- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: why pgp sucks
by alt＠iquest.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>"Perry E. Metzger" <perry(a)imsi.com> writes: >>I'll also note, yet again, that unless PGP quits this bad practice of >>identifying counterparties only by a number, it is NOT going to be >>universally deployed. Counterparties need to be identified by a name >>that can be looked up in the DNS -- meaning "joe(a)foo.com" rather than >>some key ident number. > >PGP of course looks up keys by strings in addition to numbers. A widely >accepted practice is to use <joe(a)foo.com> in the user ID which allows the >lookups to be by internet address. PGP was intended for use beyond the >internet, such as in bbs's, fidonet, corporate networks, etc., where DNS >style addresses may not be useful. I would prefer that PGP would not give out ANY info about addressees. It would seem to me that it is quite a security breach to have PGP dutifully tell you to whom it is addressed. ************************************************************ * Just your basic signature block * * * * Al Thompson * * Fidonet 1:231/110 * * alt(a)iquest.net * ************************************************************

2 1

NYT on Cybertheft and Sex Writer
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ralph Blumenthal writes on NYC conference on "cyberthieves" of ideas and intellectual property. For email copy send blank message to <jya(a)pipeline.com> with subject: TEF_ida Peter Lewis writes on the U Mich student arrested for posting fictional rough sex story. For email copy, same, with subject: RIT_xxx ---------- Also, for the famished, these not very fresh tomatoes: Negroponte writes OpEd piece supporting Newt's idea for a laptop in every cave, arguing that it will help with international economic competition, especially against those countries with the youngest population. NEG_poo Peter Lewis writes on PSI's buy of Pipeline. PSI_pip

2 1

"Being Digital" spinde
by Rick H. Wesson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I thought you guy's would enjoy this... I found out Nicholas Negroponte, the author of "being Digital" encoded a message in the spine of the book all ones and zeros. It's a decent book, and not much about crypto except for the spine. I made a text file mof the 1260 bits on the spine. a sample perl script is included to grab the bits. Next mont's issue of wired is supposed to have a discussion about the spine and the encrypted messages. the only hint I've got is: 000 000 111 I know how you guys love this stuff, he says it's (the code) is unbreakable... -Rick ========================= Cut Here ========================== begin 644 bd.tar.gz M'XL("%HL/2\``V)D+G1A<@#M5E%OVS80]FOX*VYQ@+9`9Y&6:6W(NCUM0X"A M#WL;NJV0+#H6HDB"*,,-ANVWC^3=41Z&[LT9T/(+8H>ZTW=WW]T1J>IL<6G` M1A9:PP(`U`:_0:WQ&R$!=*&*]7JKUKDSREQO%Z`OGIG#T4[E"+`X&6O[\?!1 M/^>VWS]'0L^+JLZJ>C6TEXRAY'_W?UW$_NLBWSJCR@NY`'G)I!B?>?^77V1' M.V9MORO;K&JZ;#!C*X1OR\T/=S]]#V_@V@U(74[7M^%I/YCNI;>\NA7BZJ:R MWH-LIT/3FI??>.NWK_X05YWY,$&SA^SW97:+SJLW</,>O?_$*)[A+[#9KUV6 M/=ZC:=?VUG`4_P`S&L:FF_P;M^+_UNU3`>Z_:^\%8[C]WVXV']W_/-=KWO^\ MV$B__SHOTOX_!Y9B"?NQ?X3I8,`.36>@W[N5-TUW#W5SWTQE>PW5$[QM=H>^ M+2V\-?=C/_236;E7`9H)1E.V3S`TUAH+CYY@[ZX"T\$=',H:IA[JWO$W%J93 MLS.K%;[Y2W]T&]V755FYUT^E6VWGNCN8W4/P?@UWDP53VB?_?!K+S@[N6@BV M0&"GXWZ_@A_'_CB8&IK.3U7E$^I/[FWMOZ%R5]N#.ZGU5GJCQ>!7[UQ1D\NW M[KL7$YSZ\>&UTL5*X^/OX+?@]N7/S>Y!+/T/:"&5DFZ8PX=PO^Y/%1X)&4XR M6-D2CB*X*#PZ$O^$'=TS@>\K-!,U4RI%)"JX<73/H@4:Z0DE$CR$8G:%P2@$ MICQ3+F&-09`%BY(a)/S.\A,$>L2A!%^/(LFL)CF501%:%8(L6Z<,HLDL)<<BDD MRR2Q8"*B\BA3;^$\HV(8SK-H,8=0F+>D0(*K42PHIR#4G*1GV9#XL[JLHI*Q MB)D?_6;=)>JR";EPWF=2^"(XME+_5!=UX1A^Z*3@#N(XL6K>5_ZK+5@$L=#9 MLV@115&2IH+JB(*&(KB5;(GSXUBV..<\%W&VL`A.9!X1*H*[JK!'6RVBV-1/ MCLZ=X$['),_+PWDI:(^H$C938G%;@M1Q5<Y&$',I-(@H&D9ADMA0/`EVB6-- M%I_,5SQ<M'3Q`I@/5#XUC,8Z*H\L6K":9(["D?#T(7@@%.TF#5`HZ6MYM@*2 M#UQ$7)=0'@^,I'6G9#R+GFM4?&?Q;<`33[EP'^39;JHP=DK&Q&E%J+5*\@J> MC?(\A(H74A*-IHGE^L_O#LG7)(U!U.;\"E,B_<>8D)"0D)"0D)"0D)"0D)"0 3D)"0D)"0D/"9X&_^(G<;`"@``(U! ` end

1 0

Re: Does PGP scale well?
by jrochkin＠cs.oberlin.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:53 PM 02/11/95, Tom Jones wrote: >One of the reasons that I consider this to be untrue is my empirical >experience with two groups that are constantly interested in exactly >who I am: the government and the credit bureaus. They both chose to >use my SSN even though that has all the same attributes of a KeyID, >except that it is somewhat denser. Now if this is what happens when >the real world tries to identify me, why is the KeyID such a bad way to >identify keys? It seems like it might be important to note, however, that the government identification systems are definitely _centrazilized_ modes of information storage and distribution. Credit buearues are less obviously centralized, but still perhaps centralized. And it could be argued that credit bureaus would never have used a system like social security numbers for identification if it hadn't already been in widespread use in the centralized governmental systems which created it. This is in sharp contrast to the decentralized mode that we want our encryption and authorization to function in. This is for anti-authoritarian reasons, as well as simply practical reasons. When the government is involved, it can mandate that everyone use the system they are in control of, and they can get the neccesary manpower to actually implement a centralized system too. But we don't want to have to trust any one authority, and we also want a system where everyone does their own work (like DNS, where every domain has it's own server), if possible. Conventional wisdom is that PGP is inherently decentralized, and it is, in a sense, and in it's current web-of-trust model. But a social-security-number model of key distribution would definitely _not_ be centralized. You are assigned your social security number by a central authority, and others can look up your social security number by consulting with that central authority, or with other authorities that have themselves consulted with the central authority. That's not a model most of us think desirable for PGP key distribution. [It also could be noted that a SSN has some contained meaning, where a PGP keyid doesn't. The prefixes on your SSN say what state (and maybe even what county, I'm not sure) you were born in. But generally this isn't very useful information, so this probably isn't an important point.]

1 0

Re: UMich student arrested for rape story
by Richard F. Dutcher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: "L. McCarthy" <lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu> > Rich Dutcher writes: > > They *do* have to prove intent -- as to how, that's what juries are > > for. BTW, he used her real name in the post, with no disclaimers > > about fiction. From what I have heard, if he had said the same thing > > in her presence, he could have been arrested for assault. > > Based on the NY Times article I've read, you're omitting some important > extenuating circumstances here. For one thing, it was apparently posted to > alt.sex.stories, which seems to obviate the use of "fictional" disclaimers. > Furthermore, he did _not_ identify her as a UMich student. > Well, I was quoting a small AP story in a paper notorious for clipping articles short, so I knew that some [if not many] circumstances would be missing. In conversations today at Potlatch 4 I learned of other circumstances, albeit not necessarily what I would call "extenuating" ones. And the lawyers, of course, will be spin controlling from now until a verdict. > I don't see the relevance of "if he had said the same thing in her presence". > He *didn't* ! There's an enormous difference between making a comment about > a person to third parties, and making the comment to that person. > Not necessarily -- there's lots of case law that the threatened person need not be present to be threatened. The people present are still witnesses. I agree there's a difference, but its nature isn't obvious. Precisely what that difference is is up to judges, juries and [goddess help us!] legislators. > According to the NY Times story, the woman mentioned in the story only heard > about it because reporters asked her about it ! I find a great deal of irony > in the report that the controversy started because an alt.sex.stories reader > in _Moscow_ tipped off the UMich authorities. > Irony noted and appreciated -- but it does illustrate the "public" nature of the forum. > It appears that the Russians are allowed to read erotic fiction, while the > Americans are forbidden to read it, and get tossed in jail for writing it. > We've come a long way, baby. Yeah. > > -L. Futplex McCarthy I was in high school while the Supremes [the real Supremes, with Earl Warren, not the bogus nostalgia group currently wearing the black robes] were doing the decisions that allowed Joyce and Lawrence to be sold in bookstores, and I was taught Shakespeare from a bowlderized edition of Romeo & Juliet. Trust me, we aren't in a place remotely like that now [not that there aren't plenty of people trying to get back there]. Which is not to say I'm complacent -- when I have money to spare from Green work, it goes to the ACLU. Eternal vigilance and all that. And this dude is entitled to presumption of innocence, a jury trial, and all the other paraphenalia of procedural liberty. However, given the information available to date, I see no reason to believe that he's been busted for writing "erotic fiction" rather than threatening a woman. Violence against women is too real, and in other contexts courts have held to a standard of what a "reasonable woman" might fear. BTW, does alt.sex.stories presume fiction, or is it pretend truth like the readers' sex stories in Penthouse?

3 2

Privacy digest an all
by Ben 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I found this on another list that I"m on. I have no connection at all with the distributor, but I thought that it would be interesting to share it with the list. Ben. ________ 1. New Publication: PRIVACY & GEMS: HOW TO AVOID THE PRIVACY INVADERS We all have something to hide, right? From nosy neighbors, burglars, our spouses, private detectives, but most of all the government and business. In this 38-page booklet, you will learn how the government and business, through the extensive use of super-computers, is compiling data on ever facet of your life. Discover exactly how they do it. The amount of information kept on you is astounding: bank statements, investments, credit histories, medical records, school transcripts, driving histories, videotape rentals, retail purchases, tax returns, legal records, and more! This booklet explains who is collecting information on you and what they are doing with it. Your dossier is compiled and sold without your permission or knowledge. Find out what technologies are available today, and their frightening implications for tomorrow. We are on the verge of a 1984 Orwellian-type Police State! How can you keep some of your life private? After you read this booklet, at least you will have some idea! Learn how to make untraceable telephone calls. Be prepared for the New Money . There are a few low-profile investments that do not generate reports to business or government. Learn what they are and how to go about protecting yourself from the privacy invaders. Once you have shifted some of your assets from high -profile assets to low-profile assets, learn how to store and conceal them so you will not be discovered. Subjects covered include: Why Privacy?, Political Persecution, High-Risk Business, Divorce, Probate, Protection from Robbery, Protection from Government Seizure, The Future: The Total Surveillance State, "Smart Cars", "Smart Cards", "Video Surveillance", "Satellite, Surveillance", "Clipper Chip", "Robot Spies", The Future Workplace: A Look At Electronic Banking System, Inc., How Profiles Are Created, Damaging Dossiers, Privacy And The Telephone, The New Be A Private Investor, An Analysis Of Low-Profile Investments, Diamonds and Precious Gems, Rare Coins, Foreign Currency, Collectibles, Cash, The Tangible Investment Philosophy, Recent DeBeers Diamond Price Hikes, Long Term Investment Gem Performance, Low-Profile Strategies In A High-Profile World, Confidential Model Portfolio For Privacy Clients, 10 Rules For Gem Investing, How To Safeguard Your Valuables. This is an excellent tool for anyone concerned with our vanishing privacy. Here is how you order: Send $9.95 ppd (includes first class postage). Illinois Residents add 6.5% sales tax. to: Superior Broadcasting Company, Box 668, Lindenhurst, IL 60046. Request #119O "Privacy & Gems: A Special Report by Bob Genis"

1 0

Involve Telcos in activism?
by rishab＠dxm.ernet.in 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

storm(a)marlin.ssnet.com (Don Melvin): > Telecoms have bucks. > Telecoms have lawyers. > Telecoms are the 'transmission' agents for pretty much all of > the internet. Even high speed dedicated T1s are usually > from a telecom or two. That's a laugh! Yes, it would be a good idea to involve telcos in our cause, but it was my impression that most cypherpunks expressed derision for the EFF for 'compromising' (i.e. being realistic). Telcos do not necessarily share the interests of cypherpunks; they want to make money, that's all. They'd love to compromise, and provide funding for CDT, Jerry Berman's new lobbying outfit. A good example of their attitude is what they do in India, or China. Here none of them are too keen to say anything against some of our ancient and idiotic laws, and they're all happy to budget for huge and unjustified 'licence fees' because they want to lick state ass. They want to grab these huge markets before it's too late, free speech be damned. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Electric Dreams subscriptions and back issues, send a mail to rishab(a)arbornet.org with 'get help' as the message Subject. Rishab Aiyer Ghosh rishab(a)dxm.ernet.in rishab(a)arbornet.org Vox +91 11 6853410 Voxmail 3760335 H 34C Saket, New Delhi 110017, INDIA

1 0

Re: Factoring - State of the Art and Predictions
by jrochkin＠cs.oberlin.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:19 PM 02/12/95, Matt Blaze wrote: >No it hasn't. Factoring is believed to be hard, but no one has ever >shown it to be NP-hard (let alone NP complete). Woops. Thanks for the correction, and thanks to everyone else who managed to correct me within only minutes after I made the mistake. :) You can all stop sending me mail now. [Moral of the story: don't make a math error on the cypherpunks list.]

1 0

Re: PGP Anti- ITAR sig
by alano＠teleport.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Re: UMich student arrested for rape story
by Richard F. Dutcher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > The July `94 issue of Harper's described the case of a Menlo Park city > employee who claimed in 1993 to be harassed by some paintings of female nudes > hanging in a hallway. The city removed the paintings the following day. It > used to be that when the majority of people in some state/county/town > disapproved of some instance of expression, they could suppress it. This was > bad. Nowadays, it takes just one zealot to suppress it. This is much worse. > As far as I can see, anyone can claim to be harassed/threatened/offended by > just about anything, and get away with it. Just the other day, I heard that > in Vermont (or was it New Hampshire ?), they're still talking seriously about > an amendment to the state constitution against burning the U.S. flag. Between > the censors on the left and the censors on the right, there's precious little > room remaining for those of us in the middle who believe in tolerating > divergent views. > Toleration of divergent views is not one of those issues that breaks out well along left-right polarities. E.g., Andrea Dworkin's closest aliies on porn are on the xtian right, not among her fellow radical feminists [contrary to the image promoted in some mass media]. Threats to Catcher in the Rye in libraries are far more common than incidents like the one in Menlo Park. > > Violence against women is too real, > > Strongly agreed, but a newsgroup article is not an act of violence. > Legally, that's a question yet to be resolved. In any case, this is hardly cyrpto-related. I would far rather lurk as the mathematicians discuss factoring. I learn more [even if I only get one word in three :-] =================================== Rich Dutcher, San Francisco Greens P.O. Box 77005, San Francisco, California 94107 USA "That's libertarians for you - anarchists who want police protection from their slaves." Kim Stanley Robinson, "Green Mars" Greens, of course, only enslave plants - so weed-whackers work better than cops ... ====================================

3 2