- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

True Crypt is Not Secure
by Yush Bhardwaj 30 Jul '15

30 Jul '15

BitLocker is better or I should try something else ? WARNING: Using TrueCrypt is not secure http://krebsonsecurity.com/2014/05/true-goodbye-using-truecrypt-is-not-secu… http://truecrypt.sourceforge.net/ *Yush Bhardwaj*

14 20

Best court document you've read in your life
by Seth 30 Jul '15

30 Jul '15

Includes interesting info about Target shopping chain pulling surveillance video to identify a Tracphone buyer, surveillance drone usage in support of car-theft ring on Mare Island in the Bay Area, threatening the local Vallejo police department, Christian repent, you name it. And of course the obligatory dipshit move or two by the defendant in the criminal complaint, such as leaving his drivers license under the seat of a stolen car. Starts getting good around page 20. Hat tips to Jacob AppleBaum and @ncweaver (twitter) https://twitter.com/ioerror/status/624249473779257344 http://www1.icsi.berkeley.edu/~nweaver/vallejo.pdf

1 0

Kentucky Man Jailed For Shooting Down Drone... Privacy, Trespass, Creeping, Etc
by grarpamp 30 Jul '15

30 Jul '15

http://tech.slashdot.org/story/15/07/29/142227/kentucky-man-arrested-after-… "We’re not going to let it go," he said. "Because our rights are being trampled daily," he said. "Not on a local level only - but on a state and federal level."

1 0

Obama Orders Exaflop CPUs... Spy And Police You
by grarpamp 30 Jul '15

30 Jul '15

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/obamas-new-executive-order-says-the-us-wil… The initiative will primarily be a partnership between the Department of Energy, Department of Defense, and National Science Foundation, which will be designing supercomputers primarily for use by NASA, *the FBI*, the National Institutes of Health, *the Department of Homeland Security*, and NOAA. Each of those agencies will be allowed to provide input during the early stages of the development of these new computers. Big data... * Relatively new stakeholders, in addition to the traditional role of killing you provided by DoD/DoE. For Science...

1 0

Re: Open Fabs
by wirelesswarrior＠Safe-mail.net 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

-------- Original Message -------- From: jim bell <jdb10987(a)yahoo.com> Apparently from: cypherpunks-bounces(a)cpunks.org To: Zenaan Harkness <zen(a)freedbms.net>, "cypherpunks(a)cpunks.org" <cypherpunks(a)cpunks.org> Subject: Re: Open Fabs Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 16:40:40 +0000 (UTC) ----- Original Message ----- From: Zenaan Harkness <zen(a)freedbms.net> On 7/29/15, wirelesswarrior(a)safe-mail.net <wirelesswarrior(a)safe-mail.net> wrote: >> For CPunks what's needed is a DIY Electron Beam Litho apparatus. Its >> basically an electron microscope in reverse. For relatively simple chips it >> could be more than adequate as its possible eliminates the need and >> complexity, chemistry, etc. for masks and can perform most all process >> functions (doping, implantation, etc.) and attain feature sizes commensurate >> with current foundary tech. AFAIK, its possible to build from used >> e-microscopes though maintaining calibration and linarity is something best >> learned in a working environment at someone else's expense. :) One of the >> main shortcomings of EBL is its low production rate since all features must >> be developed by "writing" them, like an old stylevector display, on the >> substrate. >Whereas with "photon lithography" (terminology?) a light source covers >an area (of the mask?) which is then lens-focused down to the >appropriate scale (eg 24nm) onto the silicon and etc physical layer? >Firstly is this minimal understanding correct? That's the way things were about 25 or so years ago. Wafers with photoresist were exposed with machines using UV, which over the years used ever-decreasing wavelengths of UV, in equipment:436. 365nm, and 248nm, eventually reaching 193 nanometer UV. In the 1970's, entire wafer-masks (which covered the entire wafer) were used. This became impractical as feature-sizes were reduced. Step-and-repeat devices ("wafer-steppers) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stepper then allowed exposure of a much smaller portion of a wafer. (these eventually used mirrors, rather than lenses, because it is hard to process UV in a solid lens.) However, because the wavelength of light eventually became a large portion of the size of a chip feature (a line or a space) it was increasingly difficult to 'draw' the picture necessary to expose the resist on the wafer. Due to many ever-more-heroic technologies, it eventually became possible to use 293 nanometer wavelength to expose features far smaller than the wavelength itself, which would have been considered phenomenal in the 1970's. These days, EUV ("extreme ultraviolet") has been used for ever more small features. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_ultraviolet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extreme_ultraviolet_lithography EUV is strongly absorbed by air, so such exposure is typically done in a vacuum. > > Is this using near-field optics? There also has been experimentation with soft x-rays using wiggler-type linear accelerators. > > The differences between photons and electrons enables e-microscopes and EBL (which also operates in the vacuum) to avoid the optical-based limitations. > >Secondly is there any potential areal electron emission device (as >opposed to point electron emission device) comparable to current litho >tech (areal photon emission)? None that I'm aware of. But EUV will take over from electron-beam: The latter is quite slow, and typically has been used mostly for making masks.

2 1

Re: Open Fabs
by wirelesswarrior＠Safe-mail.net 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

-------- Original Message -------- From: Zenaan Harkness <zen(a)freedbms.net> Apparently from: cypherpunks-bounces(a)cpunks.org To: cypherpunks(a)cpunks.org Subject: Re: Open Fabs Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2015 09:27:53 +0000 > On 7/29/15, wirelesswarrior(a)safe-mail.net <wirelesswarrior(a)safe-mail.net> wrote: > > For CPunks what's needed is a DIY Electron Beam Litho apparatus. Its > > basically an electron microscope in reverse. For relatively simple chips it > > could be more than adequate as its possible eliminates the need and > > complexity, chemistry, etc. for masks and can perform most all process > > functions (doping, implantation, etc.) and attain feature sizes commensurate > > with current foundary tech. AFAIK, its possible to build from used > > e-microscopes though maintaining calibration and linarity is something best > > learned in a working environment at someone else's expense. :) One of the > > main shortcomings of EBL is its low production rate since all features must > > be developed by "writing" them, like an old stylevector display, on the > > substrate. > > Whereas with "photon lithography" (terminology?) a light source covers > an area (of the mask?) which is then lens-focused down to the > appropriate scale (eg 24nm) onto the silicon and etc physical layer? > Firstly is this minimal understanding correct? > > Secondly is there any potential areal electron emission device (as > opposed to point electron emission device) comparable to current litho > tech (areal photon emission)? There was research and patenting in this area beginning in the 60-70s but I not seen any articles showing use.

1 0

Re: Open Fabs
by wirelesswarrior＠Safe-mail.net 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

For CPunks what's needed is a DIY Electron Beam Litho apparatus. Its basically an electron microscope in reverse. For relatively simple chips it could be more than adequate as its possible eliminates the need and complexity, chemistry, etc. for masks and can perform most all process functions (doping, implantation, etc.) and attain feature sizes commensurate with current foundary tech. AFAIK, its possible to build from used e-microscopes though maintaining calibration and linarity is something best learned in a working environment at someone else's expense. :) One of the main shortcomings of EBL is its low production rate since all features must be developed by "writing" them, like an old stylevector display, on the substrate. -------- Original Message -------- From: grarpamp <grarpamp(a)gmail.com> Apparently from: cypherpunks-bounces(a)cpunks.org To: "cypherpunks(a)cpunks.org" <cypherpunks(a)cpunks.org> Subject: Re: Open Fabs Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2015 22:20:41 -0400 > > Steve Kinney wrote: > > If a market is willing to pay enough to support and grow the > > project, it can be done. Are there potential partners and large > > scale consumers for "top security through total transparency" to > > make an open hardware project viable today? > > > > One potential route would be to broker a deal to pool the > > resources of specialty hardware integrators who already have a > > market base for high security "solutions." The Open Office > > project pulled off something similar years ago, obtaining major > > funding and support from IBM and others who wanted Microsoft out > > of their hair. So, who wants a shot at defending some of their > > digital assets from outfits like NSA and GHCQ, badly enough to pay > > for it? > > > > The first place I would start shopping this "crypto anarchist" > > project around would be State security services - pretty much any > > small to mid-sized outfit not in BRICS or FVEYE could be a > > potential market for auditable scrambler phones for military > > commanders, senior elected officials, diplomatic corps and > > double-nought spies. From there to high performance servers and > > workstations would be a natural progression. > > > > I haven't looked at how the Black Phone folks are doing lately, > > but that looks like the kind of product line where open hardware > > might find its first viable home. > > > > Another consideration: One needs not necessarily own the facility > > where the chips are made: ISO quality assurance programs already > > in place support client access for audit and validation. A > > contract that specifies the client's intrusive presence during > > every phase of production and handling would cost extra, but a QA > > process that assumes the presence of hostile actors on the shop > > floor is definitely possible. Such a process would also be needed > > at a dedicated facility: One must assume the presence of hostile > > actors there, too. :o) > > That's basically all part of the idea. And that some serious multi > philosophical combination of hardcore Stallman Ghandi Cpunk > Riseup Coder Maker Opensource Auditor like motherfuckers all > build, run and observe the joint from the ground up as essentially a > crosschecked incorruptible thing that anyone can look at. > > Todays shops are a mutable system of hierarchical employee > paychecks, payoffs, closed door privacy and backroom games.

3 2

first annual I2Pcon in Toronto August 15-16 #I2PCon #I2PToronto
by Seth 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

I2P Meetup Hacklab.to Saturday, 15 August 2015 at 2:00 PM - Sunday, 16 August 2015 at 11:30 PM (EDT) Toronto, Ontario https://www.eventbrite.ca/e/i2p-meetup-tickets-17773984466 I should also mention that I2P's budget contains 0% government funding. https://twitter.com/GetI2P/status/583731852504133633 If you have long term concerns (like me) about the Tor project's funded-by-the-adversary-slopping-at-the-government-blood-money-trough funding model, maybe you can (like me) put your money where your mouth is and kick some Bitcoin down to a mixnet privacy project that does suffer from this compromise.

1 0

another google nugget
by Juan 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

Yep. I've forgotten about this one. Just the thing for all the list's neocunts. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston_Dynamics "don't be evil"

10 10

"Stagefright" text attack to Android.
by jim bell 29 Jul '15

29 Jul '15

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/2419531/text-based-android-stagefr… "A MOBILE SECURITY RESEARCHER has done his work and found a cluster of vulnerabilities in Android that, when combined, present a problem for 95 percent of the user base. This is bad stuff. Despite references to unicorns in the official information, there is also some goosebump-inducing wordplay. The official warning is that almost anyone with an Android mobile phone can be sent one text message and be plunged into security chaos. This threat package has been dubbed Stagefright by Joshua Drake from the security outfit Zimperium zLabs. "Gaining remote code execution privileges merely by having access to the mobile number? Enter Stagefright. The targets for this kind of attack can be anyone from prime ministers, government officials, company executives, security officers to IT managers," said the firm in a blog post. "[We] dived into the deepest corners of Android code and discovered what we believe to be the worst Android vulnerabilities discovered to date. These issues in Stagefright code critically expose 95 percent of Android devices, an estimated 950 million devices." If this does not have you standing on a chair pushing your phone away with a broomstick, then get ready for this. Zimperium said that Stagefright is worse than Heartbleed - and we all know how that worked out."

1 0