- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Information gathering by news servers
by David Rosoff 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 12.33 PM 8/2/96 -0400, Scott McGuire wrote: >How much information about what someone reads can be gathered >by a news server? Is there an anonymous way to read a public >news server, or would a server have to be set up intentionally >to allow anonymous reading? You could use the Anonymizer (http://www.anonymizer.com/) in combination with a Web Usenet archive: Dejanews, for example. (http://www.dejanews.com/) =============================================================================== David Rosoff (nihongo ga sukoshi dekiru) ---------------> drosoff(a)arc.unm.edu PGP public key 0xD37692F9 -----> finger drosoff(a)acoma.arc.unm.edu or keyservers 0xD37692F9 Key fingerprint = 25 7D AA 01 85 41 43 89 50 5A 33 76 F1 F1 99 67 Do you know who's reading your email? ---> http://www.arc.unm.edu/~drosoff/pgp/ Is it a forgery? --- I have PGP signed all email and news posts since May 1996. =============================================================================== "Relax. It's not a real alarm. They can't crack _Pentagon_ codes. Can they?" :p -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMgOHcBguzHDTdpL5AQE2QAQArHuoLVA0dOJ+LddI2TumYvD/vaFrWBmI LQ3pDNlDRHdyY7u1RouVKkJbYVTvxNZCKQyaWYMgcA38eZl52V65DFq+N11Jhwm4 egCBlOlezDjPOeTk/nK25Ojavdb8ABtqGXGRFf4GwfFBQPq2kApzi8MewYEYeCJG HaofCy5FDWU= =bG1v -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: TrustBucks
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:11 AM 8/2/96, TrustBuckFella wrote: >An alternative model of electronic money. > >Every model of electronic money I know of except one retains some degree >of centralization. There is always a central "mint", usually a bank. If >you can't find a bank that acts the way you want, you're SOL. And the >only thing that enforces non-abuse (inflation, etc) by the bank is the >equivalence of electronic money to some form of "real" money. The sole >exception is Digicash. Unfortunately, Digicash has no restraint on ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >infinite spending-into-debt. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ You want to elaborate on this contention? If Alice transfers Digicash-type money to Bob, this is because Alice either bought the DC-money someplace, or already had it, or otherwise arranged with a bank to make the transaction. Maybe the bank "loaned" her money she didn't already have, but this is a completely separable issue from the form of DC-money. So what is this "restraint on infinite spending-into-debt"? Gullible lenders can always lend her vast amounts of money which she may never repay, but this is fully separable from what transfer protocol she uses to "spend" this loaned money. If, on the other hand, your point is something about inflation, this is also separable. Digicash and other forms of electronic money are generally not currencies per se, but are a kind of transfer order, more like a check. As such, not directly implicated in the issue of inflation. >I'm not going to try to develop the cryptographic protocols for >TrustBucks. I haven't got the requisite paranoia and pickiness >(compliments both) for that. TrustBucks also has nothing in the way of >anonymity and restraint on double-spending right now. If you can see how >it could be anonymous or restrain double-spending and still work, please >feel free to add. No protocols. No anonymity. No protection against double-spending. Looks promising. Keep us informed. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: fbi, crypto, and defcon
by David Rosoff 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 09.02 PM 8/2/96 -0700, Alan Olsen wrote: >>Can you name another business that has comparable mark-ups? > >Verisign? > >InterNic Domain name registration? > >Licence plates in Washington state? All the money they could possibly make is peanuts compared to the colossal rip-off of compact discs. :) =============================================================================== David Rosoff (nihongo ga sukoshi dekiru) ---------------> drosoff(a)arc.unm.edu PGP public key 0xD37692F9 -----> finger drosoff(a)acoma.arc.unm.edu or keyservers 0xD37692F9 Key fingerprint = 25 7D AA 01 85 41 43 89 50 5A 33 76 F1 F1 99 67 Do you know who's reading your email? ---> http://www.arc.unm.edu/~drosoff/pgp/ Is it a forgery? --- I have PGP signed all email and news posts since May 1996. =============================================================================== "Relax. It's not a real alarm. They can't crack _Pentagon_ codes. Can they?" :p -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMgOXvxguzHDTdpL5AQGzyQP/cDvyqIPmlU1Gg6BE+4u4GQb/RNe6LPa8 AR8fqae+dnEMsqRBF5ChEXNwNDxXCMzxVF0xXhVytlLUonlPpKCTL5E3YZ7nrj5/ SkO0/QpnyqTH1wzb6dV9RBcSxF0+V6EWX1rbHEqfXna52qWOCjDsaH3Wno5FZGJF O60tNSmcVcE= =8vn1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Digital Telephony costs $2
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:52 AM 8/3/96 -0800, Chris Adams wrote: >On 3 Aug 96 01:16:48 -0800, jimbell(a)pacifier.com wrote: > >> I propose that the better way of implementing it, rather than going through >>a sound card, is for modem manufacturers to built an new modem with an >>extra telephone connection (perhaps the same physical connector that's >>currently used for the telephone handset) which goes to an ordinary >>telephone and does the audio A/D and D/A conversion, as well as the data >>compression/data expansion function that will be necessary. The latter >>function would be done by an extra DSP on this modem/Internet telephone card. > >If you were so inclined, you could implement the whole thing for MWave >modems. They are fast enough to handle 28.8k and sound card functions at >the same time off of a single DSP. That seems a bit difficult to believe. I get the impression that implementing a 28.8Kbps+ modem pretty much uses up the capability of a near-state-of-the-art DSP chip. Further, recently an item appeared on CP concerning a new voice-compression standard that was claimed to put good-quality voice into a 2400 bps stream. Each function, coding and decoding, was claimed to occupy about (don't recall the exact figures) a little over half the capability of a TI 32025 DSP chip, which admittedly is an older unit. Assuming full-duplex is desired (and that's the purpose of this exercise) you'd need the full resources of something with greater 'ooomph' than a 32025 just for the coding/decoding. Sure, it may not be necessary to compress voice audio all the way down to 2400 bps, since the current modem standards allow 28.8kbps and beyond, but I suggest that decreasing net traffic by a factor of 12 (28.8k to 2.4k) is a desirable goal. Remember, in the long term "everybody" will be using Internet telephone. (And no doubt you've noticed that high-volume hardware gets cheap, really fast. Putting in a second DSP for compression/encryption won't increase the costs all that much.) Leaving the encryption in hardware would improve exportability, at least from a legal/ITAR standpoint. While eventually full-fiber-capacity Internet will be able to increase the capacity to "unlimited" levels, in the meantime the capacity is limited (by switches if nothing else) and going the extra mile to limit Internet telephone's impact on the national net would be better. >With the right drivers you could use >the telephone/speaker/mic jacks that are on most of the integrated cards. > Also, they have a standard realtime OS with most of the functions being >portable across cards as well, so you'd have to do very little work to >support other Mwave cards. The reason I think a system I've described has a future is that modem manufacturers have a PROBLEM. Their problem is that they've pretty much run out of room to improve the bit-pushing through a 3 KHz bandwidth. Sure, they can focus their attention on cable modems or ISDN units or other toys, but the market for such beasts won't develop for a few years. They'll pretty much be stuck doing an occasional upgrade, or selling into new computers, but that will slow down. What they'd like to have is a new function that "everybody" wants to have, and allowing people to bypass LD telephone charges is a powerful motivating factor to get people to upgrade their modems. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: Liberating Clipper Stuff from Mykotronx Dumpsters
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:33 PM 8/3/96 -0400, Mark M. wrote: > >These files can also be found at ftp.funet.fi/mirrors/dsi/cypherpunks/clipper/ >mykotronx*, as the archives are still down. Actually the path is: ftp://ftp.funet.fi/mirrors/ftp.dsi.unimi.it/cypherpunks/clipper/ --- Alan Olsen -- alano(a)teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction `finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."

1 0

WARNING: SecureDrive & PartitionMagic
by Geoffrey C. Grabow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It seems rather obvious now, but since I learned the hard way, I figured that I'd save the rest of you from a painful experience. I have one HD of 1.2gb. I created a 50mb partition at the end of the drive using PM and encrypted it with SD14b. I ran out of room on the secured partition and wanted to enlarge it. I used PM to shrink the primary partition a little, and to enlarge the secured partition. When I shrank the primary, the free space on the drive appeared between the two partitions. To enlarge the secondary, I moved it to the free space, then enlarged it on the right. This was BAD! PM did its thing, but no matter what I did after that, I couldn't get the secured partition to a usable state. I ended up formatting the secured partition to recover. After some playing, it seems that PM tries to "re-align" the data on the 2nd partition when you move left. That's where things get screwed up. I tested a few combinations, and found that everything works fine if you decrypt the partition before moving/resizing, then re-encrypt after. Just some friendly info. G.C.G. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | Geoffrey C. Grabow | Great people talk about ideas. | | Oyster Bay, New York | Average people talk about things. | | gcg(a)pb.net | Small people talk about people. | |----------------------------------------------------------------------| | PGP 2.6.2 public key available at http://www.pb.net/~wizard | | and on a plethora of key servers around the world. | | Fingerprint = A6 7B 67 D7 E9 96 37 7D E7 16 BD 5E F4 5A B2 E4 | |----------------------------------------------------------------------| | That which does not kill us, makes us stranger. - Trevor Goodchild | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Re: "And who shall guard the guardians?"
by Arun Mehta 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:20 03/08/96 -0700, Martin Minow wrote: >Does the English Only bill conflict with the UN Declaration of >Human Rights (Article 2): .. >For that matter, does the escrowed crypto legislation conflict with >Article 12: .. >My understanding is that the United States is (finally) a signatory >to the Declaration. A couple of points need clarification: A Declaration isn't, in international law, binding. A covenant is, provided you haven't just signed it but also ratified it (i.e. made it a part of national law). So the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is basically just a statement of good intentions. Much more important, legally, is the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights(ICCPR), http://www.pluggedin.org/amnesty/rights4.htm which the US *ratified* not so long ago. Says the ICCPR Article 17 1. No one shall be subjected to arbitrary or unlawful interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to unlawful attacks on his honour and reputation. 2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. Article 19 1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference. 2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice. 3. The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary: (a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; (b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals. ________ Key, in Article 17, is the term "unlawful." With this escape clause, the US gov has no problems, long as they make appropriate laws. Article 19 is more interesting, because restrictions must be shown to be necessary... Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta(a)cpsr.org http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/ finger amehta(a)cerfnet.com for public key

1 0

Internet telephony (was Freeh slimes again)
by Arun Mehta 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 13:11 02/08/96 -0700, Lucky Green wrote: >The sound quality really isn't there, unless you have a fast machine or a >fat pipe. In addition, the vast majority of Intel based computers lack the >crucial (for user acceptance) full-duplex soundcard. Add to that the >physical impossibility of getting decent real time services over a >non-isochronous network, such as the Internet, I'net phones just don't >provide suffcient speech quality for business/serious personal use even >without the added overhead of crypto. What I'd like to see -- for which technology is all in place, and none of the shortcomings you mention apply -- is voice mail that functions seamlessly between people who only have a phone, and those with Internet connections on computers with a sound card. Many companies practically use voice mail as an alternative to long phone conversations. This might also help the Internet spread, because with a connection you would be able to save on long-distance charges -- and strong crypto could be used. I'm sure the software for this exists too -- the ISPs only have to run it on their servers. It would be nice, though, if the ISPs had a facility that when there is a voice message for you, it either phones or pages you... Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta(a)cpsr.org http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/ finger amehta(a)cerfnet.com for public key

1 0

Re: Anonymous Message Broadcast
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:58 PM 8/3/96 -0400, Laszlo Vecsey <master(a)internexus.net> wrote: >Has anyone implemented a simple anonymous chat system (an anonymous irc) >using the technique described in Applied Cryptography 2nd edition? I'm >speaking of the Anonymous Message Broadcast documented in section 6.3, it >begins on page 137. A lot of people talk about Dining Cryptographers networks, but I'm not aware of more than an occasional test implementation - the concept is simple, but getting all the details right is a lot of work, including things like collision detection, and there aren't a lot of good uses for the things to motivate development, even though they are basically cool. One design approach is to use IRC; another is email. IRC probably requires that all the participants be on simultaneously, or requires a coordination system to handle whoever's on right now. >Can the same system be implemented using base256 (unsigned char, 8bit ASCII) >instead of the simple on/off binary method that is described in the >explanation? How would it differ. Rather than doing Base256, just XOR the bytes; you get the speed of doing things a byte or word at a time, while still getting bitwise changes. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Defuse Authority!

1 0

Re: WARNING: SecureDrive & PartitionMagic
by Geoffrey C. Grabow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 15:47 08/04/96 -0400, Charley Sparks wrote: > > >where can I get a copy of SD and does it work with NT ?? > Check out: http://www.serve.com/ruccia/securedr.html for the SD. As for working on NT... I haven't the foggiest. I've got a kludgey way of using it under win95, but it mostly works. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMgUdrsr4ljoOgY7BAQGTpQP+IZXlrMJh3snU27ydLDcdzCOeDC813GYW ujHcDpHiItY7Uq4hgBW6qoHIhmrb8DRHgVJDWyfa/OAmwJzs6sAOEzQCP1ktPM7b LLn1oPphtoPCXN1RXB+s38jHZmzzY32sLidmAqgpMDRboUwDvKfczHs9Tik1PzgQ X3k3S43k0pc= =+lgv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- G.C.G. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ | Geoffrey C. Grabow | Great people talk about ideas. | | Oyster Bay, New York | Average people talk about things. | | gcg(a)pb.net | Small people talk about people. | |----------------------------------------------------------------------| | PGP 2.6.2 public key available at http://www.pb.net/~wizard | | and on a plethora of key servers around the world. | | Fingerprint = A6 7B 67 D7 E9 96 37 7D E7 16 BD 5E F4 5A B2 E4 | |----------------------------------------------------------------------| | That which does not kill us, makes us stranger. - Trevor Goodchild | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0