- cypherpunks-legacy@lists.ogf.org

RE: White House Replies
by DrZaphod 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

The White House writes: > PS: If you did not include your U.S. mail return address in your > message and you want a reply, please send your message again and > include that information. Well this is completely useless, isn't it.. If we imagine this logically we can see masses of e-mail entering the White House while snail mail trickles out... Definately a buffer problem |-]. At least they're trying, I suppose. TTFN! DrZaphod [AC/DC] / [DnA][HP] [drzaphod(a)ncselxsi.uucp] Technicolorized

1 0

Re: White House letter
by DrZaphod 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

In Message Thu, 4 Feb 1993 23:22-EST, GS80.SP.CS.CMU.EDU!Marc.Ringuette(a)netcomsv.netcom.com writes: >Dear President Clinton, > Bring democracy to the bits! Let's take a vote among all the bits > to decide which value, 0 or 1, is most correct. Then we can set all > bits to that value and they will all be equal! >Best regards, The Cypherpunks (Socialist Subgroup). > This one soundz a bit like self-rightiousness [sp?] FIND WHAT IS RIGHT AND MAKE EVERYBODY "RIGHT". I think that's what they're [we're?] already doing. >Dear President Clinton, > Freedom for the bits! We will not rest until each bit is free to > determine its own natural orientation without outside coercion. The > good news is, you don't need to do anything at all; merely get out of > the way of the free market, and the bits will free themselves. >Best regards, The Cypherpunks (Anarchist Subgroup). I like this one.. |-] TTFN! DrZaphod [AC/DC] / [DnA][HP] [drzaphod(a)ncselxsi.uucp] Technicolorized

1 0

Re: How to e-mail the White House
by deltorto＠aol.com 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

>> The following is NOT a joke. It is a real service being >>provided by President Clinton. If you feel you have something to >>say, send them a letter. I heard they will reply to most messages. >> >> From: The White House <75300.3115(a)compuserve.com> >> >> As you know, this is the first time in history that the >>White House has been connected to the public through electronic mail. >>We welcome your comments and suggestions for ways to improve your >>Public Access E-mail program. Ladies & Gents, I think a group letter would be appropriate from all of us. What an opportunity. I love this country sometimes, y'know? dave PS: Extra special thanks to Mr. Tribble for finding this. Where did you pick it up?

4 3

spread spectrum synchronization
by Phil Karn 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

Synchronization is indeed one of the more complex parts of a spread spectrum system. But there are standard, well studied ways to do it, and any of several textbooks have good descriptions. It's more tedious than difficult. A good job for VLSI. The "gold codes" you mention are simply one family of spreading sequences. There are others. You'd search for signals that use them in the same way you'd search for any kind of spreading sequence -- by searching the sequence space until you find a correlation between the incoming signal and your local copy of the spreading sequence. You detect this by the sudden increase in narrowband signal energy seen at the output of the despreader around the nominal carrier frequency when you're within a chip of the correct time. You then lock onto and track the spreading sequence with a circuit very similar to a phase locked loop. Practical spread spectrum systems aid this process either by synchronizing the spreading sequence to a common clock source, or by using a small enough spreading sequence to make searching the entire sequence feasible. In our CDMA cellular system, we use both approaches and several ordinary LSFR PN sequences (not Gold codes). There's a "short PN" code (2^15 chips long) common to all cells that can be found by a mobile within a few seconds of being turned on, and an additional per-user "long code" (2^47-1 chips) that is synchronized with the aid of GPS receivers at the cells. Both operate at the same chip rate (1.2288 Mhz). The gory details can be found by anonymous FTP to lorien.qualcomm.com, in /pub/cdma. Read the "overview" document first. Phil

1 0

[uunet!bigtex.cactus.org!wixer!wixer.cactus.org!jagwire: white house email (fwd)]
by tribble＠xanadu.com 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

> From jmedway(a)ccwf.cc.utexas.edu Wed Feb 3 20:24:33 1993 > From: jmedway(a)ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (johnjmedway) > Message-Id: <9302031943.AA23259(a)huey.cc.utexas.edu> > Subject: white house email > To: jagwire(a)wixer.cactus.org (Dan Zappone), > resmith(a)ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Rob Smith) > Date: Wed, 3 Feb 93 13:43:54 CST > X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.3 PL11] > > One of my coworkers passed this out to all of us @ work. > > Spread el verbum. > > > >> Subject: White House email address > >> > >> I thought you might find this interesting... > >> > >> > >> ================= { Begin included text } ===================== > >> > >> > > >> > How's this for interesting? > >> > We just got wind of it down here... :) Barbie > >> > - -------- > >> > > >> > President Clinton (The White House) = 75300.3115(a)Compuserve.com > >> > > >> > : Here's something you might find useful... President Clinton's email > >> > : address. (Obviously, he has people to screen it for him!) A friend > >> > : just emailed this to me. > >> > : > >> > : >Posted-Date: 27 Jan 93 20:19:51 EST > >> > : >Date: 27 Jan 93 20:19:51 EST > >> > : >From: The White House <75300.3115(a)compuserve.com> > >> > : >Subject: Re: Press Briefing, January 27, 1993 > >> > : > > >> > : > Thank you for your recent electronic mail message to the White > >> > : > House. As soon as practicable it will be sent to the appropriate > >> > : > office for consideration. You should receive a written reply in due > >> > : > course. Unfortunately, we are not yet ready to respond substantively > >> > : > to your message by electronic mail. We appreciate your patience as > >> we > >> > : > implement our new electronic systems. > >> > : > > >> > : > As you know, this is the first time in history that the > >> > : > White House has been connected to the public through electronic > >> > : > mail. We welcome your comments and suggestions for ways to > >> improve > >> > : > your Public Access E-mail program. > >> > : > > >> > : > Regards, > >> > : > Jock Gill > >> > : > Electronic Publishing > >> > : > Public Access E-mail > >> > : > The White House > >> > : > Washington, D.C. > >> > : > > >> > : > 75300.3115(a)Compuserve.com > >> > : > CLINTON PZ on America Online > >> > : > > >> > : > PS: If you did not include your U.S. mail return address in your > >> > : > message and you want a reply, please send your message again and > >> > : > include that information. > >> > > >> > ------- End of Forwarded Message > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------- > jmedway(a)ccwf.cc.utexas.edu "Be careful what you're doing, > aka john j medway you're messing up my life." > -- John Lydon aka John Rotten > ---------------------------------------------------------------- >

1 0

Re: White House letter
by Marc.Ringuette＠GS80.SP.CS.CMU.EDU 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

Dear ld231782, I believe that a good letter to the President has _one_ theme. If it comes out to more than one, write more than one letter. My own emphasis would be on computer security concerns, and the legitimate privacy, anonymity, and electronic-cash interests of Internetters. Aren't these the issues which bring us together as cypherpunks? -- Marc Ringuette (mnr(a)cs.cmu.edu) p.s. Here are two draft letters for your consideration. Dear President Clinton, Bring democracy to the bits! Let's take a vote among all the bits to decide which value, 0 or 1, is most correct. Then we can set all bits to that value and they will all be equal! Best regards, The Cypherpunks (Socialist Subgroup). Dear President Clinton, Freedom for the bits! We will not rest until each bit is free to determine its own natural orientation without outside coercion. The good news is, you don't need to do anything at all; merely get out of the way of the free market, and the bits will free themselves. Best regards, The Cypherpunks (Anarchist Subgroup).

1 0

RE: White House letter
by DrZaphod 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

In Message Thu, 04 Feb 93 17:02:44 -0700, longs.lance.colostate.edu!ld231782(a)netcomsv.netcom.com writes: >Hello, I think the official cyberpunk White House (Pres. Bill Clinton) >letter would be a great idea, although my experience is that the more >you want to say, the more people will say "that's not for cypherpunks >to say" or "I don't agree with that as a cypherpunk" and that it will >be hard to build consensus. But, on the other hand, a lot of >cypherpunks are kind of extremists that may even say some things don't >go far enough. I think to start off and get attention and respect from the big white house we should simply send our stance on encryption and why it shouldn't be regulated.. I think this is the common goal among all the cypherpunks on this list [ that is except the NSA folks who are listening in |-] ]. I think, for now, we just want to let people know that there IS a specific group of individuals who are willing to protest for their right to privacy [you are, aren't you?] and follow up with suggestions to specific issues in later messages to the White House. and YES we should definately send all our public keys along with the message.. basically telling the government that we DO enjoy extreme privacy in part of our lives and would like to see it extended to all forms of communication. TTFN! DrZaphod [AC/DC] / [DnA][HP] [drzaphod(a)ncselxsi.uucp] Technicolorized

1 0

`Sunday Times' article on GSM changes
by Jay Prime Positive 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

I speculated: > Speculation: The "A5 `scrambling code'" is used as the spreading code > for a spread spectrum radio. But I now belive I was wrong. A reader, who I will allow to remain unnamed, informed me that there is only one SS cellular comunication system -- interestingly enough they were using it at the time! They told me that the GSM system is narrow band. So I now ... Speculate: The "A5 `scrambling code'" is an actual cypher system. But the key is negociated between the phone and the cell, not the phone and the other phone. j'

1 0

Re: `Sunday Times' article on GSM changes
by Tom Libert 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

Jay Prime Positive <jpp(a)markv.com> writes: > A fourth is to use an externaly generated sync signal -- for example >a radio transmission that both sender and reciever can hear. (For >this aplication, I don't see how this would be used...) Some spread spectrum systems synchronize using the (very accurate) time signals provide by Global Positioning System (GPS) satellites. > Aditional solutions are possible. (What is this S.A.W. thing I read >about??) I don't know where you read it, but it might stand for "Surface Acoustic Wave".

1 0

`Sunday Times' article on GSM changes
by pmetzger＠shearson.com 05 Feb '93

05 Feb '93

Thought I'd forward this. ----- Begin Included Message ----- >From libernet-request(a)dartmouth.edu Wed Feb 3 18:51:12 1993 Resent-Message-Id: <4fQ2vaH0BwxI41u9ED(a)transarc.com> Resent-Date: Wed, 3 Feb 1993 15:45:26 -0500 (EST) Resent-From: Lyle_Seaman(a)transarc.com Resent-To: libernet(a)dartmouth.edu X-Andrew-Widereply: netnews.sci.crypt Newsgroups: sci.crypt Path: andrew.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!news.sei.cmu.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!doc.ic.ac.uk!rhbnc!andy From: andy(a)csqx.cs.rhbnc.ac.uk Subject: `Sunday Times' article on GSM changes Organization: RHBNC Date: Tue, 2 Feb 1993 16:07:01 GMT Lines: 94 Sender: libernet-request(a)dartmouth.edu X-Mailing-List: libernet(a)Dartmouth.EDU Content-Length: 4387 Having finally managed to track down a copy of last Sunday's `Sunday Times', here is the text of the article describing changes to the GSM mobile communications standard. The A5 `scrambling code' refered to in the article is the stream cipher between the mobile and base stations, which uses a 64-bit key derived from an initial authentication exchange. Whilst it's not exactly secret, as many people involved with developing GSM need to know the details, it is covered by non-disclosure agreements. `New Scientist' also have an article on GSM in this week's issue. andy -- `The Sunday Times', 31 January 1993. Main section, p. 12. (Home News) SPYMASTERS ORDER REDESIGN OF `TOO SECURE' MOBILE PHONES by Christopher Lloyd [Cartoon of a ridiculous mobile handset with various antennaea and dishes protruding. It is being held by a dismayed, purple-suited, man whilst a sign reads: "New! GCHQ-approved mobile phone".] The next generation of mobile telephones has proved so secure against tapping that it is to be made less safe on the advice of the intelligence services. The phones, based on coded digital technology, will have their technology modified so that spies can continue to eavesdrop on private conversations. The changes, ordered by a European Community (EC) telecommunications committee in Brussels, are being made at the insistance of European governments, including Britain's. They fear that surveillance operations against drug barons, the criminal underworld and foreign powers could be undermined. Digital mobiles phones, based on a system called GSM, are already replacing standard analogue networks across the world. They are equipped with a sophisticated scrambling code called A5, offering protection from interception equivelant to many military systems. It is this code that is to be replaced by one called A5X, to allow undercover eavesdropping to continue. Last week a Department of Trade and Industry spokesman confirmed changes were being introduced to make it easier for security agencies - ranging from GCHQ, the British government's listening post near Cheltenham, to the FBI in America - to eavesdrop. "Alternatice coding is being developed for the reasons you have outlined," he said. "There is a general desire for this among the governments of Europe." The department, which issues export licenses for the phones, is particularly concerned that the original A5 technology should not be sold to countries that may adapt it for military applications. In America, the FBI has voiced similar concern. Nestor Michnyak, spokesman for the FBI headquarters in Washington, said that digital technology was advancing so fast that counter-surveillance was in danger of being undermined. "We are trying to get companies and manufacturers to work with us to allow us to maintain the surveillance operations we have undertaken since the late 1960s," he said. "All we are asking is to be able to continue to do what we are currently doing and we want the same access we are having now." Manufacturers of GSM mobile phones will be forced to adapt products to work with the new codes. Motorola, one of the leading makers of the digital mobile handsets, complained that costs may rise as a result. "We are flying blind here," said Larry Conlee, the assistant general manager of Motorola's European cellular division. "The GSM system has ended up more secure than it should have been for the commercial market and now we're trying to recover from it." Vodafone, Britain's largest analogue mobile phone company, which has already installed 250 GSM base stations covering 50% of the UK population, said its network will need to be adapted to accept the new codes. "Government authorities have made it known that they don't want this high level of encoding," said Mike Caldwell, the spokesman for Vodafone. Caldwell said the problem with the original system was that it would take security services weeks rather than minutes to decode the conversations they wanted to bug. Despite the changes, it will be still virtually impossible for any amateur eavesdropper to intercept calls made on the digital mobile phones. -- Andy Thomas Information Security Group, Department of Computer Science Royal Holloway, University of London TW20 0EX, England Internet: andy(a)dcs.rhbnc.ac.uk phone: + 44 784 443696 ----- End Included Message -----

3 4