- cypherpunks-legacy@lists.ogf.org

Shamir papers in postscript
by fnerd＠smds.com 04 May '93

04 May '93

I have the postscript versions of the papers of the two Adi Shamir talks I summarized last week. Shamir gives permission to distribute them freely. If anyone's interested, please mail to me, and depending on how many ask for them, I'll either mail directly or post to the list. -fnerd Titles: ``On The Generation of Multivariate Polynomials Which Are Hard To Factor'' and ``Cryptographic Applications of Birational Permutations'' by Adi Shamir Weizmann Institute FIRST ABSTRACT: In this talk we consider the difficulty of factoring multivariate polynomials F(x,y,z,...) modulo n. We consider in particular the case in which F is the product of two randomly chosen polynomials P and Q with algebraically specified coefficients, and n is the product of two randomly chosen primes p and q. The main result of this talk is that (with one trivial exception), the problem of factoring F is at least as hard as the factorization of n whenever P and Q are chosen from the same sample space, regardless of what may be known about its form. SECOND ABSTRACT: Many public key cryptographic schemes (such as cubic RSA) are based on low degree polynomials whose inverses are high degree polynomials. These functions are very easy to compute, but time consuming to invert even by their legitimate users. To make such schemes more efficient, we consider in this talk the class of birational permutations f over k-tuples of numbers, in which both f and f^-1 are low degree multivariate rational functions. We develop new families of birational permutations, and describe how to use them in new cryptographic schemes which are faster than the known schemes. --

2 1

FWD: Hearings by Congressman Markey
by John (FuzzFace/Fast-Eddie) McMahon 03 May '93

03 May '93

Date: 03 May 1993 09:12:58 -0400 (EDT) From: carl(a)malamud.com (Carl Malamud) Subject: Hearings by Congressman Markey To: announce(a)malamud.com Org: Internet Talk Radio Channel: Internet Town Hall Program: Special Program Release: May 2, 1993 (Hearings were on April 29, 1993) Content: Hearings by House Subcommittee on Telecommunications and Finance Chairman Edward Markey held oversight hearings on April 29 on the rights and responsibilities of individuals and organizations in cyberspace. A high tech presentation highlighting issues such as encryption, electronic invasions of privacy, fraud, civil liberties and computer crime, preceded a panel discussion. For the demonstration, a world-class team of four engineers from Sun and the San Diego Supercomputer Center brought in an HDTV, an ATM switch, an ISDN switch, a Russian satellite dish, a XEROX Liveboard, a BARCO projector with special video equipment, four Sparcstation 10s, a few Sparcstation 2s, and miscellaneous other equipment. The purpose of the demonstration was to show that while our current public policy makes distinctions based on industry, those distinctions have no meaning in the underlying technology. A television is a computer and a computer is a television; a computer is a telephone and vice versa. To demonstrate the latter point, Gage and his associates showed how a new AT&T cellular phone could be changed by any 13-year old into a scanner. The demonstration also showed how DES code could be pulled off anonymous FTP systems in Finland, yet US industry was unable to export this technology. The panel consisted of Raymond Kammer, Acting Director of NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology), who provided testimony on technology standard setting issues including the government-endorsed "Clipper Chip" encryption technology; Mr. Bruce Sterling, noted science fiction writer on cyberspace and also author of the non-fiction book, "The Hacker Crackdown: Law and Disorder on the Electronic Frontier," which discusses computer crime and civil liberties; Mr. John Lucich, State Investigator with the New Jersey Division of Criminal Justice. Mr. Lucich combats computer and electronic fraud crimes by electronically infiltrating the underground computer bulletin boards of the "hacker" and "phone phreak" community; and Mr. Joel Reidenberg, Professor of Law at Fordham University Law School, who has studied how personal privacy is affected by telecommunications and computer technologies and the various privacy protections afforded citizens of different countries. We would like to apologize in advance for the very poor audio quality of this tape. The hearing room was quite antiquated, and was full of ungrounded electricity, lots and lots of electronic equipment, wireless mikes, and PA systems turned up way too loud. We hope the content makes the mind happier than the ears. Support for this program was provided by O'Reilly & Associates and by Sun Microsystems. ITH Program Files: 050293_spec_01_HALL.au (Testimony of John Gage) 050293_spec_02_HALL.au (Testimony of Panel) ITH Readme File: 050293_spec_HALL.readme (This File) For information on Internet Talk Radio, write to info(a)radio.com. More information on Internet Town Hall will be available shortly. For a current, partial listing of sites, write to sites(a)radio.com.

1 0

Need permission... or info...
by crunch＠netcom.com 03 May '93

03 May '93

Greetings, On the EFF Conference on the WELL, some people over there who are NOT in the cypherpunks list want to get the question list we generated at the last meeting. John G. posted it but no revisions were done. Is someone going to be adding more stuff to the list, and is it OK for me to cross post thje list into the EFF Conference on the WELL?? Thanx JD

1 0

PGP: Re: Tough Choices: PGP vs. RSA Data Security
by edgar＠spectrx.Saigon.COM 03 May '93

03 May '93

The conflict between RSA and PGP -may- be about to be solved. You all may recall my "announcement" of an effort to create a USA-Legal version of PGP by incorporating RSAREF code. Among several offers to help, I received the following messages: ======================================================================== To: spectrx!edgar (Edgar W. Swank) Subject: Re: PGP: USA-Legal PGP Project In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 28 Apr 93 01:02:23 PDT." <ouiP3B12w165w(a)spectrx.saigon.com> Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 12:37:30 -0600 From: "L. Detweiler" <szebra!longs.lance.colostate.edu!ld231782> >I confirmed with Jim Bidzos, President of RSA, who was >present at the meeting, that a USA Legal version of PGP could be >constructed by just replacing certain sections of code with free code >from RSAREF. Since source for both PGP and RSAREF are available, this >sounds like an easy job. Since no-one's actually done it yet, perhaps >it's not, but I will try. I hope I haven't bitten off more than I can >chew. At best, I can compile and test only the MSDOS version of PGP. I >will certainly need help if USA-Legal MAC, AMIGA, UNIX, etc. versions >are to be available. I'm sorry Mr. Bidzos didn't tell you, but the PGP development group is already looking very seriously into integrating RSAREF, and one person phr(a)america.Telebit.COM (Paul Rubin) has already done it. If you would like to join the list send mail to prz(a)sage.cgd.ucar.EDU (Philip Zimmermann). ========================================================================== Date: Wed, 28 Apr 93 19:32:55 PDT From: szebra!america.Telebit.COM!phr (Paul Rubin) Message-Id: <9304290232.AA10138(a)america.TELEBIT.COM> To: spectrx!edgar Subject: PGP: USA-Legal PGP Project >I confirmed with Jim Bidzos, President of RSA, who was >present at the meeting, that a USA Legal version of PGP could be >constructed by just replacing certain sections of code with free code >from RSAREF. Not quite true. RSAREF's license requires that the RSAREF routines be called only in certain ways unless special permission is obtained. Calling the RSAREF routines in the generally permitted manner won't work with PGP because PGP's file format is different than what RSAREF expects. PGP needs to call RSAREF in a non-standard way which is easy technically, but needs special permission from Bidzos. Attempts to get such permission have thus far been inconclusive. ====================================================================== I am msging Phil Z. to ask to be placed on "the list". I'm also trying to get more details from Paul Rubin, offering my assistance, and forwarding to him the other offers of assistance I received. It remains to be seen whether RSA's witholding of permission to use non-standard interfaces to RSAREF is reasonable or designed to be obstructive. When we find out, I think we should choose sides (if we -need- to choose sides) accordingly. It looks like the PGPers have made a good faith effort to at least meet RSA halfway. A "PGP-like" "consumer" crypto product which does not exchange keys and messages with PGP will -not- be acceptable. Any such product produced here will almost certainly be export restricted. I am -not- willing to give up my present ability to exchange keys and encrypted data with PGP users outside the USA. (I'm currently exchanging encrypted e-mail with persons in Poland(!!), Germany, and Taiwan). PGP is currently an -international- standard, and, because of ITAR, it's likely to be the -only- international standard for a long time to come. Note that current PGP is legal outside the USA -only- for non-commercial purposes (Phil Zimmerman's "copyleft"). If a USA version is approved by RSA, it will be legal only for non-commercial use inside the USA (RSA's patents & copyrights on RSAREF). If PGP becomes popular (even more so than at present, it's already the leader) worldwide for individual non-commercial use, businesses are going to want a PGP-compatible product they can use for exchanging encrypted data with their (non-business) -customers-. For example, encryption is a good idea if you're ordering merchandise with your credit-card number. Jim Bidzos has told me that Phil Z. or anyone else can get a license from RSA for $20,000 plus minimum $10,000/yr. royalties. If we say we don't want to spend more than 50% of our revenues on licensing, then if Phil can get $60,000 of firm orders for a -commercial- USA version of PGP, he's in (a very profitable) business. $60,000 might be 600 copies at $100 or six site licenses at $10,000. Also, if a -foreign- software producer wants to license a commercial version of PGP useable only overseas, he only needs to deal with Phil (& maybe the other PGP co-authors). But the effect of this would just be to increase the market for a USA commercial version (for businesses who wanted to exchange encrypted data with other businesses, or their own subsidiaries, overseas). I guess anyone who wants to can get onto Phil's list. I'd prefer if you all didn't bombard Paul Rubin with E-mail. I'll post more details of this project here as I get them (unless I'm asked not to). -- edgar(a)spectrx.saigon.com (Edgar W. Swank) SPECTROX SYSTEMS +1.408.252.1005 Silicon Valley, Ca

1 0

Re: RSA patent!
by Peter Honeyman 03 May '93

03 May '93

> Don't patent holders *have* to license patents to all comers? no. peter

1 0

Re: Tough Choices: PGP vs. RSA Data Security
by Peter Honeyman 03 May '93

03 May '93

> re paying a reasonable license fee, I wonder if RSA would cash my check > for (say) $10 if I wrote on the check that it was for a license for > whatever they might claim on PGP. writing conditions on the back of a check don't mean shit. > One wonders what they would do with several hundred checks. discard them, would be my guess. peter

1 0

ANON: Stepping up the pace...
by Stop the Big Brother CHip 03 May '93

03 May '93

Hi All, With all this excitement about clipper, I am questions about a number of points: * are we losing momentum on the anon-server front * we have just 13 remailers deployed... and from what I am given to understand insufficient traffic on all. * did penet II (with PGP inbound encryption similar to PAX) ever materialize?.(how about it Julf??) * what about John Gilmores suggestion for defensible U.S. Anon-sites. * 2 stage usage of anon-servers. * anonymous cash protocols and digital banks? * support of cypherpunks encrypted remailer blocks by aservers. * is anyone besides me working on supporting aliases for MH, the pgpedit script, and pgp 2.2's multiple recipient feature? * is anyone working on converting MajorDomo to support PGP encryption and PGP 2.2 multiple recipient feature and cypherpunk anonymous encrypted return address blocks. (I have already taken a pass at it and it didnt meet my design goals..i.e. runnable from a shell users .forward file, it requires sendmail.cf mods.) * anonymous posting/mail via open NNTP/SMTP servers and header social engineering. Email or reply to the list... cheers kelly -- Parts of this .sig borrowed with permission from T.C.May. Perhaps it will indeed get me busted also. .......................................................................... Kelly Goen | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, kelly(a)netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero Intelligence Systems | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Specialists Inc. | black markets, face banks, data havens, dark | tech, covert channels, shared secrets, | alt.whistleblowers, collapse of governments. Technical Monkeywrench | Public Key: PGP 2.2. | .......................................................................... PGP 2.2 Key available from PGP Keyservers on the Internet. pub 1024/1BA573 1992/09/09 kelly <kelly(a)netcom.com> Key fingerprint = EF 7A 38 99 22 84 E3 3B 90 2A DB 80 DC 65 DA 31 STOP THE WIRETAP CHIP(Clipper Chip)!!

3 2

Re: RSA patent!
by Sy Verpunc 03 May '93

03 May '93

5) (Misuse) Does RSA telling Phil Zimmermann that they will "never" license PGP to use RSA constitute monopolistic abuse? Could you tell us more about this? 6) (Misuse) The underlying purpose of the patent system was to encourage the creative genius for the benefit of the public. Has the public benefited in this case? Don't patent holders *have* to license patents to all comers? If say a rich sugar-daddy could be found who would put up the same scale of money as Lotus and Microsoft have, to use these patents - on behalf of Phil and PGP users - would they be obliged to license it? (I'm assuming if they did they would have to offer roughly similar conditions, and not charge punitively to force us out the market) If yes - then who do we know that's rich? :-) If no - are they doing anything wrong that we could get them in court over? G

1 0

comments solicited (fwd)
by Mike Godwin 03 May '93

03 May '93

Forwarded message:

1 0

RSA patent!
by William Oldacre 03 May '93

03 May '93

To: >Internet:cypherpunks@toad.com Enclosed is the essential text of the "RSA" patent. Now it's time to go to work. 1) (Interference) Is there anything in history wherein someone created a cypher consisting of two parts which could only be broken when they were combined mathematically? Or how about a wax seal created by impressing two images, one after the other-----verifying authenticity? 2) (Interference) Stripped of it's turgid language, does the basic equation fit any other ordinary operation such as factoring some type of equation. Is there some routine mathematical operation in number theory which resembles it? 3) (Invalidity) is there any part of the description language that could be interpreted two different ways? 4) (Misuse) a) Were any federal funds used in this project? Somebody at MIT needs to dig into the public documents there. b) If so, was the government irresponsible in licensing something so useful to the public to a company (in which they are a partner) which makes it's use by the public difficult? Can any evidence be found that this was deliberate? 5) (Misuse) Does RSA telling Phil Zimmermann that they will "never" license PGP to use RSA constitute monopolistic abuse? 6) (Misuse) The underlying purpose of the patent system was to encourage the creative genius for the benefit of the public. Has the public benefited in this case? 7) Keep thinking, and volunteer to take on some aspect of this and research it. Most research is not done by attorneys but, rather, by assitants who simply assemble the case histories for them to work from. By doing this work ourselves, any attorney or company wishing to challenge this patent in court is halfway there. 1475889 2329848 E/ CRYPTOGRAPHIC COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM AND METHOD -------------------------------------------------------------------- Inventors: Adleman Leonard M (US); Rivest Ronald L (US); Shamir Adi (US) Assigned to: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Code: 52912 Patent Number: 4405829 Application Number: US 860586 Application Date: 12/14/77 Issue Date: 9/20/83 Patent Type: Utility Citations: Cited by 29 later patents Abstract: --------- A cryptographic communications system and method. The system includes a communications channel coupled to at least one terminal having an encoding device and to at least one terminal having a decoding device. A message-to-be-transferred is enciphered to ciphertext at the encoding terminal by first encoding the message as a number M in a predetermined set, and then raising that number to a first predetermined power (associated with the intended receiver) and finally computing the remainder, or residue, C, when the exponentiated number is divided by the original message at the decoding terminal in a similar manner by raising the ciphertext to a second predetermined power (associated with the intended receiver), and then computing the residue, M', when the exponentiated ciphertext is divided by the product of the two predetermined prime numbers associated with the intended receiver. The residue M' corresponds to the original encoded message M. Exemplary Claim: ---------------- A communications system for transferring a message signal Mi comprising k terminals, wherein each terminal is characterized by an encoding key Ei (ei, ni) and decoding key Di (ei, ni), where i 1,2, . . . ,k, and wherein Mi corresponds to a number representative of a message signal to be transmitted from the ith terminal, ni is a composite number of the form ni pi X qi Pi and qi are prime numbers, ei is relatively prime to 1 cm(pi-1,qi-1), di is a multiplicative inverse of ei(mod(1 cm((pi-1),(qi-1)))) wherein a first terminal includes means for encoding a digital message word signal MA for transmission from said first terminal (i A) to a second terminal (i B), said first terminal including: means for transforming said message word signal MA to one or more message block word signals MA', each block word signal MA being a number representative of a portion of said message word signal MA in the range 0 < OR = MA < OR = nB-1, means for transforming each of said message block word signals MA'' to a ciphertext word signal CA, CA corresponding to a number representative of an encoded form of said message block word signal MA'', whereby: CA identical MA''eB(mod nB).

1 0