security offered by >> commercial versus military methods. >I think that this reply betrays a serious lack of reading competence. The >breakthroughs cited were the most important breakthroughs in the >science of cryptography, period. There are no branches of mathematics >called "military" and "commercial". The techniques have both >military and commercial application. There is no evidence that the NSA >knows about _any_ fundamental technique that has not been published >in the literature. Nor is there any evidence (save the hearsay about >S-boxes, which were actually developed at IBM) that they have made >any major contribution to the science of cryptography, despite the >massive resources they throw into it. But they do want to preserve their >jobs, so they would like you to think they do. Their ability to drop >hints here and there without having to demonstrate they actually know >anything, to make people believe that Skipjack is an "advanced" algorithm >without having to actually publish it, in general their ability >to use their top secret status for the purpose of selective >revelation, is perfectly suited to this kind of PR. I always love it when they try to get a personal attack in first; be that as it may, I prefer to think my reading competence is quite adequate, thank you. As for there not being any branches of mathematics that differentiate between application, you make a serious error when you fall into the standard academic 'if they didn't publish it, they didn't do it' mentality. Unlike corporations such as AT&T with the old Bell System Technical Journal or IBM with their internal publication of their own filed patents (and technical papers designed to act as prior art to prevent *others* from filing patents), NSA and the others who make advances do not publish, but build systems that stay in the defense sector and remain classified. If you want an interesting clue as to what sort of things they will leak into the commercial domain every so often, research the creation of relational databases and the involvement of CIA; it is quite educational. As for their making advances, they have done it on a number of occassions, and I think you would benefit by reading a good primer on the history of the topic and organizations. Kahn or Bamford would do nicely. As for rumours... I am uncertain of which rock you have been hiding under, but until recently, they weren't even officially recognized, and capabilities that we know about are known more from leaks or defectors. NSA is a military organization and is run as one; the snake pit that the anonymous author works in may operate on rumour, but these people do not. >Thus they can claim to "contribute to American competitiveness" by >releasing Skipjack, an algorithm for which there is _not even >any evidence that it is stronger than DES_, much less state of >the art algorithms like IDEA. This has the actual efffect >of shooting the American computer security industry in the balls, >while making Congress believe they are helping it. Actually, the argument they are truly using is one of 'the child down the street can listen to your portable and cell phone conversations, and this will stop that.' What Skipjack and Clipper provide is a higher floor for the average person; it also, incidentally, kills the viability of the marketplace for alternate solutions. No money, no advances. Life gets simpler for them. I have pointed this out in my two earlier posts, which you in fact are commenting on. >Note that I am _not_ accusing the NSA of political incompetence. >Any organization that can get a Congressional intelligence committee >to vote its way 13-0, that can keep pushing a warmed-over DES >crippled with a last-minute Rube Goldberg version of key escrow, >in the face of 70% public opposition (and nearly unanimous and quite >vocal opposition in the hi-tech industries) is no political slouch. >Any organization that can increase their budget after their mission >has gone away, knows the ropes in D.C. They are simply much better >lobbyists than cryptographers. NSA didn't get anyone to do anything; the situation is status quo--crypto wasn't liberalized for export, which is what Cypherpunks want, and would have constituted a change. NSA has a very real function, which I would like to remind you of--they are responsible for the introduction of technology security into the Defense Department. Based on track record, from 'spy birds' capable of picking up a conversation on the ground, to creating the first evaluation rigor of computer security (even though Orange was out of date when instituted), they have been doing it. As for political ability, of course they are no slouch; they view it much as I do, a form or warfare, which they are very good at. Has their mission gone away? Not in the least; they are still the watchdog of the airwaves. People who think that NSA and CIA have no remaining mission are people who have no understanding of what they do. >> integration style 'one shot' systems for military use created a number of >> companies, such as the Honeywell Secure Computing Technology Center, as well as >> a number of DARPA funded groups such as Cray and Thinking Machines. >Of course with their budget, they can buy lots of slick hardware. >That doesn't mean they know how to use it well. >Let's face it, our awe of NSA stems entirely from their budget >and their ability to stamps their incompetence top secret. I don't think you know *how* they use the gear they have, so I recommend you don't make comments that you are not informed to make. My awe of NSA comes from viewing them as a powerful opponent with incredible resources, but as one who is limited by their own tradecraft; a healthy respect, but we hold our own. You do raise an interesting point, and that is the ability of groups such as NSA to abuse their Classification priviledge. They do. Everyone in the intelligence community does. Far too much material is considered classified. The hazards of professional intelligence organizations stem from classification; they aren't open to outside review, analyses can end up driven by political agendas rather than available facts (see Casey and his positions vis a vis terrorism and State sponsorship by the Sovs and Libyans, neither of which is accurate), and sometimes gross errors are covered by the same cloak of secrecy. Do not, however, assume that they do not know and perform their job to the best of their abilities, or you will be in the position of the mark talking to a cardsharp: 'I'm not any good at cards, but I sure do like to play for money.' Michael Wilson Managing Director, The Nemesis Group [The Maryland Procurement Office, which was the shell used to purchase budgeted items of a 'black' nature by the intelligence community, actually published (by accident) their complete records during the hottest part of the Cold War. You can find them if you look in the right place, and see what it was that NSA, CIA, etc. were spending their money on. Capability is augmented by resource, including such hardware, and so this gives vital clues as to the lines they were developing themselves along.]

1 0

NSA Agents Threaten to Kill Bidzos of RSA?
by tcmay＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cypherpunk Criminals, I'm surprised that I got home today and didn't find any mention of this distrurbing and important news article anyplace I looked. So I wrote up this article and posted in several newsgroups. It is not a spoof on my part, and I assume Bidzos was speaking the truth as he knew it. Maybe the NSA agents were half-joking, but it doesn't look like that. I avoided speculating and commenting in the article I posted, expecting to do so in the discussion that I hope will follow. I urge you to make your most cogent responses in public, in the newsgroups listed. (If posting under your name bothers you, use one of the Remailer-to-Usenet gateways mentioned on this list so often...if you have no info on this, send me a note and bounce you back some instructions.) I think things are really heating up. In the aftermath of Waco, Randy Weaver, drug raids, and the government losing the Clipper war, it looks like they're playing hardball. --Tim May Newsgroups: talk.politics.crypto,alt.politics.org.nsa,comp.org.eff.talk Path: netcom.com!tcmay From: tcmay(a)netcom.com (Timothy C. May) Subject: NSA Agents Threaten to Kill Bidzos of RSA? Message-ID: <tcmayCs2vI2.6EC(a)netcom.com> Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] Date: Mon, 27 Jun 1994 22:51:37 GMT Lines: 51 I know it sounds strange, but I have the article in front of me. I'll excerpt it without further comment: "The Keys to the Kingdom," David Bank, San Jose Mercury News, June 27, 1994, page D-1. Blurb: "The government wants to be able to see private computer communications. A Silicon Valley entrepreneur is leading the fight to keep secret messags secret." [stuff elided, to avoid copyright violations and because I don't feel like typing in the whole article.] "Take a meeting in April, for example, when three NSA agents dropped in on Bidzos, president of RSA Data Security, Inc. For two hours, Bidzos said, the agents were civil and pleasant as he drew diagrams, told jokes and tried to convince them that the agency's attempts to promote an alternative encryption scheme would fail. "He must have said something wrong. One of the agents threatened to run him over in the parking lot, Bidzos said. "'He looked at me and very coldly said he would do me,' Bidzos said. 'He clearly threatened me.' "To Bidzos the incident--which could not be confirmed independently--was another indication that tensions are increasing as his eight-year struggle with the government moves into its final stages." [discussion of privacy, NSA, Clipper, civil rights, etc., elided] The article closes with this quote from Jim: "'If we are ever in danger of undermining the NSA, they will either buy us or shoot us.' "'We'll know when we screw up. We'll either be rich--or dead.'" Something to contemplate. I'll make comments in followups. --Tim May -- .......................................................................... 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: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway." -- .......................................................................... 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: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway." -- .......................................................................... 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: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Is the NSA really competent?
by catalyst-remailer＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I think that this message betrays a serious misconception that a number of > people likely share, and that has to do with the levels of security offered by > commercial versus military methods. I think that this reply betrays a serious lack of reading competence. The breakthroughs cited were the most important breakthroughs in the science of cryptography, period. There are no branches of mathematics called "military" and "commercial". The techniques have both military and commercial application. There is no evidence that the NSA knows about _any_ fundamental technique that has not been published in the literature. Nor is there any evidence (save the hearsay about S-boxes, which were actually developed at IBM) that they have made any major contribution to the science of cryptography, despite the massive resources they throw into it. But they do want to preserve their jobs, so they would like you to think they do. Their ability to drop hints here and there without having to demonstrate they actually know anything, to make people believe that Skipjack is an "advanced" algorithm without having to actually publish it, in general their ability to use their top secret status for the purpose of selective revelation, is perfectly suited to this kind of PR. Thus they can claim to "contribute to American competitiveness" by releasing Skipjack, an algorithm for which there is _not even any evidence that it is stronger than DES_, much less state of the art algorithms like IDEA. This has the actual efffect of shooting the American computer security industry in the balls, while making Congress believe they are helping it. Note that I am _not_ accusing the NSA of political incompetence. Any organization that can get a Congressional intelligence committee to vote its way 13-0, that can keep pushing a warmed-over DES crippled with a last-minute Rube Goldberg version of key escrow, in the face of 70% public opposition (and nearly unanimous and quite vocal opposition in the hi-tech industries) is no political slouch. Any organization that can increase their budget after their mission has gone away, knows the ropes in D.C. They are simply much better lobbyists than cryptographers. > integration style 'one shot' systems for military use created a number of > companies, such as the Honeywell Secure Computing Technology Center, as well as > a number of DARPA funded groups such as Cray and Thinking Machines. Of course with their budget, they can buy lots of slick hardware. That doesn't mean they know how to use it well. Let's face it, our awe of NSA stems entirely from their budget and their ability to stamps their incompetence top secret.

2 1

CRYPTO '94 prelim. pgm (long)
by baum＠apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hope I'm not wasting net bandwidth here, - its long, but relevant. -AJB ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ CRYPTO '94 August 21-25, 1994 Crypto '94 is the fourteenth in a series of workshops on cryptology held at Santa Barbara, California and is sponsored by the International Association for Cryptologic Research, in cooperation with the IEEE Computer Society Technical Committee on Security and Privacy and the Computer Science Department of the University of California, Santa Barbara. Formal proceedings will be provided at the conference. Preliminary Program Monday August 22 ================ 8:30-8:45 Welcome Session 1: Block Ciphers: Differential and Linear Cryptanalysis (8:45 - 10:10) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 8:45 - 9:05 The First Experimental Cryptanalysis of the Data Encryption Standard Mitsuru Matsui (Mitsubishi, Japan) 9:10 - 9:20 Linear Cryptanalysis of the Fast Data Encipherment Algorithm Kazuo Ohta (NTT, Japan) and Kazumaro Aoki (Waseda Univ., Japan) 9:20 - 9:40 Differential-Linear Cryptanalysis Susan K. Langford and Martin E. Hellman (Stanford, USA) 9:45 - 10:05 Linear Cryptanalysis Using Multiple Approximations Burton S. Kaliski Jr. and M. J. B. Robshaw (RSA Laboratories, USA) Coffee Break 10:10 - 10:35 Session 2: Schemes Based on New Problems (10:40 - 11:25) -------------------------------------------------------- 10:40 - 11:00 Hashing with SL_2 Jean-Pierre Tillich and Gilles Zemor (ENS, France) 11:05 - 11:15 Design of Elliptic Curves with Controllable Lower Boundary of Extension Degree for Reduction Attacks Jinhui Chao (Chuo University, Japan), Kazuo Tanada (Tokyo Inst. of Tech., Japan) and Shigeo Tsujii (Chuo University, Japan) 11:15 - 11:25 Cryptographic Protocols based on Discrete Logarithms in Real-quadratic Orders Ingrid Biehl, Johannes Buchmann and Christoph Thiel (Univer. Saarlandes, Germany) Session 3: Practical Implementations I -------------------------------------- 11:25 - 11:55 Cryptography in the Commercial World --- Hardware Aspects (Invited presentation) David Maher (AT&T) lunch Session 4: Signatures I (1:30 - 2:30) ------------------------------------- 1:30 - 1:50 Designated Confirmer Signatures and Public-Key Encryption are Equivalent Tatsuaki Okamoto (NTT, Japan) 1:55 - 2:05 Directed Acyclic Graphs, One-way Functions and Digital Signatures Daniel Bleichenbacher and Ueli M. Maurer (ETH, Switserland) 2:05 - 2:25 An Identity-Based Signature Scheme With Bounded Life-span Olivier Delos and Jean-Jacques Quisquater (Univ. Louvain, Belgium) Session 5: Implementation and Hardware Aspects (2:30 - 3:15) ------------------------------------------------------------ 2:30 - 2:50 More Flexible Exponentiation with Precomputation Chae Hoon Lim and Pil Joong Lee (Pohang University, Korea) 2:55 - 3:05 A Parallel Permutation Multiplier for a PGM Crypto-chip Tamas Horvath (Univ. Essen, Germany), Spyros S. Magliveras (University of Nebraska, USA) and Tran van Trung (Univ. Essen, Germany) 3:05 - 3:15 Cryptographic Randomness from Air Turbulence in Disk Drives Don Davis (Openvision Technologies, USA), Ross Ihaka (Univ. Auckland, New Zealand) and Philip Fenstermacher (USA) Coffee Break 3:15 - 3:35 Session 6: Authentication and Secret Sharing (3:40 - 5:05) ---------------------------------------------------------- 3:40 - 4:00 Cryptanalysis of the Gemmell and Naor Multiround Authentication Protocol Christian Gehrmann (Lund University, Sweden) 4:05 - 4:15 LFSR-based Hashing and Authentication Hugo Krawczyk (IBM, USA) 4:15 - 4:35 New Bound on Authentication Code with Arbitration Kaoru Kurosawa (Tokyo Inst. of Tech., Japan) 4:40 - 5:00 Multi-Secret Sharing Schemes Carlo Blundo, Alfredo De Santis, Giovanni Di Crescenzo, Antonio Giorgio Gaggia and Ugo Vaccaro (Univ. Salerno, Italy) Poster Session Tuesday August 23 ================= Session 7: Zero-Knowledge (8:30 - 10:10) ---------------------------------------- 8:30 - 8:50 Designing identification schemes with keys of short size Jacques Stern (ENS, France) 8:55 - 9:15 Proofs of Partial Knowledge and Simplified Design of Witness Hiding Protocols Ronald Cramer (CWI, The Netherlands), Ivan Damgard (Aarhus University, Denmark) and Berry Schoenmakers (CWI, The Netherlands) 9:20 - 9:40 Language Dependent Secure Bit Commitment Toshiya Itoh, Yuji Ohta (Tokyo Inst. of Tech., Japan) and Hiroki Shizuya (Tohoku Univ., Japan) 9:45 - 10:05 On the length of cryptographic hash-values used in identification schemes Marc Girault (SEPT, France) and Jacques Stern (ENS, France) Coffee Break 10:10 - 10:35 Session 8: Securing an Electronic World: are we ready? (10:40 - 12:00) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 10:40 - 11:10 Securing the Information Highway (Invited presentation) Whitfield Diffie (Sun Microsystems) 11:10 - 11:30 Opening statements 11:30 - 12:00 Panel Debate (could continue till 12:45) Panel members: Ross Anderson, Bob Blakley, Matt Blaze, George Davida, Yvo Desmedt (moderator), Whitfield Diffie, Joan Feigenbaum, Bob Greenlee, Martin Hellman, David Maher and Miles Smid free afternoon 7:00 - 11:00 pm Rump session Wednesday August 24 =================== Session 9: Signatures II (8:30 - 9:20) -------------------------------------- 8:30 - 8:50 Incremental Cryptography: the Case of Hashing and Signing Mihir Bellare (IBM, USA), Oded Goldreich (Weizmann Inst., Israel) and Shafi Goldwasser (Weizmann Inst., Israel and MIT, USA) 8:55 - 9:15 An Efficient Existentially Unforgeable Signature Scheme and its Applications Cynthia Dwork (IBM, USA) and Moni Naor (Weizmann Inst., Israel) Session 10: Combinatorics and its Applications (9:20 - 10:10) ------------------------------------------------------------- 9:20 - 9:40 Bounds for resilient functions and orthogonal arrays Jurgen Bierbrauer (Math. Inst., Heidelberg, Germany), K. Gopalakrishnan and D. R. Stinson (University of Nebraska, USA) 9:45 - 10:05 Tracing Traitors Benny Chor (Technion, Israel), Amos Fiat (Tel Aviv Univ., Israel) and Moni Naor (Weizmann Inst., Israel) Coffee Break 10:10 - 10:35 Session 11: Number Theory (10:40 - 11:30) ----------------------------------------- 10:40 - 11:00 Towards the Equivalence of Breaking the Diffie-Hellman Protocol and Computing Discrete Logarithms Ueli M. Maurer (ETH, Switserland) 11:05 - 11:25 Fast Generation of Provable Primes Using Search in Arithmetic Progressions Preda Mihailescu (UBS, Switzerland) Session 12: Practical Implementations II 11:30 - 12:00 Cryptography in the Commercial World --- Software Aspects (Invited presentation) Joseph Pato (Hewlett-Packard Co.) lunch Session 13: Cryptanalysis and Protocol Failures (1:30 - 2:45) ------------------------------------------------------------- 1:30 - 1:50 Attack on the Cryptographic Scheme NIKS-TAS Don Coppersmith (IBM, USA) 1:55 - 2:15 On the Risk of Opening Distributed Keys Mike Burmester (Univ. London, UK) 2:20 - 2:40 Cryptanalysis of Cryptosystems based on Remote Chaos Replication Th. Beth, D. E. Lazic and A. Mathias (Univ. Karlsruhe, Germany) Coffee Break 2:45 - 3:05 Session 14: Pseudo-Random Generation (3:10 - 3:35) -------------------------------------------------- 3:10 - 3:30 A Fourier Transform Approach to the Linear Complexity of Nonlinearly Filtered Sequences James L. Massey and Shirlei Serconek (ETH, Switserland) 3:30 - 4:15 Special event 4:15 - General Assembly of the IACR (IACR President: Peter Landrock) Thursday August 25 ================== Session 15: Block Ciphers: Design and Cryptanalysis (8:30 - 10:10) ------------------------------------------------------------------ 8:30 - 8:50 The Security of Cipher Block Chaining Mihir Bellare (IBM, USA), Joe Kilian (NEC, USA) and Phillip Rogaway (Univ. California, Davis, USA) 8:55 - 9:15 A Chosen Plaintext Attack of the 16-round Khufu Cryptosystem Henri Gilbert and Pascal Chauvaud (CNET, France) 9:20 - 9:40 Ciphertext Only Attack for One-way function of the MAP using One Ciphertext Yukiyasu Tsunoo, Eiji Okamoto and Tomohiko Uyematsu (J. Adv. Inst. Sci. Techn., Japan) 9:45 - 10:05 Pitfalls in Designing Substitution Boxes Jennifer Seberry, Xian-Mo Zhang and Yuliang Zheng (Univ. Wollongong, Australia) Coffee Break 10:10 - 10:30 Session 16: Secure Computations and Protocols (10:35 - 11:50) ------------------------------------------------------------- 10:35 - 10:55 A Randomness-Rounds Tradeoff in Private Computation Eyal Kushilevitz (Technion, Israel) and Adi Rosen (Tel Aviv Univ., Israel) 11:00 - 11:20 Secure Voting Using Partially Compatible Homomorphisms Kazue Sako (NEC, Japan) and Joe Kilian (NEC, USA) 11:25 - 11:45 Maintaining Security in the Presence of Transient Faults Ran Canetti (Weizmann Inst., Israel) and Amir Herzberg (IBM, USA) adjournment and final lunch The following people served on the Program Committee. Tom Berson, Anagram Laboratories, USA Don Coppersmith, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center, USA Donald Davies, United Kingdom Yvo Desmedt, Chair, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, USA Shimon Even, Technion, Israel Amos Fiat, Tel Aviv University, Israel Russell Impagliazzo, University of California San Diego, USA Ingemar Ingemarsson, University of Linkoping, Sweden Mitsuru Matsui, Mitsubishi Electric Corporation, Japan Alfred Menezes, Auburn University, USA Andrew Odlyzko, AT&T Bell Laboratories, USA Jennifer Seberry, University of Wollongong, Australia Ben Smeets, Lund University, Sweden Moti Yung, IBM T. J. Watson Research Center, USA General Information Facilities will also be provided for attendees to demonstrate hardware, software and other items of cryptological interest. If you wish to demonstrate such items, you are urged to contact the General Chair so that your needs will be attended to. The social program will include hosted cocktail parties and dinners on Sunday, Monday and the Beach Barbecue on Wednesday. These events are included with the cost of registration. No evening meals will be provided at the dining hall. About the conference facilities: The workshop will be held on the campus of the University of California, Santa Barbara. The campus is located adjacent to the Santa Barbara airport and the Pacific Ocean. Accommodations are available in the university dormitories at relatively low cost for conference participants. Children under the age of 13 are not allowed to stay in the dormitories, so those bringing small children will need to make separate arrangements in one of several nearby hotels. More information on hotels is enclosed. Parking on campus is available at no cost to participants. Travel information: The campus is located approximately 2 miles from the Santa Barbara airport, which is served by several airlines, including American, America West, Delta, United and US Air. Free shuttle bus service will be provided between the Santa Barbara airport and the campus on Sunday and Thursday afternoons. All major rental car agencies are also represented in Santa Barbara, and AMTRAK has rail connections to San Francisco from the north and Los Angeles from the south. Santa Barbara is approximately 100 miles north of the Los Angeles airport, and 350 miles south of San Francisco. Registration: Participation is invited by interested parties, but attendance at the workshop is limited, and pre-registration is strongly advised. To register, fill out the attached registration form and return to the address on the form along with payment in full before July 8, 1994. Campus accommodations will be available on a first come, first serve basis for attendees who register by July 8, 1994. Late registrations, subject to a late registration fee, may be accepted if space is available, but there are no guarantees. The conference fees include participation in the program and all social functions, as well as membership to the IACR and a subscription to the Journal of Cryptology. The room and board charges include dormitory lodging Sunday night through Wednesday night and breakfast and lunch Monday through Thursday. Technical sessions will run from Monday morning to Thursday at noon. A very limited number of stipends are available to those unable to obtain funding. Students whose papers are accepted and who will present the paper themselves are invited to apply if such assistance is needed. Requests for stipends should be sent to the General Chair before June 3, 1994. ================================================================== Hotels For those who choose not to stay in the dormitories, the following is a partial list of hotels in the area. Those who choose to stay off campus are responsible for making their own reservations, and early reservations are advised since August is a popular season in Santa Barbara. Note that Goleta is closer to UCSB than Santa Barbara, but a car will probably be required to travel between any hotel and the campus. All prices are subject to change; prices should be confirmed by calling the individual hotels directly. However, mention CRYPTO '94 when you are making your reservation and in several of the hotels you will be eligible for the university rate which can be significantly less than the normal rates. We are not able to block rooms in these hotels, so please make reservations as early as possible. The quality of the hotels range from rather expensive beach-front resorts to basic inexpensive accommodations. For further information, try contacting the Santa Barbara Convention and Visitors Center, (805) 966-9222. South Coast Inn: 5620 Calle Real, Goleta, CA 93117. Single is $89; Double is $94. Call to see if they have University rates. Contact person is Ms. Murrill Forrester (805) 967-3200, Fax (805) 683-4466. Cathedral Oaks Lodge: 4770 Calle Real, Santa Barbara, CA 93110. Single rates start at $75; double rates start at $85. No University rates available. Prices include breakfast. Contact Doug Smoot or Tom Patton at (805) 964-3511. Fax (805) 964-0075 Motel 6: 5897 Calle Real , Goleta, CA 93117. Single rate is $36.99 + tax.. Double rate is 42.99 + tax. (Rates are subject to change.) (805) 964-3596. The Sandman Inn: 3714 State Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93105. Single rate: $71 Double rate: $81. (805) 687-2468. Fax (805) 687-6581. Miramar Hotel (Beachfront): 3 miles south of Santa Barbara on U.S. 101 at San Ysidro turnoff. No specific single or double rate. Rooms begin at $75. Call Laura at (805) 969-2203. Fax (805) 969-3163. Pepper Tree Inn: 3850 State Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93105. Single rate: $112 Double rate: $120. (805) 687-5511. Fax (805) 682-2410 Encina Lodge: 2220 Bath Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93105. Single rate: $112 Double rate: $118. (805) 682-7277. Fax (805) 563-9319. Pacifica Suites (formerly Quality Suites): 5500 Hollister Avenue, Santa Barbara, CA 93111 (close to campus). Normal rates begin at $120 for a suite. Includes full-cooked breakfast. Contact Michael Ensign at (805) 683-6722. Fax (805) 683-4121. Upham Hotel: (bed-and-breakfast) 1404 De La Vina Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93101. Beginning rate: $105 per night. (You must mention you are attending the Crypto conference.) Contact: Shirley Fagardo or reservations at (805) 962-0058. Fax (805) 963-2825. The El Encanto Hotel: 1900 Lasuen Road, Santa Barbara, CA 93105. Beginning rate: $90. Contact: Elizabeth Spencer, (805) 687-5000. Fax (805) 687-3903. ================================================================== CRYPTO '94 Registration Form Registration deadline: July 8, 1994 Last Name:________________________________________________________ First Name:__________________________________ Sex: (M)___ (F)___ Affiliation:______________________________________________________ Mailing Address:__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ Phone: _________________________ Fax: __________________________ Electronic Mail: _________________________________________________ Payment of the conference fee entitles you to membership in the International Association for Cryptologic Research for 1995 at no extra charge, including a subscription to the Journal of Cryptology, published by Springer-Verlag, at no extra charge. Do you wish to be an IACR member? YES_____ NO ______ Conference fee: Regular ($300) US $ ________ Attended Eurocrypt '94, Perugia ($250) ________ Full Time Student ($150) ________ deduct $50 if you do not wish the proceedings ________ (There will be NO pre-proceedings; the proceedings will be provided at the conference) Total Conference fee: ________ Room and Board (4 nights): Smoking ______ Non-Smoking _____ (Prices include breakfast and lunch on Monday through Thursday) Single room ($250 per person) ________ Double room ($200 per person) ________ Roommate's name: ___________________ Saturday Night ________ ($50 per person single / $40 per person double) $50 late fee for registration after July 8; ________ (registration not guaranteed after July 8) Total Guest Fees (from back of form) ________ Total funds enclosed (U.S. Dollars) US$ ________ Payment must be by check payable in U.S. funds, by money order in U.S. funds or by U.S. bank draft, PAYABLE TO: CRYPTO '94. Payment should be mailed to the General Chair: Additional Contact Information: Jimmy Upton, Crypto '94 Email: crypto94(a)uptronics.com 1590 Oakland Road Phone: (408)451-8900 Suite B203 Fax: (408)451-8901 San Jose, CA 95131 ================================================================== CRYPTO '94 Guest Form Registration deadline: July 8, 1994 Please fill out this form for anyone who is coming with a conference attendee but not registering for the conference and wishes to either stay on campus or attend the social functions Sunday, Monday and Wednesday. Guests are not entitled to attend the talks and must be attending with someone registering for the conference. Last Name:________________________________________________________ First Name:__________________________________ Sex: (M)___ (F)____ Affiliation:______________________________________________________ Mailing Address:__________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ Phone: _________________________ Fax: __________________________ Electronic Mail: _________________________________________________ Social Program Attendance ($50) _________ (Sunday, Monday and Wednesday Night Dinners - No admittance to talks) Room and Board (4 nights): Smoking ______ Non-Smoking _____ (Prices include breakfast and lunch on Monday through Thursday) Single room ($250 per person) ________ Double room ($200 per person) ________ Roommate's name: ___________________ Saturday Night ________ ($50 per person single / $40 per person double) Total Guest Fees US$ ________ (Show here and on the other side of this form) ************************************************** * Allen J. Baum tel. (408)974-3385 * * Apple Computer, MS/305-3B * * 1 Infinite Loop * * Cupertino, CA 95014 baum(a)apple.com * **************************************************

1 0

Where to get the latest PGP FAQ
by Michael Paul Johnson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- WHERE TO GET THE PRETTY GOOD PRIVACY PROGRAM (PGP) (Last modified: 27 June 1994 by Mike Johnson) WHAT IS THE LATEST VERSION? There is more than one latest version. Pick one or more of the following that best suits your computer, patent restrictions, and export restrictions. Some countries (like France) may also restrict import or even use of strong cryptography like PGP. |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | Platform(s) | Countries | Allowed Use | Latest Version | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | DOS, Unix, | USA & Canada | Commercial | Viacrypt PGP 2.4 | | or WinCIM/CSNav | | Personal | | | | | Research | | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | DOS, Unix, Mac, | USA & Canada | Personal | MIT PGP 2.6 | | OS/2, others | | Research | | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | DOS, Unix, Mac, | Most of the | Personal | PGP 2.6ui | | OS/2, others | world except | Research | | | | the USA. | | | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | Mac Applescript | Most of the | Personal | MacPGP 2.3aV1.2 | | | world except | Research | | | | the USA. | | | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | Mac Applescript | USA | Research | MacPGP 2.3aV1.2 | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | Amiga | Most of the | Personal | Amiga PGP 2.3a3 | | | world except | Research | | | | the USA. | | | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | Amiga | USA | Personal | Amiga PGP 2.6 0b0.6 | | | | Research | | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | Atari | Most of the | Personal | Atari PGP 2.3a | | | world except | Research | | | | the USA. | | | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | Atari | USA | Research | Atari PGP 2.3a | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| | Any of the | Countries | Commercial | Any of the above | | above | where IDEA | Personal | | | | is not | Research | | | | patented and | | | | | cryptography | | | | | is not | | | | | restricted. | | | |-----------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------| Note: there are other versions available, but these are either old, or outside of the mainstream PGP project. Look for new versions from one of three sources: Viacrypt (Commercial), MIT (North American freeware), or mathew(a)mantis.co.uk (the unofficially non-designated holder of the unofficial international version that parallels what Philip Zimmermann and the rest of the PGP development team is doing in the USA. WHAT IS ALL THIS NONSENSE ABOUT EXPORT CONTROLS? For a detailed rant, get ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/cryptusa.zip The practical meaning, until the law is corrected to make sense, is that you are requested to get PGP from sites outside of the USA and Canada if you are outside of the USA and Canada. If you are in France, I understand that you aren't even supposed import it. Other countries may be worse. WHERE CAN I GET VIACRYPT PGP? Versions are available for DOS, Unix, or WinCIM/CSNav Commercial software. Call 800-536-2664 to order. If you are a commercial user of PGP in the USA or Canada, contact Viacrypt in Phoenix, Arizona, USA. The commecial version of PGP is fully licensed to use the patented RSA and IDEA encryption algorithms in commercial applications, and may be used in corporate environments in the USA and Canada. It is fully compatible with, functionally the same as, and just as strong as the freeware version of PGP. Due to limitations on ViaCrypt's RSA distribution license, ViaCrypt only distributes executable code and documentation for it, but they are working on making PGP available for a variety of platforms. Call or write to them for the latest information. The latest version number for their version of PGP is 2.4. Prices shown include release of version 2.7 if you buy your copy after May 27, 1994 (otherwise the upgrade will be about US$10). Viacrypt's licensing and price information is as follows: ViaCrypt PGP for MS-DOS 1 user $ 99.98 ViaCrypt PGP for MS-DOS 5 users $ 299.98 ViaCrypt PGP for MS-DOS 20 users or more, call ViaCrypt ViaCrypt PGP for UNIX 1 user $ 149.98 ViaCrypt PGP for UNIX 5 users $ 449.98 ViaCrypt PGP for UNIX 20 users or more, call ViaCrypt ViaCrypt PGP for WinCIM/CSNav 1 user $ 119.98 ViaCrypt PGP for WinCIM/CSNav 5 user $ 359.98 ViaCrypt PGP for WinCIM/CSNav 20 users or more, call ViaCrypt If you wish to place an order please call 800-536-2664 during the hours of 8:30am to 5:00pm MST, Monday - Friday. They accept VISA, MasterCard, AMEX and Discover credit cards. If you have further questions, please feel free to contact: Paul E. Uhlhorn Director of Marketing, ViaCrypt Products Mail: 2104 W. Peoria Ave Phoenix AZ 85029 Phone: (602) 944-0773 Fax: (602) 943-2601 Internet: viacrypt(a)acm.org Compuserve: 70304.41 WHERE CAN I GET MIT PGP? MIT PGP is Copyrighted freeware. Telnet to net-dist.mit.edu, log in as getpgp, answer the questions, then ftp to net-dist.mit.edu and change to the hidden directory named in the telnet session to get your own copy. MIT-PGP is for U. S. and Canadian use only, but MIT is only distributing it within the USA (due to some archaic export control laws). 1. Read ftp://net-dist.mit.edu/pub/PGP/mitlicen.txt and agree to it. 2. Read ftp://net-dist.mit.edu/pub/PGP/rsalicen.txt and agree to it. 3. Telnet to net-dist.mit.edu and log in as getpgp. 4. Answer the questions and write down the directory name listed. 5. QUICKLY end the telnet session with ^C and ftp to the indicated directory on net-dist.mit.edu (something like /pub/PGP/dist/U.S.-only-????) and get the distribution files (pgp26.zip, pgp26doc.zip, pgp26src.tar.gz, MacPGP2.6.sea.hqx, and MacPGP2.6.src.sea.hqx). If the hidden directory name is invalid, start over at step 3, above. File names (shortened file names are for DOS BBS distribution): pgp26doc.zip - documentation only pgp26.zip - includes DOS executable & documentation pgp26src.zip - source code pgp26src.tar or pgp26src.tar.gz - source code release for Unix and others macpgp26.hqx or MacPGP2.6.sea.hqx - Macintosh executable & documentation macpgp26.src or MacPGP2.6.src.sea.hqx - Macintosh source code mcpgp268.hqx or MacPGP2.6-68000.sea.hqx - Macintosh executable for 68000 pgp26os2.zip - OS/2 executable (may not be on the MIT archive) RSA and IDEA algorithms licenced for personal and noncommercial use. Uses RSAREF, which may not be modified without RSADSI permission. Contains "time bomb" to start generating messages incompatible with PGP 2.3 and 2.4 on 1 September 1994 as an incentive for people to not use PGP 2.3a in the USA, which RSADSI claims infringes on their patents. Mac versions are not yet Applescriptable. This version is not intended for export from the USA and Canada due to the USA's International Traffic in Arms Regulations and Canada's corresponding regulations. You can also get MIT PGP 2.6 from: ftp.csn.net/mpj ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/pgp26.zip ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/pgp26src.zip ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/pgp26os2.zip ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/pgp26src.tar ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/mac MacPGP2.6.sea.hqx MacPGP2.6.src.sea.hqx MacPGP2.6-68000.sea.hqx ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/amiga/ pgp26-amiga0b0.6-000.lha pgp26-amiga0b0.6-020.lha pgp26-amiga0b0.6-src.lha amiga.txt See ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/README.MPJ for the ??????? See ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/help for more help on negotiating this site's export control methods. ftp.netcom.com/pub/mpj ftp://ftp.netcom.com/mpj//I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/pgp26.zip ftp://ftp.netcom.com/mpj//I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/pgp26src.tar ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/mpj/I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/ MacPGP2.6.sea.hqx ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/mpj/I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/ MacPGP2.6.src.sea.hqx MacPGP2.6-68000.sea.hqx See ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/mpj/README.MPJ for the ??????? See ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/mpj/help for more help on negotiating this site's export control methods. TO GET THESE FILES BY EMAIL, send mail to ftp-request(a)netcom.com containing the word HELP in the body of the message for instructions. You will have to work quickly to get README.MPJ then the files before the ??????? part of the path name changes again (several times a day). ftp.eff.org Follow the instructions found in README.Dist that you get from one of: ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/Net_info/Tools/Crypto/README.Dist gopher.eff.org, 1/Net_info/Tools/Crypto gopher://gopher.eff.org/11/Net_info/Tools/Crypto http://www.eff.org/pub/Net_info/Tools/Crypto/ Colorado Catacombs BBS Mike Johnson, sysop Mac and DOS versions of PGP, PGP shells, and some other crypto stuff. Also the home of some good Bible search files and some shareware written by Mike Johnson, including DLOCK, CRYPTA, CRYPTE, CRYPTMPJ, MCP, MDIR, DELETE, PROVERB, SPLIT, ONEPAD, etc. v.FAST/v.32bis/v.42bis, speeds up to 28,800 bps 8 data bits, 1 stop, no parity, as fast as your modem will go. Use ANSI terminal emulation, of if you can't, try VT-100. Free access to PGP. If busy or no answer, try again later. Log in with your own name, or if someone else already used that, try a variation on your name or pseudonym. You can request access to crypto software on line, and if you qualify legally under the ITAR, you can download on the first call. Download file names: pgp26.zip (DOS version with documentation) pgp26src.tar (Unix version and source code) pgp26doc.zip (Documentation only -- exportable) macpgp26.hqx (MacPGP executables, binhexed .sea) macpgp26.src (MacPGP source, binhexed .sea) mcpgp268.hqx (MacPGP executables, binhexed .sea for 68000 processor). (303) 772-1062 Longmont, Colorado number - 2 lines. (303) 938-9654 Boulder, Colorado number forwarded to Longmont number intended for use by people in the Denver, Colorado area. Verified: This morning. Other BBS and ftp sites do have these files, as well. I noticed that PGP26.ZIP is being distributed on FIDONET. WHERE CAN I GET PGP FOR USE OUTSIDE OF THE USA? The latest for outside the USA is the "Unofficial International" PGP 2.6 for most platforms, MacPGP 2.3aV1.2 for the Mac (although 2.6ui is under development and should appear very soon), and 2.3a3 for the Amiga. The latest amiga version is fully compatible with MIT's PGP 2.6. Copyrighted freeware. Version 2.6ui released by mathew(a)mantis.co.uk. Amiga version 2.3a3 released by Peter Simons <simons(a)peti.gun.de> These versions do NOT use RSAREF. No RSA patent problems outside the USA, but this version is not legal for commercial or extensive personal use in the USA. IDEA licensed for presonal use only in countries where the IDEA patent holds. The freeware version of PGP is intended for noncommercial, experimental, and scholarly use. It is available on thousands of BBSes, commercial information services, and Internet anonymous-ftp archive sites on the planet called Earth. This list cannot be comprehensive, but it should give you plenty of pointers to places to find PGP. Although the latest freeware version of PGP was released from outside the USA (England), it is not supposed to be exported from the USA under a strange law called the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). Because of this, please get PGP from a site outside the USA if you are outside of the USA and Canada. Even though the RSAREF license associated with PGP 2.6 from MIT no longer prohibits use outside the USA, it still carries the not-for-profit restriction that the original RSA code in PGP 2.6ui doesn't have. On the other hand, patents on the IDEA cipher may limit PGP use in your country to nonprofit applications, anyway. Indeed, I understand that there are some countries where private electronic mail is not legal, anyway. These listings are subject to change without notice. If you find that PGP has been removed from any of these sites, please let me know so that I can update this list. Likewise, if you find PGP on a good site elsewhere (especially on any BBS that allows first time callers to access PGP for free), please let me know so that I can update this list. Source code (gzipped tar format): * _UK:_ ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/pgp/pgp26ui-src.tar.gz * _UK:_ ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/pgp/pgp26ui-src.tar.gz.sig * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP/pgp26ui-src.tar.gz * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP/pgp26ui-src.tar.gz.sig.gz * _TW:_ ftp://nctuccca.edu.tw/PC/wuarchive/pgp/pgp26ui-src.tar.gz * _TW:_ ftp://nctuccca.edu.tw/PC/wuarchive/pgp/pgp26ui-src.tar.gz.sig.gz Source code (zip format): * _UK:_ ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/pgp/pgp26uis.sig * _UK:_ ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/pgp/pgp26uis.zip * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP/pgp26uis.sig * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP/pgp26uis.zip * _TW:_ ftp://nctuccca.edu.tw/PC/wuarchive/pgp/pgp26uis.zip Executable for DOS (zip format): * _UK:_ ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/pgp/pgp26uix.sig * _UK:_ ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/pgp/pgp26uix.zip * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP/pgp26uix.sig * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP/pgp26uix.zip MacIntosh: * _DE:_ ftp://ftp.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/pub/virus/crypt/pgp/mac /MacPGP2.6ui_beta.sit.hqx * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/PGP/MacPGP2.6ui_V1.2sources.cpt.hqx Other sites to look for the above mentioned files at: ftp.informatik.uni-hamburg.de /pub/virus/crypt/pgp <---- a good collection! ftp.ee.und.ac.za /pub/crypto/pgp soda.berkeley.edu /pub/cypherpunks/pgp (DOS, MAC) ftp.demon.co.uk /pub/amiga/pgp /pub/archimedes /pub/pgp /pub/mac/MacPGP ftp.informatik.tu-muenchen.de ftp.funet.fi ftp.dsi.unimi.it /pub/security/crypt/PGP ftp.tu-clausthal.de (139.174.2.10) wuarchive.wustl.edu /pub/aminet/util/crypt src.doc.ic.ac.uk (Amiga) /aminet /amiga-boing ftp.informatik.tu-muenchen.de /pub/comp/os/os2/crypt/pgp23os2A.zip (OS/2) black.ox.ac.uk (129.67.1.165) /src/security/pgp23A.zip (MS-DOS executables & docs) /src/security/pgp23srcA.zip (Unix, MS-DOS, VMS, Amiga sources, docs, info on building PGP into mailers, editors, etc.) /src/security/pgp23A.tar.Z (Same as PGP22SRC.ZIP, in Unix tar format) /src/security/macpgp2.3.cpt.hqx (Macintosh version) iswuarchive.wustl.edu pub/aminet/util/crypt (Amiga) ftp.csn.net /mpj/public/pgp/ contains PGP shells, faq documentation, language kits. ftp.netcom.com /pub/dcosenza -- Non-mainstream variants on PGP with huge keys sizes. /pub/gbe/pgpfaq.asc -- frequently asked questions answered. /pub/qwerty -- How to MacPGP Guide, largest steganography ftp site as well. PGP FAQ, crypto FAQ, US Crypto Policy FAQ, Steganograpy software list. MacUtilites for use with MacPGP. Stealth1.1 + other steganography programs. Send mail to qwerty(a)netcom.com with the subject "Bomb me!" to get the PGP FAQ and MacPGP guide if you don't have ftp access. nic.funet.fi (128.214.6.100) /pub/crypt/pgp23A.zip /pub/crypt/pgp23srcA.zip /pub/crypt/pgp23A.tar.Z van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca (192.48.234.1) /m/ftp2/crypto/RSA/PGP/2.3a/pgp23A.zip /m/ftp2/crypto/RSA/PGP/2.3a/pgp23srcA.zip ftp.uni-kl.de (131.246.9.95) qiclab.scn.rain.com (147.28.0.97) pc.usl.edu (130.70.40.3) leif.thep.lu.se (130.235.92.55) goya.dit.upm.es (138.4.2.2) tupac-amaru.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (137.226.112.31) ftp.etsu.edu (192.43.199.20) princeton.edu (128.112.228.1) pencil.cs.missouri.edu (128.206.100.207) StealthPGP: The Amiga version can be FTP'ed from the Aminet in /pub/aminet/util/crypt/ as StealthPGP1_0.lha. Also, try an archie search for PGP using the command: archie -s pgp26 (DOS & Unix Versions) archie -s pgp2.6 (MAC Versions) ftpmail: For those individuals who do not have access to FTP, but do have access to e-mail, you can get FTP files mailed to you. For information on this service, send a message saying "Help" to ftpmail(a)decwrl.dec.com. You will be sent an instruction sheet on how to use the ftpmail service. Another e-mail service is from nic.funet.fi. Send the following mail message to mailserv(a)nic.funet.fi: ENCODER uuencode SEND pub/crypt/pgp23srcA.zip SEND pub/crypt/pgp23A.zip This will deposit the two zipfiles, as 15 batched messages, in your mailbox with about 24 hours. Save and uudecode. For the ftp sites on netcom, send mail to ftp-request(a)netcom.com containing the word HELP in the body of the message. World Wide Web URLs: (Thanks to mathew(a)mantis.co.uk) _________________________________________________________________ MACPGP 2.3 Program * _UK:_ ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/pgp/MacPGP/MacPGP2.3.cpt.hqx * _UK:_ ftp://black.ox.ac.uk/src/security/macpgp2.3.cpt.hqx * _SE:_ ftp://isy.liu.se/pub/misc/pgp/2.3A/macpgp2.3.cpt.hqx * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP/macpgp2.3.cpt.hqx * _FI:_ ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/crypt/ghost.dsi.unimi.it/macpgp2.3.cpt.hqx * _US:_ ftp://soda.berkeley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/pgp/macpgp2.3.cpt.hqx.gz Source code Requires Think C. * _UK:_ ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/pgp/MacPGP/MacPGP2.2src.sea.hqx -- version 2.2 only * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP/macpgp2.3src.sea.hqx.pgp * _FI:_ ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/crypt/ghost.dsi.unimi.it/macpgp2.3src.sea.h qx.pgp Documentation PGP is rather counter-intuitive to a Mac user. Luckily, there's a guide to using MacPGP in ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/qwerty/Here.is.How.to.MacPGP. _________________________________________________________________ OS/2 PGP You can, of course, run the DOS version of PGP under OS/2. * _DE:_ ftp://ftp.informatik.uni-hamburg.de/pub/virus/crypt/pgp/2.6ui/pgp26ui-os2.zip * _US:_ ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/I_will_not_export/crypto_???????/pgp/pgp26os2.zip ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/README.MPJ for the ??????? _________________________________________________________________ AMIGA PGP * _DE:_ ftp://ftp.uni-kl.de/pub/aminet/util/crypt/PGPAmi23a_3.lha * _US:_ ftp://ftp.wustl.edu/pub/aminet/util/crypt/PGPAmi23a_3.lha Source * _DE:_ ftp://ftp.uni-kl.de/pub/aminet/util/crypt/PGPAmi23a3_src.lha * _US:_ ftp://ftp.wustl.edu/pub/aminet/util/crypt/PGPAmi23a3_src.lha _________________________________________________________________ ARCHIMEDES PGP * _UK:_ ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/archimedes/ArcPGP23a _________________________________________________________________ DOCUMENTATION ONLY * _US:_ ftp://net-dist.mit.edu/pub/PGP/pgp26doc.zip * _UK:_ ftp://ftp.demon.co.uk/pub/pgp/pgp26doc.zip * _US:_ ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/mpj/public/pgp/pgp26doc.zip * _US:_ ftp://ftp.ftp.csn.net/mpj/public/pgp/pgp26doc.zip _________________________________________________________________ LANGUAGE MODULES These are suitable for most PGP versions. I am not aware of any export/import restrictions on these files. German * _UK:_ ftp://black.ox.ac.uk/src/security/pgp_german.txt * _US:_ ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/public/pgp/pgp_german.txt * _US:_ ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/public/pgp/PGP_german_docs.lha Italian * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP/pgp-lang.italian.tar.gz * _FI:_ ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/crypt/ghost.dsi.unimi.it/PGP/pgp-lang.italian.tar.gz * _US:_ ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/public/pgp/pgp-lang.italian.tar.gz Japanese * _US:_ ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/public/pgp/pgp-msgs-japanese.tar.gz Lithuanian * _US:_ ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/public/pgp/pgp23ltk.zip Russian * _RU:_ ftp://ftp.kiae.su/unix/crypto/pgp/pgp26ru.zip (MIT version) * _RU:_ ftp://ftp.kiae.su/unix/crypto/pgp/pgp26uir.zip (ui version) * _US:_ ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/public/pgp/pgp26ru.zip Spanish * _IT:_ ftp://ftp.dsi.unimi.it/pub/security/crypt/PGP/pgp-lang.spanish.tar.gz * _FI:_ ftp://ftp.funet.fi/pub/crypt/ghost.dsi.unimi.it/pgp-lang.spanish.tar.gz * _US:_ ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/public/pgp/pgp-lang.spanish.tar.gz Swedish * _UK:_ ftp://black.ox.ac.uk/src/security/pgp_swedish.txt * _US:_ ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/public/pgp/pgp_swedish.txt _________________________________________________________________ OTHER SITES Some cryptographic software is available from ftp://van-bc.wimsey.bc.ca/pub/crypto/software/. Read the README file and proceed from there. BBS sites: Colorado Catacombs BBS (See also the entry above for PGP 2.6) (303) 772-1062 Longmont, Colorado (2 lines) (303) 938-9654 Boulder, Colorado (free call from Denver CO, but 1 line) For free access: log in with your own name, answer the questions, then select [Q]uestionaire 3 from the [M]ain menu. Verified: This morning. Hieroglyphics Voodoo Machine (Colorado) DOS, OS2, and Mac versions. (303) 443-2457 Verified: 5-2-94 For free access for PGP, DLOCK, Secure Drive, etc., log in as "VOO DOO" with the password "NEW" (good for 30 minutes access to free files). Exec-Net (New York) Host BBS for the ILink net. (914) 667-4567 The Ferret BBS (North Little Rock, Arkansas) (501) 791-0124 also (501) 791-0125 Special PGP users account: login name: PGP USER password: PGP This information from: Jim Wenzel <jim.wenzel(a)grapevine.lrk.ar.us> If you find a version of the PGP package on a BBS or FTP site and it does not include the PGP User's Guide, something is wrong. The manual should always be included in the package. If it isn't, the package is suspect and should not be used or distributed. The site you found it on should remove it so that it does no further harm to others. ARCHIE WHO? There are many more sites. You can use archie and/or other "net-surfing" tools to find a more up-to-date listing, if desired. - -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.4 mQCNAi0aFSUAAAEEAOCOKpaLepvJCFgIR4m+UvZe0IN8g7Guwc+6GH4u6UGTPxQO iAhk/MJ7E8LE4c55A1G8to2W4y3aKAHvi9QCYKnsLV8Ag0BYWo3bGGTPEfkS7NAI N+Zy6vSjuF1D6MUnbvrQJ5p4efz7a28iYRKoAdan2bfnvIYWUD9nBjyFM+vFAAUR tDdNaWNoYWVsIFBhdWwgSm9obnNvbiA8bXBqQGNzbi5vcmc+IG1wajQgW2V4cCAz MSBEZWMgOTRdiQCVAgUQLTqfXj9nBjyFM+vFAQGU7wP/ZuuHfdAnCIblNCtbLLG8 39CSg6JIVa3KWfe0WIz6dXFU3cvl2Wt094kJgZ+Nmq01INWlib2lTOznbkA9sV1W q0aJSBHFWQH29qGmIdEqThs7A5ES2w8eRjJD80lxHodRIkBcC5KI6x4Mxo8cib5V BrwsvtG0+81HD6Mrpvc+a0GJAJUCBRAtJc2rZXmEuMepZt0BAe4hA/9YANYPY4Z3 1pXv2mT6ReC09cZS5U3+xxC5brQdLsQGKuH6QVs/b5oc6NV84sh8A9tZyHG2067o 3XIEyN7PPQzRm2UUnHHqw9lBCNhMiFQsAJi4W+m8zXrVrpJWK0Wv61eV2/XIQl0V d4lxu0r+MNRP6ID6FBzA4C9rO+RYEZmwOIkAlQIFEC0aGRzb/VZRBVJGuQEBfaUD /3c2h//kg843OIcYHG4gMDqdeeZLzGlp3RVvh0Rs3/T0YylJZGjPL2L/BF/vfLlB 9E2Urh9mDG/7hiB5FncrUnkmN63IkSj+K9YyfPyYxBVx06Srj8ZzYynh0N+zledd 6cnwxRXhaD3Wc4EfSNR7BH9M2rjkGzyb5to9cgBb0ng+ =BLg5 - -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- - -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6 mQCNAi4PT2QAAAEEAPPCZnrshEJ9PSnV+mXEwjM4kzJF0kyg2MnLMzo83vWI40ei jogncqdkXT0c2TQWg+Bsu9ckFoXdId0utumYv0aqd8yI/oU/DwJ1zJrqRL2PFbxe ZLofHoKFjvq1TiNiJq9ps3jW6iYS4IU1SzyKhjmyE+K0+WyrPPX0zg8FAL9FAAUR tCdNaWNoYWVsIFBhdWwgSm9obnNvbiA8bXBqQGNzbi5vcmc+IG1wajiJAJUCBRAu D1m7P2cGPIUz68UBASsjA/wO5L/dQtWWSEbZGwvZPZbFjoDpzvMBvGxjGo2nKOOu WeZZVg/mPEAjHUlnKMLTgRn1tFr9W2dbnm3gqYNS+uqSewvgThMa5ID6kVQrLSy4 lXqyhnkjmaN8l7cWCmF+5h0D6x6ffHn+31BuCIikvkvs55hsaScK1bB2UZYSd4V1 LIkAlQIFEC4PWXn19M4PBQC/RQEBQUwEAIeLuFbp+1oT7i+n7F4l5qWmhn3i7Xd2 4kY/2jjABtXh7oVXVno8e9aK5sik3TQdmFeem6bBNyUPyoQbmA6NDUpEZ6njNkvh H+2mRIOkOOLlxudqagmVJXbQnmHzrN2iwkfUjJXOmN85qUsAdcCj9OfrTfc67jWF SigS1hCBQGO1tCtNaWNoYWVsIFBhdWwgSm9obnNvbiA8bS5wLmpvaG5zb25AaWVl ZS5vcmc+tCBNaWNoYWVsIEpvaG5zb24gPG1wakBuZXRjb20uY29tPrQoTWlrZSBK b2huc29uIDw3MTMzMS4yMzMyQGNvbXB1c2VydmUuY29tPrQrTWljaGFlbCBQLiBK b2huc29uIDxtcGpvaG5zb0BueXguY3MuZHUuZWR1PrQtRG8gbm90IHVzZSBmb3Ig ZW5jcnlwdGlvbiBhZnRlciAyNyBKdW5lIDE5OTYu =1B8+ - -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- ___________________________________________________________ |\ /| | | | | \/ |o| | Michael Paul Johnson Colorado Catacombs BBS 303-772-1062 | | | | / _ | mpj(a)csn.org aka mpj(a)netcom.com m.p.johnson(a)ieee.org | | |||/ /_\ | ftp://ftp.csn.net/mpj/README.MPJ CIS: 71331,2332 | | |||\ ( | ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/mpj/README.MPJ -. --- ----- ....| | ||| \ \_/ |___________________________________________________________| -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.4 iQCVAgUBLg9jvD9nBjyFM+vFAQFK4gQAuBM4AYkrMk5wI4M40AUqAxrY/8rybYKO U9lzypAQsNQNYMAot2Y+iCZQo1G3axEdyvxLb7Dwp5HDx4j/paQ866mHWX4nHOlA 7PXJv1jV9c+acnr8Z/cc7H3LiZ7UX1FaXmqoWGX1oRDdhCkLgLKtc6DPlsCNYaBR Z18e6nKFd3s= =j240 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Archives?
by norm＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 13:21 1994/06/22 -0600, Roger Bryner wrote: >Hello, >Are there archives for this mailing list? ... Probably at NSA.

3 2

EFFector Online 07.11 - House vote on NII bills, OR ISDN, Clipper news
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

========================================================================= ________________ _______________ _______________ /_______________/\ /_______________\ /\______________\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ ||||||||||||||||| / //////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/ ||||||||||||||||| / //////////////// \\\\\\_______/\ ||||||_______\ / //////_____\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ |||||||||||||| / ///////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\/____ |||||||||||||| / ///////////// \\\\\___________/\ ||||| / //// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \ ||||| / //// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\/ ||||| \//// ========================================================================= EFFector Online Volume 07 No. 11 June 27, 1994 editors(a)eff.org A Publication of the Electronic Frontier Foundation ISSN 1062-9424 In This Issue: ALERT: Open Platform Update - House Vote on HR3636, HR3626 06/28/94 Oregon PUC Request for Comments on ISDN Deployment House Intelligence Committee Just Says No to Crypto Export Republican Party Texas Denouces Clipper, DigTel, and ITAR Regs PSI and Canter & Siegel Negotiate Net Access: No Spamming SunFlash E-Journal Call for Papers: "UNIX and the Law" Symposium "How Do I Get the Most Current EFFector?" What YOU Can Do ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: ALERT: Open Platform Update - House Vote on HR3636, HR3626 06/28/94 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- EFF OPEN PLATFORM UPDATE JUNE 27, 1994 House Prepares to Vote on Landmark Communications Bills EFF's Open Platform Language Remains a Central Aspect On June 28, 1994, the full House of Representatives will vote on landmark telecommunications legislation. Two bills will be considered: H.R. 3636, the "National Communications and Information Infrastructure Act of 1994" (which contains EFF's Open Platform Proposal), and H.R. 3626, the "Antitrust and Communications Reform Act of 1994" (which will permit RBOCs - local-loop telephone companies - to re-enter the long distance, manufacturing, and information services markets). Together, these bills represent the most dramatic restructuring of communications law in more than 60 years. Both bills are expected to pass easily, but your supporting faxes and calls to your Representatives are still important. See ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Issues/Activism/govt_contact.list for a full list of Congressional fax numbers. H.R. 3636, THE NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS COMPETITION AND INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE ACT OF 1994 H.R. 3636 seeks to promote the development of the National Information Infrastructure (NII) through a combination of increased competition and a new regulatory framework. The bill would require local telephone monopolies to provide equal access and interconnection to their network, remove restrictions preventing telephone companies from providing video services, and preserve and enhance the universal provision of telecommunications services at affordable rates. There have been no major changes to the legislation since it was marked up by the Energy and Commerce Committee on March 16, 1994. Key points of the bill are analyzed below: * OPEN PLATFORM SERVICE EFF believes that open platform service, available to all Americans in the near-term at low cost, is key to promoting the democratic potential of the NII. Open platform service is designed to give residential and commercial subscribers access to voice, data, and video services over digital lines on a switched, end-to-end basis. With open platform service widely available, individuals and organizations would have access to a variety of important applications, including telemedicine, telecommuting, and distance learning. Open Platform services enable any user on the network to reach any other user or information source on the network, without having to pass through any bottlenecks that might be erected by vertically integrated network operators. Today, many carriers are only building capacity for primarily one-way services such as video-on-demand, home shopping, and 500 channels of entertainment. Open platform architecture is a strong safeguard against anti-competitive behavior and will promote the First Amendment goal of access to a diversity of information sources. EFF has been working closely with Rep. Markey and other members of the House Telecommunications Subcommittee to ensure that the open platform philosophy was incorporated in NII legislation. Open platform service, as defined in section 101 (3)(ii) of H.R. 3636, refers to -- ...a switched, end-to-end digital telecommunications service that is subject to Title II of [the Communications Act of 1934: Common Carriers]; and that (1) provides subscribers with sufficient network capability to access multimedia information services, (2) is widely available throughout a State, (3) is provided based on industry standards, and (4) is available to all subscribers on a single line basis upon reasonable request. Section 102 (d)(3) of H.R. 3636 directs the FCC to conduct an inquiry in order to determine what regulations and policies are necessary to make open platform service available to subscribers at reasonable rates. Based on the inquiry, the FCC is then directed to prescribe regulations to ensure the deployment of open platform services. The FCC may also require carriers to file tariffs for open platform service as soon as such service is economically feasible and technologically reasonable. The FCC is also directed to establish procedures for granting carriers a temporary waiver from complying with the open platform requirements. Carriers would be granted a waiver if they could demonstrate that compliance with the open platform requirements would (1) be economically or technically infeasible, or (2) would materially delay the deployment of new facilities with improved capabilities or efficiencies that will be used to meet the requirements of open platform services. Access to open platform service at affordable rates is also a key part of the definition of universal service in H.R. 3636. * UNIVERSAL SERVICE Universal access to telephone service has long been a cornerstone of Federal and State telecommunications regulatory policies. Because residential local telephone service is provided by a monopoly carrier, maintaining universal service has not been difficult. As the ability to participate in society becomes increasingly more dependent on access to information, the need to preserve and maintain universal service becomes more and more important. However, as competition in the local exchange increases the diversity of communications services providers, the old systems for maintaining universal service will become more and more ineffective. H.R. 3636 seeks to establish a mechanism that ensures universal service is preserved as competition increases in the telecommunications market. H.R. 3636 does not attempt to establish a statutory definition of universal service. Instead, the bill establishes a process which allows the definition of universal service to evolve as new technologies and services emerge. Federal-State Joint Board to Determine the Definition of Universal Service The bill establishes a Federal-State Joint board (composed of representatives from the FCC and State public utility commissions) to determine what policies and regulations are necessary to preserve and enhance universal service. In determining the nature and extent of universal service, the Federal-State board is directed to consider several factors. These include the extent to which: (1) a telecommunications service has, through the operation of market choices by customers, been subscribed to by a substantial majority of residential customers; (2) the possibility that denial of access to such service to any individual would unfairly deny that individual educational and economic opportunities; (3) such service has been deployed in the public switched telecommunications network; and (4) inclusion of such service within a carriers' universal service obligations is otherwise consistent with the public interest, convenience, and necessity. The bill states that all providers of telecommunications services should contribute to the preservation of universal service. * LOCAL COMPETITION: EQUAL ACCESS AND INTERCONNECTION In order to promote competition in the local telecommunications market, H.R. 3636 requires local exchange carriers to provide equal access and interconnection to their networks. The equal access and interconnection requirements will allow competitors, such as cable companies, long distance providers, and others, to compete with local telephone monopolies without requiring competitors to build their local network from scratch. Regulations Required The bill directs the FCC to establish regulations that require reasonable and nondiscriminatory equal access and interconnection with the facilities of a local exchange carrier's network. Such regulations must allow a competitor to place any equipment necessary for interconnection to the network on the premises of a local exchange carrier. The FCC is also directed to prescribe regulations requiring reasonable compensation to the exchange carrier providing equal access and interconnection. State Preemptions H.R. 3636 preempts existing State and local regulations prohibiting competition in the local exchange, while maintaining a State's ability to enforce consumer protection laws, protect public safety and welfare, and regulate interstate rates and quality of service. Exemptions Finally, small and rural telephone companies (those with fewer than 500,000 access lines) are not required to comply with the equal access and interconnection requirements unless the FCC determines that complying would not be unduly economically burdensome, unfairly competitive, technologically infeasible, or otherwise not in the public interest. * PROVISION OF VIDEO SERVICES BY TELEPHONE COMPANIES H.R. 3636 removes restrictions preventing telephone companies from providing video services within their service area. In order to provide video services within its service area, a telephone company would be required to: (1) establish a separate video programming affiliate; and (2) establish a video platform. Separate Video Programming Affiliate: H.R. 3636 requires separate video programming affiliates to maintain separate books and records from their affiliated telephone company, and conduct its own separate promotion (with certain exceptions). The bill also contains prohibitions against cross subsidies. The separate affiliate requirements are intended to prevent a telephone from using its power as a monopoly from impeding competition in the market. Video Platform H.R. 3636 requires any common carrier that provides video programming to its subscribers in its telephone service area to establish a video platform. Any carrier establishing a video platform is required to grant, on a nondiscriminatory basis, access to all bona fide requests for carriage. The FCC is also directed to prescribe regulations to prohibit video platform providers from imposing discriminatory rates, terms, and conditions on access to the video platform. In order to promote competition in the delivery of video services, H.R. 3636 also prohibits (with exceptions for small and rural areas) any common carrier that provides telephone exchange service (or its affiliates) from purchasing an existing cable system located within its telephone service area. Extension of Regulations to Other High Capacity Systems This section extends the video platform requirements of H.R. 3636 to cable systems that operate switched broadband delivery systems. Such systems are required to establish a video platform, and are prohibited from discriminating among program providers with respect to carriage, and requires that the rates and conditions for carriage of video programming are just and reasonable The FCC is also directed to study whether it is in the public interest to extend the video platform requirements to other cable operators though they may not have switched broadband video delivery systems. * INTERACTIVE SERVICES AND CRITICAL INTERFACES (SET-TOP BOXES) The bill states that set-top boxes and other interactive communications devices may be "a critical gateway" to American homes and businesses. The bill states that, "In order to promote diversity, competition, and technological innovation among suppliers of equipment and services, it may be necessary to make certain critical interfaces open and accessible to a broad range of information providers", the FCC is directed to identify "critical interfaces" that allow end users to connect information devices to networks and information service providers to transmit information to end users. The bill directs the FCC to conduct an inquiry, to examine the convergence of interactive technologies. The FCC would examine the costs and benefits of establishing open interfaces between, on the one hand, the network provider and the set-top box, and on the other, between network providers and information service providers. The FCC would also determine how to ensure the interoperability of converter boxes with interactive networks. The bill instructs this FCC to report to Congress within one year of the date of enactment of this section on the results of its inquiry. Finally, the FCC is instructed to make such changes in its regulations as deemed necessary in order to implement the findings of its inquiry. * BROADCAST SPECTRUM FLEXIBILITY If the FCC decides to issue additional licenses for advanced television services (such as HDTV) H.R. 3636 allows the FCC to prescribe regulations that would permit broadcasters to use spectrum for "ancillary and or supplementary services". Such ancillary or supplementary services will be treated as broadcast services and are subject to all regulations applicable to broadcast services * PUBLIC ACCESS H.R. 3636 requires the FCC to prescribe regulations to provide access for the public on video platforms and cable systems at preferential rates. The FCC is directed to determine the appropriate capacity consistent with the video platform requirements of the bill. * CIVIC PARTICIPATION ON THE INTERNET The bill directs the FCC in consultation with the NTIA, to conduct a study of policies that will enhance civic participation on the Internet. In conducting this study, the FCC and NTIA are directed to request public comment on whether common carriers should be required to provide citizens with a flat rate service for gaining access to the Internet. For More information on EFF's Open Platform Proposal, contact Jerry Berman, Executive Director, <jberman(a)eff.org> Danny Weitzner, Deputy Policy Director <djw(a)eff.org> Jonah Seiger, Project Coordinator, <jseiger(a)eff.org> For the most up-to date version of the bills and the reports, call the Telecommunications Subcommittee at +1 202 226 2424 ------------------------------ Subject: House Intelligence Committee Just Says No to Crypto Export ------------------------------------------------------------------- June 15, the House Intelligence Committee deleted the provisions of the Export Administration bill (HR3937, formerly HR3627) which would have allowed the export of all mass-market encryption products and thus eliminated the ITAR restrictions on most cryptographic material. The Intelligence Committee substituted the cryptography study previously adopted by the Senate. So, instead of getting strong encryption in the international information infrastructure, we'll get a nice big study to read and debate. The next phrase of this fight will be in the House Rules committee, which will have the job of resolving the dispute between the Foreign Affairs Committee, which approved the Cantwell bill, and the Intelligence Committee version, which removed it. The Rules Committee will decide which version, if any, goes to the floor of the House for vote. Stay tuned for further news and action alerts... The members of the House Rules Committee are listed below. You may wish to send them letters and faxes supporting retention of the language supporting the export of cryptographic products, in the version of the bill passed by the House Foreign Affairs Cmte. p st name phone fax position ______________________________________________________________________________ D MA Moakley, John Joseph 1-202-225-8273 1-202-225-7304 Cmte Chair D SC Derrick, Butler 1-202-225-5301 na R NY Solomon, Gerald B.H. 1-202-225-5614 1-202-225-1168 D CA Beilenson, Anthony 1-202-225-5911 na D TX Frost, Martin 1-202-225-3605 1-202-225-4951 R TN Quillen, James H. 1-202-225-6356 1-202-225-7812 D OH Hall, Tony P. 1-202-225-6465 na R CA Dreier, David 1-202-225-2305 1-202-225-4745 R FL Goss, Porter J. 1-202-225-2536 1-202-225-6820 D MO Wheat, Alan 1-202-225-4535 1-202-225-5990 R TN Gordon, Bart 1-202-225-4231 1-202-225-6887 D NY Slaughter, Louise M. 1-202-225-3615 1-202-225-7822 ------------------------------ Subject: Oregon PUC Request for Comments on ISDN Deployment ----------------------------------------------------------- EFF will be filing comments in this inquiry and we encourage all interested parties, especially those in Oregon, to do so as well. Oregon Public Utility Commission May 26, 1994 TO: ALL INTERESTED PARTIES The Public Utility Commission of Oregon has been sponsoring a series of workshops concerning the deployment of an Integrated Services Digital Network (ISDN) in Oregon. Through the workshop process, the Oregon ISDN working group has established the feasibility of ISDN deployment by local exchange carriers (LECs) within the state. The Commission now seeks comments on ISDN deployment from the work group and any other interested parties on the following issues and questions. If parties have comments on any issues or concerns not covered in the questions, they are encouraged to add them to the issues list. Issues and Ouestions: 1. Does the Commission have jurisdiction to compel the provision of ISDN? Explain the basis of your position. 2. What policies should the Commission adopt regarding the deployment of ISDN? Should the Commission mandate deployment or encourage deployment to be driven by customer demand? 3. Should ISDN-based services be considered a replacement for, or an evolution of, current services? 4. Should all Oregon subscribers have access to ISDN? What policies should be adopted concerning the general availability of ISDN to customers? 5. Assuming that all central office switches in Oregon are either digital or analog electronic, what network upgrades are necessary to deploy ISDN? 6. What is the cost of these upgrades? Are these upgrades necessary exclusively for ISDN, or will they be shared by other services? Explain. 7. What digital switches are currently incapable of providing ISDN? Are there plans for making them ISDN-capable? In what time frame? 8. Are there methods of providing ISDN from ISDN-incapable switches? Explain in detail. 9. If overlay methods are used to provide ISDN in certain exchanges, how will this affect the current structure of local, EAS, and toll services within Oregon? 10. What policies regarding ISDN standards should be adopted by the Commission? Please explain. 11. Should the Commission require that certain services or capabilities be provided by ISDN? What are they? Why? 12. What is the appropriate time frame for ISDN deployment in Oregon? Why? 13. How should ISDN services be priced? Should there be a residential/business price differential? Why? 14. Should there be a voice/circuit data price differential? Why? 15. Should there be flat rate/measured rate pricing options? Why? 16. How should features be priced? Should they be provided in packages, unbundled, or both? Why? 17. How should the policies regarding ISDN be implemented by the Commission? If tariff filings are required, what should they contain? Why? 18. To which local exchange carriers should rules and policies on ISDN apply? Why? 19. Should the LECs be required to provide ISDN services in a manner that is conducive to the competitive provision of ISDN? Why? If so, how? 20. Should there be a mandated interconnection and interoperability of competitively provided ISDN services? Why? If so, how and by whom? 21. Are there any other aspects or characteristics of providing ISDN that should be considered by the Commission? If yes, describe each and explain why. Please mail one copy of your comments by July 22, 1994, to: Woody Birko Oregon PUC 550 Capitol St. NE Salem, OR 97310-1380 and one copy of your comments to everyone on the attached ISDN work group mailing list. If you are not on the ISDN work group mailing list and would like to receive a copy of everyone's comments, please call Woody Birko at (503) 378-6122. Reply comments should be mailed in a similar manner by August 30, 1994. The next meeting of the Oregon ISDN work group is tentatively scheduled for September 14, 1994, to discuss the comments and reply comments and to see if a unified position paper can be written to the Commission on ISDN deployment in Oregon. If you have any questions concerning this, please call me at (503) 378-6122. Wolodymyr Birko Sr. Utility Engineering Analyst Telecommunications Division (503) 378-6122 ------------------------------ Subject: Republican Party Texas Denouces Clipper, DigTel, and ITAR Regs ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Partly in response to a widespread petition effort, conducted primarily over the Internet, the Texas Republican Party has adopted a platform supportive of electronic privacy, denoucing in one breath the ITAR crypto export restrictions, the FBI's draft wiretapping bill, the Adminstration's Escrowed Encryption Standard, and overly-broad cryptographic algorithm patents. This is comes as something of a surprise given the unanimous House Intelligence Committee Vote to retain export restrictions on cryptographic products - a vote which included the ballot of Rep. Larry Combest (R/TX). [see previous article in this issue] The relevant section of the RPT 1994 Platform is reproduced here: "Electronic Privacy-The Party believes that no governmental trapdoor encryption standards should be advanced for use in any civilian communication system (eg Clipper Chip, Digital Telephony Act) and that the US patent office should limit the RSA patent to allow individuals to secure their own communications systems. We believe that encryption systems publicly available outside the US should not be classified as munitions." More info will follow when available. ------------------------------ Subject: PSI and Canter & Siegel Negotiate Net Access: No Spamming ------------------------------------------------------------------ Date: Thu, 23 Jun 1994 18:19:47 -0400 From: "Martin Lee Schoffstall" <schoff(a)us.psi.com [This is just an informational forward, and is not an EFF document, nor does it reflect official EFF positions or statements - mech(a)eff.org] I'm sure this will provide for stimulating discussion... Marty ------- FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE PSI AND CANTER & SIEGEL NEGOTIATE AGREEMENT ON FUTURE INTERNET ACCESS June 23, 1994 - Herndon, VA - Performance Systems International, Inc. (PSI), of Herndon Virginia, which provides Internet connection services to more people and organizations than all other providers, today disclosed that an interim agreement had been reached with Canter & Siegel (C&S), of Phoenix, Arizona regarding the controversial C&S advertising over the Internet and USENET. Both firms concur that the continuing orderly evolution of the commercial Internet must be preserved, and to that end, Canter & Siegel and PSI have agreed to the following: a) C&S will refrain from mass electronic postings of any unsolicited, non-contextual, non-topic advertisements to the USENET discussion group bulletin board system; b) C&S will refrain from mass postings of any unsolicited, non-contextual, non-topic advertisements using electronic mail or other TCP/IP Internet applications. The worldwide Internet and USENET response to Canter & Siegel's activities have been very strong. Many of the actions have been particularly virulent, including the sending of "mail bombs". PSI has had first hand experience where the actions in response to C&S were damaging to third parties. PSI took a number of steps to remove these damaging situations as they occurred. While the actions of C&S have been considered by many to be completely inappropriate, the same is now being said about the actions in response to C&S. Clearly, the ENTIRE situation needs to be amended and will take many months, if not years, to settle out. Better education will be key to Internet evolution with books like "NET Etiquette" and the Internet Business Association (IBA) of Washington, DC facilitating those changes. In addition, mediation and discussion instead of unilateral confrontation, threats, and disconnection will be required to develop the general framework for operating on the Internet as it continues to evolve. Several other application-oriented Internet service providers have taken this approach successfully with C&S and others in parallel with PSI. ### PSI's headquarters are located at 510 Huntmar Park Drive, Herndon, VA 22070. Canter & Siegel is located at 3333 East Camelback Road, Suite 250, Phoenix, AZ 85260. ------------------------------ Subject: SunFlash E-Journal Call for Papers: "UNIX and the Law" Symposium ------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: troll(a)sug.org (Alex Newman) [Excerpted from _The_Flordia_SunFlash:_The_Electronic_Journal_for_Sun_Users_ _Since_1988_, Vol. 66, No. 54, June 1994.] Theme: UNIX and the Law Security Computers and Privacy UNIX and the Government Copyrights and Licensing The Sun User Group is pleased to announce its First Annual Technical Symposium, which will address the important issues of legality and morality that face computer users every day. Technical papers and presentations concerning this topical issue, as well as other topics of interest to the Sun/SPARC community, are invited. Manufacturers of computer equipment and software based on SPARC/Solaris technology are encouraged to participate in this conference with presentations, and technical talks. CALL FOR PAPERS SUN USER GROUP First Annual "UNIX and the Law" Symposium November 14-18, 1994 Austin, TX SUG conferences are attended by members from all over the world. Past conferences have drawn upwards of 4000 attendees from 43 countries and 43 states. We expect this timely topic to generate even more interest than usual. Submission Guidelines: Submissions should be in the form of extended abstracts (750 to 1000 words) and be sufficiently complete to allow the committee to understand and evaluate the submission. Abstracts should include: 1. Author name(s), postal and e-mail address(es), and telephone number(s). 2. Presenter name(s), postal and e-mail address(es), and telephone number(s). 3. Title of the paper 4. Time needed for presentation/questions. (30,45,60,90 Min. time slots) 5. Audio-visual requirements. 6. Student paper entry (Full time students only) Authors whose submissions are accepted will receive instructions for the preparation of final papers which will be published in the conference proceedings. The Presenter will receive one free registration for the conference. Any tutorial attendance must be purchased. IMPORTANT! All presentations will require a paper submission for inclusion in the conference proceedings. Deadlines: Abstracts Due: July 8, 1993 Notifications to Authors: August 22, 1993 Final Papers Due: September 12, 1993 Student Papers: There will be an award for the best student paper. Be sure to indicate with your submission if you are a full time student. A cash prize and free registration will be awarded by the Conference Program Committee. Submit one hardcopy and one electronic copy to the Sun User Group office: Sun User Group Conference Committee 1330 Beacon Street Suite 315 Brookline, MA 02146 Email: office(a)sug.org Phone: (617) 232-0514 Fax: (617) 232-1347 The Program Committee will select presentations from among those submitted. It includes experts from many areas of the Sun/Sparc world. It will be aided by: S. Lee Henry SUG board liaison Johns Hopkins University Peter Galvin SUG board liason Brown University Alex Newman SUG liason Sun User Group Possible themes and topics are listed below. These are only for reference, however, and all submitted papers will be considered for presentation at the conference. Thematic Track Topics directly related to the theme of the program: System Security; Software law for businessmen; Copyrights vs Copylefts; Encryption Sytems; Public and private keys; Clipper chips; Digital signatures; Designing software for export; Carjacking on the Information Superhighway; Mini-Tutorials and Q&A These sessions should be designed to directly address Sun user's needs. They could include step-by-step guides to administration, networking, programming in various tools, and understanding aspects of system operation such as performance and utilities. Q&A sessions are important and interesting to attendees because of their interactive, problem solving and question-resolving nature. Previous talks in this vein have included "securing your environment" and "system administration tips and tricks". System Administration, System Security Talks in this area should address the interests of those who have been Sun users for a year or more. Some of the more in-depth topics: mixed environments/mixed operating systems, backups, PPP/Slip, automounter, perl, tools for problem troubleshooting, and remote off-site administration. Technical Product Information This topic provides a chance for vendors to toot their own (technical) horns and describe the compelling technical advantages of their products. Panels of competitive products will be assembled when it seems appropriate to do so. No sales-oriented or non-technical talks will be accepted. Alex Newman Sun User Group Heus, Cerebre, quid vis troll(a)sug.org 1330 Beacon St., facere hac nocte? (617) 232-0514 voice Suite #315 Quod semper noctu facimus, (617) 232-1347 fax Brookline, MA 02146 o Rufo. Conari ut mundum superemus! ------------------------------ Subject: "How Do I Get the Most Current EFFector?" -------------------------------------------------- For those that may have not received an issue due to net.troubles, found it expired in their newsfeed before they could get to it, or don't wish to subscribe to the mailing list, EFF Systems Administrator Dan Brown has set up an infobot (an automated mail reflector, that will send you a file in response to email) to deliver the current issue of EFFector to you. Simply send any message to effector-reflector(a)eff.org (or er(a)eff.org for short), and you'll get the latest issue mailed to you. For ftp users, ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector/current will always contain the most recent issue of this newsletter. Reminder: the info(a)eff.org infobot will send you basic EFF info and membership form in response to any email, while the netguide(a)eff.org infobot will likewise send you the current version of EFF's Guide to the Internet, and pgpkey(a)eff.org will send you our PGP 2.6 public key for encrypting sensitive messages (e.g. membership forms that bear a credit card number) to us. Queries that need answers from a real live person should be sent to ask(a)eff.org. ------------------------------ Subject: What YOU Can Do ------------------------ "If you say to people that they, as a matter of fact, can't protect their conversations, in particular their political conversations, I think you take a long step toward making a transition from a free society to a totalitarian society." - Whitfield Diffie of Sun Microsystems, world reknowned cryptographer, MacNeil/Lehrer News Hour, Thursday, 4/7/94 Who will decide how much privacy is "enough"? The Electronic Frontier Foundation believes that individuals should be able to ensure the privacy of their personal communications through any technological means they choose. However, the government's current restrictions on the export of encrytion software have stifled the development and commercial availability of strong encryption in the U.S. Now, more than ever, EFF is working to make sure that you are the one that makes these decisions for yourself. Our members are making themselves heard on the whole range of issues. To date, EFF has collected over 5000 letters of support for Rep. Cantwell's bill (HR3627 - Sen. Murray's companion bill is S1846) to liberalize restrictions on cryptography. The bill's provisions, now part of the more general HR3937, will need your immediate and vocal support to succeed. We also gathered over 1400 letters supporting Sen. Leahy's open hearings on the proposed Clipper encryption scheme, which were held in May 1994. If you'd like to add your voice in support of the Cantwell bill's language, which is in danger of being stripped from HR3937, fax the members of the House Rules Committee [see above for fax number] immediately! You KNOW privacy is important. You have probably participated in our online campaigns. Have you become a member of EFF yet? The best way to protect your online rights is to be fully informed and to make your opinions heard. EFF members are informed and are making a difference. Join EFF today! For EFF membership info, send queries to membership(a)eff.org, or send any message to info(a)eff.org for basic EFF info, and a membership form. ------------------------------ Administrivia ============= EFFector Online is published by: The Electronic Frontier Foundation 1001 G Street NW, Suite 950 E Washington DC 20001 USA +1 202 347 5400 (voice) +1 202 393 5509 (fax) +1 202 638 6119 (BBS - 16.8k ZyXEL) +1 202 638 6120 (BBS - 14.4k V.32bis) Internet: ask(a)eff.org Internet fax gate: remote-printer.EFF(a)9.0.5.5.3.9.3.2.0.2.1.tpc.int Coordination, production and shipping by: Stanton McCandlish, Online Activist/SysOp/Archivist <mech(a)eff.org> Reproduction of this publication in electronic media is encouraged. Signed articles do not necessarily represent the views of EFF. To reproduce signed articles individually, please contact the authors for their express permission. To subscribe to EFFector via email, send message body of "subscribe effector-online" (no quotes) to listserve(a)eff.org, which will add you a subscription to the EFFector mailing list. To get the latest issue, send any message to er(a)eff.org, and it will be mailed to you automagically. You can also get ftp.eff.org, /pub/EFF/Newsletters/EFFector/current. ------------------------------ Internet Contact Addresses -------------------------- Membership & donations: membership(a)eff.org Legal services: ssteele(a)eff.org Hardcopy publications: pubs(a)eff.org Technical questions/problems, access to mailing lists: eff(a)eff.org General EFF, legal, policy or online resources queries: ask(a)eff.org End of EFFector Online v07 #11 ****************************** $$

1 0