- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Motorola Secure Phone
by dan＠milliways.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 17 Dec 1995 17:38:49 -0800 you wrote: >At 06:40 PM 12/15/95 EST, you wrote: >> > >I don't know Moto's phone models, but there are some cordless phones, >especially long-range 900MHz ones, that are "secure" because of >spread-spectrum, and others that call themselves "secure" because >they're "digital", so you can't eavesdrop on them just by playing >with a scanner and maybe single-sideband. Sigh. > Well, just to finish the story, I ended up getting the Cincinatti Microwave Escort 9000 (yes, the radar detector people). It's 900 MHz digital spread-spectrum, although it's still unclear how secure their implementation is. I'll call them and see what I can come up with....I realize it's *not* going to give me military-style security. But really all I'm interested in is making it simpler (ie cheaper) for Big Brother to wiretap me than to deal with trying to scan me without court authorization. Dan *************************************************************** #define private public dan(a)milliways.org Worcester Polytechnic Institute and The Restaurant at the End of the Universe ***************************************************************

1 0

GIA_nts
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

12-18-95. NYPaper: "Telecommunications Giants Join Internet Security Quest." The consortium seeks to establish a layer of software and hardware standards that would effectively rest atop the Internet. Their goal is to make the Internet more secure, reliable and easy to use. The consortium started meeting last summer, and had seven core members: AT&T, Deutsche Telekom, Lotus, Novell, NTT, the Telstra Corporation and Unisource. The group held private meetings from Dec. 6 through Dec. 9 in New York, attended by 24 phone carriers and 14 computer companies, including Intel, Microsoft, Sun and the Hewlett-Packard. "The prospect of Internet censorship raises troubling issues for business." Denise Caruso's column. While most of the outcry has raised valid concerns about the First Amendment and civil liberties, little of the discussion has focused on how censorship could cripple much of the Internet's commercial potential. "This proposal will have more than a chilling effect," Ms. Fulton said. "It may well mean a cold death for everyone except very rich and very cautious media companies." GIA_nts (11 kb)

1 0

Re: Political Cleanup program
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:35 AM 12/18/95 -0500, Brian Davis wrote: >> A better solution is to move assets and money into forms where >> politicians cannot get at them, thus reducing the power of politicians, >> and thus the incentive to buy favors from them. > >I'm not sure what you mean here: are politicians to be prohibited from >campaigning (which cost money)? And if politicians, who generally take >the form of human beings, can't get at $$$, how can you or I? Brian, the above means cut the power and the purse of politicians so they have nothing to sell to contributors so no contributors will buy. DCF

1 0

(fwd) the anonymizer (Mac Anonymous Web Proxy?)
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >Date: Sun, 17 Dec 1995 10:04:16 -0700 >From: webmaster(a)silkpresence.com (Pete Storm) >To: apple-internet-providers(a)solutions.apple.com >Subject: the anonymizer >Message-ID: <v02140a03acf9fc782bf3(a)[204.17.38.3]> > > hi all, > > if everyone could take a look at ><http://anonymizer.cs.cmu.edu:8080/prog/snoop.pl>, i'd appreciate it. by >following a link at this site, you begin surfing anoymously. now, can this >be programmed and run on a mac(s)? if so, please contact me personally and >we'll talk about my clients contracting out for this. > > if you can't get ahold of my (e.g. mail bounces) try >webmaster(a)joshua.silkpresence.com or webmaster(a)aimc.com as well as we're in >the middle of registering the new network. > >thanks, >phs > > >>>>>> > >Pete Storm >SilkPresence.Com Internet/WWW Publishing and Solutions >webmaster(a)SilkPresence.Com http://SilkPresence.Com > >Fabio Casartelli (August 1, 1970 - July 18, 1995) (TdF No. 114) > >Fallen in the quest for ultimate glory... > > ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 958-3971 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell The NEW(!) e$ Home Page: http://thumper.vmeng.com/pub/rah/ >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf(a)clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<<

1 0

Re: Motorola Secure Phone
by andr0id＠midwest.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>That just refers to the fact that it is no longer legal to sell >scanners that can listen in to that range. I havn't seen any scanners that block the 900 MHz range. Didn't think they were blocking that. There isn't any reason to. After all they don't block the 49 MHz. >(BTW, a couple of years ago Nuts & Volts ran >an article with information on a program and some toys that let >a laptop computer, properly wired into a cell phone, act as a >cell scanner. Never did wire it up, but it looked like fun ;) > Most cellular phone like the Motorola and the NEC can scan cellular channels. Whats neat is that they require little or no modification. They can scan through all cellular channels including control, pause on a channel that has audio, and should signal level. I've use the Novatel and Motorola phones to even force the transmit on my phone on a channel that was already in conversation and create a three way call. Since the cellular system already proccessed the original MIN and ESN of the calling party my ESN is never checked. All of this without modifying my phone internaly or adding a computer. This type of stuff makes encryption needed. More and more people are using PCMCIA cellular modems for all kinds of transaction not realizing that anyone can pretty much intercept and use that information. Digital will help in some ways but harm on others. $49 bucks will buy you an upconverter that will enable any scanner that can pick up the 400 MHz range to pickup cellular. Dr0id

1 0

Re: Political Cleanup program
by Johnathan Corgan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:11 AM 12/18/95 -0500, Duncan Frissell wrote: >At 10:35 AM 12/18/95 -0500, Brian Davis wrote: > >>> A better solution is to move assets and money into forms where >>> politicians cannot get at them, thus reducing the power of politicians, >>> and thus the incentive to buy favors from them. >> >>I'm not sure what you mean here: are politicians to be prohibited from >>campaigning (which cost money)? And if politicians, who generally take >>the form of human beings, can't get at $$$, how can you or I? > >Brian, the above means cut the power and the purse of politicians so they >have nothing to sell to contributors so no contributors will buy. Yep. If politicians didn't have capricious, arbitrary, and absolute power over individuals and businesses, there would be no market for influence peddling.

1 0

Re: What ever happened to... Cray Comp/NSA co-development
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:50 AM 12/18/95, Jim Gillogly wrote: >Correction of one detail: > >> tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) writes: >> When you've done this, and concluded that RSA-129 could be done in, say, X >> minutes, then move on to RSA-384 (the BlackNet key cracked by the MIT >> group), and on to the 1024- and 2048-bit keys. Tell us how many years or >> centuries it will take. (Hint: Rivest and Schneier have done these > >The BlackNet key break didn't have any MIT involvement: it was done by >Paul Leyland of Oxford, Arjen Lenstra of Bellcore, Alec Muffet of Sun UK, >and Jim Gillogly of Cypherpunks, RAND, and Gillogly Software in no >particular order. > Sorry, Jim. I thought that Derek Atkins was involved, which led to thinking it was MIT. Now that you've reminded me, some of the details are beginning to come back. (I knew that someone from our list was involved....) --Tim May 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."

1 0

Re: Political Cleanup program
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri(a)netcom.com> >there seem to be a lot of people who suggest that merely because politics involves money, it is therefore corrupt. this is an awfully vague and nebulous line of thinking in my view. are we to suppose that any industry that involves money (all of them, of course) inevitably moves in the direction of corruption? perhaps some more "cynicalpunks" may have this view, but I don't share it. --------------------------------- I am admittedly uncertain whether to reply to this, but... one thing about capitalism is that money serves as a reward. Attempts to remove this (such as in the Soviet Union) have resulted in people no longer being motivated by things like bonuses. In other words, if we can remove the government from having influence on the markets, then politics by money is not really a problem. It's just another motivation for people to get more money. -Allen

1 0

Re: (Fwd) SECURITY ALERT: Password protection bug in Netsca
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jeff writes: > This report is mostly bogus. Netscape does not, and never > has stored http auth passwords in files on your disk. However > we do cache documents from servers that use http auth. > In this case the user had their preferences set to check the > host site for updated content "once per session". There is > a bug, which we are fixing before 2.0 ships, that if the > auth fails the document should be removed from the cache but > was not. If the user had set their cache checking to "never", > then if the document is in the cache, it will always be shown to > the user, since no connection is made to the server. > Content providers who don't want their web pages cached > should use the 'Pragma: no-cache' http header. This will > tell the navigator to not save the document in the disk cache. > > --Jeff Thanks for clearing that up - I see you've already been over to www-security. The fast response Netscape (and in particular, you yourself) make to reported problems is something I'm very pleased to see. Peter Trei trei(a)process.com

1 0

Re: ADDRESS DATABASE?
by andr0id＠midwest.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I'm not familiar with this aspect - how do cellular services store and >make use of billing information, as opposed to traditional phone services? > Most cellular systems still write billing tapes and send them to a clearing house for proccessing. It may take 2 or 3 days before a bill is updated. Thats not including that it takes sometimes up to a month before your roaming charges are recorded from all of the other cellular carriers. Some carriers have realtime billing but it still doesn't take into account roaming. >> If >> cellular customers start getting sales calls from a company that received a >> list from a cellular carrier, the cellular carrier is obligated to refund >> the customers bill for those calls if the customer complains becuase the >> customer pays for calls comming or going. > >Is this obligation incurred by the contract between the customer and the >cellular service, by statute, or otherwise? Contracts can always be >broken, and passing laws to guard the guardians generally amounts to >having the fox guard the henhouse... > This obligation is uncurred mostly by the fact that cellular carriers HATE to loose customers. If refunding a few min. of air-time helps keep a customer then they will. Unlike the phone company, a threat to discontinue service with a cellular carrier works well in getting your way. Dr0id

1 0