- cypherpunks-legacy@lists.ogf.org

Re: Encrypted voice protocol?
by Bob Stratton 05 Mar '93

05 Mar '93

> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 93 10:39:20 -0500 > From: Theodore Ts'o <tytso(a)athena.mit.edu> > Subject: Encrypted voice protocol? > > > So for roughly $200 US, and a little software, it should be possible to > put together something that would do encrypted voice communications > over the network. Is there any interest in developing some sort of > standard protocol and software to do encrypted, compressed voice > communications over TCP/IP? > I don't know how many of you are at sites on the MBONE, or multicast backbone. There are already a few pieces of code out there for experimentation with transmission of audio and video information, in a variety of forms/encoding, and probably the most widely used tool, "vat - the Visual Audio Tool", already has provisions for carrying on encrypted audio teleconferences via IP. In fact, it's as simple as typing a key into a field, and the tool will DES en/decrypt the conference. --Strat, budding multicast weenie

2 1

MISC: Internet Talk Radio
by root＠rmsdell.ftl.fl.us 05 Mar '93

05 Mar '93

This is not really relevant to the topics of this list, but... > From: tcmay(a)netcom.com (Timothy C. May) > > I just read in the local paper about "Internet Radio," which sounds like > some kind of transmission of compressed audio, if I have the details right. > Anybody know anything about this? What they are going to do is produce talk radio programs in professional audio studios, and then instead of broadcasting on the air, they will convert it all to a large (estimated about 15MB) sound file, which is then widely distributed using ftp, and played by anyone who wants, on their workstation (or a PC with a sound card). I have an article on it, if you want me to send it to you, let me know. -- Yanek Martinson yanek(a)novavax.nova.edu

2 1

Revocation of key...
by babani＠cs.Buffalo.EDU 05 Mar '93

05 Mar '93

Well, since the remailer won't be running in "my" account at UB anymore... I've issued a compromise certificate for the key to the remailer: Anonymous Remailer <babani(a)cs.buffalo.edu> -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.1 mQCNAitx/vQAAAEEAOUPjAfSeFmMsq7eWN47LzOwdSXmXoArMJOcBZ0bB3NRR3Nc BF7ZIIbY5m/b/rBn6+IimthV/aa39hKOSPPnFZn7kxIAUwoolMmxUUPJRzcRcTDK bsgLMCPfDuE8MWj0R960oaAFEE+yCCoDNiyPl6goN3XluVeie+ehVSuMvgdRAAUR iQCVAgUgK5fLK+ehVSuMvgdRAQF7KQP/exSgzXs4GWB39ZwIGCuGvqlIeTaDOmSc Uru9F8LNO8ytz2BCxdQA3N5Aj9AzNL3U5Fhbum/ZhP0MmfrYqT3S+BjEvMNdFpTp 7K8ApRgx3upqcd6I4mhAgUjlygl4dHJl/b8kdblO7unzRq38vSxyiIOXLwlY33lF 9H/n3fWKlTi0KkFub255bW91cyBSZW1haWxlciA8YmFiYW5pQGNzLmJ1ZmZhbG8u ZWR1Pg== =S9lO -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- -- +==== Internet: babani(a)cs.buffalo.edu ===+======== Amateur-Radio: N2LYC ======+ ! Bitnet: V078LNGT(a)ubvms.BITNET | UUCP: rutgers!ub!babani ! ! Alternate: an173(a)cleveland.freenet.edu | Plsure dpnds on the othrs prmison. ! +== PGP key available. (If you don't know what a PGP key is... find out!) ==+

1 0

Re: ANON: Sysadmin Policies at Universities (and HS)
by jordan＠imsi.com 05 Mar '93

05 Mar '93

From babani(a)cs.buffalo.edu Fri Mar 5 13:56:06 1993 Here is the responce I got as to WHY I CANT RUN A REMAILER IN MY ACCOUNT... Why do you continue to think it's "your" account? If you want to have such a thing to call "your account" you're welcome to plunk down some $$$, buy a machine, get yerself a network link, and remail to your heart's content. If I were another CS student at UB, I would be bummed if the scarce (by your account, and by most others at universities) cycles I needed to get my homework done were being given away to folks all over the world via a remailer. That's all those machines need is more sendmail processes running :-) /jordan

2 1

Re: Wasted BAndwidth
by Duncan Frissell 05 Mar '93

05 Mar '93

>They're not going to *care* that the last remailer on the chain (who >will, presumably, be identifiable) wasn't responsible for the message >which was sent. They're just going to invade the building the >remailing host is in, kill everyone in the room, and destroy the >machine, and all the machines around it. If they don't know which is >the remailer, they'll just blow up the whole block. They don't care > >I do not advocate censorship. I advocate responsibility. > > Marc In another couple of years, the "remailers" will not be *in* buildings but running as distributed processes on machines from Anchorage to Wellington. Hard to raid. You will be able to set up your own communications server located "somewhere on the nets" to handle message forwarding to you. Hard to raid a billion "processes". This over romatization of government power and violence is peculiar to writers of technothrillers and certain libertarians. You know who you are. Government is good at point force. It can bomb and raid fairly effectively. This ability to put a mass of organized muscle in the field was decisive in earlier technological eras. If you are fighting peasants bound to the soil or undisciplined barbarians, a Roman Square could prevail. Government is less able to apply force on a widespread basis. It depends on the respect, fear, or acquiescence of its subjects. If those weaken or disappear governments weaken or disappear. Markets apply "force" (incentives) across a wide front. They do not require fear or acquiescence to survive. They are self-enforcing. Even commies know trade. As we become stronger as individuals (I just spent a week's pay to buy more computing power (hardware) than existed on earth in 1955) we have less fear of (others) government and greater capabilities for self- government. The "anarchy" debates are beside the point. If the market is engaged in breaking down hierarchies, the government monopoly cannot stand either. King Canute cannot order back the sea. Radical restructuring (peristroika) is on the march. Strong individuals cannot avoid replacing "others government" with self government. Others government is only stable when a monopoly institution can maintain control over information and force. Information and force are becoming widely spread. We are seeing the collapse of the coercion metaphor at least in its wholesale form. When people and markets turn away from the state, it disappears. If its monopoly is broken, we will be in the realm of competing legal systems. Duncan Frissell

1 0

UCS Computing Usage Policy.
by Duncan Frissell 05 Mar '93

05 Mar '93

>Here is a copy of the policy that my system administrator was referring to: > >From: gerland(a)ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (James R. Gerland) >Subject: UCS Computing Usage Policy. So call the ACLU and see if they are interested. Buffalo is a State Uni and subject to the 1st Amendment. Sounds like they are censoring messages based on content (or lack of content in the case of anonymity. Could the University Post office refuse to accept or deliver anonymous letters? It is unlikely that a government could force a publisher to reveal the identity of an anonymous author. There are cases in point in which people wanted NAACP membership lists where the orders were overturned on the basis of freedom of association and speech. Likewise anti-mask ordinances in some cities. As long as your remailer wasn't causing volume problems, regulation would fall outside the "time, place, and manner" restrictions. Maybe the Electronic Frontier Foundation would be interested as well. Duncan Frissell

1 0

ANON: Sysadmin policies at universities
by Eric Fogleman 05 Mar '93

05 Mar '93

Jordan Hayes responds to Rusty Babani: > From babani(a)cs.buffalo.edu Fri Mar 5 13:56:06 1993 > > Here is the responce I got as to WHY I CANT RUN A REMAILER IN > MY ACCOUNT... > > Why do you continue to think it's "your" account? > > If you want to have such a thing to call "your account" you're welcome > to plunk down some $$$, buy a machine, get yerself a network link, and > remail to your heart's content... I have to agree with Jordan on this. In a truly free society, you have the right to use your property as you see fit. And so does the university. Your right to free speech doesn't mean you have the right to someone else's soapbox. Eric Fogleman

2 1

Re: Encrypted voice protocol?
by dmandl＠shearson.com 05 Mar '93

05 Mar '93

> I just read in the local paper about "Internet Radio," which sounds like > some kind of transmission of compressed audio, if I have the details right. > > This could be interesting. The "Crypto Home Companion Show"? > > Anybody know anything about this? (The originator comes from Alexandria, > Virginia, so perhaps Strat and our other D.C. area folks have heard more > about this.) > > -Tim Yup, big article in the New York Times yesterday (front page!), and a smaller article in today's New York Newsday. Anyone out there have the time to post either of them to the group??? BTW, a friend and I are just wrapping up a big anthology on radio (the new issue of Semiotext(e), if anyone's interested). I would have loved to get this stuff in there, but alas, we just missed... --Dave.

1 0

Re: Encrypted voice protocol?
by wcs＠anchor.ho.att.com 05 Mar '93

05 Mar '93

(Carl - this is a reply to a cypherpunks mailing list mention of your program. Way to go, and good luck!) Internet Talk Radio also made the Front Page of the New York Times 3/4/93. The picture of Carl Malamud showed him in his office, with a computer near the front with "Internet Talk Radio" running on it, and a poster on the back wall saying "Freedom of the Press belongs to those who own one", put out by some computer company or other. Story by John Markoff, of course. It's basically going to be a half-hour audio segment, with interviews ("Geek of the Week") plus miscellaneous news and stories, kind of in the style of All Things Considered. Folks with high-end systems will be able to listen in real-time; folks with lower-end will need to download slowly and listen later. Size is about 15 MB, data rate 64 kb/s, estimated 2400-baud time 14 hours. I'm surprised he's not doing better compression than that, but (speculation) this may be broadcast-quality audio with ADPCM rather than telephone-quality 3kHz audio uncompressed? The broadcast will be split up into segments, so you can get pieces without downloading the whole thing. Initially it's audio-only but may add some multi-media stuff, especially for navigation through the sound files. GIFs of the guest would be an obvious extension.... Some good interviews with Nicholas Negroponte of MIT Media Lab and Paul Saffo of Institute for the Future. No mention of encryption, MIME, pricing, retransmission policy, etc. Some nice commentary on the relationship between this and the broadcast industry. Computer fu. Gratuitous NREN fu. No blood but a little Gore. Joe Bob says "Check it out!" Bill Stewart wcs(a)anchor.att.com

1 0

Unsubscribe me!!!!
by ghabrech＠ultrix.ramapo.edu 05 Mar '93

05 Mar '93

Come on guys, I asked a couple of times already, UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! UNSUBSCRIBE ME!!! Got the point? Thanx, ghabrech(a)ultrix.ramapo.edu

1 0