- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

TrustBucks
by TrustBuckFella 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May): > You want to elaborate on this contention? > > If Alice transfers Digicash-type money to Bob, this is because Alice either > bought the DC-money someplace, or already had it, or otherwise arranged > with a bank to make the transaction. Maybe the bank "loaned" her money she Mistaken terminology, mea culpa. The scheme I was thinking of is actually called Private Currency. Someone mistakenly labelled the writeup Digicash and I cut and pasted without thinking. I do know the difference when my brain is on. s/Digicash/Private Currency. Apologies to Digicash. I'll explain Private Currency and why it's good and bad. In Private Currency you don't "buy the [money] someplace". You mint it when paying. Alice and Bob check each other's public debt and if neither is scared off by the other's high debt, they mint a debt for Alice and money for Bob. They publish a record of the transaction, which is how they knew each other's public debt in the first step. So in theory the amount of currency in existance is exactly 0. In practice I wouldn't trust anyone for a debt that I didn't trust directly for that amount. I believe the scheme would stall. I conceived TrustBucks as an alternative that would retain the decentralization but work. > No protocols. No anonymity. No protection against double-spending. > > Looks promising. Keep us informed. Fine. I doubt my mechanisms will be optimal but here you go. Restraint on double-spending: Each participant publishes a list of the ID and value all outstanding TrustBucks of their own variety. Value of the notes can be obscured so it can only be verified by someone who has seen the note itself. What if some participant doesn't publish a complete list? Well, who are they robbing? People who directly trusted them for that amount and now won't ever again. Anonymity: Each participant identifies their currency by a randomly chosen ID-number instead of name and publishes their ID/value under that number. However, it's pretty pointless, since the chain of trust has a hard time extending beyond people who directly know each other anyways. A better objection would have been that it's hard to identify a chain of mutually trusting links between two strangers who want to make a transaction. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBMgPoDJi7GCxryNrZAQHeEgQAmHsJithWMhmRv4y3IjnCBFKAgmZLCQ+i NVYGDBVJ19iwAOTTwqHgcYMGEYdKBLUaBMRAczJDfGRbsB6WbFLKyiESHT8gpV7R 6CVesb7XpRaVDBylgTvoE/NNXfNrLrTfWOeVWtivMSVkDRKJC6BbONR1J5juhQjv A9s1wa/uwSw= =hsSY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

SAC_ard
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

August ScaAm has longish article on smart-cards by Carol Fancher, a Motorola engineer and developer of the smart- card market. ----- http://jya.com/sacard.txt (26 kb) Lynx: http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~jya/sacard.txt Via www.anonymizer.com SAC_ard

1 0

Re: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:37 AM 8/4/96 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > >On Sun, 4 Aug 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM asked: > >> Is there truth to the rumor that poking a file inside the barrel >> will alter the marks on future test firings? >I have heard, but have not evidence for, is that with use, these >characteristic markings change. As a result, putting 200-300 >rounds through a gun at the range is enough to alter its >identifiable barrel markings sufficiently to defeat forensic >matching. Don't know, just heard, but it sounds reasonable. Heard same thing here; it's almost certainly true. It would help if the gun got a thorough cleaning as well: You can "de-copper" a barrel by plugging one end, and filling the barrel with an ammonia solution. (this is available as a commercial product for guns, at wildly-inflated prices. Ordinary ammonia solution works just as well, cheap.) This dissolves the copper left from the passage of copper/brass-jacketed bullets. You can tell it's working: The copper forms the distinctive blue cupramine ion in solution. BTW, all this changes is the microstructure of the markings: The number of riflings and the twist of the riflings are, obviously, unchanged. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

ANNOUNCE:- RSAEURO Version 1.03
by RSAEURO General 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ANNOUNCE:- RSAEURO Version 1.03 =============================== What is RSAEURO? ---------------- RSAEURO is a cryptographic toolkit providing various functions for the use of digital signatures, data encryption and supporting areas (PEM encoding, random number generation etc). To aid compatibility with existing software, RSAEURO is call-compatible with RSADSI's "RSAREF(tm)" toolkit. RSAEURO allows non-US residents to make use of much of the cryptographic software previously only (legally) available in the US. RSAEURO contains support for the following: * RSA encryption, decryption and key generation. Compatible with 'RSA Laboratories' Public-Key Cryptography Standard (PKCS) #1. * Generation and verification of message digests using MD2, MD4, MD5 and SHS (SHS currently not implemented in higher-level functions to maintain compatibility with PKCS). * DES encryption and decryption using CBC (1, 2 or 3 keys using Encrypt-Decrypt-Encrypt) and DESX(tm), RSADSI's secure DES enhancement. * Diffie-Hellman key agreement as defined in PKCS #3. * PEM support support for RFC 1421 encoded ASCII data with all main functions. * Key routines implemented in assembler for speed (80386 and 680x0 currently supported). International Use ----------------- IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please do not distribute or use this software in the US it is 'illegal' to use this toolkit in the US, as RSADSI and Cylink hold patents relating to public-key cryptography. If you are a US resident, please use the RSAREF toolkit instead. On The Web ---------- RSAEURO can now be found at http://www.sourcery.demon.co.uk/rsaann.html Ftp Sites --------- RSAEURO can be found at ftp://ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/misc Author Details -------------- With comments and suggestions, please address them to Stephen Kapp, at 'rsaeuro(a)sourcery.demon.co.uk' ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- RSAEURO: rsaeuro(a)sourcery.demon.co.uk RSAEURO Bugs: rsaeuro-bugs(a)sourcery.demon.co.uk Tel: +44 (0) 468 286034 Http: http://www.sourcery.demon.co.uk/rsaann.html RSAEURO - Copyright (c) J.S.A.Kapp 1994-1996. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Digital Telephony costs $2
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:09 PM 8/3/96 -0800, Jim Bell talked about mixing telephony, voice compression, and modem functions on future modems, and how doing a 28.8 modem uses up most of a DSP chip, while 2400bps voice coding and decoding also each use up about half, making full duplex tough. One advantage of higher-speed modems is that you can get away with 16kbps ADPCM coding, which is dirt-simple computationally; your 386 probably has enough horsepower to do it, though a PC's interrupt structure may make it tough to shove all the data in and out in real time. You still need a sound card that'll do the A/D and D/A conversion simultaneously if you want full-duplex; that wasn't part of the original market vision of Soundblaster, so vanilla sound cards don't all do it. It also has the advantage that the data is being moved through your CPU, so encryption is an easy add-on, rather than having one combined modem/voiceblaster card which doesn't have any hooks for crypto or other processing. >Sure, it may not be necessary to compress voice audio all the way down to >2400 bps, since the current modem standards allow 28.8kbps and beyond, but I >suggest that decreasing net traffic by a factor of 12 (28.8k to 2.4k) is a >desirable goal. One problem is that tighter compression methods are far more sensitive to network latency than crude ones, and need to process more milliseconds of speech before putting out a packet on the net (e.g. a 64-byte tinygram is 200ms of speech at 2400bps, vs. 32ms at 16kbps.) For modem-to-modem communications, this is no problem; for Internet random delays it is. Also, another big difficulty with full-duplex transmission is that you need echo-cancelling, especially with high-latency circuits. Half-duplex is annoying, but it doesn't echo, and it's more tolerant of delay because you're not expecting it to have natural timing... >The reason I think a system I've described has a future is that modem >manufacturers have a PROBLEM. Their problem is that they've pretty much run >out of room to improve the bit-pushing through a 3 KHz bandwidth. Given that the "3KHz" is almost universally transmitted over 64kbps digital channels, there's really no point in pushing past 33.6 with analog-based coding; better to just do ISDN. (You can still do analog-only calls if you're on an analog central office talking to someone else at the same exchange, but it'd be a flat-rate local call anyway. If there's anybody still using analog trunks between offices, it's some mom&pop rural telco, and you can't get 28.8 on barbed-wire...) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Defuse Authority!

1 0

Re: FAA to require transponders on all aircraft passengers
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>At 3:21 PM 8/3/96, David Lesher wrote: >>They are going to hang one of these on EVERY bag? >>At what per-unit cost? Probably low enough, at least if they can reuse the tags (should be easy to find them, since they're transponder-equipped.) My guess about how they'll be used is to replace the bar-code stickers used by many baggage-handling systems - they'll stick one on at checkin, corresponding to the number on your ticket, track them when they load them on the plane (so they know that all the bags correspond to people expected to get on the plane, as well as knowing the bags are getting on the correct plane), and track the tickets to make sure that all the people expected to get on the plane actually do get on (I think they use bar-code readers or OCR today, and that'll probably continue.) Tim> "bag escrow" will allow other agencies--such as DEA--to sniff Also useful for the baggage checkers at the baggage claim, who'll be able to check that your baggage tag belongs to your ticket, and that nobody sneaks baggage out unchecked, either stealing it or trying to pick up the contraband. Of course they'll _have_ to check all the bags to collect the transponders. David>>THEN think of the RFI problems..... Tim> The RFI problems are actually the least of the concerns, Tim> given the "code space" technology which is possible. The RFI issue isn't just telling one transponder from another, it's interference with the airplane's electronics. The devices will be a bit quieter than your laptop, since they presumably only broadcast in response to polls - probably quieter than pagers but noisier than digital watches. Bill # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Defuse Authority!

2 1

Re: "And who shall guard the guardians?" [NOISE]
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Arun and Marin have been quoting from UN docs and the >International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR), >http://www.pluggedin.org/amnesty/rights4.htm > which the US *ratified* not so long ago. >2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; >this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart >information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, >either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or >through any other media of his choice. >3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 >of this article carries with it special duties and >responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain >restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law >and are necessary: >(a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; >(b) For the protection of national security or of >public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^ Lots of UN declarations of rights have this sort of exception; "protection of public morals" is something so blatantly vague and broad that if a government contends that such a concept exists, as the covenant does, it could probably force the World Court to conclude that it permits them to declare as "necessary" just about anything short of burning witches and heretics, and humanely beheading heretics, drug dealers, and anonymous remailer operators is probably ok by this standard. The UN Declaration (or was it Convention) on the Rights of the Child is even worse - it strongly states the right to believe in and practice religion, except when the government needs to interfere to protect public morals or public order... On the other hand, it provides no such exception for the right to mandatory public education or identity registration. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Defuse Authority!

1 0

Re: Kalifornia Scoffs at Privacy for Minors
by Schaerer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Eric Cordian wrote: >> Jim Byrnes writes: >> > Bwaahaha. ROTFLOL! No argument over public schools, but families? Ok, >> > I'll send my eight year old out to fend for himself. Its about time >> > that lazy bum got a job. >> >> You seem to be under the misperception that since society has entrusted >> you with the care of a member of a class of individuals having special >> needs, that such individuals have no civil rights as long as you are >> giving them something. >> >> The rights of your biological offspring do not depend in the least on >> their working to support themselves. Your legal obligation to provide >> food, shelter, education, and medical care does not depend in the least >> upon your getting your own way at their expense 100% of the time, or being >> allowed to violate their reasonable personal boundaries and limits. >This legal obligation is another form of slavery, then. Somehow the >law makes parents slaves to their children. > > - Igor. ... slavery only to yourself - who made the choice to have children in the first place? Once you make that choice, you're stuck with it. That's not a penalty, just propagation of species: you accept the responsibility to teach your children what they need to know in order for them to become functional adults, so they may someday do the same. To extend on this 'teaching process', it seems folly to assume that a child will all-of-a-sudden turn into a thinking, reasonable adult on their 18th birthday without a certain degree of critical thinking ability beforehand. - Jim Schaerer

1 0

Re: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
by Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Oh dear oh dear.... First off people on cypherpunks seem to have the idea that the type of people who go blasting peoples heads off have brains. Without wanting to inflate people's egos too much the average reader of cypherpunks is an awful lot smarter than your average criminal. Fancy plans to disolve gun barrels etc are way too complex for your average criminal and in any case it is substantially easier to drop a gun in a lake or the sea and less likely to result in incrimination than to try disolving it, run 200 rounds through it or whatever. Vacuming up powder left over from a rifle range would not help very much. One of the problems of building a bomb is to make sure that all the explosive goes off. A gas chromatograph is able to differentiate spent and unspent explosive. It would be easier to go off and buy the stuff from multiple sources or to make ones own explosive from nitrates with oxidants. I would expect that anyone vacuming up the residue from a gun club is likely to have difficulty explaining what he is doing. After all one does not usually go off to play Rambo, then stick an apron on and start doing the housework. I personally think that tagants is an insuffieicent approach to the problem. Given the number of gun related homicides in the US it is not unreasonable to require each individual cartridge to be stamped with a serial number and for gun dealers to be required to record each individual purchase. That at least was my advice to the UK govt after Dunblane. If people go arround claiming that ownership of guns is necessary so that people can commit acts of treason against the US govt then it is inevitable that there will be pressure for greater regulation. The NRA has been playing a bad hand stupidly. By raising the militia argument they have played into the hands of abolitionists. It would be entirely foolish for the crypto lobby to allow themselves to be tied to the NRA. The NRA has no choice but to support civil liberties, there is no reason why the wider civil liberties movement needs to support the NRA. More significant for crypto policy is the recent revelations about US spying on the European Union by spoofing CISCO routers via SNMP. That act should be exploited to drive a wedge between US attempts to bar use of cryptographic security systems and the members of the EU. Phill

2 1

Re: Stop the presses -- Anti-terrorism bill not that bad
by drose＠AZStarNet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Phil H-B writes: >Oh dear oh dear.... (Mucho B.S. elided) Dear Doc: Trollmeister supreme Sternlight has left the building. Hint...hint...

1 0