- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Should we oppose the Data Superhighway/NII?
by George A. Gleason 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

RE "killing route 666," my primary objection is that there seems to be very little emphasis on increasing access at the grassroots level; the way things are going it will be 500 channels of commercial TV with "interactive" limited to Home Shopping and other trivial bullshit. I'm all in favor of common carrier status, guaranteed access for all, etc; but the current govt and private proposals & general moves like Bell/TCI, seem to miss the mark widely. -gg

1 0

Re: OMNI CARD
by lefty＠apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I suppose this is some metamorphicly generated checksum. Until someone >gets ahold of one of these OMNI cards and takes it apart... We use SecurID cards, which sound very similar, as a security measure on some of our remote access connections. BTW, you can't take the cards apart. They fry themselves if you try. -- Lefty (lefty(a)apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.

3 3

(fwd) Netcom adds access in Denver area
by tcmay＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cyphertentacles and Extropiates, Here's a convenient list of the latest Netcom sites, which span the U.S. I've been happily using it (well, they changed to a new emacs yesterday and now my autowrap doesn't work....I hate having to spend a couple of hours on such a trivial matter) for a year and a half and I conservatively estimate I've influenced at least 30 people to sign up for it....too bad I don't get any usage credits for it. The best things about it: flat monthly fee ($17.50), unlimited connect time, full range of services (much better than most universities have, folks tell me), and--best of all--your Netcom account won't change when you change jobs! And posting with Netcom presumably won't run the risk of angering your employer. I'm thrilled that Netcom is expanding so rapidly. --Tim Newsgroups: netcom.general,co.general,ba.internet,alt.internet.access.wanted From: glee(a)netcom.com (Glee Harrah Cady) Subject: Netcom adds access in Denver area Distribution: netcom,usa Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1993 17:22:36 GMT NETCOM On-line Communication Services, Incorporated is pleased to announce the expansion of the NETCOM backbone into the Denver, CO metropolitan area. To reach the service, using a VT100 terminal emulator dial 303-758-0101 with your modem set to 8,1,N, and hardware flow control. Denver's new Point of Presence (POP) joins our nationwide backbone in supporting a full range of network services including: o Internet Connections (T1 & 56kb, dedicated and dialup) o News/Mail feeds with Domain service o Business Dial-up access (news / mail / ftp / telnet / shell) o Host dial access (International and National News, news / mail / ftp / telnet / shell) o Personal Network (SLIP or PPP) Connections (PNC) o FrameConnect Internet Services NETCOM can be your gateway to economical global communications. A connection to the NETCOM state-of-the-art network will deliver connectivity at very affordable prices. NETCOM offers Internet connections, news feeds, electronic mail, local access points throughout the United States, source archives, telecommunications consulting, discounts on purchases of communication equipment, and other services. NETCOM offers a guest account to provide more information about its services. To access the guest account via your modem and personal computer, dial a local access number from the list below. After you connect, at the Login: prompt, type "guest". You need not type in a password. Remember, you must use lower case letters. If you prefer, you can also log in via telnet to netcom.netcom.com or to the IP address of 192.100.81.100. Here are a few of the local access 1200/2400/9600 V.32/V.42 numbers: 206-547-5992 Seattle 214-753-0044 Dallas 310-842-8835 Los Angeles 303-758-0101 Denver 404-303-9765 Atlanta 408-241-9760 San Jose 408-459-9851 Santa Cruz 415-328-9940 Palo Alto 415-985-5650 San Francisco 503-626-6833 Portland 510-426-6610 Pleasanton 510-865-9004 Alameda 617-237-8600 Boston 619-234-0524 San Diego 703-255-5951 Washington DC 714-708-3800 Irvine 818-585-3400 Pasadena 916-965-1371 Sacramento VOICE: (408) 554-8649 FAX: (408) 241-9145 Local Access Numbers: (800) 488-2558 _____________________________________________________________________________ - info(a)netcom.com (408) 554-8649 NETCOM On-line Communication Services, Inc.

4 4

Re: Should we oppose the Data Superhighway/NII?
by doug＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Perry E. Metzger" <pmetzger(a)lehman.com> said: >A single fiber optic strand has enough capacity in theory to carry the >equivalent of every call made in the U.S. during the peak capacity >utilization period on Mother's Day. This is a nice reduction to theory; the current optical modulation rates fall vastly short of the theoretical limits, but yes, at their maximum it would be something on that order. >I don't know about you, but I personally can't produce more than 750 >simultaneous videos at once for network distribution, so I suppose I'm >uninteresting, but even the people who can do more than that are >likely going to be fine. If they aren't, well, I suppose they could >get TWO fibers coming into their home, or maybe even TEN or ONE >HUNDRED if necessary. Heh. Well. By today's standards, theoretical-capacity fiber optic will be indeed be overkill; there would be plenty left over. Keeping in mind that we're talking about the medium to long term future rather than the immediate future, though: needs tend to grow easily as fast as does capacity to meet needs. In the past one can point to 1950's quotes about how many computers would ever be needed worldwide, or to 1970's arguments about why GUI interfaces would never be realistic, or even to Bill Joy's late 1980's Nanotech Conf. talk when he coined the unit of VAX-MIPS-Millenia, which he thought would be useless even if available. Counterexamples to Joy's thesis are trivially found in cryptography, and less obviously in things like computer generated holography. The latter might easily become a GUI standard of the future, and will indeed require VAX-MIPS-millenia of computation to compute in real time. They would also require similarly astronomical amounts of bandwidth to transmit. By today's standards, that's ridiculous to assume. But by the standards of 10 years hence, two dimensional video may well appear as primitive as 110 baud text transmission does to us today. Judging the future by today's standards tends to leave one's predictions high and dry. Doug

2 1

Politics on the List?
by gtoal＠an-teallach.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In article <199311120422.UAA28483(a)mail.netcom.com> tcmay(a)netcom.com writes: > Of course, I notice that very few of us are writing any code these > days. Some of the remailer wizards are still revising their code, and > a few C-punks are trying to implement DC-Nets in code. But the vast > majority of the 500+ folks on this List are either not writing crypto > code, or are keeping silent about it. Just FYI, I'm working on integrating pgp to the mailer that comes with 386bsd. I hacked it first a long time ago, and never gave it out because it had a lot of loose ends - now I'm tidying them up so that I can give it out and people won't have to be careful what they type to avoid some of the misfeatures... > The intent of the "Cypherpunks write code" line, if I can venture a > motivation (it was of course Eric's line), is that we are more > interested in seeing the Brave New Crypto World happen than in just > jawboning about export laws, the Zimmmermann case, and whether > libertarians are right and socialists are wrong. The intent of 'Cypherpunks write code' is that Perry can dump on people talking about anything other than code ;-) (When we *do* talk about practical stuff he tells us its impractical or been done before or pointless, or that we should stop *talk*ing about it and go away and do it...) I'm surprised we bother running a list at all actually. We should all be locked away in our garrets hacking I guess. (What I'm really saying is that this list clearly serves a purpose, and it is evolving into its own character, whatever that may be, despite the efforts of the early founder members to keep it on some tightly defined track that they once conceived it as. I don't see this evolution as being a problem, and I'm slightly (though not to Detweilerian proportions) annoyed whenever people like Tim or Perry pull rank and try to limit the topics of discussion, when on closer inspection they're just as bad as the rest of us at drifting 'off topic'.) G

2 1

Are we gatewayed to Usenet
by Clark Reynard 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Never. I don't _ever_ want to see this made into a 'semi-private' mailing list. Extropians, for example, does this, and it's ended up being an incestuous, closed group, with extremely low signal-to-noise ratio; as the same groups of people chatter and blather about the same subjects to no end. I'd rather have the list the way it is. At least the noise is usually _new_ noise; and new signal comes in constantly. I even prefer it with L. Detweiler; perhaps he'll cease his rather garbled rants and return to being a constructive poster. In any case, if this sort of thing were ever to be put to a vote, I'd be emailing everyone I knew not to have anything to do with such a giddy, doomed proposal. ---- Robert W. F. Clark PGP Key Available Upon Request rclark(a)nyx.cs.du.edu clark(a)metal.psu.edu

2 1

Re: (fwd) Netcom adds access in Denver area
by hfinney＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Unfortunately, netcom's nearest point-of-presence is a $.10/minute nighttime long distance call away from me. So this "free" service would cost me about $6/hour. There are several services which provide access via packet-switching networks which have hundreds of POP's, including some local to me. Two of these networks are Sprintnet and Compuserve's network (which is separate from the Compuserve service itself). These networks charge $2-$3/hour off-prime, so they are a better deal. But the carrying capacity of these networks seems somewhat limited, and you don't get the full throughput of your baud rate. There are resources available on the net, the "pdial" and "nixpub" lists, which provide lists of service providers for Internet access. I don't have access information handy.... Well, I just grabbed some info. Here is an excerpt from alt.internet.services FAQ: > *** 3.1: WHERE CAN I GET INTERNET ACCESS IN MY AREA? > Check out PDIAL, a list of public access service providers offering > dialup access to Internet connections. PDIAL lists both free and pay > services all around the world. The PDIAL list is posted semi-regularly > to alt.internet.access.wanted, alt.bbs.lists, ba.internet, and > news.answers. > > To receive PDIAL via e-mail, send mail with a subject line of > "Send PDIAL" to "info-deli-server(a)netcom.com". To receive future > editions as they are published, send email with the subject > "Subscribe PDIAL" to the same address. The most recent PDIAL is also > available by sending mail with a message body of > "send usenet/news.answers/pdial" to "mail-server(a)rtfm.mit.edu". To get > PDIAL via FTP: > ftp.netcom.com:/pub/info-deli/public-access/pdial > rtfm.mit.edu:/pub/usenet/alt.internet.access.wanted/P_D_I_A_L_(P) > > For more information about service providers and getting on the > Internet, read "FYI: Searching for Treasure" (FTP info at the end of > this document.) > > Another list of service providers, and tips on getting Internet access, > is provided in the "alt.bbs.internet" FAQ, available via FTP as > rtfm.mit.edu:/pub/usenet/news.answers/inet-bbs-faq.Z > > Access provider information from the book "Internet: Getting Started," > (detailed in the final section of this document) is available via > anonymous FTP as > ftp.nisc.sri.com:/netinfo/internet-access-providers-us.txt > ftp.nisc.sri.com:/netinfo/internet-access-providers-non-us.txt > > If you are a college student or faculty, check with your campus computer > center to learn about the online facilities available to you. Many > schools offer free accounts to students and staff. > > Next, turn to the Usenet community for assistance. Find out if there is > a local newsgroup for your area or state. For instance, Columbus, Ohio > users can check on the "oh.general" and "cmh.general" newsgroups. Many > other areas have regional newsgroups. Ask the locals questions about the > area - who better to know the answers? > > If all else fails, post your plea on the Usenet newsgroup > "alt.internet.access.wanted". Note that such requests aren't looked > kindly upon if posted elsewhere. > > *** 3.2: I NEED A BBS (ON THE INTERNET OR IN MY AREA)! > This is covered extensively in the "alt.bbs.internet" FAQ, available on > the Usenet group "alt.bbs.internet" or via FTP as > rtfm.mit.edu:/pub/usenet/news.answers/inet-bbs-faq.Z > > Also look for information on the Usenet newsgroups > "alt.internet.access.wanted" and "alt.internet.services". Get the PDIAL > list, mentioned at the end of this document. > > Also available is NIXPUB, a listing of over 100 free and pay-for-play > accessible systems. It is posted regularly to the Usenet newsgroups > "comp.misc", "comp.bbs.misc", and "alt.bbs". Retrieval information near > the end of this document. > > Also, for BBS information for your area code or specific interest, FTP > to: > wuarchive.wustl.edu:/mirrors/msdos/bbslists > I check these lists every so often, hoping to find cheaper access, but still no luck. But I agree with Graham Toal that a much better setup would be smarter software on my home PC, with an intelligent protocol for communication with the net service provider. I wouldn't care if it was UUCP, POP, SLIP, or whatever, at this point; it's probably better than semi-automated ZMODEM. I hope that these facilities become more widely available at a price of around $20-$30 a month or less. Paying hundreds of dollars a month for these capabilities is far beyond my budget. I can't understand why England is so far ahead of the U.S. in this regard. No offense intended, but I always thought of their telecommunications and computing infrastructure as being several years behind the U.S. Hal

1 0

Re: Privacy, Property, Cryptography (long)
by doug＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mike Godwin <mnemonic(a)eff.org> said: >This quotation needs to be debugged a little bit. The actual quotation [...] >as against the government, the right to be let alone--the most [...] >(Note in particular that it's "let," not "left.") It's always nice to get quotations down correctly, but surely the original "let" translates in today's speech to "left"? If not, I'd like to hear about the difference. Doug

2 1

Re: Anonymous Digicash
by hfinney＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mike Ingle asks about digicash. The simplest system I know of that is anonymous is the one by Chaum, Fiat, and Naor, which we have discussed here a few times. The idea is that the bank chooses an RSA modulus, and a set of exponents e1, e2, e3, ..., where each exponent ei represents a denomination and possibly a date. The exponents must be relatively prime to (p-1)(q-1). PGP has a GCD routine which can be used to check for valid exponents. As with RSA, to each public exponent ei corresponds a secret exponent di, calculated as the multiplicative inverse of ei mod (p-1)(q-1). Again, PGP has a routine to calculate multiplicative inverses. In this system, a piece of cash is a pair (x, f(x)^di), where f() is a one-way function. MD5 would be a reasonable choice for f(), but notice that it produces a 128-bit result. f() should take this 128-bit output of MD5 and "reblock" it to be an multi-precision number by padding it; PGP has a "preblock" routine which does this, following the PKCS standard. The way the process works, with the blinding, is like this. The user chooses a random x. This should probably be at least 64 or 128 bits, enough to preclude exhaustive search. He calculates f(x), which is what he wants the bank to sign by raising to the power di. But rather than sending f(x) to the bank directly, the user first blinds it by choosing a random number r, and calculating D=f(x) * r^ei. (I should make it clear that ^ is the power operator, not xor.) D is what he sends to the bank, along with some information about what ei is, which tells the denomination of the cash, and also information about his account number. The bank debits his account for the amount corresponding to exponent ei, and signs D by raising it to the power di. This leads to E = f(x)^di * r, which is what the bank sends back to the user. The user divides E by r (this is done by calculating the multiplicative inverse of r modulo the bank's modulus, and multiplying E by that), giving C=f(x)^di. The user can then create the actual coin as (x, f(x)^di). This should also have some information appended to it to remember what exponent was used (what denomination this is), so it would actually be (ei, x, f(x)^di). There are some complications in this system. The user may want to withdraw several coins at once, and when he gets back the E values he needs to know which is which (so he knows which r to divide by for each one). So he may want to include some unique tag with his D values he sends to the bank and get the bank to send those back with the E values so that he can distinguish them. The bank will not recognize the coins (ei, x, f(x)^di) when they are deposited (returned to the bank), due to the blinding. But it will need to keep a list of all the x values it has seen so far so that it can detect double-spending. If the ei values encode not only denominations but also issue dates at some level, and if the cash is given a limited lifetime, the list can be purged of old values periodically. I do think a prototype digital cash system would not be too hard to do. It would not have to address all of these problems right away. The larger problem is how to experiment in a meaningful way with diigicash due to the difficulty in giving it value. We've talked about this problem before but I haven't seen any really good solutions. Karl Barrus tried to start up a non-anonymous cash system some months ago but there was nothing to spend it on. (Actually, he does have a remailer which uses his cash, but since other remailers are free that has probably limited interest in the for-pay remailer.) I am continuing to work on a simple TCL interface to much of the PGP functionality which would be needed for such a system (and for other types of experimentation). I have the MP library done, so the additional entry points needed would include the MD5 one-way function, the random- number generation, and the reblocking. Perhaps in another week I will have those hooks in place. Then you could write the control software in TCL, which would be easier for prototyping purposes since it's interpreted. Hal Finney hfinney(a)shell.portal.com

1 0

A Clarification on My Trials and Tribulations
by L. Detweiler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cypherpunks, you just don't get it. Why am I continuing to attack you and your leaders despite your vicious, cowardly attacks on me and my friends? Because, as long as you stand for *lies*, you do not have a right to exist. And to the extent that you promote *lies* you are corrupting the Internet and poisoning cyberspace. J.Gilmore says, `a pseudonym is not illegal unless used for deceptive purposes.' But you cypherpunks, that's the *only* purpose you are using them for! If I asked a tentacle, `are you a pseudonym', and it said `yes', do you think I would have gone to all this trouble to write tens of thousands of words attacking people and a movement I used to respect? If I asked your leaders, `have you ever communicated with me under a pseudonym' and they gave me straight answers, do you think I would still be around? YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO LIE TO ANYONE. Cypherpunks, how many of you have gotten messages, `hey, what do you think about T.C.May or E.Hughes and this pseudospoofing thing? Are you going to do anything about it?' For all of you who don't give a damn about your leaders pseudospoofing, why don't you care that your own leaders could be molesting you with their tentacles in this way? Using them in a manipulative way to gauge your loyalty to the movement and manipulate your trust? On the list and in your email? WHY DON'T YOU GIVE A DAMN? All I can conclude is that everyone here is in favor of deception, treachery, betrayal, and perversions, *particularly* if their leaders are responsible. Where the hell do you think I got all the stuff for `Joy of Pseudospoofing'? You think I made it all up? Your leaders molested me in precisely this way, but both the tentacles and your leaders stonewalled, evaded, and counterattacked. They think it is FUNNY how they have personally driven me to the BRINK OF INSANITY. And they *continue* to escalate instead of making simple statements about their beliefs in pseudospoofing, which would satisfy me and anyone else who has doubts. You want the truth? despite their bland statements your leaders *know* that pseudospoofing is PERVERTED and that is the only reason they refrain from saying anything about it, the only reason they continue to attack me as a deranged lunatic. What am I, the police? I don't GIVE A DAMN about all your perversions, as long as you keep them the hell out of my mailbox. But you *don't*. Everytime I think there is another person I can trust, it was nothing but another Leader Tentacle. Look, if you LIE TO ME in mail, THAT PISSES ME OFF and I will ATTACK you for it in an attempt to get to the TRUTH. and it should PISS OFF EVERYONE ELSE HERE TOO but NOBODY GIVES A DAMN. When I hear strange rumors about deceptions in the media, and your eminent leaders fail to reassure me, why is no one else upset about this? Cypherpunks, don't you give a DAMN that articles by reputable authors may contain DISTORTIONS AND LIES? Look, Markoff is a highly respected writer. And if you lie or deceive a reporter, that is like a personal insult. These people could get *fired* if their articles are incorrect in a serious way. but you don't GIVE A DAMN. you think it is FUNNY that you can TRICK REPUTABLE PEOPLE TO BELIEVE IN LIES and so you can PROPAGATE THEM FURTHER. Is there an honest cypherpunk in the entire world? None have contacted me so far. There are a few people that are slinking away quietly with their tail between their legs, but I think you all are just the same scurrilous cowards that your leaders are.

1 0