- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Your Home Town Provides Everything You Need
by zida27＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

YOUR HOME TOWN WILL DO 100% OF THE WORK FOR YOU WE OFFER: You the chance to own your own Home Based Business. WE OFFER: To build your Home Based Business for you. WE OFFER You financial independence. WE OFFER: You life saving and life changing products. WE OFFER: You the easiest way we know to, improve your Health, your Wealth and your Happiness. For more information Call: Our toll free 24 hr message center at 888-771-9338 Our toll free 24 hr recorded message at 888-771-9340. Reference # 1007698 our research showed you would be interested in this subject. If this is not true and you would like to be removed from our data base please call 888-771-9338 and leave your e-mail address for removal. Thank You.

1 0

Warez 4
by Human Gus-Peter 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

MAKE MORE MONEY ONLINE
by info＠homebusinesscentral.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Friend and Internet Entrepreneur, Discover little known ways of how to promote virtually any product, service or idea online and see income within 24 hours. Guranteed! It's finally here! **ALL NEW** E-Mail Marketing Home Study Course reveals how to use responsible, targeted, e-mail marketing in your business to boost Web site traffic, generate leads, sell products, and make more sales online. Learn totally new information about how to e-mail your sales message to prospects and sell your products and services online without getting flamed. Discover detailed techniques for using opt-in marketing, compiling mailing lists, the secrets of writing ad copy, and much more. You will learn: How to create targeted e-mail lists of prospects who are as much as 5 times more responsive than names you can rent or buy. Discover which e-mail management and sending software is best. (And Receive A FREE 10 Day Trial Version Of The Best One) Discover which teaser ads and subject lines get your mail opened and responded to quickly. How to use e-mail to generate qualified traffic to a Web site. And Much Much More.... You will receive an extensive step by step course guiding you every step of the way! Plus as part of this national marketing test if you ACT NOW! you are going to receive as a bonus gift: "The Secrets To Successful Search Engine Submission" Audio series Learn how to get on top and stay on top! "I generated 19 brand new paying customers in less than a week with this course" Thank You To learn more about this exciting course please visit us at http://www.homebusinesscentral.net/emarket.html This is a very limited offer, so act now! To be removed from this list please respond with "remove" in the subject field World Tek Inc. 7210 Jordan Ave. Canoga Park CA. 91303 1-818-718-9429

1 0

US to Ease Crypto Export
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

7 July 1998 Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPlate/1998-07/07/064l-070798-idx.html Thanks to FT U.S. to Ease Limits on Export of Data-Scrambling Technology By Elizabeth Corcoran Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, July 7, 1998; Page E04 Commerce Secretary William Daley plans to announce today that the government will give U.S. software companies new freedom to export their most sophisticated data-scrambling technology to financial institutions chartered in 45 countries, according to Clinton administration sources. Under the new rules, which officials said are likely to take effect in late summer, eligible banks, securities firms, brokerage houses and credit-card companies will need to receive approval only once from the Commerce Department before they can license the most sophisticated "encryption," or data-scrambling, technology. Once they receive approval, those institutions will be permitted to share the technology with any of their branch offices, except for those located in terrorist states. Government sources estimate that the new rules will include about 70 percent of the world's banks, including the 100 largest (ranked by assets). For years, the government has closely regulated export of encryption software, on the grounds that terrorists or hostile governments might use it to cloak their communications. The software industry argues that the rules are unworkable and unfairly block foreign sales. Unfriendly parties wanting to use encryption already can obtain it overseas, industry executives said. The new rules on banks are "a move in the right direction," said one industry executive familiar with the regulations. "But we're still leaving some groups out. Basically, we need to keep spreading the circle wider," to include the growing number of businesses offering financial services, such as insurance companies. "What we've heard sounds great," said Kawika Daguio, a lobbyist for the American Bankers Association. "We've been arguing [for several years] that the regulatory structure we have guarantees we're good citizens" who wouldn't make illicit use of the technology, he said. Now the government appears to have agreed. Current regulations require that U.S. companies apply for permits before exporting anything but the simplest versions of encryption products. To export more sophisticated technology, organizations must have a plan for creating so-called "spare keys." That way, law enforcement officials who have obtained a court order would be able to unlock the information. In May 1997, the Commerce Department said it would not restrict the sophistication of the data-encryption technology sold to financial institutions. But it required spare keys and case-by-case licensing. Approvals have been slow. Now the government is doing away with the key requirement, defining more precisely which financial institutions qualify and pledging to end case-by-case approval. Because of concerns about money laundering, the government will grant the new permission only to financial institutions chartered in countries that have agreed to take steps against money-laundering. If U.S. companies want to sell to financial institutions chartered in other countries, they will have to apply for licenses from the Commerce Department. Such provisions still fall short of the demands of U.S. companies. "To take a piecemeal approach [to loosening encryption restrictions] is the wrong direction," said Ed Gillespie, executive director of Americans for Computer Privacy, a lobbying group. "We need a blanket lifting of restrictions with individual prohibitions," such as bans on sending such technology to terrorist states, he said. In a related development, a federal court in Ohio ruled on Friday that posting the text of an encryption program on the Internet, where people all over the world could see it, was not protected by the constitutional right to free speech. The ruling, made late Friday, contradicts a ruling made by a California district court last August. Privacy advocates predict that the issue will be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court. © Copyright 1998 The Washington Post Company

1 1

Junger decision
by Cindy Cohn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

For those who haven't yet heard, Judge Gwin in the District Court in Ohio has granted the government summary judgment in the Junger case. Judge Gwin apparently agreed with the government that the "functionality" of encryption source code, and the government's claims that it only intends to regulate that "functionality" mean that the regulations are not "narrowly and directed at expressive conduct" and so do not merit prior restraint analysis. The Judge then held that the regulations were content neutral, applied the intermediate scrutiny tests and found that the export restrictions meet those tests. I haven't had the opportunity to review the decision yet. As soon as I have, I will post some brief comments. Still no decision from the 9th Circuit in Bernstein. Cindy ****************************** Cindy A. Cohn, Cindy(a)McGlashan.com McGlashan & Sarrail, P.C. 177 Bovet Road, 6th Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 (650) 341-2585 (tel) (650) 341-1395 (fax)

1 0

Re: Attacking Clipper with timing info?
by jim＠bilbo.suite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Without having the details of the algorithm, I suspect > the answer is 'remotely possible, at best'. > > However, to extend what I suspect you were getting at: > > It would be very interesting to determine if the NSA knew > about this crypto-design problem... > That was indeed what I was wondering. I expect we wont have to wait too long before we hear whether Clipper chips require the same or a different amount of time to encrypt/decrypt. Should be interesting. Jim_Miller(a)suite.com

2 1

Algorithims ?
by john.ellis＠wmcmail.wmc.ac.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Were can i get a set of the most popular algorithims from for encryption, and does any one have and info on the algorithim used in the second WW by the germans, (The Enigma system) any info would be greatfully recieved Cheers John

2 1

Warez 35
by Human Gus-Peter 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Warez 34
by Human Gus-Peter 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

RE: Junger et al.
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Nevermind that source code is suppose to be "human readable" material that is _translated_ into function instructions of machine code. A play is normally considered 'protected' free speech under US law, but what if robot was created which acted out the play and Gwin's argument was extended to apply the situtation where a play performed. Would the play itself no longer be a protected form of free speech, because it is seen as "functional" instructions to the robot actor? Would the playwrite become responsible for the robot's actions, such as killing a character/actor? As a programmer, I have "acted out" source code myself, as part of the debugging process. It is normally called "a walkthrough," so the difference between source code and a play is not as broad as some people may view it. I have followed the source code like a script, acting out the instructions like stage directions in a play. Does it matter who might 'read' the material, in regards to the protection of free speech? Whether it is written so that Russians or computers might be able to read it? If source code is written on a napkin, it can be currently exported, but what if tomorrow a vendor announces a 'napkin computer' which can directly read from napkins akin to a super-low densiy floppy disc. At 07:20 PM 7/6/98 -0700, Ernest Hua wrote: >Did anyone demonstrate the "functionalness" of any arbitrary language >via a scanner and a compiler? > >Why doesn't Gwin understand that the moment one successfully claims that >a specific class of source code is not speech by the virtue of the fact >that a compiler can transform it automatically into executable code >which performs a function, then ANY speech of ANY sort is fundamentally >vulnerable to being classified as functional as soon as a compiler can >transform it into real machine code. > >Ern > > -----Original Message----- > From: jkthomson [SMTP:jkthomson@bigfoot.com] > Sent: Monday, July 06, 1998 7:12 PM > Reuters > >3:40pm 6.Jul.98.PDT WASHINGTON -- A district court has dismissed a law >professor's challenge to US regulations strictly limiting the export of >computer data-scrambling technology. > >Judge James Gwin ruled late Friday that the export limits, which prevented >Case Western Reserve University Law School professor Peter Junger from >posting the text of encryption programs on the Internet, did not violate >the constitutional right to free speech. > >The Ohio court's ruling contradicts a California district court ruling last >August that said source code -- the instructions a person writes telling >the computer what actions to perform -- constitutes a form of speech >subject to First Amendment protection. > >"Unlike instructions, a manual or a recipe, source code actually performs >the function it describes," Gwin wrote. "While a recipe provides >instructions to a cook, source code is a device, like embedded circuitry in >a telephone, that actually does the function of encryption."

3 2