- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

International Sports Book
by jpp＠markv.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Bag Your Bookie..." begins the add for "the world's largest legalized International Sports Book". With the optional ATM card, you can access your winnings within 48 hours of the event, at any ATM. Another example of the strength of "speed bumps" on the internet. Can the Internet Casino be far behind? Does anyone want to pitch digital cash to these folks? Does anyone want to make some bucks setting these folks up on the net? (How big do you think the market is for a internet sports book?) For further information you can "Enroll right now! Call 1-809-462-2279 and talk to one of our sports agents..." 24/7 I assume. j' P.S. It would cost me (US dollars) 1.41(connect charge) + 2.50(calling card) for the first minute, and 0.97 for each additional minute for me to call these folks (located in Saint John's Antillees (sp!?)) from here in Encino, California at 1940 monday via the MCI network.

1 0

reading someone's files
by perry＠imsi.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Re: The Norton Encryption thread I'm suprised that no one has given the obvious answers on this topic. If you have physical access to someone's machine, it is trivial to find out what their encryption keys are. After all, the victim types into the machine regularly -- recording all their keystrokes is not a difficult matter at all. Now, I agree with all the people who note that violating people's privacy is wrong and that this individual should get a new girlfriend rather than learning how to hack her files, but from a technical point of view there is no challenge here at all. Perry

2 1

'brief' macro for invoking pgp
by Alan Pugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- hello all, does anyone out there have a macro for the editor _brief_ by borland (last time i checked) that will invoke pgp to sign a message in the buffer. i've been using _brief_ as my primary editor since they were owned by _underware_, (no joke), and would like to be able to sign messages by pressing a hot key. i've been trying to do this off and on for some time, but my programming skills are almost nonexistant. preferably it would be filename independant. that is, it would work on the current buffer. the package was written to be able to compile files while within it, so it should be possible. any help would be greatly appreciated. thanks, amp <0003701548(a)mcimail.com> December 21, 1995 20:27 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.61 iQEVAwUBMNnfligP1O9KJoPBAQHtEgf/TV8OeTFBpKhufmbIJqBpoj2Gt6dTjtH/ o3z1ExLFSYols4YAOAJbquqnUariSNrnqV1Ap2IjtNFM08eEAeAOBykjlKfjXWBt ZudoDlRfVoKmGnGVpn4Njo6wrlolpU0rezFls+4Zdx2sA7cLkBuTUBMNN0yq3oBw Yws2rfpKW8SGoj6gyDtkGKisDQtHUotmHTiIPVYI9FbTPa2Fs0Q5RnvAidl0i47m dDuWmfoP3VpiyAbPH9PMnI19Ax3U+n5MFKK0B8zUWIonUdv4px4u7eRo3b0kNCKl qETMZtoNB1Um3o7oZUZvjLAlKEEBOEmDweT4OVyxNt5q9thOO53wKA== =YlLN -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Breaking into girlfriend's files
by blancw＠pylon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Snappy comeback to msg by Mark Terka: "GROAN! What the hell is this list about anyway?????? I think we are losing perspective about encryption, privacy etc etc... >From the 'Welcome' message for new subscribers to the list: "Cypherpunks will make the networks safe for privacy." It doesn't say "Cypherpunks will make it possible to mount crypto invasions against your opponents." "To make judgement calls is WAY out of line and a hell of a bad precedent for this group." Yes, it's bad precedent, seeing as how everyone on the list is unoriginal, followers who are likely to take any ideas presented as incentive to act, as sanctioned by the members. Everyone knows that, that's why the list is always so quiet. .. Blanc

1 0

To Cpunks EveryWhere
by blancw＠pylon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

{000} [[[[[[[[[[]]]]]]]]]]]]]]] Q=%=QAtwhDbN/799e763=%=ho PiiE/////iRWQfoVPmME6fMYlU/////luLonSm mHk8/////D\\\\\Y0j4udH2oqvd6V/////gsN\\\\\bQeFC r3Lt/////25wSZ\\\\\lQ8BAXQw/////wIxBaxEM\\\\\ER9o 969/////XgnnoKybR\\\\\ +Zfli/////drRyt40MIkg1/Z5\\\\\Lg02 Ct7iHDbjkcn+!MerryChristmasCypherpunks!+3BF34RD d0+ezN5NM+2v4P5+&Tim+&+LD,too+GJ/lxi+exc6+C/m BrDqwa((@))((@0nGwiq((@))((@))XjrxlQ((@))((@))m suq((@))OI2l((@KSzy((@))0+((@))ptx((@))JiF((@) @))O+DcU((@))((@))VAgU((@))((@))6I8ZrPn \3xjsTLiUx((@))Mkxko/lnIR((@))oy9T42/ \eXORJOjaj4P5LRbYeRm2Ve8O/ \u830e3zt+b4Tmj7fe3u/ \ \VYVYVYVYV/ / ^*^*^*^*^ +*+*+ :: : . .. Blanc

1 0

Re: Moving from 1024-bit -> 2048-bit key.
by an169306＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am wondering if going to 2048 bits is worth it or not. After a certain point, it doesn't matter whether it takes 200 quadrillion years or 200 decillion years to factor a key, it will be a long time before its factored ;-). Perhaps keep your 1024 bit key, unless you want to expire it and generate a new one. (I did that, expired two keys, replaced them with a 2048 bit key, but realize that a 2048 bit key takes somewhat more time and processing power to do the usual PGP hijinks with. I probably would be better off just using a 1500 bit key, but too late now...) Just remember (so your web of trust stays intact) to sign your new key and use your new key to sign your old one before revoking the old key. This confirms that it IS a new key, rather than someone trying to spoof you. Also, keep a backup of your public and secret keyrings before revoking the old key. This is just common sense. Make sure your backup is secure, though. (I PKZIP my PGP stuff, encrypt it several times with convential key encryption, wnstorm it, THEN lastly use Norton Diskreet with a password that is different from all the rest. If Diskreet is not secure, PGP and wnstorm are, so I don't really care if Diskreet has holes in it or not. Its just there to 'spice things up' for anyone trying to crack the backup, which is stored in a place any party I authorize or I can easily get at it. If anyone sees something weak about this, E-mail me... ;-) The main thing is not to go keysize crazy which I did, as you do pay a performance penalty for those huge keys, and make sure that your other avenues of attack are defended against. (As soon as I can, I am buying a portable 486 or Pentium, since my main weakness is a 'black bag' attack using a good keystroke monitor or a hardware bug, then a simple copy of the secring file when I mount my SecureDrive partion and the Stacker partition inside of that to access my PGP stuff.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized, and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi.

1 0

Re: Breaking into girlfriend's files
by Jonathon Fletcher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It seems a little strange that cypherpunks are arguing over whether or not to disclose information about a (supposedly) cryptographic product to a certain individual. Let's relate this this to other examples of restricting cryptographic information - can anyone think of any groups or organisations that do this ? Okay, now we've thought of a couple, lets compare reasons (left as exercise for the reader) for the restriction of this information and our opinions on those restrictions. Have I made my point ? Should we change the infamous slogan to: "Cyperpunks is watching you". Someone asked a techical question about cryptography, other list members answered it. Can we now get on with more relevant matter ? -Jon -- Jonathon Fletcher, j.fletcher(a)stirling.ac.uk

5 7

Re: bug in remailers
by jml＠wizard.synapse.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I am getting the same errors, even without pgp! > > homer Well to tell the truth I'm glad that I'm not the only one it's happening to. This seems a fairly serious problem. (To anonymous remailers sysadmin) Is this something new? Must be I guess. (Paranoid mode on). Sabotage? -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAy8X2ZIAAAEEALbeB9136vtAk/FOOb8a1rYv7OWAVJZMiWs/CI1Hla9iUxBj hv+KM1rK31cygbk2/y38cZFQupgP34/0HkLKXsl5bP7vifXi5JzyNpeOmYT3Cr/E FqyWRFUo6dyp7AVm23ryZGZAM2qfcdXaslEqWAD3PczAnQ34vKhVa3SvpHjhAAUR tAZ3aXphcmQ= =syn9 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

2 3

Validating SSNs
by putney 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>At 4:13 PM 11/13/96, Black Unicorn wrote: >>Exercise for the reader: How does the bank verify SSNs? >OK, I'll bite. >My guess is that the bank sticks the SSN in a report to the IRS and the >bank is happy with the SSN as long as the IRS doesn't complain about it. >Now, does the IRS check? I suspect that they don't, either. Their objective >is to look for "matches" with SSNs that show up on filed tax forms, since >they want to verify the data on the tax form. Given the behavior of every >other large database I've ever seen, I'd guess that there would be a huge >number of SSNs that don't in fact associate with tax forms. If someone High >Up hasn't decreed that they should chase such things down (and allocated >heaps of money to do it), they'll ignore the mismatches. >This seems consistent with the reports of people who use bogus SSNs for >decades at a time. >Rick. >smith(a)sctc.com Yup - You've got it right. A bank's responsibility is to make the SSN match on tape with what the IRS has - thats it. It was part of the big stink in the 80's when congress first said that all banks had to withhold on all interest, the banks yelled, and then the SSN match program was instituted. There are significant fines for banks that do not follow up on mis-matches, or do not begin "back-up" withholding. One person is no big deal, but they add up fast! The IRS's job is to collect income so if the number matches with a filing then a-okay! Yo. Putney

2 1

HACK - U HAVE NO PRIVACY
by lefty＠apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I don't know whether you all have seen this: I've got a double-sawbuck that says it's nonsense, but those of you who are into recreational paranoia may enjoy it. I especially enjoyed the mention of the Bilderbergers... >From: fringeware(a)io.com (FringeWare Inc) >To: lefty(a)apple.com >Precedence: list >List-Server: fringeware-request(a)io.com >Errors-To: fringeware-owner(a)io.com >X-Www-Page: http://io.com/commercial/fringeware/home.html >Keywords: exchael psychotes convestuffican geneur existration tription >Subject: HACK - U HAVE NO PRIVACY >Reply-To: holo(a)netcom.com (D. Ronan Hallowell) >Date: Wed, 25 May 1994 21:51:06 -0700 (PDT) > >Sent from: holo(a)netcom.com (D. Ronan Hallowell) > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >>Date: Wed, 25 May 94 09:42:11 -0700 >>From:paul.geronca@support.com >>To: sfraves(a)techno.Stanford.EDU > > [mod's note: We received another forwarded copy of this message > annotated with a msg saying it's a hoax...?] > >NSA can crack PGP > >A lot of people think that PGP encryption is unbreakable and that the >NSA/FBI/CIA/MJ12 cannot read their mail. This is wrong, and it can be a deadly >mistake. In Idaho, a left-wing activist by the name of Craig Steingold was >arrested _one day_ before he and others went to stage a protest at government >buildings; the police had a copy of a message sent by Steingold to another >activist, a message which had been encrypted with PGP and sent through E-mail. > >Since version 2.1, PGP ("Pretty Good Privacy") has been rigged to >allow the NSA to easily break encoded messages. Early in 1992, the author, >Paul Zimmerman, was arrested by Government agents. He was told that he >would be set up for trafficking narcotics unless he complied. The Government >agency's demands were simple: He was to put a virtually undetectable >trapdoor, designed by the NSA, into all future releases of PGP, and to >tell no-one. > >After reading this, you may think of using an earlier version of >PGP. However, any version found on an FTP site or bulletin board has been >doctored. Only use copies acquired before 1992, and do NOT use a recent >compiler to compile them. Virtually ALL popular compilers have been >modified to insert the trapdoor (consisting of a few trivial changes) into >any version of PGP prior to 2.1. Members of the boards of Novell, Microsoft, >Borland, AT&T and other companies were persuaded into giving the order for the >modification (each ot these companies' boards contains at least one Trilateral >Commission member or Bilderberg Committee attendant). > >It took the agency more to modify GNU C, but eventually they did it. >The Free Software Foundation was threatened with "an IRS investigation", >in other words, with being forced out of business, unless they complied. The >result is that all versions of GCC on the FTP sites and all versions above >2.2.3, contain code to modify PGP and insert the trapdoor. Recompiling GCC >with itself will not help; the code is inserted by the compiler into >itself. Recompiling with another compiler may help, as long as the compiler >is older than from 1992. > >Distribute and reproduce this information freely. Do not alter it. >------------------------------------------------------------------------- >To find out more about the anon service, send mail to help(a)anon.penet.fi. >Due to the double-blind, any mail replies to this message will be anonymized, >and an anonymous id will be allocated automatically. You have been warned. >Please report any problems, inappropriate use etc. to admin(a)anon.penet.fi. > > > > -- Lefty (lefty(a)apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.

2 1