- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

RE: [NTSEC] SKIPJACK / NT4.0 (SP3?) (fwd)
by J.A. Terranson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Since I've had so many people either ask what s/w was installed on this box, or else claim that "J.A. must be on crack! :-)", here is the breakdown... NT4.0; SP3; Every post SP3 hotfix through the third week of December; NT4.0 Server Resource Kit; I.E. 3.02 with Java VM pkg installed; PGP 5.0 Commercial; Adobe Photoshop 4.0 with a couple of special filter plugins; Adobe Illustrator 4.something, no addons; Adobe Premier with no addons; Micrographics Webtricity; Front Page 97 with assorted HotFixes; Outlook 97 with assorted HotFixes; TCL/TK; J++; Java 1.something with SDK; WordPerfect Suite 7.something. Obviously, this is on a Web Authoring station, so there is absolutely no reason for any of the above programs to be playing around with Skipjack... Never the less... I brought up a testbed system over the Xmas break, using the same install packages that I used to build the workstation in question. No sign of ANY ciphers: Skipjack or anything else! Which makes sense. The question now is just how in the h%@#& did it get here in the first place? And why are my others ciphers explicitly disabled for SSL? This is a really disturbing finding. I am more concerned that Skipjack was *silently* installed than anything else: I have plans to completely reinstall all of the software from scratch on this particular box, and then enable full key ACL logging in an attempt to find out how it got there. I am VERY concerned about this! The ONLY way I can conceive of this machine having this configuration is if it was silently downloaded to the machine during a W3 session. And it would NOT likely have been an SSL session: We do absolutely NO on-line transactions here. If Skipjack is being silently, I want to know by whom, and for what purpose. OK, maybe I'm just paranoid, or smoking crack, but I spent several years in the late '80's working in COMSEC, and the scenario which first comes to mind is not too far-fetched (at least for me) to be believable... It is most definitely an SSL 3 supported cipher but unless you have the token or such, then it is not going to be used for anything, and then only if you try to connect to a Skipjack (ie. fortezza) site. I doubt you have the code as it is classified and available (at this time) only in hardware. Don't sweat it, it looks like it's just a hook or ..... What environment/flavor of stuff are you running? I can help you with this if you want to contact me off the list. At 11:45 AM 12/26/97 -0500, Ray Arachelian wrote: >Now this is interesting! :) (Either that or JA is smoking crack... - no >idea on JA's reputation capital though...) > >=====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== >.+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. >..\|/..|sunder(a)sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ ><--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ >../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. >.+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... >======================= http://www.sundernet.com ========================== > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Wed, 24 Dec 1997 01:29:07 -0600 >From: "J.A. Terranson" <sysadmin(a)mfn.org> >To: 'NT Security Listserv' <ntsecurity(a)iss.net> >Subject: [NTSEC] SKIPJACK / NT4.0 (SP3?) > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >I was rooting around in the registry tonight, (looking to repair my own >stupidity!), >and guess what I saw? SKIPJACK is installed, and ENABLED! I have NOT >(now would I EVER) installed it voluntarily, and Micro$loth only advertises >the >"standard" ciphers (which I also found). > >Is anyone else aware of this? Is it safe to delete the key (and code? >Hopefully >this is DLL driven: I'm still looking!). > >Also, anyone know what it was put there for? It's certainly not what I would > >consider an SSL issue! > >J.A. Terranson >sysadmin(a)mfn.org >A small fading light in a vast and obscure universe... > >PROTECT YOUR RIGHT TO PRIVACY - ENCRYPT! >PGP/DSS: 0x12896749 FP: 63F2 1777 BC38 AC1E 3359 > 0B0E C6C0 ED6B 1289 6749 >PGP/RSA: 0x9D85DF05 FP: 810C 25E9 7DD3 C157 > 3081 A202 DDFD 4245 >If Government wants us to behave, it should set a better example! > > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 >Charset: noconv > >iQEVAwUBNKC5wqAMF5Wdhd8FAQFsDQgAkietW1awMFDE9ZY5d9B+Zc0cGuGxlPC+ >XzVy6+RleDngUecSAf8MbZZlTDDyN69liKG2Of0n+pZnlJSbKZWZiG0cRN592bbL >xCF/cwgNdJi1/HTA/mDZ7fpRT1phCMi/b2U3XXyV3QG2fv+Z8M5o4LjykYT+u4Lt >aEkfedFZKjkURO+artvGFnISfVxAMwpW0TfdbxE2Izw8iSjX2w+4aT0ub+Ck3OA4 >X3Bek8ZPhbmsf9lIfBSe38ZPMZGrk7VwTPaMo7JiU5MM58OmCMaodKlwyxfsptKf >khLnbWJbwHrlbW2yXL7nh7Ttnxv1WJ6BHaaJhxX/5EWSU4xAc/FjaQ== >=jsvV >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > >Attachment Converted: "F:\GDW\Mail\[NTSEC] SKIPJACK NT4.0 (SP3)" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNKRqWaAMF5Wdhd8FAQEoawf+PlZlxSUBhsO1Pj37arRPt0YDIiCX0e5K UzKIOyIk82Q3s2py5LQmqUv8hrqIY2NxTcn2DaNYm4yS2UOgKDfgfJbswmWdRlYZ UHOt+ROiUn5P7qJqMThKHxE2EnQKhhtyiRJaUYgilGbgKCAAs/YYtP5uu7XOfd3l u9TNmZwz6GCUv3+QrGXBi3g5+KQkzNZ/4cJLn+LYV5dGBzbGAsnSaAjQ+Kai0Xs9 tNTLZjM2wWvUDU7BNUYu/mHyY+ltiURgaqUSQpz9VV3y6SOlyh/Oef2JMtZtYkVc K8EkebhEQNQ4uECxChyGYsmiuDmnt8yCYeX3moCcu+szHebQ/YyPeA== =KIsG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: cypherpunks missing from Usenet
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In <199712270822.DAA12498(a)panix2.panix.com>, Information Security <guy(a)panix.com> wrote: >I know most of you don't use Usenet anymore... > >Nevertheless, I'd appreciate any help. >---guy We don't like Usenet because it's full of faggots like Guy Polis. A useful function for a government would be to round up all the AIDS-infected faggots like Guy Polis and to put them publicly out of their misery in fun creative ways, like they do in Iran. I see great possibilities for live family entertaintment. Thank God for AIDS!

1 0

Eureka! Sun Dec 28 '97
by eureka＠eureka.abc-web.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Welcome to Sunday's issue of Eureka! PUSSY PARADISE Yet again Eureka! has managed to negotiate a special week's free access to one of the web' s premier porn sites. Pussy Paradise is simply packed with 100s of videos (many live), thousands of photos, and so much more. You will need your credit card as adult verification but it will not be charged for your free week! So check it out - there's smut a plenty! Pussy Paradise .... http://www.pussyparadise.com/eureka.html EUREKA! is now available in FOUR languages. So now you can choose from one or more of these following languages! FRANÇAIS ..... http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/francais.htm DEUTSCH ....... http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/deutsch.htm ESPAÑOL ....... http://eureka.abc-web.com/eureka/espanol.htm SEXWORLD3D Quick loading, with some great free cock in pussy pix. They have 75 free ones in all. Including, threesomes, duos, les- bians, nudes and xxx. We thought they were all nude. In the xxx thumbnail area check out the broken dick -ouch! Surf it. SexWorld3D ...................... http://www.sexworld3d.com/ NAAASTY PUSSY A few banners and some pay site links but there are about 20 or so free pix that are worth the trip. They have thumbnails and they are easy to find. See "Brandi" 602x768 jpeg! Super nice tits. Where's a color printer when you need one? Enjoy! Naaasty Pussy ....................... http://207.171.55.199/ 1 VERY BIG SITE Quick loading site with great free pix. Check out the Andrea image where you are asked, "Touch Andrea all over and find a lot of hidden (wet) spots" This image map take you to lots of great pussy pix. It may just cause a stir in your jeans! 1 Very Big Site ....... http://onewebstreet.com/golden/site/ NO BS FREE PICS SITE Well, this website lives up to its name! Just free pix. See the clear dildo in the limo picture (fuck pic 2), how about those rock hard nipples! They have beach sex too. Oo yeah! No BS Free Pics Site ...... http://www.undermydesk.com/nobs/ AZZIAN XXX Nice site, nice thumbnails, nasty asian women. These guys love their asian babes, and their chicks are hot, horny and in hardcore action in 70 free thumbnailed pix! They give you the pix quick too, so no fumbling around. Their promise... 'Asian beauties their pussies, asses, hardcore and more' Azzian XXX .................... http://www.suzyq.com/azzian/ SOURCE XXX It's a great source for XXX! Here's why - there's 4 free pix galleries, and they're themed. Hot girls in Erotic positions - they've got it. Sweet Young girls - mmm yeah! All Lesbian action - get it here. If you like seductive naked girls with cum to bed faces, get here quick! It's a site for sore eyes. Source XXX ............... http://www.cimkraf.com/sourcexxx/ FREE STREAMING VIDEO Please note that most of these feeds require a Netscape bro- wser in order to successfully view them. Unfortunately Micr- osoft's browser does not have all the features of Netscape's yet. However, many of the feeds use the RealPlayer and will work in most browsers. If you do not have Netscape and want a free copy click here ... http://www.netscape.com/download/ 20vids+Chat .. http://209.1.31.175/chat/videochat.cgi?eureka CHAT WITH OTHER READERS This chat is growing fast, and already there are a number of regulars you will meet most days. It's good to see Eureka! readers interacting with each other and having a great time! Just surf in and have fun! ...... http://137.39.63.229/chat/ THE BEST PHONE SEX Live Hetero 1-on-1, 2-on-1, group, dateline...1-800-644-8779 FREE Hetero live 1-on-1 (international call)...011-678-77416 FREE Gay live 1-on-1 (international call)......011-678-75629 AMATEUR SITE OF THE DAY SHELLY R: How would you like to see a 19 year old model, with the vital stats of 5'4" tall, 105 lbs, on a tight 34b- 24-34 frame? She is nothing but sweet, you can catch her on IRC and IRQ. Stop in and tell this Oklahoma native that she is OK! ..................... http://amateurindex.com/eureka/ TODAY'S FREE PIX In the new year we will be creating a much simpler system for you to view your FREE pix. It will also offer the oppor- tunity for you to view previously published pix you may have missed. In addition you'll be able to select your favorite categories of photos such as lesbian, asian, teen(18+), group sex, and so on. We think you will simply love it! Pic 1 ...................... http://137.39.63.229/?xdAKtHhZ Pic 2 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?101 Pic 3 ...................... http://137.39.63.229/?QTksOopx Pic 4 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?102 Pic 5 ...................... http://137.39.63.229/?BW1aoKCW Pic 6 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?103 Pic 7 ...................... http://137.39.63.229/?a7DWL_MQ Pic 8 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?104 Pic 9 ...................... http://137.39.63.229/?QNIy80xD Pic 10 ........................... http://137.39.63.229/?105 PLEASE VISIT THIS FINE EUREKA! MEMBER SITE 6600+ Free Pics and Stories!! http://www.erotizone.com/qindex.html We have it all!! We are the LARGEST free site on the planet. Lesbians, bondage, couples, teens, latinos, asians, golden gals, males, transexuals and more. We WILL Rock your world!! ------------------------------------------------------------ If you would like to unsubscribe from the Eureka! Newsletter simply select reply and send us a quick reply to this email. ------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Kwanzaa hijacked by white businesses... [CNN]
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Just as a side remark: why what standard are hallmark and giant foods "white"? >If they're like most big corporations, they probably bend over backwards to >promote blacks via "affirmative action" quotas, and have more blacks in >positions of responsibility than they possible could have if they based their >hiring decisions on merit. Evidently this is not good enough for racists >hatemongers like Jesse "Hymietown" Jackson and Louis Farrakhan. By extension what would happen if a white guy called for black people to be banned from any given thing? They'd be called a racist and run out of town, sued, and everything else. I spit on political correctness and affirmative action, and I'm not a racist or sexist either. <spit hack loogie>

1 0

Re: cypherpunks missing from Usenet
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From pooh(a)efga.org Sat Dec 27 19:07:33 1997 > > At 03:22 AM 12/27/97 -0500, Information Security wrote: > >What else? What have the U2 Czars controlling CAUCE also done? > > > >Not allowed the admin of a one-way remailer who returned the required > >token for posting to comp.org.cauce to post here; no explanation given > >despite repeated requests. > > My understanding was that the Cracker remailer was allowed to post on some > CAUCE moderated thing, presumably the newsgroup. I seem to recall that the > token was returned and posting capability had been verified. Has something > changed? Which remailer was it? If I was wrong, nobody ever corrected me despite my posting the complaint repeatedly to comp.org.cauce. Look up the original posts at DejaNews: # Subject: Re: Has the lcs mixmaster remailer been banned? # From: lcs Remailer Administrator <mix-admin(a)nym.alias.net> # Date: 1997/11/25 # Message-ID: <19971125051724.27312.qmail(a)nym.alias.net> # Newsgroups: comp.org.cauce # # beigel(a)rbo.eecs.lehigh.edu (Richard Beigel) writes: # # > You have to reply to the message sent by the modbot. If you don't, # > then your message shouldn't be posted. I guess you find out how this # > works the first time that you post (Ooh! I can hardly wait:-). # # I think you are missing the point. I replied to the original message. # That's how the strange moderation policy thread got started. The fact # that a thread was started proves that I went through the cookie # exchange properly. The problem is that that e-mail address seems to # have been subsequently banned with no apparent expanation. Or, there # is some technical problem. # # It's definitely the case that mix(a)anon.lcs.mit.edu bounces a copy of # non mixmaster messages back to the sender in case the sender didn't # know it was a remailer and wants to resend the article somewhere else. # However, that doesn't mean I can't spool such messages in a mailbox # and read them if this is required by the moderation policy. # # I just want to know exactly what the policy is and what I need to do # to post from the address mix(a)anon.lcs.mit.edu. They never answered. Not him, not me. Speaking of problems: it's definite: the great attempt to censor the Internet has begun in England. Mainly Usenet is under attack: pics of mere nudity are being deleted without any legal process whatsoever. See my posts in comp.org.eff.talk ... I've put two pics of nekked kids up at www.panix.com/~guy as part of the "discussion". They (Demon, UUNET, ...) are deleting both pics and apparently text files too, and reporting them to the police. The Thought Police are here. ---guy

1 0

Re: ALERT: PICS Rules, not OK!
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In article <67qbl6$am2(a)senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU>, Seth Finkelstein wrote: >In article <67ptsh$4rl$1(a)illuin.demon.co.uk>, >Richard Letts <richard(a)illuin.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>In uk.net Paul L. Allen <pla(a)sktb.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>> With PICSRULES they can tell ISPs, say, that all web traffic (see >>> qualification above) must go through the ISPs proxy (some ISPs would >>> probably like to make their routers enforce that anyway for bandwidth >>> reasons) and that the proxy should use PICSRULES that the govt specify. >> >>Replace PICSRULES with 'English language specification' in the sentance >>above. > > Doesn't work, because there is no standard "English language >specification" for content restrictions on proxy servers. This "PICS >is like English" bit is getting really tiresome, if PICS were really >like English, then there would be no need to construct such a special >system in the first place! The fact that there is a need for such a >language *designed* and *optimized* for censorship should give the lie >to this comparison. Right. I must be missing something here: PICS is designed to label information under a variety of criteria. The stated reason is that we want to "protect the children and those with frail minds" from "bad" information. Of course the definition of "bad" information varies from person to person. Let's assume PICS doesn't exist. Instead there's a single flag which can go on a web page, USENET post, text file, FTP site, or whatever which denotes whether the material is "suitable for children." I go off and publish bomb-making information. Since that material is available in a high school chemistry textbook with a little synthesis on the reader's part and I don't believe in censorship of information, especially based on age, I mark it "suitable for children." How is anybody going to stop me? I've expressed my opinion. And, after all, SingleFlag isn't for censorship, so theoretically nobody can do anything about it. Of course people won't like this. Further if a bunch of people do that SingleFlag becomes completely and totally useless. The only ways to enforce it are to sue me, throw me in jail, or blacklist me from ISPs. In all three cases censorship is in effect. In the first two cases people scream to the government <Exon> "We *already* censor or rate content on the public airwaves, in computer games, on TV, and at the movies. Why not on the Internet too?" </Exon>, and that's assuming that such a law isn't in place already. So say SingleFlag doesn't exist. Instead we have MultiFlag which rates content on the basis of sexual content, violence, language, and nudity. Again, because I don't believe in censoring content, I rate my material as "no sex, no violence, no lude language, and no nudity." And again, the only way to enforce it is to sue me, throw me in jail, or blacklist me from ISPs. And, again, in all three cases I'm censored. And if all the ISPs censor USENET feeds and HTTP connections, nothing keeps me from playing all kinds of games with TCP/IP (or making my own protocol entirely) and distributing information that way. But then I suppose we have to ban that too, since after all it has no use except to "corrupt the youth of the world" and to espouse politically incorrect thoughts. Now let's say that does happen. I go off and post my pornography anonymously, or stick it on an Eternity server. Well, I guess we'd better ban those pesky anonymous remailers now, right? After all, who needs anonymity unless they have something to hide, right? "Good users are known users," we should have digital signatures required on everything (and they aren't just any digital signature -- that would defeat the purpose. We need some kind of central certification authority!), and ban those politically incorrect opinions -- after all, we have the framework, right? Posted anonymously. After all, this is politically incorrect and I wouldn't want to get on somebody's ban list, right?

1 0

Re: cypherpunks missing from Usenet
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Clive Feather person is emphatic only real child porn is being deleted and reported to the police; he clarified that the 1800 items listed for Sep 1997 are *total* for the existence of IWF. So, it's probably going to take me several weeks to verify his claim. I back off from my claim (based on his dialog) that they are canceling mere nudity, for now. ---guy

2 1

Sue Congress?...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Section 4. The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors. [Clearly congressmen are responsible for their actions while in office since they are civil officers. It looks like all it should take to remove a civil officer is a misdemeanor such as speeding.] Section 2. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; -- to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls; -- to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; -- to Controversies between two or more States; -- between a State and Citizens of another State; -- between Citizens of different States; -- between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States; -- and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects. [Note that there is no federal jurisdiction for sueing your own representatives at the federal level since they are citizens of your own state, however you *can* sue the representatives of the *other* 49 states for their actions and that *is* a federal level case] In all Cases, affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all other Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and Fact, with such Exceptions, and under such Regulations as the Congress shall make. [Clearly any such claims *must* be at the level of the Supreme Court since they hold original jurisdiction, further there doesn't seem to be any mechanism they can refuse to handle the case] The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed. [Since the breaking of the oath to uphold the Constitution while a representative is a impeachable offence no jury is required. Once the case is before the Supreme Court then the Congress is required to set the time and date] The question of the day is: How does one go about submitting a case directly to the Supreme Court? The Constitution apparently leaves this up to the Supreme Court to decide in its rules of operation. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make | | violent revolution inevitable. | | | | John F. Kennedy | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

NRA vs. KRA
by David Miller 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From www.jya.com/cn122297.txt quoting 15 December 1997, Interactive Week: > Network Associates dropped out of the Key Recovery Alliance. But there > are plenty of major players left, even if they include some of the harshest > foes of current crypto policy. Remaining members include: > America Online Inc. > Compaq Computer Corp. > Digital Equipment Corp. > Entrust Technologies Ltd. > Frontier Technologies Corp. > Fujitsu Ltd. > IBM Corp. > Intel Corp. > NCipher Corp. > Novell Inc. > RSA Data Security Inc. > SafeNet Trusted Services Corp. > Silicon Graphics Inc. > Sun Microsystems Inc. > Trusted Information Systems Inc. Some of these players I would expect to sit at the key recovery table, but why SUN? Any of you California dudes know what's up with that? Am I right in assuming that the International Elvis marketing deal will never go through? --David Miller -- middle rival devil rim lad Windows '95 -- a dirty, two-bit operating system.

3 3

NY Times on history of public key crypto
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

By PETER WAYNER T o the list of institutions that Tony Blair's Labor Party is shaking up, add the British Secret Service. Last week, the British government's eavesdropping organization known as the Government Communications Headquarters, or GCHQ, posted a document to its Web site describing its role in the discovery of public key cryptography. The set of algorithms, equations and arcane mathematics that make up public key cryptography are a crucial technology for preserving computer privacy in and making commerce possible on the Internet. Some hail its discovery as one of the most important accomplishments of 20th-century mathematics because it allows two people to set up a secure phone call without meeting beforehand. Without it, there would be no privacy in cyberspace. The move by the once dusty and secretive organization is clearly an attempt to recast its image as a pioneering leader of cyberspace. For the last 20 years, the public gave credit for the discovery to Martin Hellman, a professor at Stanford University, and two graduate students who worked with him at the time, Ralph Merkle and Whitfield Diffie. They started publishing their work in 1976. Three professors at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology at the time, Ron Rivest, Adi Shamir and Len Adleman soon followed with another similar approach known by their initials, RSA, which went on to become one of the dominant solutions used on the Internet. Before public key cryptography, anyone who wanted to use a secret code needed to arrange for both sides to have a copy of the key used to scramble the data, a problem that requires either trusted couriers or advance meetings. PKC, as it is sometimes known, erased this problem by making it possible for two people, or more properly their computers, to agree upon a key by performing some complicated mathematics. There is no publicly known way for an eavesdropper to pick up the key by listening in. T he new document details how three employees of the British government discovered the same approach several years earlier, but kept it a secret for reasons of national security. A spokesman for the British government's GCHQ, said that the document's release is part of a "pan-governmental drive for openness" pushed by the Labor party. The document describing the steps of invention taken by the spies was written by James Ellis, a mathematician and cryptographer who died less than a month ago. In it, Ellis describes how he suggested the existence of what he called "non-secret encryption" in 1970s. Ellis says that Clifford Cocks followed with a more practical solution in 1973 that was essentially the same thing as the algorithm published by Rivest, Shamir and Adleman. The paper also says that Malcolm Williamson discovered an algorithm in 1974 that was very similar to the work of Diffie and Hellman. They did not replicate the work done by Merkle and Hellman. In a telephone interview from his office in La Jolla, Calif., Malcolm Williamson said that he felt bad when others discovered the solution, but concluded, "I was working at the British government and that's just one of the restrictions you work under when you work for the government." Hellman said in a telephone interview that he agrees. "It must be really difficult for them to watch other people get the credit," he said. "But that's the agreement they made when they agreed to work in secret." He was also quick to point out that the secret branches of the government have the help of large budgets and classified knowledge. "Diffie, I and Merkle were working in a vacuum." he said. "If we had access to all of the classified literature of the previous 30 years, it would really be an advantage." For his part, Diffie said in a telephone interview from Cirencester, England, that he thinks that GCHQ never realized the deep importance of what the mathematicians discovered. He said that he met James Ellis several years ago and "within an hour of meeting me, Ellis said, 'You did much more with this than we did.'" Diffie also suggested that the history of ideas is hard to write because many people often find solutions to different problems only to later determine they've discovered the same thing. T he story keeps going farther back. Recently, Matt Blaze, a cryptographer employed at Bell Labs, got a copy of a memorandum from the desk of John F. Kennedy about the problem of securing nuclear weapons with launch codes. Steve Bellovin, a colleague of Blaze's at Bell Labs, said: "When I read this memo, I don't see anything that would require public key cryptography. But I think they're in the neighborhood. For so many things, the answer is the easy part. Asking the question is the hard part. I think this got them asking the questions." Historians of science will certainly spend time sorting out the various claims. David Kahn, the author of the best selling history The Codebreakers, said that he recently asked the National Security Agency to declassify some documents so he could write the proper history of public key cryptography. He said an NSA staff member told him, "I've spoken to the guys who did this, but they don't want to be interviewed now." This suggests that the NSA also may have discovered public-key systems or had a hand in exploring them. Kahn hopes that the NSA will follow in Britain's lead so an accurate history can be written. Jim Bidzos, the chief executive of RSA Data Security, the division of the publicly traded Security Dynamics that holds the patent on the RSA, said that the announcement in Britain will have no effect on the company's business. Patent law is based on the notion that the inventors trade knowledge about the invention in return for an exclusive license to practice it. In fact, it is an interesting question to wonder whether Britain could have changed the history of cyberspace by disclosing the invention and encouraging the development of widespread cryptographic security for the public. This may have been a wise move during the height of the cold war in the 70's when there were thousands of Soviet tanks poised on the edge of western Europe. Williamson also hastens to note that mathematical equations weren't considered patentable in Britain at the time and without a patent anyone could have used the invention. The RSA patent in the United States was one of the first and it is generally accepted to have expanded the definition. Others are pushing a similar question. In a debate on cryptography policy at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County, John Gilmore, one of the founders of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, said the NSA should be more open. While national defense is very valuable, he suggested that the need for security in cyberspace for all citizens is going to be essential in the future. In the long run, the history of the discovery of public key cryptography is certain to be written and rewritten often in the next several years as more documents emerge from secret government laboratories. The spokesman from GCHQ promises that more documents are on the way. Hellman is philosophical. "In a way, these things are like gold nuggets that God left in the forest." he said. "If I'm walking along in the forest and I stubbed my toe on it, who's to say I deserve credit for discovering it?" He is quick to point out, however, that he shared the discovery with everyone. _________________________________________________________________ Copyright 1997 The New York Times Company

1 0