- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Wiretap Docs
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association suit against the FBI over disputed wiretap requirements of CALEA: http://jya.com/ctia-fbi.htm (19K) The FBI's definition of "upgrade" and "modification" for CALEA wiretap requirements, Federal Register, April 28, 1998: http://jya.com/fbi042898.txt (60K)

1 0

Re: Cypherpunk Certification Authority
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:20 AM 11/25/95 -0800, you wrote: >At 01:53 AM 11/26/95 -0800, anonymous-remailer(a)shell.portal.com wrote: >>You'd rather sign before encryption?? >>Doesn't that give you "known plain-text" to attack? > >The signature is not known unless the whole message being signed is >known. Signatures often have known, or easily guessed, plaintext in them, like the signer's name or ID number, or various header fields such as X.509's equivalent to ----- BEGIN PGP .... >And any encryption scheme that is vulnerable to known plaintext attack >where only a part of the message is known, is worthless anyway. DES isn't worthless. It's a bit weak, but not worthless. #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, Freelance Information Architect, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # Phone +1-510-247-0663 Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281

2 1

Mixmaster Remailer FAQ
by Mixmaster 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Frequently Asked Questions about Mixmaster Remailers FAQ Verson 1.7 Nov 27 1995 by Lance Cottrell This document is a semi-technical discussion of Mixmaster remailers. I wrote this to answer questions often asked by new users of Mixmaster, and to explain why you would want to use Mixmaster remailers. At the end of this FAQ is a list of currently active Mixmaster remailers. **Announcements** I am pleased to announce the release of Mixmaster 2.0.3 It contains many bug fixes, and a much improved Makefile which makes compiling a snap! **What is Mixmaster?** Mixmaster is a new class of anonymous remailers. Inspired by the existing "cypherpunk" remailers and discussions on the Cypherpunk mailing list. Mixmaster is the next generation in the evolution of remailer technology. **What is an anonymous remailer?** Quoting from Andre Bacard's remailer FAQ: An anonymous remailer (also called an "anonymous server") is a free computer service that privatizes your e-mail. A remailer allows you to send electronic mail to a Usenet news group or to a person without the recipient knowing your name or your e-mail address. For a non-technical introduction to remailers (not including Mixmaster), I recommend Andre's FAQ. It is posted regularly to: alt.privacy alt.privacy.anon-server alt.anonymous or you can get it by sending mail to: To: abacard(a)well.com Subject: Help1 Message: [Ignored] There is also a version on the World Wide Web. <http://www.well.com/user/abacard/remail.html> **What do I need to use Mixmaster remailers?** Unlike other remailers, you can't just make your own message and send it to the remailer. Mixmaster's security comes in part from using a special message format. The disadvantage of this is that you need a special program to make the message for you. Once you have that program (the client) remailing is as easy as running the program, and telling it which remailers you want to use. **How do I get the Mixmaster client software?** There are two sites for distribution. The first is my machine, http://obscura.com/~loki/Welcome.html/ or ftp to obscura.com and read /pub/remail/README.no-export. The other is by anonymous ftp to jpunix.com. You will have to follow the instructions there to get Mixmaster. Because Mixmaster contains cryptography, it may not be exported from the U.S and Canada. The reason for the circuitous route to download Mixmaster is to show my good faith efforts to keep Mixmaster from being exported. I have heard rumors that someone has already broken this law, and that Mixmaster is available from Europe. I do not approve of this and will not support that site. **How do I get the software to run a Mixmaster remailer?** The remailer software is available from the same sites as the client. **But I only see one Mixmaster distribution?** The same program is used for both the client and the remailer. The only difference is in the installation. For the client you just compile it and you are ready to go. For the remailer, you need to set up mail forwarding and cron jobs. **What kinds of computers does Mixmaster run on?** Unfortunately, not PCs or Macs. But it is being ported to those right now. Mixmaster runs under UNIX. The only machine it is known not to work on is Dec Alpha. It has been tested on Linux, FreeBSD, SunOS 4.1.3, Solaris, and several others. It has been compiled and tested on Netcom. If you use it on a machine or service not on this list, please let me know so I can add it. **How does Mixmaster work, and why should I use it?** You should use Mixmaster if you want the highest level of anonymity available, or if your are tired of building remailer messages your self. A discussion of how Mixmaster provides this level of security is beyond the scope of this FAQ, but I put an essay on the subject on my home page. **Does Mixmaster use PGP?** No, Mixmaster uses the rsaref package from RSA. Mixmaster uses its own keys and key file formats. To add a key to a key ring, simply append the key to your key file using your favorite text editor. **Can Mixmaster post to News?** Yes, like older remailers some Mixmaster remailers can post to news. Also like older remailers, not all Mixmaster remailers can post to news. Request the remailer's help file to check if it supports posting. Do this by sending mail to the remailer with the subject line remailer-help. **When Was Mixmaster Released?** Mixmaster was originally released on an experimental basis in late 1994. There were only ever two remailers running Mixmaster 1.0. Mixmaster 2.0 was released on May 3, 1995. There are now 18 publicly available Mixmaster remailers. **What is the latest version of Mixmaster?** Version 2.0.3 was released on Nov 27, 1995. This version uses a new Makefile, which makes compiling it a snap. Several bugs were also fixed, and some esoteric functions added. Version 2.0.2 was released on Sept 22, 1995. Mixmaster remailers can now accept messages containing multiple Mixmaster packets. Mixmaster can be told to choose a random set of remailers to chain your message through. It will now route multiple packet messages over independant chains. Several minor bugs were fixed. Version 2.0.1 was released on May 27, 1995. The only changes from 2.0 are some improvements in the documentation, and the inclusion of a more up to date list of remailers. **What remailers run Mixmaster?** The most recent list of remailers is available on my homepage, along with the remailer list and key file for Mixmaster. You can simply replace your old files with the ones from my site to keep up to date. They are also available by ftp. Here is the current list of Mixmaster remailers. Send mail to the remailer with the subject remailer-key to retrieve the remailers Mixmaster key. mix mixmaster(a)obscura.com vishnu mixmaster(a)vishnu.alias.net knight mixmaster(a)aldebaran.armory.com robomix robo(a)c2.org syrinx syrinx(a)c2.org replay remailer(a)replay.com hacktic remailer(a)utopia.hacktic.nl crynwr remailer(a)crynwr.com spook remailer(a)spook.alias.net flame remailer(a)flame.alias.net Armadillo remailer(a)armadillo.com anon mixmaster(a)anon.alias.net secrets secret(a)secret.alias.net wmono wmono(a)valhalla.phoenix.net ecafe-mix mixmaster(a)remail.ecafe.org aD anon(a)ad.org shinobi remailer(a)shinobi.alias.net amnesia amnesia(a)chardos.connix.com q q(a)c2.org precipice mixmaster(a)mix.precipice.com Since this is a new FAQ, I am sure it is far from comprehensive. Watch this space for changes to the FAQ. It will be evolving rapidly for a while. Please send any questions you think should be here to: Lance Cottrell <loki(a)obscura.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMLoU3FVkk3dax7hlAQElGgP+NgE9z/sX402DN2pN9CZ5GKDLNdglEPIM Wz52Zone7hmd1w76VFwb7RSl1uCZxVekJIb1KnPNNXmWX5fmQYMj77ucyjInmkYe 9GVnWL6SjmKmagXppyeatvOMYDt+FtolZU0hisvRS5A+LwnX95IJhiAdZkXjba// CYC3uMqd21k= =64iE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

ECHELON 1988
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Duncan Campbell has provided his 1988 article on the NSA ECHELON global surveillance system, one of the earliest accounts: http://jya.com/echelon-dc.htm Duncan, who was hounded in court for years by the UK gov for allegedly revealing official secrets, provided substantial support to James Bamford for "The Puzzle Palace." He was interviewed about ECHELON on French TV yesterday. See his most informative Web site for investigative reporting: http://www.gn.apc.org/duncan

1 0

Re: The future will be easy to use
by Jonathan Zamick 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>* Clear goals. > >* A leader, someone who would call the shots, and would also serve as the >person you'd have to convince. > >* Open communications. Shrouding a project in secrecy is a good way to >kill it. This is one potential advantage we have over the spooks. > >It _is_ doable. I know the skill is out there. Wei Dai, Eric Young, Peter >Gutmann, and others have proved themselves quit capable of writing good >solid code. Sameer Parekh has done an incredible job with PR. Phil Karn, >Dan Bernstein, and some others (who I'm not sure want to be named) are >talking to the government. GUI I'm less sure about, but I'd hope that some >cpunks would come out of the woodwork. > >It is not a matter of ability, but of will. It is also a matter of funding of course. While development can be donated time, the rest often takes money. Still, its something to look into. Handling RSAREF is sapping much of my time, otherwise I'd jump right in, however I like to always pause before committing my time to endeavors. I wouldn't mind helping out though. Certainly Consensus probably has some resources with its own contacts to contribute. I agree with your points though. Another thing to consider, are some alternate methods of enterprise design that involve better communication, iteration of goals vs product, etc. (Actually I need to work on a speech about this that is coming up soon. Yet another project. :) Jonathan ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ..Jonathan Zamick Consensus Development Corporation.. ..<JonathanZ(a)consensus.com> 1563 Solano Ave, #355.. .. Berkeley, CA 94707-2116.. .. o510/559-1500 f510/559-1505.. ..Mosaic/WWW Home Page: .. .. Consensus Home Page ..

3 2

Judge won't drop Netcom from suit
by Joey Grasty X3697 P6611 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Check out the story on the Scientology suit. http://www.sjmercury.com/scie1127.htm

2 1

Re: Internet Terminals
by Marshall Clow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate sez: >Forwarded message: > >> Subject: Re: The future will be easy to use >> From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr. Dimitri Vulis) >> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 95 21:28:05 EST >> >> One thing that David didn't mention is security add-ons to the "network >> computers" that are supposed to be rolled out within the next few months -- >> the successors to X terminals, $500 boxes with a good screen/sound, >> cheap cpu, and a few megs of ram and flash memory to hold a web browser. >> I expect some folks to make a good living by writing add-ons (including >> crypto add-ons) to these gizmos. >> > >Don't hold your breath. The current market surveys say that there is no >market for them. Check out this weeks PC Week or Mac Week, as they both >have several articles discussing this. Bottem line is that the under $1000 >computer seems to have no future either in industry or the home. > I agree and disagree. ;-) The "internet terminal", or "internet appliance", as it is sometimes called, is IMHO, worthless. Would you write and send e-mail if you had no way of archiving it? Would you use "net-quicken", if it required all your data to be stored on a shared disk at Intuit? (There was an interview on NPR 11/17 where this was touted as "the next big thing"!) On the other hand, I believe that a <$1000 computer would be a big seller. >From a marketing point of view, there's just something about a price tag with three digits left of the decimal point, even if they're all nines :-) The tough part is making it usable, and making some money on it. [ I've got this 386-40, with 1 MB RAM and a 40MB hd, see... ] >Realisticaly, who in their right mind would buy a diskless workstation to >connect to Internet? > No one. >You certainly wouldn't do crypto on it because it has >to boot from somewhere else and this leaves all kinds of security holes. > Actually, I think the plan is to boot from ROM. >Anyone who bases their business on this technology won't have a business. > I agree. -- Marshall Marshall Clow Aladdin Systems mclow(a)mailhost2.csusm.edu "Eternal vigilance is the price of PostScript" -- MacUser Jan 96 DTP and Graphics column

1 0

Diskless "Eunuchs" Machines Likely to Fail
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:17 AM 11/28/95, Steven Weller wrote: >The same sort of things could be said of the telephone compared with >written correspondence. Why would anyone have one in their business or >home? Anyone can overhear a conversation, people will just chat, the only >thing you can do with it is talk, there is no record of the correspondence, >why would anyone want to talk to people on the other side of town? etc. > >Think telephone, not computer. Think people over 40 who want a >communication tool with zero maintenance and zero learning curve. I'm skeptical of the "Diskless Internet Box = Telephone" analogy. Folks I know who are not computer-savvy, or who have other things they'd rather be doing, are not likely, as I see it, to buy boxes that still require them to type messages to other people but that don't allow them to download and save the interesting stuff they find. The telephone appealed to those who truly wanted to "just keep talking"...that was the beauty of it. Most people don't know how to touch-type, and typing by hunting-and-pecking is painful and unnatural for most people. A couple of years ago "the computer for the rest of us" was said to be a pen-based Newton-type machine, now it is said to be a diskless, memory-limited "Eunuchs" machine. (The diskless--and disketteless--systems I've seen described recently would make it impossible for me to interact as I currently do. To be sure, maybe "data storage services" will spring up to temporarily store stuff one has snarfed, but the download to one's home terminal still must be done again. Faster modems, and cable modems, will change things somewhat, but then this is a huge change in a lot of ways, in any case. Even the stereotypcial "chatters" at AOL are heavy users of local storage: witness the massive number of "me too!" posts from AOLers whenever a nude GIF or JPEG of Sandra Bullock or Jennifer Anniston is mentioned...they clearly are downloading a lot of images and whatnot to home machines...that measly 4 MB of flash memory is going to get filled up mighty fast.) By the way, Intel builds a lot of the motherboards for use by various companies. Someone at Intel claimed recently that even if the CPU was completely free (as some 486s effectively are already), Intel could not see how a system could be consistently built for under $500, including monitor, small disk, memory, etc. (The Oracle folks are muttering about a Newton-like OS which would load objects or applets or whatever in a more efficient way...this might work, but I'm still skeptical that user's needs can be met. Those folks wanting local access to the JPEGs of Sandra Bullock will still be out of luck....) I see a greater chance that home game machines, such as the 3DO and Sony PlayStation machines will get Web browsers done for them than I do that people will buy machines that are so limited. The only relevance of this whole topic to Cypherpunks is....is....minimal. --Tim May, who plans to find a way to use this boondoggle idea by Oracle to make money. (Right now I'm long Oracle, but this may soon change.) Views here are not the views of my Internet Service Provider or Government. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

Meeting: Austin, TX
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi all, The Austin Cypherpunks will be meeting this Saturday from 6-8pm at Ted's Greek Restaurant on Congress between 4th and 5th. We will be taking the tables in the rear. The main topic of discussion will be the proposed 1 hour public access video on cryptography. Also we will be discussing making some form of monthly key-signing. Hope to see you there!

1 0

The corrected Mixmaster
by John Perry 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The corrected mixmaster 2.0.3 is also available on vishnu.alias.net via the normal methods. I apologize for any inconvenience. John Perry - KG5RG - perry(a)alpha.jpunix.com - PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome! Packet Radio - KG5RG(a)WA4IMZ.#SETX.TX.USA.NA WWW - http://www.jpunix.com PGP 2.62 key for perry(a)jpunix.com is on the keyservers. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMLpmXlOTpEThrthvAQFpSQP/euSY5hvIvSwRMZuiOEx9j6IER5k2rDEc 6rfNEccIP95YtGcDJ70lLbuTq4sHjrKYe2vyz9OpMn48mQEVfjcs/JFSt4xfpU8s hpK2a4HvWACBa/J9TKlgtEuXCrAkBoROkn6pVsV4hAqwDhM6oNuDaEk+93KVl/wn dJ/5+gqSiYY= =0EGC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0