- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

NTT & electronic "cash"
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This qualifies as one of the most uninformative news items I've seen from Reuters. Anyone know any substantive info on their process? -Allen --------------------- Reuters New Media _ Wednesday December 20 2:04 PM EST _ NTT Says Develops Secure Electronic Cash System TOKYO- Nippon Telegraph and Telephone said today that it has developed a secure electronic cash system which can be used for settling transactions on the Internet and in daily life using smart cards. "The system has very secure algorithms, and that makes fraudulent uses of the system very difficult," NTT researcher Mikio Suzuki told Reuters.

1 0

KGB_cia
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

12-21-95. WPutz: "In an unusual interview Yevgeny Primakov, head of the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service, discussed problems and challenges facing his intelligence agency in terms that often sounded like testimony that CIA Director John M. Deutch gave the House intelligence committee Tuesday. In comments that echoed those of his U.S. counterparts, Primakov charged that some post-Cold War budget cuts in his agency developed 'because the [Russian] press ganged up on us [and] many newspapers wrote absurd things about us, including statements that foreign intelligence was no longer necessary at all.' His remarks about media coverage were similar to recent statements by Deutch and his predecessors, R. James Woolsey and Robert M. Gates." KGB_cia (5 cia)

1 0

Re: revised time quantization package (Unix & WIN32) available
by Dan Harmon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perry, the only crypto code you seem to do is the unintelligble postings that you send to the list. .d On Wed, 20 Dec 1995, Perry E. Metzger wrote: > > Dan Harmon writes: > > If this is what you consider contributing them you seem to have some > > deep problems that cannot be solved here. You may have to seek professional > > help. Your continued and at times seemingly uncontrollable use of vulgar > > language may indicate a neurobiological disorder such as Tourette's > > syndrome. You really should have it checked out before you harm yourself > > and possibily others. > > Thank you for the pseudopsychology, but really, all you've done is > further confirm my diagnosis of "non-contributing asshole". > > When was the last time you did anything to actually help spread > cryptography, eh? > > If you'll pardon me, I have crypto code to get back to. > > .pm >

3 2

Re: ex encrypted script
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Is there a way to encrypt a script yet still allow it to be runnable? I >know that the simple answer is to write it in C and compile it but I don't >have the means of doing that at the moment. (i.e. there is not compiler on >the system) Given your constraints: no. /r$

1 0

Re: The Problem With Blaze And Weinstein
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:12 AM 12/21/95 GMT, "Bill Gates" wrote: [...] >Evidently the cypherpunks are all too impressed >with Blaze and Weinstein's master degrees to see >what's really happening. Only true visionaries >like myself and Dr. Frederic B Cohen are telling >it like it is; everyone else has had the wool >pulled over their eyes by the NSA/ATT/Netscape axis. > >It's amazing how clear everything becomes once >one stops taking the medication that THEY prescribed. > >s/ Bill Gates Oh, I see. I think you misspelled "troll". Hope this helps. -- "The anchored mind screwed into me by the psycho- | Greg Broiles lubricious thrust of heaven is the one that thinks | gbroiles(a)netbox.com every temptation, every desire, every inhibition." | -- Antonin Artaud |

1 0

Re: ex encrypted script
by John Pettitt 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:57 PM 12/21/95 -0500, Beavis B. Thoopit wrote: >> >| Is there a way to encrypt a script yet still allow it to be runnable? I >> >| know that the simple answer is to write it in C and compile it but I don't >> >| have the means of doing that at the moment. (i.e. there is not compiler on >> >| the system) >> >| >> >| I thought of a few simple protections but they all involve decrypting before >> >| running. >> > >> > Ever hear of chmod? chown? >> >Adam >> >> The vendor also has superuser access.. chmod chown won't protect it.. :( > >I once had to obfuscate an awk script. "Cryptography is Economics." My >job was to make it difficult for the enemy to steal the source. There >was a license agreement... > >The simple answer of "no" is right in the strong sense, but there are >tricks to make life difficult for the amateur attacker. > >My approach was a self-decrypting program. The "real" script was >encrypted within the body of the encasing script. For increased >obfuscation, decrypt only small pieces at a time. > > There is encrypt and then there is render useless to the reader. A tale I hear is that when HP had to deliver operating system source to the french government they stripped all comments and changed all variable and subroutine names to 32 byte strings of I 1 0 (zero) and O (uppercase O). It still compiled but was 100% useless to human readers. -- John Pettitt email: jpettitt(a)well.sf.ca.us (home) jpp(a)software.net (work)

1 0

Re: Political Cleanup program
by James M. Cobb 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Friend, On 12 17 95 jimbell(a)pacifier.com proposed ...a system...that would "blind" campaign donations as to their source: The donor could be satisfied that his dona- tion gets to the candidate or cause, but the candidate could- n't know who actually paid the money (and the donor would be unable to prove that he made a donation...). Let's analyse: A gives B what B wants (money) so that B will give A what A wants (whatever). A knows B got the money. A can't prove he gave the money to B. B knows he got the money. B can't be sure that A gave the money. So, depending on time, place, and circumstance; and assum- ing B's elected: B will not give A what A wants OR B will give A what A wants For instance, if... A gives the money but dies before B gets elected. A gives the money but gets sent to the Balkans. A is a nobody. ...B will not give A what A wants. For instance, if... A gives the money but B's already in debt to him, and the baloon payment's due. A gives the money and A's appointed head of an office where B's relatives "work." A is the main man in town. ...B will give A what A wants. Some things are known by some people whether they're entered on the books or not. I agree with the proposer that his system ...would change politics as we know it. Flexible corruption is best. Cordially, Jim

1 0

Re: FTC Privacy Initiative (fwd)
by blancw＠accessone.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Jyri Kaljundi From: Internet Marketing Discussion List The US Federal Trade Commission has launched a "Privacy Initiative" to investigate whether the information collected at websites (either that affirmatively submitted by a visitor via a form or information collected based upon a visitor's selection of pages at a site to reflect personal interests) should be the subject of regulation by the FTC. ............................................... "Hey, we can't just stand around here with nothing to do. Give us something to regulate - anything, pro or con; we must regulate something." Dang! .. Blanc

2 1

Re: Microsoft Flame[tm] [NOISE]
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forget about the monopoly aspects for a second and look >at MS as an American success story. It has all the classic elements: started >small, with a crew of social misfits and eventually grew up. >RobL >------------------|----------------------------------------------------------- >Rob Lowry | >PO Box 288 | >Rockford Wa 99030 | ral(a)otc.mhs.compuserve.com robl(a)on-ramp.ior.com Well, I disagree. Microsoft succeeded primarily because it was "chosen" by IBM in about 1981 or so, needing an OS for their PC. MS didn't even write it; Seattle Computer did, and that was a port of CP/M. Not much creativity. MSDOS revisions 1.0 and 1.1 were pure crap.

2 1

No Subject
by floyddb＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

andr0id(a)midwest.net (Jason Rentz) wrote: >> >>Whats the current thinking on the security level of 900Mhz digital spread >>sectrum cordless phones? Clearly it's not a basic scanner job but how much >>more equipment is needed to monitor one ? > >Well when you listen into a spread spectrum conversation what you will hear >is open squelch white noise. The spread spectrum radios that I know about >send information on several deffrent frequencies throughout the >conversation. [snip] > Dr0id > > >( Computer Consulting & Management ) >(P.O. Box 421 Cambria, IL 62915-0421) > [snip] There is a company called Optoelectronics that markets a radio reciever called the Interceptor. This is a broad band (several hundred MHz) device designed to lock on to the most powerful signal around, regardless of frequency. As supplied, it only has a rubber duck antenna, but a broadband, directional antenna (Log Periodic?) could be attached. There are AM and FM versions that output audio and a version called the Scout that controls a scanner. These could have outboard devices hung on to them to decode digital signals, record the conversation ... all for less than $1000. Floyd D. Barber floyddb(a)alpha.c2.org Key fingerprint: 8A 98 1F 6B 70 7A FE 24 35 D4 48 CF 9D F6 B0 91 PS Sameer, thanks for the nym.

1 0