- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Can the inevitability of Software privacy be used to defeat the ITAR?
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:21 PM 7/12/96 -0400, Michael Froomkin wrote: >> could claim that MIT came very close to violating ITAR, but the same claim > >"The ITAR do not apply to books" I'm not sure the exact legalities apply here. I think it is more like the mob pressuring business men for protection and punishing those who do not comply. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet may fairly be | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | regarded as a never-ending | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | worldwide conversation. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Re: I@Week on crypto export loophole 6/24/96
by Will Rodger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >As I see it, the most important issue is not the legal status of the one >actually doing the export/mailing, but in fact the organization which is the >recipient and thus, the beneficiary of this act. _THAT_ organization will >be well-identified, yet will not have done anything obviously illegal. Is >there any indication that Baker was trying to distinguish between the one >physically mailing it, and those receiving it? Yup. He was speaking only of the US company. As you mentioned, odds of anyone getting caught are fairly low in many cases, but even lower for anyone outside the US. The odds the US would go after a foreign company would seem pretty remote, unless based in a country that strongly suppported US policy. The UK comes to mind, but few others. I'll leave it others to decide who else should be on that list. Will -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMebLF0cByjT5n+LZAQF3Owf5AbJCUK/9sbaUGDVV4eZcqggSuOgH+ubr fbx3W7HXaXcAlqvATFRt+mw5h6GMubNrRCC+Ka6CJYC60QESWnHCw8/XX000I2UQ ucBwRMTID+KZuNHN9vD4/hE+JBLkWDQyu2S4IDWkCR0+7UJDFQQ9z3kSVmqgczlB jGyOtUwVpNHETg0yGreuQVCMz6gzxX1eZf0Hv38BJQqD8ROOLVCmYC1grRlrltRV VJqRohsVustzqgu35OoKKzZES3hJxqvmXaNHIDMKhZmnbeHiZeAKs0tQ9hJz7Znp oNAGcwIugB7S7mANIr6bd0EPHiljOP2Ipe13LgMAtkhidipTDQgtRQ== =6+G6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: CDT Policy Post 2.27 - No New News on Crypto:
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:23 PM 7/12/96 -0400, Bob Palacios wrote: >----------------------------------------------------------------------------- > _____ _____ _______ > / ____| __ \__ __| ____ ___ ____ __ > | | | | | | | | / __ \____ / (_)______ __ / __ \____ _____/ /_ > | | | | | | | | / /_/ / __ \/ / / ___/ / / / / /_/ / __ \/ ___/ __/ > | |____| |__| | | | / ____/ /_/ / / / /__/ /_/ / / ____/ /_/ (__ ) /_ > \_____|_____/ |_| /_/ \____/_/_/\___/\__, / /_/ \____/____/\__/ > The Center for Democracy and Technology /____/ Volume 2, Number 27 >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > A briefing on public policy issues affecting civil liberties online >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > CDT POLICY POST Volume 2, Number 27 July 12, 1996 >(1) NO NEW NEWS ON ENCRYPTION - VP GORE REITERATES SUPPORT FOR KEY ESCROW > >Despite the growing pressure from Congress, privacy advocates, the computer >industry, and the public for the reform of US encryption policy, the >Administration continues to embrace its Clipper III key-escrow encryption >proposal. Bob, I think I'd feel a lot better about CDT if you'd explicitly withdraw any support for the Leahy encryption bill. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: I@Week on crypto export loophole 6/24/96
by Will Rodger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 01:03 PM 7/13/96 +0200, you wrote: >Will Rodger wrote: >> >> The odds the US would go after a foreign company would seem pretty remote, >> unless based in a country that strongly suppported US policy. > >Er, right ... Just like they don't go after the Swiss bankers who >choose to have dealings with Columbians, or German businessmen who >have dealings with Cubans ... > You're right. I should have be more specific: I was thinking the odds the US could successfully prosecute a non-US citizen for violating those laws seems pretty remote if that person was from a country not in agreement with US crypto policy. "Go after" is a bit vague. Shame on me. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMefTA0cByjT5n+LZAQFPIAgA1CePSpY1wJm8CCQEloxIZMQMXNuaOC3U Un6JpPtIIDY8X/uSFP7wg8Mgbt+bKBNp1Ehgx6dPMavs8JnMTQWZGGuSDlIdc+5Y 41sTEA6ig6iIls3NqnnVz+0F6JTRF20gKCR1KH++7EdG/zJKJJN833N9NU4QP3od vXQ8jkaNILWzawsh83d9ZngC3ublDFU9onDOx6XIJAoSFNUn39hN8198BCtixCSq FzIDsR2cuiWe4k1PcrUAtKCOlqRxjNqrgc/sy5Gf56qIdjbgJ/rfvO9Rf6JVFZ3i 6dIqw37OEZZ89+pm5hWnjjRQUj2O3oFgO6psBdLkfXkYF6w9ryVbAw== =+1IU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Good dictionary files?
by Sentiono Leowinata 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

As many people say, a good password cracker is very dependent on the dictionary file(s). When one has a very good dictionary file(s), the chances of password being cracked is bigger. I am wondering if someone can tell me where I can get good dictionary file(s). Search on the web result to nothing. I have one large dictionary file (about 14Mb) to check it, but I still not feel comfortable to say it's a good one. This might be off topic from cryptography, but until we can reverse engineer (decrypt the crypt or crypt(3)) functions, nothing we can do but to rely on those good dictionaries. Thank you and I apologize for anyone who might get offended by my post. Regards, Sent.

2 1

Re: Needed: Bay Area "Cracker" for TV Show
by sparks＠bah.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perhaps we should spam them with responses and encrypt all of them ?? only a small Sunday morning thought ! no reason for a sig... CP wannabe >From: anvil(a)encryption.com >Date: Sun, 14 Jul 96 02:32:20 PDT >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Subject: Re: Needed: Bay Area "Cracker" for TV Show >To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Precedence: bulk > > > >On Fri, 12 Jul 1996, Alan Horowitz <alanh(a)infi.net> wrote: >>> July 11th, a San Francisco television reporter called me. He wants to >>> broadcast a story about "crackers". He'd like someone who can describe, >>> on-the-air >> >> >>Hey peachpit >> >>The cartoon news broadcasts are part of the problem, not part of the >>solution. >> > >And apparently they'd like to charge you to *be* part of the problem. I >offer the >following (I'd like to file this under 'clueless', but you never know...) > >=========================================================================== >======= >Return-Path: <patty(a)cyberone.com> >Received: from cyberone.com ([206.102.194.2]) by pulm1.accessone.com >(4.1/SMI-4.1) >id AA23842; Fri, 12 Jul 96 16:32:30 PDT >Received: by cyberone.com (940816.SGI.8.6.9/940406.SGI) for >anvil(a)ACCESSONE.COM id >TAA21956; Fri, 12 Jul 1996 19:23:20 -0400 >Date: Fri, 12 Jul 1996 19:23:20 -0400 >From: patty(a)cyberone.com (Patty Elliot) >Message-Id: <199607122323.TAA21956(a)cyberone.com> >Subject: Your site: ENCRYPTION.COM >Apparently-To: anvil(a)ACCESSONE.COM >X-UIDL: 837333887.020 > >Dear Sir, >We are producing the national television series .com hosted by Star Wars > celebrity Mark Hamill. The series airs nationally on CNBC and the Bravo > Network and is all about the Internet and how it is changing the way we do > business. We are reviewing storylines and Web Sites to be featured in >our fall > programming. > > We have featured stories on digital Imaging including Kodak, on-line banking > with Digital Insight, and Healthful On Line Web Sites such The American Heart > Association as well as many others. > > Please take this time to complete this brief questionnaire and we will >consider > your story and Web Site as a feature on the show. If the story or Web >Site fits > our programming requirements, one of our producers will contact you. > > There is a pre-production fee to participate on the show which offsets >some of > the pre-production costs, however we pay for all of the production and post > production costs. > > Please allow us at least one week to review your response and your web site, > Thank-you. > > > > Patty Elliot > Vice President, Programming > > > Questionnaire > > > What is your URL: http://www. _______________________ > > What kind of information is available at your Web Site? > > What is the message you would like to communicate to the viewer? > > What are the most important functions of the Web Site? > > Who are you trying to reach? > > Where are you promoting now? > > Is your company a public or private company? > > How many employees are devoted to managing your web site? > > What sales category would your company fall? > (Less then 1 mill) : > (1-5 mill): > (6-50 mill): > (51-100 mill): > (101 mill +): > > Who is in charge of marketing your Web Site? > > > Name: Title: > > Tel: > > Fax: > > email: > > Address: > > > > >-- >J R Slack I'm not really a cryptographer, I just play one on the Internet. >68 FLH, "In wildness is the preservation of the world" - H.D. Thoreau >63 R60 "In wildness is the preservation of the soul" - H.D. Motorcycles >

1 0

Re: Failed mail
by Jean-Francois Avon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 13 Jul 96 at 22:22, root(a)mail.demon.net wrote: Could you please explain me why my message was blocked? P.S. any CPunks who could answer my questions below? Please reply by e-mail. Thanks ---------- begin quoted message ------------- > Whilst talking to mist.demon.co.uk: > > MAIL FROM:<jf_avon(a)citenet.net> > 503 Local policy blocks mail from <jf_avon(a)citenet.net> > > ------ Original Message Follows ------ > > Received: from punt-1.mail.demon.net by mailstore for iolo(a)mist.demon.co.uk > id 837281345:17284:1; Sat, 13 Jul 96 19:09:05 BST > Received: from cti02.citenet.net ([198.53.26.132]) by punt-1.mail.demon.net > id aa16801; 13 Jul 96 19:08 +0100 > Received: from g34-138.citenet.net by cti02.citenet.net (4.1/SMI-4.1) > id AA13507; Sat, 13 Jul 96 13:17:50 EDT > Message-Id: <9607131717.AA13507(a)cti02.citenet.net> > Comments: Authenticated sender is <jf_avon(a)pop.citenet.net> > From: "Jean-Francois Avon" <jf_avon(a)citenet.net> > Organization: JFA Technologies > To: Edgar Swank <edgar(a)Garg.Campbell.CA.US> > Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 13:13:33 -0500 > Subject: SecureDrive(IDEA), Realdeal and plaintext attack > Reply-To: jf_avon(a)citenet.net > Cc: Iolo Davidson <iolo(a)mist.demon.co.uk>, > Arnoud "Galactus" Engelfriet <galactus(a)stack.urc.tue.nl> > Priority: normal > X-Mailer: Pegasus Mail for Windows (v2.32) > > Hi! > > I wrote to you the other day to send you my config files (excepted > Galactus). > > Just to refresh your memory: > > I use Secure Drive 1.4a on my data drive. > > While running Win3.11wg (with dos7 with locked drives), I load > realdeal.exe /pers . > > > Question: > > Since realdeal overwrite everything with 0s, and that theses > zeroed sectors are encrypted later with IDEA, will that give an > attacker an edge? The attacker will likely know that there are > large disk areas that contains 0s. > > Any comments? > > Thanks > > jfa > > DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee; Limoges porcelain, silverware and crystal > JFA Technologies, R&D consultants: physicists, technologists and engineers. > > PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon > ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891 > > -------- end quoted message ---------------

1 0

Re: Internet Relay Chat
by AwakenToMe＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

welllllllll all, It really depends on what you do. Hacking IRC can be determined as hacking OPS in a channel... which I can see NO legal frontier in which it crosses. Its more of a battle of wits. Something as simple as finding a server disconnected from the net....making that channel there...and waiting for it to rejoin the net was used to hack OPS on a channel. Now.. that can be something done purely by accident..not realizing the server isnt fully hooked up at the time. Regards, Adam

2 1

Dep. AG Gorelick on CSPAN2 advocating escrow
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Saw Jamie(?) Gorelick, Dep. Attny Gen. on CSPAN2 talking about needs for key escrow. Emphasized the what if people lose their keys, or someone dies, or if an employee steals company secrets & encrypts them... rather than the usual what if terrorists use crypto line (though she did mention that too). Guess they're taking a new tack to sell it to the public. A lot of bunkum... (project left to the reader how these can be handled in a non-GAK manner). Rob. --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

2 1

Re: CDT Policy Post 2.27 - No New News on Crypto: Gore Restates
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 12 Jul 96 at 18:23, Bob Palacios posted: [Banner Snipped!]] > CDT POLICY POST Volume 2, Number 27 July 12, 1996 [..] > Today's statement is essentially a re-statement of the Clipper III proposal > released in May. Among other things, the Vice President: > > * Called for the liberalization of export controls provided computer > users participate in a "global key management infrastructure" > designed to make personal encryption keys accessible to law > enforcement. This is particularly problematic... if the mainland Chinese gov't requested a key from a N.Amercian or European (or even UN controlled) escrow agency, who is to say it isn't really for political reasons (even though they may claim the persons are drug smugglers)? Or what if the 'crime' was, say, discussing Mormon beliefs, which is illegal in Singapore (and I think Russia as well)? Or what if some terrorist was using keys escrowed in a country that sponsered terrorist acts? --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

2 1