- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: How would Leahy bill affect crypto over HAM radio?
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:36 PM 3/10/96 +0000, Ed Carp wrote: >On Sun, 10 Mar 1996, David Lesher wrote: > >> > >> > Subject asks it. I'm not a HAM, but still curious. Wonder if anyone >> > has brought this to Leahy's attention... >> > >> > Comments from the packet folx on the list? >> >> Non-cleartext has been forbidden for last 60 years anyhow. > >Not quite. Anything intended to hide the meaning of the message is >banned. Compression isn't banned, because the intention is to make more >efficient use of the frequency, not to hide the meaning. >-- >Ed Carp, N7EKG Even so, it isn't clear that this new law WON'T change the rules under which hams operate. An affirmative statement of the right to use encryption would seem to pre-empt prior bans, except if there was some sort of explicit exception for over-the-air transmissions. After all, the law was written broadly, and presumably is to be interpreted broadly. It if doesn't list or single out any particular medium (text on paper; Internet; modem/telephone; etc) then it may reasonably be assumed to apply to all media. Not that such an interpretation will necessarily be welcomed by some hams: Part of the reason for maintaining the ban on encryption would be the fear by hams that ham bandwidth will be surreptiously used by commercial services masquerading as ham users. Encryption would make such usage difficult to detect. However, I happen to believe that hams should be entitled to use good encryption, for voice and data communication. Jim Bell, N7IJS jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: PGP reveals the key ID of the recipient of encrypted msg
by Robert A. Rosenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:25 3/11/96, savron(a)world-net.sct.fr wrote: >I began testing PGP a few days ago ( I'm a PGP newbie ) and I found >that it gives out the key ID of an encrypted message . From this you >can get the identification of the recipient of the message , if it's >someone who has publicaly distributed his key (keyserver , homepage >...) . So even if you are unable to decode the message you can find >who is the recipient of a given message . I think this is a big >privacy problem . There is little that can be done about this. There must be something in the message to identify who it is intended to be read by. As someone else has stated, you can always set up private keys to be used to send to you that are different from your Public KeyID for cases where you want to hide your identity or that of the party you are communicating with. >The problem is carried along when you encrypt a message for multiple >recipients , you get the key IDs of all the recipients and same >problem as above . I think something like 'blind email copy' should >be used , because the recipients don't have to know the identity of >each other . If you want to hide the recipient list, then send separate messages to each recipient - each of which is only encrypted to that one respective recipient.

1 0

Re: Stego - images and sounds
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"sasha1(a)netcom.com" "Alexander 'Sasha' Chislenko" 9-MAR-1996 22:59:54.01 >At 12:19 PM 3/8/96 -0800, Jim McCoy <mccoy(a)communities.com> wrote: >> >>Provided the bits are random in the way that they should be... The low-order >>bits in such files were chosen by implementors of stego programs because >>modification would not be noticed by the person viewing or listening to >>the file, not necessarily because there was actually randomness at this >>level which could be replaced. Does anyone know of a survey of images or >>sound files which tested the statistical randomness of these bits? They >>may not be as random as people think they are. >> > This should depend on how the image/sound was obtained, though I am pretty >sure in most cases there would be easily detectable patterns. They would >be the strongest in software-generated files, smaller in good reproductions >of precise recordings, and very small in noisy recordings. In all cases, >the number of lower bits used for stego-messages may be chosen lower than >the existing noise of the signal. Changing all lower bits in a good >rendered image may still be unnoticeable for the human viewer, but really >easy to detect to a program. Unless the picture, sound, whatever has a periodic function, the LSB ought to have an approximately random distribution (barring all 0's and all 1's, for full color saturation). The periodic function part could be a problem. -Allen

1 0

The Future of Electronic Commerce
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"The Future of Electronic Commerce," released March 11 by The Aspen Institute's Communications and Society Program, describes the new economics of transacting business in cyberspace, from consumer privacy to potential advantages for entrepreneurs. The 270 kb report in .PDF format is available at: http://www.aspeninst.org.

1 0

re: Video resolution
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:14 AM 3/11/96 -0500, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security wrote: >Note: this refers to the IBM PC & clones only > >> The point is that they do a lousy job on dithering. So does Microsoft >> explorer. They probably purchased the identical code from some clot. >Have been watching this go back and forth & get further from the original >question as usual. I suspect that if the original poster looks in her/his/ >its/other SYSTEM.INI file, the line "display.drv=vga.drv" will be found in >the [boot] section. This is the default 16 color driver installed by >Windows to be compatible with every 256k 640x480 VGA card. And I also remembered to turn the computer on. I can assure you that I know how many colors my screen supports, and I have numerous dithering programs on my computer, two of them written by me. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: Leahy and Mrs. Bemmis (now that's a subject line)
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:24 AM 3/11/96 -0500, A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security wrote: > At the same time am pragmatic enough to accept the idea that it will have > no effect unless it passes and to be passed today it must have something > like the criminalization statement. I am glad to hear that the bill can be easily stopped. I think we should do something to kill it right away. The only good thing the bill does is give big companies the same power that most of us now possess -- the power to export crypto and get away with it. A good thing, a very good thing, but small change compared to the important individual liberties that the bill lightly discards. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: Do you feel lucky, punk?
by medea＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:02 PM 3/11/96 jim bell scribbled: > >Again, you give no specific examples. And what is "twisted >rhetoric", at least as you've used it here? > >>but you don't seem to know the difference between dicta and holdings. > >I didn't use either term. Neither did George Will. You don't know what you're talking about - it's as simple as that. When someone points out to you the error of your ways using terms you're not familiar with, then display that at least one brain cell is working and look up the terms. Your response that you don't use them is childish. Was it meant to imply that you and George Will have formed a *Proud to be Stupid* club? <end of off-topic flame but deemed it necessary> Medea ============================================================ +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ + |---------------------------------------------| + + | The mind is its own place, and of itself | + + | Can make a heaven of hell, a hell of heaven | + + |---------------------------------------------| + +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 0

Re: Cryptographers against cryptography
by David K. Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 09:23 PM 03/11/96 -0800, Bill Stewart <stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote: >At 09:35 AM 3/11/96 -0800, you wrote: >>This is the second in a regular series of postings to expose >>cryptographers and cypherpunks who are either lying to us or >>making a very serious mistake in there judgement. >..... >>B. Schneier: bs208(a)newton.cam.ac.uk, schneier(a)counterpane.com >>M. Blaze: mab(a)crypto.com, mab(a)research.att.com >>J. Bizdos: jim(a)rsa.com >>S. Safaddar: shabbir(a)vtw.org >>D. Weinstein: djw(a)vplus.com >>P.. Peterson: padgett(a)hobbes.orl.mmc.com >>B. Stewart: stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com > >Oh, boy, now I'm a Tentacle Again! >But at least I can spell.... Gee, lucky you (not to be confused with Lucky Green :-). Maybe if I study real hard, and practise, and pay attention in school, *I* can make the 7 Worst Enemies List, too! Oh, BOY! As for spelling, I have it on good Authority that your secret is knowing how to operate your spell-checker. Dave "Not even a flagellum, nevermind a tentacle" Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMURc1MVrTvyYOzAZAQEm9AP/XHB/pc3wfkkd9ZoGxduVxxzB4WliFubU PoDWkF0Gt+O1BSFGvqSJWKGaxYeYqvtBHzRLBE0BYh7ot7curdHWL8/7mrnaNCJV /QsHIsYl3JvAp/nZckucWUEzSf1BDnzokeH9v2xpwaxT5cWYvCRQLu0Q25EjfZl3 4PyMemghhbA= =+yQN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------- "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." P. J. O'Rourke (b. 1947), U.S. journalist. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> For privacy tools: http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/1148

1 0

bell ringing
by David K. Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I've *finally* had a chance to try and catch up on my CyP (vice CoP) reading, including the running tit-for-tat between Jim Bell and (most of) the rest of the list. While Mr. Bell's Assassination Politics idea has a lot of interesting ramifications, I've found that his apparent in-your-face-and-wha'cha-gonna-do-about-it-PUNK attitude makes reading his postings very tedious. Perhaps if 'we' were to simply read his postings, and respond *only* to those that maintain a civil tone, it would finally sink in with him that his Terrible Two's antics aren't appreciated. The only other options I see are: Someone gets his snailmail address and sends him a Dale Carnegie book, or there's a mass kill-filing, with him as the guest of (dis)honor. As noted, his AP idea seems worth discussing, I'd be reluctant to lose it. I'd hate to see him turned into LD-2 (Son of LD? :-) because he doesn't seem to have learned Tact and Manners yet. Dave Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMURa6sVrTvyYOzAZAQFdyAQAosYKaeQBAUFL/uz1dv+NTCEULmlyRc97 H1Q7jBzJK4mqpEvaYzRBTYl8XMAKkhxl2HaCsVLx6z4zJKnMAteRF7iEN/LO68bs ncAUBoi1TfhRSkSHL9NgBSIaDBtZ5ZT+HWf3dryBYSBkLmfGnDi6o4DMSDis7hC1 pmsSbPDfjk8= =lP2I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------- "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." P. J. O'Rourke (b. 1947), U.S. journalist. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> For privacy tools: http://www.geocities.com/capitolhill/1148

1 0

Remailer passphrases
by Gary Howland 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- markm(a)voicenet.com writes: On Mon, 11 Mar 1996, Gary Howland wrote: > > This of course assumes that the remailer runs as a process - if it doesn't > > then there is no reason a 'remailer helper' cannot. > > > > The only disadvantage of this is that the remailer cannot be rebooted > > without a passphrase being entered, but then there are ways around this > > (entering the passphrase remotely over a secure link etc., or more > > sophisticated 'remote authorisation' systems). > > > > The advantage of this is that the password is never on the disk, > > only in memory (which will take serious (read "expensive") to extract). > > I don't know that it would be that expensive. If someone was able to gain ^^ > root access to the system, something like "strings /dev/kmem" could narrow > the search for the passphrase down significantly. Of course one could > obfuscate the passphrase by XOR'ing it with 0x80, but that's only security > through obscrurity. Sure, _if_ they were able to gain root access without rebooting the machine, but the usual scenario is that the filth turn up with black bin liners, not men from the NSA. Gary - -- pub 1024/C001D00D 1996/01/22 Gary Howland <gary(a)kampai.euronet.nl> Key fingerprint = 0C FB 60 61 4D 3B 24 7D 1C 89 1D BE 1F EE 09 06 - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMUVVMioZzwIn1bdtAQFFPAGAkqQFY1FRwSunSdqkvZBQx8S6BnD7UXRV ztKYpHcCkyex8pT4jL/WqeEIGPUXfi4l =voJ5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0