- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

ciphers and such
by Lloyd Cowling 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cipherpunks: I have a long running interest in ciphers. Could you put me on to your modis operundi and FAQ's, etc. Where I might find out more about you and what you do? Thx - Lloyd

1 0

Re: message depots
by jim＠bilbo.suite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It seems the message depot idea is not terribly original. Oh well, I'm not too surprised. I suspected this and that's why I put "new(?) idea" in my post. I can at least pat my self on the back for reinventing it a few years late. :-) Jim_Miller(a)suite.com

1 0

Next Step show
by crunch＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Saw Eric Hughes on the Next Step science show on the Discovery Channel last Tuesday. Good job Eric...!! Wish they would have mentioned PGP and how easy it was to get it... Cheers CC

1 0

Re: UPDATE: direct-marketing email address list
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here's what you get if you send mail to J.S. McBride's posted address to query about the direct-marketing email address list: ______ begin forward ______

1 0

Jim McBride
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Got this in the mail today: -- cut -- Date: Wed, 03 Nov 1993 22:11:07 From: jim_mcbr(a)netmail.com Subject: Auto Reply To: <me> Thank you for your mail to Jim McBride at JS McBride & Company. Due to the volume of mail be handled by this account, this is an automatic reply. PLEASE READ CAREFULLY!! 1. JS McBride is NOT collecting demographic information on email addresses. Due to the controversy surrounding this practice, we have discarded the product demographics we collected. We are however still collecting email addresses and user names. 2. The information collected (name and email address) will be offered in a printed white pages directory and in a white pages server on the net. 3. You DO NOT need to ask to have your name removed. BEFORE your name is used in the directory, you will receive mail asking for your permission. If you reply to the inquiry, your information will be used. If you do not reply, your name will NOT be used. 4. Comments regarding the white pages should be sent to Tom Manning at JS McBride & Company. <tmanning(a)netmail.com> 5. Mail to Jim McBride should be sent to <jimm(a)netmail.com> 6. Information regarding the purchase of the white pages directory should be sent to <listinfo(a)netmail.com> or telephone us at 415-949-4295 Thank you for your time, Jim McBride -- David Sward sward+(a)cmu.edu Finger or email for PGP public key 3D567F Encryption is an envelope for your email; read alt.security.pgp for details. GCS: -d+ -p+(---) c++(++++) l+ u+ e+ m+()@ s+/++ n+@ h+ f !g w+@ t+@ r+ y?

2 1

ViaCrypt PGP has arrived
by jim＠bilbo.suite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

My copy of ViaCrypt PGP arrived yesterday (Nov 3). Since I worked late, I haven't had a chance to play with it yet. I looked through the manual. The commands look similar (if not identical) to "classic" PGP's, as far as I could tell at a glance. The bulk of the text for the manual was taken from the documentation that comes with PGP, except all occurances of "PGP" where replaced with "ViaCrypt PGP". The box looks pretty good. :-) Looks like they hired a real graphics designer. I suppose some of you are wondering why I'd fork over 100 bucks for something I could get for free. First of all, I can afford it. Second of all, I simply feel more comfortable using a licensed shinkwrapped software product than a quasi-legal freeware one. Call me a coward. I realize that by not compiling the code myself on my own machine I basically have to trust the ViaCrypt PGP implementation. So be it. If there is something wrong with ViaCrypt PGP I believe it will eventually be discovered. Somebody will no doubt disassemble it and look for backdoors. If someone finds one, ViaCrypt's reputation will be worthless. It's in ViaCrypts best interest not to put in any backdoors. Jim_"Rebel without a spine"_Miller(a)suite.com

1 0

unsubscribe
by crypto＠fizbin.fredd.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please unsubscribe me. Thanks! -- Red Rover crypto(a)nowhere.com

1 0

message depots, packet routing?
by hfinney＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- A few discussions of DC-Nets here show a small misconception. The network topology does not have to be the same as the DC-Net topology. What I mean is this: the communication in the network may be a ring or any other topology. But that does not mean that you only share random numbers with your neighbors on the ring. You can share random numbers (on a pairwise basis) with every other participant in the network, in the most extreme case. Look at this diagram, showing four people communicating in a DC-Net. The lines represent shared random number one-time pads. A---------B | \ / | | \ / | | / \ | | / \ | C---------D Each person shares random numbers individually with every other person in the network, in this example. A and B share their own random numbers, A and C share a different set, A and D have their own, B and C do, and so on. But that does not mean that the network communication topology has to be all to all. Instead, a ring topology could be used, with packets passing around the network A-B-D-C-A-B-D-C-.... At each step, A would xor in the next random number from each of the three pads that he is using, then xor in his message bits if he has anything. Then he would pass it on to B. After the packet has gone all the way around, the message (if any) would be revealed. And in this case it doesn't matter who your "neighbors" are in the communication network. B and C colluding can't distinguish whether messages come from A and D despite the fact that they separate them in the comm network. So this concern about "knowing your neighbors" in the DC-Net is not as serious as it sounds. If truly paranoid people want to participate in a DC-Net (and who else would?) then they can use a DC-Net topology which does not allow partitioning. This adds overhead and inconvenience of distributing shared random numbers, but it does not require the communication pattern to change. BTW, I like the name someone proposed for a DC-Net: "Ouija Net". The idea is that messages appear in a DC-Net somewhat like messages appearing on a Ouija board. The true source of most Ouija board messages, IMO, is people pushing the indicator around. But because everyone is touching it, each person has plausible denial. You know that SOMEONE is moving it, but there is no way to tell who. This is similar to DC-Net messaging. Hal hfinney(a)shell.portal.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLNnG0qgTA69YIUw3AQFigQP+LDMO6S7HkS4YkLdctLus4GamIvb/BxSX uG8VcZ/0eujQt8ZEIlNEzwNZvBR3Sio8gKko2jjvmWDGyobibSpctfqcr5Qf42xz 42TWVzYCjg+tka6FttosZ0phwGP1m7Dy+sC/zE0YmEQagS6jDSn/RiqR2PDMSJZn FEo2lfh8tmQ= =ZUfW -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

ANON: pools
by Karl Lui Barrus 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >address). This means that you will have to trust the person running the >remailer. Well, you can always run your own remailer or two... :-) >used which can solve this problem. I call it the "message depot" paradigm. Actually, this is quite similar (identical to?) anonymous pools. The stuff about interfacing different pools sounds good. Miron is running one at extropia.wimsey.com (mail to pool0-request or pool0-help). Basically, it is a mailing list with several subscribers. If you want to send a message to one person, encrypt it and send it to the pool. Everybody gets the message, but only one person can decrypt it. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLNk3FoOA7OpLWtYzAQENwgQAoYV+LeTQ2XguY5OtXgiW1pkMuZYxwifl pmmoHvUiFN5JdOBnyII4JgFjWpU1vqzAuUaZxR7yG1/c6Uaq+IluADGsu9NdSUVX NM7UGKffDMmE0bdlfzmlZJtP7+bbUK5kNE7gJkseyZ6q8cU9qjftUlFgASNrUCH9 w75nM8tMM68= =x9BH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Returned mail: Host unknown
by Mail Delivery Subsystem 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

----- Transcript of session follows ----- 550 pax.tpa.com.au (TCP)... 550 Host unknown 554 <mail-server(a)pax.tpa.com.au>... 550 Host unknown (Authoritative answer from name server) ----- Unsent message follows ----- Received: from nyx10.cs.du.edu by mordor.cs.du.edu with SMTP id AA26759 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for <mail-server(a)pax.tpa.com.au>); Fri, 5 Nov 1993 01:16:46 -0700 Received: by nyx10.cs.du.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA26298; Fri, 5 Nov 93 01:17:11 MST Date: Fri, 5 Nov 93 01:17:11 MST From: ateel(a)nyx10.cs.du.edu (A. J. Teel - Sui Juris) Message-Id: <9311050817.AA26298(a)nyx10.cs.du.edu> X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University of Denver. The University has neither control over nor responsibility for the opinions or correct identity of users. To: mail-server(a)pax.tpa.com.au Subject: ... index pgp end ---------------------- Msg 3 ----------------------

1 0