- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Need PGP-awareness in common utilities
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:16 PM 7/6/96 +0200, you wrote: > >Let me know. We _could_ adopt the ridiculously simple NoCeM >protocol, or the ever-mutating public key certificates being >designed in a nearby mailing list, or some protocol of our own. >(Shouldn't be too hard to come up with an implementable, useful >protocol.) > Hey guys, as long as I can't get a decent mail program that handles all pgp-stuff automatically (including the cumbersome installation), I don't think pgp-awareness is of much use in "everyday communication programms") ----------< fate favors the prepared mind >---------- Remo Pini Fon 1: +41 1 350 28 82 mailto:rp@rpini.com Fon 2: +41 1 465 31 90 http://www.rpini.com/remopini/ Fax: +41 1 350 28 84 --------< words are what reality is made of >--------

1 0

Irony on strong encryption in Australia
by Sherry Mayo 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> The Australian Broadcasting Authority's report on Internet regulation issues > recommends that ISPs be required to support unescrowed strong encryption for > their users' privacy and security. > > Electronic Frontiers Australia is opposed to this idea because it puts too > much of a burden on the ISP. Are you sure you have this right. I've just joined the EFA, and am concerned about this, but I can't find any such comment on the EFA site. The relevant portion of the ABA document is as follows "The ABA considers that users with particular requirements for privacy should be able to obtain advice from their service providers on the use of encryption and the availability of suitable products to render messages unreadable by unauthorised persons." This is hardly a huge burden and I would be surprised if the EFA objects to it. I looked at their press release concerning the ABA report but saw no mention of any problems with this "encryption advice" policy. Maybe I'm looking in the wrong place? Anyway, the main problem for the EFA at the moment is the "Son of CDA" legislation currently being proposed by the NSW attorney-general. Sherry

1 0

Re: Minitel "saved" by hackers?
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 12 Jul 96 at 14:07, Daniel Salber wrote: [..] > Well, sorry if it is. That's what I read in a book about the early history > of telephone. I don't have the reference handy right now, though. Understandable. > BUT: how do you explain that from the original conception (using the > telephone for broadcasting), the telephone came to be a one-to-one > communication tool ? Even if the implementation allowed it, someone had to > think of it, right ? Bell thought of the idea orig. as a broadcaster. Then somehow when it was set up he or someone else in AT&T did that. If I recall (no refs handy) it had to do with the telegraph being (sort of) point-to-point... Bell used to tour the vaudville circuit showing off the telephone. I think the idea emerged during that time... during such shows of tech (common at the time) there was a Q&A from the audience. Rob > > Thanks for the clarification anyway. > > Daniel > > > > --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

1 0

Re: Need PGP-awareness in common utilities
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:30 AM 7/7/96 +0200, you wrote: > >Which is where the small payments to ratings producers from >ratings consumers comes in. Again this is just the >quantification of a phenomena that we all take for granted. >(Namely, that people who produce quality ratings are producing a >value and trading/contributing it to others.) It sure sounds like I'll have to pay, so someone decides for me, wether some piece of info is important to me. Now, if that isn't the first step to censorship! That kind of reminds me of an insurance company where I can call a toll-intensive number to talk to a salesman who tries to sell my something I don't really need. ----------< fate favors the prepared mind >---------- Remo Pini Fon 1: +41 1 350 28 82 mailto:rp@rpini.com Fon 2: +41 1 465 31 90 http://www.rpini.com/remopini/ Fax: +41 1 350 28 84 --------< words are what reality is made of >--------

1 0

Re: Need PGP-awareness in common utilities
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:30 AM 7/7/96 +0200, you wrote: > >Which is where the small payments to ratings producers from >ratings consumers comes in. Again this is just the >quantification of a phenomena that we all take for granted. >(Namely, that people who produce quality ratings are producing a >value and trading/contributing it to others.) It sure sounds like I'll have to pay, so someone decides for me, wether some piece of info is important to me. Now, if that isn't the first step to censorship! That kind of reminds me of an insurance company where I can call a toll-intensive number to talk to a salesman who tries to sell my something I don't really need. ----------< fate favors the prepared mind >---------- Remo Pini Fon 1: +41 1 350 28 82 mailto:rp@rpini.com Fon 2: +41 1 465 31 90 http://www.rpini.com/remopini/ Fax: +41 1 350 28 84 --------< words are what reality is made of >--------

2 1

Re: A case for 2560 bit keys
by Mark M. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Thu, 11 Jul 1996, Chris Adams wrote: > check your setup. I used to run a 386-20 (5MB RAM) and it took about 3 > seconds for a 1024 bit key. Given it didn't even have a copro (not sure > when/if PGP uses one) and that it was off of a Stackered drive, I'd > expect you to have much better times. That's consistent with the timings I've been getting. It should take about 9 seconds to decrypt an arbitrary message with a 2048-bit key with the setup you describe. Of course, I usually use X, so that probably does throw off the timings a bit. - -- Mark =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= markm(a)voicenet.com | finger -l for PGP key 0xe3bf2169 http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/ | d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348 "Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows." --George Orwell, _1984_ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBMeXTXLZc+sv5siulAQEnAAP8Dbr/WWFKDhD0CRPePVtF2o7386Na89Xd GUC7D2x9hFAcMS+YynQnLpNULHWY4e/ziY3GkpFVydSYrQfIZ7Xj8P7RPgFUmWnz 4Zo5zTIJif1jigWEmMqAr7nMBtDCFTJrB0ogD7ZlGcALHxjUKW7j20QtHyIg5/sr nS7OAI2gZgc= =/LMb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

"----- Message body suppressed -----"
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:10 AM 8/21/96, Skip wrote: > ----- Message body suppressed ----- > Sounds good to me. Keep it up. --Tim May -- [This Bible excerpt awaiting review under the U.S. Communications Decency Act of 1996] And then Lot said, "I have some mighty fine young virgin daughters. Why don't you boys just come on in and fuck them right here in my house - I'll just watch!"....Later, up in the mountains, the younger daughter said: "Dad's getting old. I say we should fuck him before he's too old to fuck." So the two daughters got him drunk and screwed him all that night. Sure enough, Dad got them pregnant, and had an incestuous bastard son....Onan really hated the idea of doing his brother's wife and getting her pregnant while his brother got all the credit, so he pulled out before he came....Remember, it's not a good idea to have sex with your sister, your brother, your parents, your pet dog, or the farm animals, unless of course God tells you to. [excerpts from the Old Testament, Modern Vernacular Translation, TCM, 1996]

3 2

DOJ Scam!
by Vipul Ved Prakash 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vipul wrote : > >I think its a DOJ's doing. They prolly want to show the courts how > >bad hackers can get so they can conjure up some support in forthcomming > >trials. C'mon the sysadmins aren't fools, they surely see their own site. Dungeon Master wrote: > this is a very highly possible conclusion... and I wouldn't go against it. > I the traditional since.. r00ts know there shit... and if the operator(s) of > DOJ didn't know how firewall down the country's own Justice web page.. then > we have some serious measures to be taken on lack of education in there > part.. and furthermore they would have portrayed it as lack of security > there and point the theoretical finger at the site admin.. but no, it > didn't happen. folks, I think its a scam... not only for these reasons... > but just look at the material that was altered... I am sorry.. but speaking > from some exp. here... if I had access to some place like that.. I wouldn't > have bothered de-facing what the public sees... I would rather have gone to > a more effective means of sabotage.. to the root of the system.. to data > storage and records.. the real hackers out there are the ones who don't > make themselves known. And particular thing to note is that *indecency*. - Vipul vipul(a)pobox.com

1 0

Re: Spamming
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:55 PM 8/22/96, Vipul Ved Prakash wrote: >> > > Internet pricing models are complicated and debatable, but you surely > end up paying for snail-junk-mail. Not directly, but hidden in the high > first-class mail costs. More mail, more infrastructure, higher costs. Actually, precisely the opposite is true, according to a number of studies. "Bulk mail" is a major profit center for the Postal Service, thus subsidizing non-bulk /first class mail. -- Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Lesson 2 in cracking (cryptoanalysis 001)
by Scottauge＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a message dated 96-08-21 20:43:50 EDT, you write: >The point is that if you took two novels by the same author and >completely sorted them alphabetically they'd be almost the same. The examples cited did this by word, not by message as your stating. >So a block of PGP encrypted ascii-armored (i.e. 8=>7-bit encoding) >wouldn't affect the frequency counts? Tell me, how long have you been on >your current medications? I was talking about the algorithm as given, not PGP. > That's the point!! IT'S A JOKE!!! You know, "hahaha - very funny"? Not a > serious proposal? I know! But at least it is relevent to the group! How many points of attack have you seen on here? How many techniques have shown up here? P.S. My apologies to the fella I called a troll. It was uncalled for - lacking in social skills.

1 0