- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

unsubscribe me please
by Peter H. B. Frelinghuysen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

After trying cypherpunks-request(a)toad.com without success, I ask: please unsubscribe me from this list. Thank You

1 0

Re: Keyserver service outage
by schirado＠lab.cc.wmich.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>During the coming week, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology will >begin formally distributing PGP 2.5, a new version of PGP that is >based on the RSAREF 2.0 cryptographic toolkit, under license from RSA >Data Security, Inc., dated March 16, 1994. When that distribution >becomes available, the keyserver will return running PGP 2.5. At that >time, the keyserver will no longer accept keys that are identified as >having been created by versions of PGP lower than 2.4. (PGP 2.4 is >Viacrypt PGP.) Questions: 1) What involvement, if any, does Phil Zimmermann have in the creation of this "new version of PGP"? 2) Will "PGP 2.5" continue to be freeware; i.e., has RSA changed its stance on licensing? 3) If the answer to 2 is "yes", has the strength of the encryption been compromised in any fashion? 4) Isn't this some sort of transparent "back door" grab by some unknown person(s) as a method of encouraging people to switch by fostering the belief that versions of PGP lower than 2.4 are somehow illegal or otherwise illegitimate? (The last is only semi-sarcastic.) Basically, I think I speak for a hefty chunk of list subscribers when I say: I want to know who's behind this.

2 1

Re: quantum Computing
by juola＠bruno.cs.colorado.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Rick Busdiecker writes: > Not true. What that means is that a polynomial time solution exists > for an NFA. The only part has not been shown. Mike McNally responds: >While we're being picky, I'll point out that (unless I'm wrong of >course) it's not really an NFA, but a non-deterministic Turing >machine (an "NTM"?) that's the automaton at issue here. That is correct. As a matter of fact, it's an easy theorem that an NFA has the same computing capacity as a DFA; it is not known whether this theorem holds for more powerful machines, and is in fact the heart of the P ?= NP conjecture.

2 1

Re: Keyserver service outRAGE
by lefty＠apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Some nobody writes: > >So that's it, isn't it? Clipperized PGP. The government has pressured >RSA into allowing a new version of PGP, in an attempt to displace the >use of freeware PGP, with the hope that they will then be able to >control it more. This stinks. Yep, you got it. Dig a hole, crawl inside, and pull it in after you. As soon as you can manage it. Personally, _I_ think the government's out to destroy this list by recruiting a bunch of low-IQ paranoid schizophrenics, denying them their medication, sitting 'em at terminals and giving 'em the Cypherpunks address and the address of an anonymous remailer. The half-wit quotient around here is definitely on the rise. -- Lefty (lefty(a)apple.com) C:.M:.C:., D:.O:.D:.

2 1

Re: Server clusterfuck
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-> As I said, I do know that the limitation son the keyserver were part of the bargain to get a legal non-infringing freeware version of PGP... Take that any way you want. Onoce I see the code and can peruse it, I will probably trust 2.5 as much as I have trusted other versions of the code. > I hope the code of 2.5 is looked at real carefully. Trust me, it will be! -derek <- Fair enough Mr. Atkins. And thanks! -uni-

1 0

RE: Anonymous phone calls.
by David Scheidt 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I asked this a while ago, but my mail system has some problems and >I don't know what the responses were, if any.... > > Is there any way to make a phone call anonymously? Caller ID can be >blocked somewhat with one of those *## numbers dialed before the call >is made. Is there a way to route a call through a series of phone-type >remailer systems? This would allow one to make a call that would be as >hard to trace as anonymous mail. > > Any ideas? > I know that the PBX my school is behind shows up in the outside world as one of a limited set of trunk numbers. This means that calls to the real world will show up as a number other than the one you are calling from, and also that it is not likely to be the same number on any given pair of calls. A friend discovered this when dealing with an AT&T long-distance relay operator. They have an 800 number you call, and then they will bill the number that their ANI pulls off. I should think that AT&T of all people would have a good enough system that if it were possible to get the number they would manage it. The Operator, whom my friend knew, commented that the number was odd, and this led to some expirmentation which confirmed the number was not his, and a couple of other similiar things. I would suspect that there are many other PBX's which operate in a similiar manner. david -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- David Scheidt scheida(a)yang.earlham.edu "If we don't remember what we do, how will we know who we are?" -Ronald Reagan

1 0

Server clusterfuck
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-> From: Derek Atkins <warlord(a)ATHENA.MIT.EDU> Sigh... You know, when things are on a delicate balance, a single message sent too soon can really screw things up. I can tell you for certain that your questions *will* be answered in due time, please wait for the final arrangements to be made. No, PGP 2.5 is *NOT* available (this second). Yes, there is one in the works, and I expect it Real Soon Now. Also, please do not condemn Bal or his keyserver for not accepting keys from versions of PGP before 2.4 -- as I understand it, that was part of the agreement in order to make 2.5 happen, but I really don't know all the details. <- Then this should have be stated in the "press release" message he sent. As should have the details, what were available, of the PGP 2.5 release. The fact that the limitations on the keyserver were imposed only makes me wonder more. I hope the code of 2.5 is looked at real carefully. -uni- (Dark)

3 2

Re: Anon posts (was irrit
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com B >Sternlight wars on Usenet. Ironic that a group calling themselves B >"punks" should be civilized, intelligent, scholarly, altruistic, and B >basic good 'net citizens, while sci.crypt is often little more than a B >bunch of people playing "did so!" games. And the PGP group! B > B >>--Tim May USENET vs mailing list. DCF --- WinQwk 2.0b#1165

1 0

Re: Why is cryptoanarchy irreversible?
by Paul Bradley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> It appears to be widely believed that cryptoanarchy is irreversible. > Everybody believes that the race to deploy or forbid strong cryptography > will define the outcome for a long time. This is certainly my position... > I can't think of a reason why this should be so. > If the wide use of strong cryptography results in widely unpopular > activities such as sarin attacks and political assassinations, it > would not be all that hard to forbid it, even after deployment. I don`t think so. The point is that cryptoanarchic ideals and strong cryptography will be too widely deployed to remove them from circulation. Also I believe that the sheer amount of traffic over the internet will make it virtually impossible to find encrypted messages even if strong encryption is outlawed. And last but not least the system of anonymous remailers and the ease with which return addresses can be forged means people using strong cryptography couldn`t be traced anyway. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

1 0

FICS Group to Build On Microsoft Platform
by Dildophus 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

BRUSSELS -- FICS Group, an international banking systems company, announced a major electronic delivery initiative based on Microsoft Corp. technology. Expanding on the personal computer and telephone modes of banking service delivery, FICS said it is expanding into smart phones, personal digital assistants and wireless phones, electronic wallets, and Internet-based services. Microsoft platforms play a major role in FICS offerings, and Microsoft's Activex technology will be employed in Internet development. "The fact that FICS has chosen Windows NT as one of its key development platforms and adheres to the Open Financial Connectivity standard makes the company a valuable partner for Microsoft," said Ashley Steele, the Redmond, Wash., software company's marketing manager for the banking industry. FICS also participates in the Tandem Computers Inc. "payments factory" program, also based on Windows NT. Separately, FICS said it entered into a strategic partnership with Swift, the global banking telecommunications network. As a Level 3 partner, FICS is one of a few select firms that exchange strategic information with Swift and promote each other's products.

1 0