- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Kids and Computer Privacy Was Re: No more stupid gun thread ...
by Scott Schryvers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:24 PM 7/22/96 -0700, you wrote: >Ok. This thread has gone on long enough and covered just about every >point except the one which I originally made in my first response, >which is that I abhor the idea that kids should carry weapons (of any >sort) to school as standard equipment. In fact, I abhor the idea >that kids should carry weapons at school for any reason. > >Enough said. > >I do not care to discuss: > >1. Should kids have any weapons at any time? > >2. Should kids have guns (specifically guns)? > >3. Should kids know how to operate weapons of any sort? > >If any of you really really have to discuss this issue, let's spare >the rest of the list and send me E-Mail directly. > >Thanks! > >Ern > Should kids have crypto? [weapons] Should parents teach their kids crypto at an early age? Should kids have a right to privacy? If yes, should there be a limit to the privacy they hold? Under Itar crypto is a weapon. If a kid were to bring a disk containing pgp to school could they be expelled for carrying a weapon? Should children's legal rights be taught at school at an early age?

1 0

Re: A Snake-Oil FAQ
by David E. Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Wed Jul 24 00:10:54 1996 > Honestly, this boycott campaign looks out of place on Cypherpunks, at > least to me. I mean, we are for freedom of speech, aren't we? > Sternlight is talking about on-topic things. How come that renowned > defenders of freedom of speech resorted to name calling and attempts to > push their opponent out of the public forum? > (cheer) I don't agree with David Sternlight; frankly, I doubt very many of us agree with David Sternlight. But if we're going to start plonking just on the basis of a periodic rant, after he goes Perry goes, and Tim goes, and before long there's no list. Now to keep things interesting, somebody wanna subscribe Dorothy Denning to the list? Might be fun :) dave - ---- David E. Smith POB 324 Cape Girardeau MO USA 63702 dsmith(a)prairienet.org http://www.prairienet.org/~dsmith send mail of 'send pgp-key' subject for my PGP public key "I'm only a social smoker, just a few packs a day really" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Automagically signed with Pronto Secure for Windows. iQEVAwUBMfWwaTVTwUKWHSsJAQHmAwf/XkwZZtAbymiSni4L8N6D6qW75W2B/Hgv yuPX0uCoXnBmvUXzq6RS7zNN0A1vtgXhCgzgyYY+1/1PRAAoQAd8q7evX1K+rTVe 1MmlOfJWFHJG9q0tHc45LONagW1m0eAp9Z9fkO4NRhGpybfWDCZKwtClbaLiAdoA 86lJnNRacjEHf1dAAHc/1dibJz+6617nfgLkea0OVbLICIsSpkc3PJLkFE9jjK2a g+5CXJ8oXg4bKlEw7QoefagXYsM9o6PF+MHIDVT/pZnfoVmGoI9+3BYHkByXh/vQ 8M+w6hZu4X50zzxCx/6lDvzfd1zccmHvJAsx6GXf4VGUp6lIw+lfCg== =KXCp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Another fascist
by Alex de Joode 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In article <v03007807ae1a03b2bb71(a)[192.187.162.15]> you wrote: : One of the great friends of free speech on this list sent a forged cancel : message to the listbot to try to cancel my subscription. : The listbot, being reasonably well designed, ignored him and told me about : it, though I have no doubt less of a dunce could bring it off. : What a piece of slime! What do others think of this practice? : David Why, David, did you decide to subscribe to cypherpunks ? bEST Regards, -- -AJ-

2 1

RE: Distributed DES crack
by pjn＠nworks.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I've a few machines around that could be dedicated almost full time to the > task. What are the bandwidth requirements? Specifically, could the > keycracker be run over a 28.8 (with a 486 running linux)? If so, how many > 486's could I get over a single 28.8 (i.e. 28.8 -> multiple 486's daisy > chained with ppp over direct serial connection)? > It's not a factor of the bandwidth, you search offline and send in > your results to a central server. > But first, a little reality check is in order. According to libdes, > the 200Mhz Pentium Pro on my desk will do 1,827,997 ECB bytes/sec, or > 228,499 ECB blocks. A DES crack would have to try, on average, 2^55 > blocks. That would take my machine 43,798,875 hours, or 1,824,953 > days. > OK, so let's be reasonable and say that a week would be a good time to > come up with a DES key. We would need 260,707 200Mhz Pentium Pro's to > achieve this. > Looking at that, 30 days seems not such an unreasonable target. We > would need 60,831 200Mhz Pentium Pro's to achieve this. > It seems obvious to me that DES is still *way* out of reach of > anything other than special purpose hardware. In> - Andy (hoping he got his sums right) (I think you did :) One small thing... You are assuming that we will not get the right equasion/code/whatever untill the very end. There is a good chance that it will only take half that time...and a slim chance that we will get it with the first try... P.J. pjn(a)nworks.com (BTW, I have a 486 DX/4 100MhZ That I will put to the effort...) ... As easy as 3.14159265358979323846264338327950288419716 ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR]

1 0

Re: PANIX.COM down: denial of service attack
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here are the gory details from the first MOTD last Saturday: The attacker is forging random source addresses on his packets, so there is no way to find his/her location. There is also no way to screen out those packets with a simple router filter. This is probably the most deadly type of denial-of-service attack possible. There is no easy or quick way of dealing with it. If it continues into Saturday we will start working on kernel modifications to try to absorb the damage (since there's absolutely no way to avoid it). This however will not be an easy job and it could take days to get done (and get done right). For those who are IP hackers, the problem is that we're being flooded with SYNs from random IP addresses on our smtp ports. We are getting on average 150 packets per second (50 per host). We are not the only site being attacked in this way. I know of one other site that is being attacked in an identical manner right now, and I know of three others that have been attacked in the last two weeks. I hope that this means that the attacker is merely playing malicious games, and will soon tire of molesting our site. If that is the case, mail will come back up as soon as the attack ends. But if the attacker is really interested in damaging Panix specifically, the attack may *never* stop and service won't be restored until we can write kernel modifications. Since then the packet streams have hit almost all the ports for news, www, telnet, etc. DCF

3 4

ALERT: S.1726 vote postponed; keep calling! Offices are swamped! (9/11/96)
by Voters Telecommunications Watch 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

======================================================================== SENATE COMMERCE COMMITTEE VOTE POSTPONED SENATOR BURNS ENCLOSES LETTER OF COMMITTMENT TO CRYPTO WE CONTINUE TO RECEIVE REPORTS OF "HEAVY CALLS" TO OFFICES. KEEP THE PRESSURE UP! WE'RE HOLDING OUR OWN! September 12, 1996 Please widely redistribute this document with this banner intact until September 30, 1996 ________________________________________________________________________ CONTENTS The Latest News What You Can Do Now Background / What To Expect This Week Description of S.1726, Pro-CODE Bill Chronology of Pro-Crypto Legislation For More Information / Supporting Organizations ________________________________________________________________________ THE LATEST NEWS The Senate Commerce Committee vote on S.1726 (Pro-CODE) originally set for today (Thursday 9/12) has been postponed. We have been told that the change was largely due to committee scheduling issues, and the Committee staff and have indicated that they are still committeed to marking up S. 1726 within the next. More information should be available shortly. Senator Conrad Burns (R-MT), co-author of S. 1726, asked us to forward the following note to the net.community: X-POP3-Rcpt: jseiger@mailserver From: Conrad_Burns(a)burns.senate.gov Date: Thu, 12 Sep 96 09:55:35 EST To: jseiger(a)cdt.org Subject: Open Letter to the Internet from Senator Burns The Commerce Committee markup on Pro-CODE, S. 1726, that we had expected to have held on Thursday, September 12 has been postponed. I am fully committed to taking Pro-CODE to markup, out of committee and onto the floor of the Senate in this Congress. I believe that this legislation is vital to ensuring the continued strength of America's high-tech community and the privacy of its citizens. I would like to thank the many thousands of Netizens who have expressed their support for Pro-CODE. Sincerely, U.S. Senator Conrad Burns It is critical to keep your phone calls and faxes coming into the offices of the Committee members listed below. Based on the feedback we are receiving from callers and conversations with Capitol Hill staff, the response from the Net has been strong and continuous. Thank you to all who have taken the time to call Congress to voice your support for encryption policy reform. If you have not yet done so, please take a moment to call the committee members below. If you have a little extra time on your hands, between now and the middle of next week please make an effort to call all the Senators on the list below. Your help and support is critical to the future of privacy and security on the Internet. Finally, please don't forget to sign the petition in support of Encryption Policy Reform -- http://www.crypto.com/petition/. More than 4000 Netizens have already signed, including encryption experts Phil Zimmermann, Matt Blaze, Phil Karn, and others. ________________________________________________________________________ WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW It's crucial that you call the Commerce committee members below and urge them to pass S.1726 out of committee without amendments. (This is also known as a "clean" bill.) Any opportunity for amendments (even if they are good) opens us up to the possibility of hostile amendments that could restrict the use of encryption even further than today's abysmal state. It could even prohibit the use of encryption without Clipper Chip-like key 'escrow' technology, which includes built-in surveillance and monitoring functionality. 1. Call/Fax the members of the Senate Commerce committee and urge them to pass S.1726 out of committee "cleanly". Do not use email, as it is not likely to be looked at in time to make a difference. Use the sample communique and directory listing below to make it a simple TWO MINUTE task. 2. Sign the petition to support strong encryption at http://www.crypto.com/petition/ ! Join other cyber-heroes as Phil Zimmermann, Matt Blaze, Bruce Schneier, Vince Cate, Phil Karn, and others who have also signed. 3. Over the next 7 days, it is crucial that you call all these members of the Senate Commerce Committee. P ST Name and Address Phone Fax = == ======================== ============== ============== D SC Hollings, Ernest F. 1-202-224-6121 1-202-224-4293 D MA Kerry, John F. 1-202-224-2742 1-202-224-8525 D HI Inouye, Daniel K. 1-202-224-3934 1-202-224-6747 D KY Ford, Wendell H. 1-202-224-4343 1-202-224-0046 D WV Rockefeller, John D. 1-202-224-6472 1-202-224-7665 D LA Breaux, John B. 1-202-224-4623 1-202-228-2577 D NV Bryan, Richard H. 1-202-224-6244 1-202-224-1867 D ND Dorgan, Byron L. 1-202-224-2551 1-202-224-1193 D NE Exon, J. J. 1-202-224-4224 1-202-224-5213 D OR Wyden, Ron* 1-202-224-5244 1-202-228-2717 R SD Pressler, Larry* 1-202-224-5842 1-202-224-1259 R MT Burns, Conrad R.(*sponsor) 1-202-224-2644 1-202-224-8594 R AK Stevens, Ted 1-202-224-3004 1-202-224-2354 R AZ McCain, John* 1-202-224-2235 1-202-228-2862 R WA Gorton, Slade 1-202-224-3441 1-202-224-9393 R MS Lott, Trent* 1-202-224-6253 1-202-224-2262 R TX Hutchison, Kay Bailey 1-202-224-5922 1-202-224-0776 R ME Snowe, Olympia 1-202-224-5344 1-202-224-1946 R MO Ashcroft, John* 1-202-224-6154 1-202-228-0998 R TN Frist, Bill 1-202-224-3344 1-202-228-1264 R MI Abraham, Spencer 1-202-224-4822 1-202-224-8834 * supporter or cosponsor. The bill also enjoys broad bi-partisan support from members not on the committee including Senators Leahy (D-VT) and Murray (D-WA). 4. Here is a sample conversation: SAMPLE PHONE CALL You:<ring ring> Sen:Hello, Senator Mojo's office! You: SAY I'm calling to urge the Senator to pass S.1726, the Burns, Leahy, THIS-> Pressler bill at the upcoming Commerce Committee Markup. The bill is critical to the future of privacy, security, and electronic commerce on the internet. Sen:Ok, thanks!<click> IF THEY SAY "The Senator has concerns about the bill", please answer, "Please try to work these issues out as it moves to the Senate floor, but passage out of committee will send an important signal to the Administration." 5. To help us measure the effectiveness of the campaign, WE NEED TO HEAR FROM YOU. Please tell us who you called, and how they sounded. We'll be passing this information to folks in D.C. who can help apply pressure where needed. $ Mail vtw(a)vtw.org Subject: I called so-and-so Hey, I called Sen. Mojo. He sounded iffy, call in the reinforcements. ^D 6. Forward this to your friends and colleagues in appropriate forums until the date of expiration at the top. Forward a copy of this to your Internet Service Provider as well, and ask them to put the following text in their message of the day (motd), or on their WWW page: ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT The U.S. Senate will be voting on a proposal to encourage better security on the Internet soon. Your help is needed to call Congress. See http://www.crypto.com/ for more details. ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ALERT ________________________________________________________________________ BACKGROUND / WHAT TO EXPECT THIS WEEK For the past 3 years, Cyber-Rights Activists, citizens, and industry leaders have been working hard to reform US encryption policy. Support has been building behind several legislative proposals this year because they send a clear signal to the Administration about the need for security and privacy in the Information Age. The digital revolution is currently being held hostage by the White House's Cold War restrictions on privacy-enhancing encryption technology. Now, with Congress less than a month away from adjournment, everyone who supports encryption and privacy is working to see this bill leave committee in order to send a clear message to the White House that they are on the wrong side of the encryption issue. Although this bill may not become law this year, its passage out of committee will be a landmark event that will clearly tell the White House that the Congress, the public, and the computer industry care about security and privacy, and need strong, reliable encryption technology in order to make the Internet a viable platform for commerce, education, and democracy. Success for our side is not certain, and the next week is not without risks. On September 12th (or sometime soon after), the Senate Commerce committee is expected to hold a "markup", where the bill is examined, voted on, and if there are enough votes, passed out of committee. Two things could happen: -the committee could pass the bill as written, -the committee could pass the bill with amendments. Any amendments are not likely to be friendly, and in particular, quiet sources have told privacy activists that the Clinton Administration has been readying a legislative assault on your right to use encryption for several weeks now. A Clipper-like amendment could be attached to the bill if our side does not have enough votes to block all amendments. It is crucial that all netizens who consider privacy and security important take a moment to call members of the Commerce Committee right now and urge them to vote S.1726 out of committee without amendments. ________________________________________________________________________ DESCRIPTION OF S.1726, PRO-CODE BILL Privacy-enhancing encryption technology is currently under heavy restrictions kept in place by the White House. Encryption that is currently allowed to be exported is not sufficient to protect confidential information. This policy acquires an "Alice-in-Wonderland" quality when one realizes that strong encryption products are available abroad both for sale and for free download off the Internet. The Pro-CODE Act resolves to: 1. Allow for the *unrestricted* export of "mass-market" or "public-domain" encryption programs, including such products as Pretty Good Privacy and popular World Wide Web browsers. 2. Requires the Secretary of Commerce to allow the less restricted export of other encryption technologies if products of similar strength are generally available outside the United States, roughly up to DES strength. 3. Prohibits the federal government from imposing mandatory key-escrow encryption policies on the domestic market and limiting the authority of the Secretary of Commerce to set standards for encryption products. ________________________________________________________________________ CHRONOLOGY OF PRO-CRYPTO LEGISLATION 9/12/96 (scheduled) Senate Commerce committee will hold markup of S.1726 and hopefully pass it out of committee with no amendments. 7/25/96: Full Senate Commerce committee holds positive hearings on S.1726. FBI Director Louis Freeh testifies along with many cyber-luminaries. Hearings are cybercast Internet Cyber-Rights activists with HotWired and WWW.Crypto.Com. You can see the photos, read the testimony, and listen to the audio transcript at http://www.crypto.com/events/072596/ 6/26/96: Senate subcommittee holds positive hearings on S.1726. Hearings are cybercast Internet Cyber-Rights activists with HotWired and WWW.Crypto.Com. You can see the photos, read the testimony, and listen to the audio transcript at http://www.crypto.com/events/062696/ 5/2/96: Bi-partisan group of Senators introduce Pro-CODE Act, which would free public-domain encryption software (such as PGP) for export, free much commercial encryption for export, and reduce the government's ability to push Clipper proposals down the throats of an unwilling public. Original sponsors include: Senators Burns (R-MT), Dole (R-KS), Faircloth (R-NC), Leahy (D-VT), Murray (D-WA), Pressler (R-SD), and Wyden (D-OR). 3/5/96: Sen. Leahy (D-VT) and Rep. Goodlatte (R-VA) announce encryption bills (S.1587/H.R.3011) that significantly relax export restrictions on products with encryption functionality in them, as well as free public domain software such as PGP (Pretty Good Privacy). ________________________________________________________________________ FOR MORE INFORMATION / SUPPORTING ORGANIZATIONS There are many excellent resources online to get up to speed on crypto including the following WWW sites: http://www.crypto.com http://www.privacy.org http://www.eff.org http://www.cdt.org http://www.epic.org http://www.vtw.org Please visit them often. The following organizations have signed onto this alert: American Civil Liberties Union Center for Democracy and Technology Electronic Frontier Foundation Electronic Privacy Information Center Voters Telecommunications Watch ________________________________________________________________________ End alert ========================================================================

1 0

J'accuse!: Whitehouse and NSA vs. Panix and VTW
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I think someone should just stand right up and accuse the NSA, at the behest of the Whitehouse, of running a denial of service attack on Panix at *exactly* the time when VTW is lobbying its hardest on the PRO-CODE bill. Ooops. I just did.... ;-) None *dare* call it conspiracy, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender." -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard, for Bart Simpson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

CryptLib CAPI for VB
by Joel McNamara 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Before I do it myself, thought I'd check if anyone has updated Peter Gutmann's CRYPT.BAS file for CryptLib (if not, I'll forward it to Peter when I get finished). The current version is fairly out of date, and I'm looking for a library to use with Visual Basic to implement some secure hashing and 3DES. Thanks in advance... Joel

1 0

Re: What is best policy paper on crypto?
by Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Adam Shostack wrote: > > Declan McCullagh wrote: > | I happen to know that an influential Congresspern will be meeting with > | some Cato folks tomorrow morning, so I'm assuming this isn't an idle > | request. > The NAS report, despite a few silly points, does push for > liberalization of the export regime, standardization, a switch to > an 'assume export' stance, states that the debate can be carried out > in public, and that classified information is not needed, and suggests > that crypto can help reduce many threats to Americans. > > It does not suggest abolishing the ITARs, and suggests > consideration of a law criminalizing the criminal use of crypto. I agree that the NAS report is the one to use. Its from an authoratative source and the conclusions are pretty reasonable. Its perhaps not as far as some would like to go but if we got there it would be livable. Given where we are it would make a good first step. Some good lines from the talk included: Re Dennings "If you know what I know argument", basically Lin said that he did know and it made no difference at all to his point of view. Also 13 of the 16 members of the committee got "the briefing" - which is all Dorothy bless her socks got, and the report was unanimous. Re who is behind the anti crypto policy, its Freeh at the FBI and not the NSA. The NSA know crypto and don't really care all that much. Gore credited as guy who is holding Freeh back. Seemed a reasonable enough guy, but a number in the audience were upset that they didn't have someone like Dorothy who we can throw tomatoes at. Phill

1 0

Re: [Long] A history of Netscape/MSIE problems
by Tom Weinstein 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hallam-Baker wrote: > > There was a long list of security holes in SSL, PCT plugged a good > number of them and SSL v3 plugged a few. This statement surprises me. It appears to mean that you think PCT has fewer holes than SSL 3.0. If you know of any holes in SSL 3.0, I'd be very interested in hearing about them. -- You should only break rules of style if you can | Tom Weinstein coherently explain what you gain by so doing. | tomw(a)netscape.com

2 1