- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

No Subject
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

:: Subject: Re: List of reliable remailers On Mon, 19 Feb 1996 06:50:11 -0800, Raph Levien <raph(a)CS.Berkeley.EDU> wrote: > I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed >information about remailer features and reliability. [snip] What does it mean if a certain remailer is *not* shown on the current list? Is it down? Or simply not tested?

1 0

ViaCryptPGP 4.0?! (was Re: PGP integrated into Z-Mail)
by Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- David A Wagner wrote: [..] > A full review of Z-Mail for Windows and other Z-Mail products is > available over NCD Software's site on the World Wide Web at > http://www.ncd.com/Z-Code/zcode.html, or via e-mail at info(a)z-code.com. > ViaCrypt information is available over the Web at http://www.viacrypt.com ViaCrypt's page talks about a beta version of PGP 4.0 available at some sites. Hmmm. The Windows version is tantalizing. A PGP.DLL would be a wonderful thing. - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBMSqspioZzwIn1bdtAQHUYgGApl4OV143Q/LL2/mPC1m0PDHiGYbVB4xm sB66fpLRrpjHBYxqYg/fGTL1rN6Z4Ydu =OmqS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: Invading Switzerland in WW2, pro and con (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "Richard Redd" <rredd(a)earthlink.net> > To: <consim-l(a)net.uni-c.dk> > Subject: Re: Invading Switzerland in WW2, pro and con > Date: Wed, 23 Sep 1998 17:56:11 -0600 > Of course there's the old story about some conqueror (I think it was Hitler > saying, "I could invade your country with 100,000 men". The Swiss diplomat > says, "Every man would fire their rifles at the invader". "Well, suppose I > send 200,00?" "Then every one would fire twice." ____________________________________________________________________ The seeker is a finder. Ancient Persian Proverb The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.)
by geeman＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There are remarkable similarities between this 'system' and the Elementrix one. Could it be that E-ix is selling some licenses to the unsuspecting? Or perhaps it's the other way around. Both involve: - An ill-defined cure-all solution which can't realy be revealed because of patent-pending status - An OTP (so they say) that's not really an OTP - Starting with a 'seed' that is truly random and then algorithmically generating a stream that is XOR-ed with the data, based on analogies to "rotors" and "dice" - Encrypting keystream data using portions of the previous keystream ** fairly remarkable coincidences. Or is it that great minds think alike?

1 0

SOW_hat
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

2-20-96. FT: "Cash versus cashless." Assays Y/Ns of e-cash and declares DigiCash the winner for its privacy and anonymity. Echoes DC privacy mantra and sketches DC/DC tests underway by the EU. Compares froth of issuers, fear of banks and so-what of consumers: "Physical cash already offers consumers a product that is universally accepted, convenient, anonymous and has no direct costs." 2-20-96. WSJ: "Security Sytem On the Internet Contains Flaw." Two Purdue University students discovered a major flaw in Kerberos that could allow a hacker to penetrate corporate networks in about 5.8 seconds, giving another black-eye to electronic commerce. SOW_hat

1 0

CRYPTO INFO
by crisper 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am fairly new to this crypto group and was looking for any good places to get some basic information on current cryptography techniques. Anyone with som info on this topic please E-MAIL the response dont post on the mailing list. E-mail to crisper(a)ascensionet.com IF ANYONE KNOWS OF ANY GOOD PLACES TOGET A GOOD PGP SHELL FOR WINDOWS PLEASE ADD THE URL OR FTP SITE. THANX

1 0

Public Access Obsolete. Capitalism offers free email
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The NYT's Cybertimes reports (http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/0219email.html) that two companies are preparing to offer free email to customers who agree to be barraged by ads. Juno and Freemark will soon offer free email to all (Americans). http://www.freemark.com/freemark.html http://www.juno.com/ And since you can do (almost) anything with email that you can do with the rest of the net (just more slowly and less conviniently) I guess we don't have to worry about government-provided public access any more. DCF

5 4

Internet Privacy Guaranteed
by James M. Cobb 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Friend, (KEY #1) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 20:01:06 -0500 From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry(a)piermont.com> To: IPG Sales <ipgsales(a)cyberstation.net> Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.) [snip] > ...keymanagem,ent makes RSA systems unmanageable for large > organizations - offer such a suystem to Merrill Lynch and be > laughed out of the office.... [snip] Even private key systems are quite workable. I actually work with these firms [large organizations] -- its what I do for a living. They have existing systems based on KDCs (do you even know what a KDC is?) and they function just fine. As for public key technologies, they [large organizations] are in many cases implementing technologies based on public key system. [snip] (KEY #2) Date: Mon, 19 Feb 1996 20:37:42 -0500 From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry(a)piermont.com> To: IPG Sales <ipgsales(a)cyberstation.net> Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.) [snip] IPG Sales writes: > there is no need in talking in circles - You may think that > you know everything there is to know about encryption, but > believe me, there is a lot more for you to learn - I do not > now what KDC's are, Key Distribution Centers, the center of Needham-Schroeder and similar key management protocols, like the Kerberos protocols. [snip] (KEY #3) Date: Tue, 20 Feb 1996 01:28:01 -0700 From: Nelson Minar <nelson(a)santafe.edu> To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: breakable session keys in Kerberos v4 I'm a bit suprised this hasn't turned up yet on Cypherpunks. A couple of forwarded messages: first, an announcement made Fri Feb 16 by Gene Spafford at COAST about an exploitable flaw they've found in Kerberos, and then a comment on the www-security list that it is due to a bad random number generator. Same old story! The message (lifted from the COAST web site) [snip] (a comment I found in reply [to the COAST message]) ------- Start of forwarded message ------- From: jis(a)mit.edu (Jeffrey I. Schiller) Subject: Re: Kerberos Vulnerability Newsgroups: hks.lists.www-security Date: 19 Feb 1996 21:42:08 -0500 Organization: HKS, Inc. Path: hks.net!news-mail-gateway!owner-www-security Lines: 8 Sender: root(a)hks.net Message-ID: <ad4e9fc40602100421be(a)[18.162.1.1]> NNTP-Posting-Host: bb.hks.net There will be a fix distributed by MIT later this week. The problem is that the random number generator in V4 is worse then we thought! The fix is to retrofit the V5 generator (which is decent) into the V4 KDC. Note: Only the KDC needs to be updated, clients and servers are unaf- fected. -Jeff ------- End of forwarded message ------- (KEY #4) Kerberos offers a better network security model than ignoring network security entirely. Unfortunately, it is plagued with holes, from windows that remain "authenticated" for hours while the user is at lunch, to passwords that are stored in plain text on the authentication server. Page 553 of: Evi Nemeth, Garth Snyder, Scott Seebass, Trent R Hein. UNIX System Administration Handbook. Second Edition. Prentice Hall PTR. 1995. ISBN: 0 13 151051 7 email: sa-book(a)admin.com http://www.admin.com Cordially, Jim NOTE. The above message excerpts are reformatted.

1 0

Re: Easy Nuclear Detonator
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"jimbell(a)pacifier.com" "jim bell" 20-FEB-1996 09:01:32.20 >As for the inclusion of your private note: sorry again. But at the time, >it just didn't occur to me that you'd object to this. "Nettiquette" is new >to me. Ah. I understand mistakes. I've made one similar to this before, although it was through not noticing that a mailing to me wasn't also to Cypherpunks, rather than not knowing the (rather basic element of) Nettiquette of not posting someone else's private email. Apology accepted. -Allen

1 0

Re: Jury duty considered harmful, or at least rare
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 23 Sep 1998, Tim May wrote: > > At 11:11 PM -0700 9/22/98, Bill Stewart wrote: > > >Yeah. The times I've known the facts in cop-vs-citizen cases, > >the cops have often been lying; I have to assume that they're often lying > >in cases when I don't know the facts as well. Of course, getting > >somebody with that kind of attitude about cops onto a jury > >is somewhat unlikely, but occasionally you'll find neutrals. > > I last served on a jury in 1973, 25 years ago, no doubt before many readers > of Cypherpunks were born. > > And I've only received a single _possible_ summons since, in the 25 years > since that one jury appearance. > > Yet some of the apolitical numbskulls I know about have served on several > juries in the same time. The Poisson, as expected, or something more human? > > Jury nullifying minds want to know. That is almost enough to make the more paranoid among us think that maybe they have a "do not summon" list. They basically have this anyway with the prosecution vetoing possible jurors. If you're on it, you just aren't summoned. People on that list would be people of libertarian mindsets, politically outspoken people, Cypherpunks, professional people, etc. If they do have a list, I'd kind of like to be on it. I'm a college student, and I _can't_ serve on a jury for more than a day or so. The same goes for doctors, corporate executives, and others. There is an inherent flaw in the jury system. You get summoned and are legally required to blow the entire day down at the courthouse. If you're a student you miss classes, and if you have a job you miss that too. You have to pay for transportation, parking, food, and whatever else you need. In return, you get paid something like $3, which often isn't even enough to cover the parking and get told every five minutes that this or that will get you, as a juror or potential juror, thrown in jail. Meanwhile, if you're a doctor, scientist, college student, lawyer, or hold any other professional position you're thrown off most of the time. If you have a decent job or if you're in school, forget about it, because if you're tied up for more than a day or so you _just can't do it_. They don't want people who know that juries are capable of nullification. They don't want people who can determine that the evidence of one side or the other is suspect. They don't want people who will actually look at the facts rather than the emotion of the opening and closing arguments. The prosecution sure as hell doesn't want anybody who will look at whether a law should exist in the first place. "Hey, Doctor! Um, I have to serve on a jury. Can you take all my patients for the next six months while I'm locked in a hotel room? Oh, and I need to still get my full salary to pay my bills. Thanks, buddy." Um, no. So you basically wind up with juries which are stacked with welfare recipients, stupid people, and retirees. A jury of retirees may work, but the others surely don't. When the trial actually starts, the average juror, regardless of what council may tell them about due process, is usually biased in favor of the prosecution, especially if the government is claiming that the defendant is an evil child molestor. If it's a case involving technology, you get a bunch of bogus "experts" up there which say what council wants to be said, because real "experts" refuse to dumb down their testimony to a kindergarden level. "Mr. May, will you please explain -- in layman's terms -- exactly how the microchip fabrication process works?" "Well, we start with..." "I'm sorry to stop you, sir. Can you please explain to the jury -- in layman's terms -- what a transistor is?" "Well, in this context it often acts as a switch for an electronic circuit, but it can also--" "Would you please explain in layman's terms what a circuit is?" Argh. Can you imagine trying to be a defense expert in a cryptography case with a bunch of jurors who can barely read, are unemployed, hate "nerds," and beat the "geeks" up in high school, while the prosecution is constantly screaming that the defendant is a kiddy porn trader and you're expected to dumb your expert testimony down to kindergarden level?

5 4