- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: A case for 2560 bit keys
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:09 PM 7/8/96 -0400, David F. Ogren wrote: >And so we have to ask ourselves, why _not_ use a 2047+ bit key. It has >greater longevity and greater security. Why not be overcautious when >the cost is so small? I don't think it's going to make a great deal of difference. We've "all" shifted to 1024-bit keys, even though it's unlikely anybody will have the resources to crack them for decades if not centuries. And the moment any government prosecutes anyone with information obtained by a decrypt of a 1024-bit key, the (then) stragglers will join the rest of us at 1500 or 2000+. The government knows this and there's nothing it can do about it, except possibly for GAK and it isn't making much headway in that. The most negative part of a long key is the false sense of security it may engender in the weak-minded: All key sizes are equally insecure from a computer black-bag job or a specially-engineered virus. If you're really interested in your future security, probably the best thing you can do is to convince Congress to write legislation to ban negotiations and/or treaties with other countries which in any way ban or restrict encryption, preventing Klinton from doing an end-run around the Bill of Rights with regard to the 1st amendment. Maybe it's just too much of a wish-list item, but a I'd like to see a legal prohibition on the government attempting to decrypt any information that it didn't (legally; with authorization) have the key to when it collected that information. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

PGP ICON
by Blake Wehlage 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone no where I can get a PGP icon for my web page?? Tanks a mil! ---

1 0

Eric Hughes at EF Forum
by jonl＠well.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cypherpunk/cryptographer Eric Hughes will join yours truly at this week's Electronic Frontiers Forum, Thursday, 6PM Pacific Daylight Time. javachat at http://talk.wired.com or telnet to talk.wired.com -- Jon Lebkowsky <jonl(a)hotwired.com> http://www.well.com/~jonl Electronic Frontiers Forum, 6PM PDT Thursdays <http://www.hotwired.com/eff>

1 0

Re: Advances in Quantum crypto
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Jul 09, 1996 20:30:11, '"Mark M." <markm(a)voicenet.com>' wrote: >On Tue, 9 Jul 1996, Derek Bell wrote: > >> I see some Australian researchers have made an advance in quantum >> crypto. > >What kinds of advances? Last I heard, British Telecom was using quantum >crypto on 10 kilometer fiber optic cables. Yes, Derek and Mark, provide more detail, maybe source citations, on both these references, if you have them handy.

2 1

July Freedom Forum Meeting
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Date: Tue, 09 Jul 1996 17:48:35 -0500 From: Jack Shimek <jshimek(a)jaqboot.mv.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 To: <very big snip...> Subject: July Freedom Forum Meeting ******** FREEDOM FORUM ******* July Meeting Announcement ********************************** July 15, 1996, 7-9 PM, Newbridge Cafe, Nashua, New Hampshire E$ ---- Electronic Money and Commerce Robert Hettinga, Digital Commerce Society of Boston --------------------------------------- Banks have been doing "electronic funds transfers" for years, and now ATM transactions have skyrocketed, due to their convenience. What happens when you can take complete control by saving your e-money right in your own personal computer's hard drive? Will there be competing e-currencies? Will transactions become invisible? The internet and new encryption techniques make the possibilities absolutely enthralling. Hear Bob Hettinga explore all the technologies and possibilities at the July Freedom Forum! (For directions, see our web page at: http://www.mv.com/ipusers/jaqboot/Freedom/Forum.html apologies to this month's speaker for not creating a full web page on his talk. Will catch up after the talk. Jack Shimek --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender." -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard, for Bart Simpson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

3 2

Re: [RANT] Giving Mind Control Drugs to Children
by mike＠fionn.lbl.gov 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Jul 9, 12:02pm, Mike Duvos wrote: > If we have safe and effective medications which increase > alertness in the school and in the workplace, why shouldn't > everyone be able to take them in small doses as the need arises? So? I hate to be flip, but is there a coffee shortage in your area? Stimulants don't have the same effect on everybody. "Normal" people who take stimulants tend to act a lot like untreated hyperactives: jittery, unfocussed, irritable. Your point about long term use is well taken, many people find the positive effects wear down after a while. Sometimes this is alrite, because in the meantime they have been able to learn coping strategies they were unable to learn before. Sometimes it is not alrite, because their problems are too severe, & they need other treatment.

2 1

ADD and Unix, + Ritalin Questions
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1. Unix aggravates the Attention Deficit Syndrome. Do you agree? 2. USENET aggravates the Attention Deficit Syndrome. Do you agree? Also 3. Are there any long term effects from Ritalin, and can it be discontinued easily? - Igor.

1 0

Giving Mind Control Drugs to Children (Last Word?)
by Tim Philp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have been watching (ie deleting) all this stuff about children and drugs. Personally, I think that if you leave children alone they will grow up and decide what drugs of choice they want to use. (insert favourite recreational drug here) As for myself, I follow the "bunghole" (tm) theory of raising children. This involves putting the child into a large barrel when they are born and sealing up the barrel. Food, water, and air are given to the child through the bunghole in the barrel. At the age of 18, you drive in the bung! Sorry folks, I couldn't resist! <G> Warmly, Tim Philp

1 0

FW: [RANT] Giving Mind Control Drugs to Children
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[for some reason this went out without my comments earlier] From: Mike Duvos Of course, no amount of reason will disuade the True Believers from embracing yet another disease model, and we shouldn't expect that it would. But I think it is clear to many people that the forced medication of children for the convenience of those who take care of them is getting a bit out of control. ........................................................................

1 0

Re: A case for 2560 bit keys
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 9 Jul 96 at 13:57, jim bell wrote: [..] > The most negative part of a long key is the false sense of security it may > engender in the weak-minded: All key sizes are equally insecure from a > computer black-bag job or a specially-engineered virus. If you're really Good point... but why limit false sense of security as to what governments or corporations can do. Poor passphrases, leaving plaintext files around (perhaps not wiping them), and even having incriminating conversations with folks on the 'net one doesn't know under the belief that encryption makes it safe, etc. etc. are probably more dangerous security holes. 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.

1 0