- cypherpunks-legacy@lists.ogf.org

Hidden encrypted messages
by derek＠cs.wisc.edu 11 Mar '93

11 Mar '93

If true encryption is ever outlawed in the U.S., I wonder if it's possible to have an encryption technique that preserves plausible deniability. That is, if seemingly innocuous messages could contain encrypted messages (for example, first-letter-of-words strung together). In such a case, I'd think that it would be difficult to prove that said message contained a hidden message unless the decryption key was available (the embedded encrypted message wouldn't look suspicious, even if an onlooker knew where to look). Is this a common idea in cryptographic circles? derek

4 3

MEET: San Diego Trip in my future
by Derek Atkins 10 Mar '93

10 Mar '93

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi. I am going to be in the San Diego area for the weekend of March 20th. I don't know where I'm going to be staying, and I don't know the San Diego area at all. (I do know that I will be near the beach ;-) However I'd like to meet people, if they have time to get together. If you have time and want to meet some time that weekend, please send me a piece of mail and let me know. OBTW -- what are the good 2m and 70cm repeaters out there? ;-) - -derek PGP 2 key available upon request on the key-server: pgp-public-keys(a)toxicwaste.mit.edu - -- Derek Atkins, MIT '93, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Secretary, MIT Student Information Processing Board (SIPB) MIT Media Laboratory, Speech Research Group warlord(a)MIT.EDU PP-ASEL N1NWH -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.2 iQBuAgUBK559fDh0K1zBsGrxAQFCeQLFGYxSChJPELdBQoutkMYa55OuxJP3e9wW PTEsrn6U1sC5p6SnyC7Al9mb38vBtmoSLnT88udMwgsbE0dJ0P//lRm4MZUVJINn 83yy3ouSyKLSk/pq2YN6Bcg= =6M90 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

FWEE!: F-117A post considered harmful
by robichau＠lambda.msfc.nasa.gov 10 Mar '93

10 Mar '93

[ disclaimer: I don't work on classified projects anymore. My experience as an aircraft mechanic is with helicopters. I read a lot. ] I believe that the recent anonymous "whistle" purporting to reveal information about the F-117A aircraft: a) didn't reveal any "real" information, and in fact contained several factual errors. For example, the Tacit Rainbow program has been cancelled for some time. Flight characteristics of the F-117A are very similar to the A-7, which is markedly subsonic. b) created the appearance of distributing classified information. Whistleblowing on fraud/waste/abuse is one thing. Disclosing classified information, however- especially when it's not relevant to revealing fraud, waste, or abuse- is probably not a good way to keep the whisteblower group safe from the Three-Letter Gang. c) created the appearance that the whistleblowers group is for posting anything too "sensitive" for normal, attributed posting. I didn't think it was; from reading this list, I thought it was for blowing the whistle- not blowing smoke. Perhaps a charter for alt.whistleblowers was posted, and I missed it. If not, I submit that we should try to develop one. Regards, -Paul -- Paul Robichaux, KD4JZG | May explode if disposed of improperly. Mission Software Development Div. | I'm not white- I'm Euro-American. New Technology, Inc. | RIPEM key on request.

2 1

March 1993 Communications of ACM Denning on Encryption
by richard_mezirka＠askinc.ask.com 10 Mar '93

10 Mar '93

I've just read with considerable distress the Dorothy Denning article in my March 1993, Communications of the ACM and all the follow up discussions supporting or refuting her positions. I can not in any way support the further erosion of the rights I believe I have to personal privacy and protection from the abuses of government. I'm contacting the EFF as a concerned member and the ACM Risk forum... are there more actions we can and should take? Professor Denning does not convince me of the benevolence of the government nor the necessity for private enterprise to foster government programs (such as building in wire tap support or reducing the effort of government agencies to invade private messages or interactions amongst citizens). A precidential extension might have the auto makers building in governors into all vehicles such that they can't exceed the national speed limit to support traffic law enforcement (the crooks couldn't have faster cars than the cops). I'd suggest cypherpunks get and read the article if they haven't already done so (it covers both wire tap and , as a not too subtle tag on, encryption availability). I'd also suggest we direct our responses to those who can derail this or similar legislation with the EFF and ACM as two likely candidates and congress folks as additional ones. My personal professional dilemma is how can I raise consciousness of the quiet majority who will not immediately be impacted... like my retired parents who fear computers like the flu and still have a strong belief that the government protects their rights rather than restricts them. Their response to Steve Jackson's tiff with the treasury department and law enforcement was along the lines that if he had nothing to hide the government wouldn't have bothered him. Still watching quietly, worried, and now letting others know... Rich

2 1

zip version for pgp2.2?
by John.Nieder＠f33.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG 10 Mar '93

10 Mar '93

* Reply to msg originally in Cypherpunks <INET> BK> I just downloaded pgp22.zip from soda, and pkunzip complains about BK> every file having a bad checksum. I'm still using pkunzip 1.1, and I BK> know that pgp20 had problems with some versions of pkunzip. Do I need BK> to get pkunzip 2.04g? The problem I found was that the file was not only compressed with the 2.04? PKZip, but that the -d option had been invoked to preserve a very silly \DOC subdirectory for the documentation. The result was that PGP22.ZIP could not be unZIPped with _either_ version's simple PKUNZIP command, but required the 2.04 version with the -d switch in the command line. I finally got the file unZIPped, but rezipped it as a simple .ZIPfile - without the ridiculous subdirectory - with v 1.10, which will unpack with either version. It's this package that I'm passing along. Hope this helps. JN ... When the going gets tough, the smart get lost. --- Blue Wave/Opus v2.12 [NR]-- John Nieder - via FidoNet node 1:125/555 UUCP - ...!uunet!hoptoad!kumr!fidogate!33!John.Nieder INTERNET - John.Nieder(a)f33.n125.z1.FIDONET.ORG

1 0

Steve Jackson Games - Legal issues resolved?
by fergp＠sytex.com 10 Mar '93

10 Mar '93

This text was extracted from RISKS DIGEST 14.39 - 8<------- Cut Here ----------------------- Date: Tue, 9 Mar 93 10:25:35 -0500 From: Eric Haines <erich(a)eye.com> Subject: Steve Jackson Games/Secret Service wrapup [Eric Haines, erich(a)eye.com, sent me a Houston Chronicle article by Joe Abernathy, a sometime contributor to RISKS, which Eric found in the electronic mail magazine "Desperado" ("no, it's not a magazine about hacking"). "There can be justice in the world, after all..." EH. I cannot include the long copyrighted article here, but have excerpted from the beginning, as follows. It's a good article. Alas, no date. But Joe may still be available at Joe.Abernathy(a)houston.chron.com if you want to dig up the whole thing. Also, see RISKS-9.95,96;10.01,ff. for the earlier history. PGN] Steve Jackson Games/Secret Service wrapup By JOE ABERNATHY Copyright 1993, Houston Chronicle [no date given] AUSTIN -- An electronic civil rights case against the Secret Service closed Thursday with a clear statement by federal District Judge Sam Sparks that the Service failed to conduct a proper investigation in a notorious computer crime crackdown, and went too far in retaining custody of seized equipment. The judge's formal findings in the complex case, which will likely set new legal precedents, won't be returned until later. [...] The judge's rebuke apparently convinced the Department of Justice to close its defense after calling only ... one of the several government witnesses on hand. "The Secret Service didn't do a good job in this case. We know no investigation took place. Nobody ever gave any concern as to whether (legal) statutes were involved. We know there was damage," Sparks said in weighing damages. The lawsuit, brought by Steve Jackson Games of Austin, said that the seizure of three computers violated the Privacy Protection Act, which provides First Amendment protections against seizing a publisher's works in progress. The lawsuit further said that since one of the computers was being used to run a bulletin board system containing private electronic mail, the seizure violated the Electronic Communications Privacy Act in regards to the 388 callers of the Illuminati BBS. The testimony described by Joe was rather strange. Agents testified that there was no criminal connection, they were not even trained in the Privacy Protection Act, and it took them only an hour to discover the true nature of the situation. The Electronic Frontier Foundation spent over $200,000 bringing this case to trial. The legal ramifications are considerable. Perhaps someone from EFF will contribute an analysis to RISKS, although many EFFers (and I) are at Computers, Freedom, and Privacy 93 this week. Don't hold your breath, but perhaps we need to wait for the judge? PGN 8<------- Cut Here ----------------------- Cheers. Paul Ferguson | Network Integration Consultant | "All of life's answers are Alexandria, Virginia USA | on TV." fergp(a)sytex.com (Internet) | -- Homer Simpson sytex.com!fergp (UUNet) | 1:109/229 (FidoNet) | PGP public encryption key available upon request.

1 0

FWEE!: Re: F-117A post considered harmful
by jthomas＠mango.mitre.org 10 Mar '93

10 Mar '93

Hmm... I thought that was the point. When I read the F-117A message, I thought the poster was trying to point out that a "whistleblower"-type newsgroup could be abused by people trying to leak classified information (not that that should be news to anyone). I didn't take the information in it any more seriously than I took DeadBeat's request that I send him my e-mail address through anon.penet.fi, so he could describe a security hole there. Am I the only one who got that impression? Joe

1 0

NSA TApping
by kelly＠netcom.com 10 Mar '93

10 Mar '93

Xref: netcom.com sci.crypt:12315 alt.privacy:6117 Path: netcom.com!netcomsv!decwrl!waikato.ac.nz!aukuni.ac.nz!cs18.cs.aukuni.ac.nz!pgut1 Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.privacy Subject: NSA tapping of UK communications Message-ID: <1993Mar8.104302.10737(a)cs.aukuni.ac.nz> From: pgut1(a)cs.aukuni.ac.nz (PeterClaus Gutmann ) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 1993 10:43:02 GMT Organization: Computer Science Dept. University of Auckland Lines: 26 The following appeared in the NZ Herald on March 4th - I thought it might be of interest to sci.crypt and alt.privacy readers. It backs up claims made in places like "The Puzzle Palace": " A former MI6 officer told the Daily Express that US agents tapped royal calls on behalf of the GCHQ spy centre. Mr James Rusbridger told the paper two top-secret listening stations - operated by the NSA - illegally tap large numbers of private conversations from their bases in Cornwall and Yorkshire. 'By getting the Americans to do it, the British Government is able to say truthfully, though misleadingly, that GCHQ does not tap domestic telephone calls', Mr Rusbridger said. 'The reason the Government is resisting an official investigation into the tapping of royal conversations is that it would be forced to admit publicly that these American owned and controlled listening stations exist on UK soil'. Incidentally, NZ has it's own NSA-controlled listening stations, the largest being at Tangimoana on the South Island. Peter. -- pgut1@cs.aukuni.ac.nz||p_gutmann@cs.aukuni.ac.nz||gutmann_p@kosmos.wcc.govt.nz peterg@kcbbs.gen.nz||peter@nacjack.gen.nz||peter@phlarnschlorpht.nacjack.gen.nz (In order of preference - one of 'em's bound to work) -- C++ will do for C what Algol 68 did for Algol --

1 0

Re: Questions about PGP 2.2 compilation messages
by Eric Fogleman 10 Mar '93

10 Mar '93

Nickey, I recently compiled _pgp2.1_ on my sun4 and had a similar problem... I got a binary that seemed to work, but I got a list of warnings. In my case, the program actually had a bug in it; it was trying to compare an unsigned character variable (8 bits) for maximum path length to 256 (nine bits) as defined in the source code. I asked around on the list and I got the same sort of responses you did... I ended up redefining and changing the compare statement to make the compiler happy and still get the intended code... So, pgp may not be entirely bug free... The sun4 compiler may be more conscientious about flagging things. I'd suggest looking through the source to see if there's something simple. In my case, it was. Let me know how you fare; I'll be going through the same thing shortly... Eric Fogleman

1 0

PGP: zip version for pgp2.2?
by Duncan Frissell 10 Mar '93

10 Mar '93

Even PGP2.1 wouldn't unzip with PKUNZIP 1.x. I had to use PKUNZIP 2.4. I assume PGP22.ZIP is the same. Duncan Frissell

2 1