HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Subject: Re: Fraction part of squareroots as one time pads ?
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:23:10 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.223532.13477@ryn.mro4.dec.com> roth@3d.enet.dec.com (Jim Roth) writes:
:
:In article <1993Jan11.143125.24040@linus.mitre.org>, bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes...
:>In article <1993Jan11.111351.7777@hsr.no> frank@hsr.no (Frank A Stevenson) writes:
:>: question about using irrational root as a "one time pad"...
:
:>Your last point might be questioned. There are some good integer relation
:>finding algorithms (Ferguson & Forcade, for example and improvements)
:>that allow one to very quickly determine that the number is the root of
:>an integer, based upon just the first few digits.  Once that is determined,
:>finding the rest of the key is trivial. 
:
:>The same would be true for any ALGEBRAIC irrational.
:
:I know how to do this using a lattice basis reduction algorithm, (such
:as LLL) but don't know the Ferguson & Forcade refrence - can you post a
 
Yep. L^3 would work as well.

See the following:

:citation?  (I think the "first few digits" would have to be on the

See D. Bailey, H. Ferguson
Numerical results on relations between fundamental constants
using a new algorithm.
Math. Comp. v. 53 p. 649 (1989)

:order of the height of the underlying minimal polynomial, but that's still
:not much info...)
 
Yep.
--
Bob Silverman
These are my opinions and not MITRE's.
Mitre Corporation, Bedford, MA 01730
"You can lead a horse's ass to knowledge, but you can't make him think"
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: RIPEM and RSAREF available by anonymous ftp !!!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 04:36:21 GMT


Mark Henderson, writing from Canada, advises a Bulgarian National
writing from Germany on how to get the RSAREF and RIPEM files
without reading or agreeing to the license agreement.

I think this is both a disgrace and a violation of ITAR. I would
not be surprised if it is also a violation of Canadian Law.

RSA has been trying to make RIPEM/RSAREF freely available to
U.S. users, within their patent and the Munitions Laws. By
revealing how to get the files without agreeing to the license,
or even reading it, Mark has likely spoiled it for the rest of us.

Shame!

Since I take this personally, given the efforts of many to provide a
free, usable, legal public key system for non-commercial use in the
U.S. I have copied Mark's message to the President of RSA, for what
action he may wish to take.

David


-- 
David Sternlight
RIPEM Public Key on server  --  Consider it an envelope for your e-mail

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: bnc@portia.si.macsch.com (Brian Casey)
Subject: Re: Any way to *CREATE* Vcr+ (VCR PLUS) codes??? (please read)
Keywords: VCR+ patent
Organization: The MacNeal-Schwendler Corporation
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 23:17:35 GMT

In article <C0F4nF.7Eu@panix.com> oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) writes:
>In <1993Jan5.191138.16420@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>
>
>>As I understand things from my conversations with the inventor of the
>>VCR+ ... [stuff deleted]
>>they provide the program to the stations on very stringent security
>>terms, to compute the codes. That was my info as of six months
>>ago--it may have changed--dunno. Back then, I noticed that two
>>sources of published codes, the L.A. Times and TV guide occasionally
>>had different codes for the same program, which suggests other
>>than a central source. (They weren't typos, and both worked.)
>
>I trust that readers of this group have no trouble figuring out why
>this would happen -- right?
>
>The VCR+ people provide programs to the LA Times, and to TV Guide,
>that are not identical.  Sure the codes work the same from both versions
>of the program, but the difference in what is printed in the guide 
>makes it possible for the VCR+ people to figure out _which_ copy
>of the program was used to create a given set of plus codes.
>That way if, say, LA Times started selling codes to TV Guide, or to
>someone else, the VCR+ people would be able to blame the LA Times.
>We intellectual property lawyers call that a "spike".
>
>
>-- 
>Carl Oppedahl AA2KW  (intellectual property lawyer)
>30 Rockefeller Plaza
>New York, NY  10112-0228
>voice 212-408-2578     fax 212-765-2519

Unfortunately, this is not correct.  The majority of codes
for both the LA Times and the TV Guide are identical.  The
major class of programs where differences occur is with 
movies.  The LA Times produces codes from the beginning of
the movie until the start of the next listed program, while
TV Guide produces codes for the exact running time of the
movie.  

Brian Casey
bnc@macsch.com 
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: jgarland@kean.ucs.mun.ca
Subject: Re: RIPEM and RSAREF available by anonymous ftp !!!
Organization: Memorial University. St.John's Nfld, Canada
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 09:48:15 GMT

In article <1993Jan7.043621.28202@netcom.com>, strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
> 
> Mark Henderson, writing from Canada, advises a Bulgarian National
> writing from Germany on how to get the RSAREF and RIPEM files
> without reading or agreeing to the license agreement. ...Mark 
> has likely spoiled it for the rest of us.

See 1 below.
 
> Shame!
> 
> Since I take this personally, given the efforts of many to provide a
> free, usable, legal public key system for non-commercial use in the
> U.S. I have copied Mark's message to the President of RSA, for what
> action he may wish to take.
> David Sternlight

1.  Of course, publicly stating that RSA has been duly informed that foreign
nationals have access to the files does _nothing_ to force RSA's hand
in this matter, does it?  [Don't know if this is/was your intention, but (a) 
consider the position your post puts them in.  Now (b) ask yourself, "Are they 
now more or less likely to openly publish now that I've put them there?"]
Semi-paranoid fantasy:  Is DS an NSA cover/plant?

2.  Rational rejoinder:  On the hand, maybe RSA knew what they were doing 
when they put it up on an ftp server.  I find it hard to believe they are 
ignorant of the ramifications this action.   

3.  Really paranoid fantasy:  Hell, maybe NSA knows how to factor big primes 
now and gave RSA the go ahead in order to get lots of good candidate material.

(Hey, I'm not paranoid...can't be, I'm a psychologist!)

John Garland
jgarland@kean.ucs.mun.ca
From: palmer@icat.larc.nasa.gov (Michael T. Palmer)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Here's a challenge
Date: 11 Jan 93 14:44:56 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA  USA
NNTP-Posting-Host: icat.larc.nasa.gov

jp@tygra.Michigan.COM (John Palmer) writes:

>I want to check out some components of an encryption system that I'm
>using and would like to see if anyone can crack this encrypted file.
>Only hint is that its text of some kind. I've uuencoded it. 

[encrypted text deleted]

John -

  Please read the sci.crypt FAQ.  Keeping your algorithm a secret is
no good, because if we really wanted to crack your file we'd break into
your house or apartment first to get everything off your hard disk, and
then try to tap all your email to see if you mentioned anything relevant.
"Security by Obscurity" is a fallacy.  The encryption system is only
secure if *everyone* knows how it works, and cannot find any flaws.

  Otherwise, you only *think* it's secure, when in fact someone who knows
how it works has already told the "bad guys."  Believe it - anyone who
really wants to know more about how your encryption system works WILL FIND
OUT whether you know about it or not.

  Sorry, but you probably won't get any takers unless you either supply
the algorithm or make it worth the time by offering a financial incentive.

  Of course, if it's simple someone who's bored might give it a shot with
the standard attacks.

  Good luck!

-- 
Michael T. Palmer, M/S 152, NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA 23681
Voice: 804-864-2044,   FAX: 804-864-7793,   Email: m.t.palmer@larc.nasa.gov
RIPEM Public Key now available  --  Consider it an envelope for your e-mail
From: anon.545@pax.tpa.com.au
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: re: Zimmermann's responses to Sidelnikov's PGP critique
Date: 9 Jan 1993 11:29:10 +1030
Organization: PAX - Public Access Unix (Adelaide,South Australia) - Anonymous Service
Reply-To: anon.545@pax.tpa.com.au
NNTP-Posting-Host: flash.pax.tpa.com.au


strnlght@netcom.com writes:
> My purpose in posting this is not to enter into the dispute between
> Zimmermann and Sidelnikov, but to comment on some interesting questions that
> the Sidelnikov post may raise. Some preface may be in order:
> 
> In my many individual visits to the Soviet Union at the personal
> invitation of the Soviet Academy of Sciences, and in my discussions
> with Soviet scientific leaders, it became clear to me that in the
> Soviet structure, the academic and Academy scientific structure was
> intimately bound up with the military and intelligence structure.
>  ...

Just the usual mixture of lies, threats, and half-truths we've come to 
expect from Mr. Sternlight.

He'll stop at absolutely nothing to intimidate those who use PGP.
Of course, whose to say that ripem is any better.

It's all a hoax folks. Mr. Sternlight has never even been to the former
Soviet Union. I verified this by a check of the Visa records, which
(fortunately) are computerized. I suppose he might have
changed his name recently, but I doubt it.


--
** Anonymity & Privacy by PAX - Public Access Unix (Adelaide,South Australia) **

anon.admin@pax.tpa.com.au (a human)   anon.info@pax.tpa.com.au    (for help)
anon.ping@pax.tpa.com.au  (get alias) anon.key@pax.tpa.com.au     (register key)
anon.###@pax.tpa.com.au   (reply)     anon.post.grp@pax.tpa.com.au (post to grp)
anon.list@pax.tpa.com.au  (to mailing list about anonymous mailers)
anon.subscribe@pax.tpa.com.au         anon.unsubscribe@pax.tpa.com.au

For dialup Unix access phone +61-8-235-9010 - online registration.
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.ripem
From: karn@servo.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
Subject: Re: How fast is DES?
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 06:31:23 GMT

In article <1ihdcmINNslg@fbi-news.Informatik.Uni-Dortmund.DE> muenx@heike.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (Holger Muenx) writes:
>  Is it possible for a software solution to reach an encryption rate
>of about 100kB/sec (read 100 * 1024 Byte not 100 * 1024 Bit per second)
>on a typical PC (say, Intel 386DX 33MHz)?

Well, my DES code (ucsd.edu, /hamradio/packet/tcpip/crypto/des.tar.Z)
when compiled and run on a 486DX-50 using GCC under 386BSD encrypts 1
million 64-bit blocks (8 megabytes) in 90.5 seconds of CPU time.
That's not quite the rate you want, and on a faster machine too.  Oh
well.

I groveled over this code quite a bit when I wrote it, and I doubt
there are any *major* improvements to be found that wouldn't either
impair its portability or greatly increase memory requirements. On the
other hand, adding inline assembler or (especially) precomputing some
very big tables (megabytes) *can* definitely pay off. My Bellcore
colleague Dave Feldmeier wrote a paper on this exact subject for Crypto
a few years back when we were building fast UNIX password crackers;
you might look it up. (Can't remember the year offhand).

Phil
From: shirriff@sprite.berkeley.edu (Ken Shirriff)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Any way to *CREATE* Vcr+ (VCR PLUS) codes??? (please read)
Date: 4 Jan 1993 21:30:09 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: hijack.berkeley.edu
Keywords: VCR+ patent

In article <C0CED1.60H@metaflow.com> rschnapp@metaflow.com (Russ Schnapp) writes:
>Is it really necessary to reverse-engineer the VCR+ algorithm?  I thought
>that VCR+ is patented.  If you can obtain the patent number, then the patent
>can be retrieved.  The patent _must_ disclose the method used.

The patent doesn't include enough information to decode the VCR+ code.
It explains how to make/decode _a_ VCR code, but not _the_ VCR+ code.  That
is, there are a bunch of specific details you need that aren't included.  (As
an analogy, the RSA patent won't help you decode a particular RSA-encoded
message.)

Ken Shirriff				shirriff@sprite.Berkeley.EDU
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: lwloen@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Larry Loen)
Subject: Name & Number of the Bills to restrict crypto
Date: Mon, 04 Jan 1993 20:50:53 GMT
Reply-To: lwloen@rchland.vnet.ibm.com
Disclaimer: This posting represents the poster's views, not necessarily those of IBM
Organization: IBM Rochester

As some posts indicate there are actual bills before congress on
this topic, can anyone post exactly what they are?  If we wish to organize
some sort of letter-writing campaign, we'll need to cite H.R such and
such or Senate Resolution such and such to reference the bill.  Otherwise,
our letter is certainly futile, because the congressional aide that
reads it won't have the foggiest idea of what we're talking about, probably
even if their boss sits on the committee.

-- 
   Larry W. Loen        |  My Opinions are decidedly my own, so please
                        |  do not attribute them to my employer
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: bs@gauss.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman)
Subject: Re: Fraction part of squareroots as one time pads ?
Organization: Research Computer Facility, MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 14:31:25 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.111351.7777@hsr.no> frank@hsr.no (Frank A Stevenson) writes:
:At one time I calculated pi and e with several houndred thousand decimal digits,
:and after taking interest in cryptology the question sprung to mind: Would it be
:safe to use the binary expansion of an irrational number as a one time pad. To my
:knowledge suche sequences of bits exhibits no knowns statistical patterns, and
:provided the key is large enough >60 bits, the one time pad would be sufficently
:hard to find.
 
Let me first politely ask that you limit the length of your lines. Run-over
lines are hard to read.

 
Your last point might be questioned. There are some good integer relation
finding algorithms (Ferguson & Forcade, for example and improvements)
that allow one to very quickly determine that the number is the root of
an integer, based upon just the first few digits.  Once that is determined,
finding the rest of the key is trivial. 

The same would be true for any ALGEBRAIC irrational.

:
:If I where to use a 68000 processor for the implementation of this scheme two
:difficulties arises:
:
:1) Taking square roots is rather expensive, and this limits the size of the
:message to be encrypted.

Define "expensive". Using FFT multiplies, once could compute a square 
root of an integer to several thousand bits in just a few seconds on a
modern workstation.

:
:2) For effeciency reasons it is best to extract square roots limited to 32 bits
:of length. (The greatest divisor fopr the DIVU command) This provides a rather
 
Why is this? Use multi-precision techniques.
--
Bob Silverman
These are my opinions and not MITRE's.
Mitre Corporation, Bedford, MA 01730
"You can lead a horse's ass to knowledge, but you can't make him think"
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Vesselin Bontchev)
Subject: Re: Is PGP 2.0 compatible with PGP 2.1?
Reply-To: bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de
Organization: Virus Test Center, University of Hamburg
Date:  8 Jan 93 20:22:39 GMT

th2_oate@csd.uwe.ac.uk (Tom Oates) writes:

> If someone sends me a message encrypted using v2.0, can I decrypt it
> using v2.1?

Yes.

> And vice versa.

Almost. Version 2.1 of PGP supports signed human-readable messages.
You won't be able to check the signature of such messages with PGP
2.0, because it does not support this feature. Otherwise everything
else is compatible.

> * Email to: th2_oate@uk.ac.uwe.csd     * PGP 2.0 Key available upon request. *

I am collecting public keys. Please consider this a request.

Regards,
Vesselin
-- 
Vesselin Vladimirov Bontchev          Virus Test Center, University of Hamburg
Tel.:+49-40-54715-224, Fax: +49-40-54715-226      Fachbereich Informatik - AGN
< PGP 2.1 public key available on request. > Vogt-Koelln-Strasse 30, rm. 107 C
e-mail: bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de    D-2000 Hamburg 54, Germany
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: RIPEM and RSAREF available by anonymous ftp !!!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 23:09:42 GMT


Perry Metzger, who purports to be a libertarian, posts a fascist message
in which he:

1. Moves from making assertions to representing them as facts.

2. Attempts to assert that everybody but me shares his views.

3. Wraps himself in the royal "we". (I guess he's a crypto monarchist
as well).

His message speaks for itself.

David
-- 
David Sternlight
RIPEM Public Key on server  --  Consider it an envelope for your e-mail

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: eay@psych.psy.uq.oz.au (Eric Young)
Subject: Re: How fast is DES?
Organization: Psychology Department, University of Queensland
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 00:57:24 GMT

In article <1993Jan8.063123.5194@qualcomm.com>, karn@servo.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn) writes:
|> In article <1ihdcmINNslg@fbi-news.Informatik.Uni-Dortmund.DE> muenx@heike.informatik.uni-dortmund.de (Holger Muenx) writes:
|> >  Is it possible for a software solution to reach an encryption rate
|> >of about 100kB/sec (read 100 * 1024 Byte not 100 * 1024 Bit per second)
|> >on a typical PC (say, Intel 386DX 33MHz)?
|> 
|> Well, my DES code (ucsd.edu, /hamradio/packet/tcpip/crypto/des.tar.Z)
|> when compiled and run on a 486DX-50 using GCC under 386BSD encrypts 1
|> million 64-bit blocks (8 megabytes) in 90.5 seconds of CPU time.
|> That's not quite the rate you want, and on a faster machine too.  Oh
|> well.
    ~88k/sec on 486DX-50

The DES library/application I had posted in comp.sources.misc a while
back could do 67k/s on a 386/33 using a non gcc compiler (but still
in 32bit mode - I did not do the testing).
This package uses standard boring C with few evil tricks (it compiles under
16bit, 32bit and 64bit machines with no problems or endian dependencies).
With 386 assembler it would probably be possible to beat 100k/s on a 33Mz
machine.

In 16bit MS-DOS the library does 27k/sec (Turbo C v 2.0 :-).
There was a DES encryption program posted
to comp.binaries.ibm.pc that was twice as fast as my code (~50k/sec).
DES can be fast if you have either a good C compiler or resort to
assembler.

The most recent version of the library can be found in pub/DES/libdes.tar.92-10-13.Z on ftp.psy.uq.oz.au (130.102.32.1)
The main difference between this version and the one in c.s.m is that
it will compile on 64bit machines.

BTW a DEC Alpha 500 APX I played with does 830kbytes/s in cbc mode.
From what I remember seeing in this newsgroup, DES hardware often does
~20mbit/sec.  The top end Alpha, with assembler should be >= 8mbit/sec.

Hardware giving only a 2.5 speedup?
I get the feeling it should be possible to produce much faster DES
chips.... :-)

eric
From: hagopes@works.uucp (Yinco Schmeer)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: secure codes
Date: 5 Jan 93 23:56:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: works.i2PXwB1w165w
Organization: The Works BBS - Informational Archives - Est. 1985

Don Alvarez posts:
>>It's a chicken-and-egg problem: You can't distribute a key in a secure
manner without a prior means of secure communications, but if that
means of secure communications is cryptographic, then it requires the
prior distribution of a key.<<

Yes, but there are other possibilities. First, the two people may be able 
to FIND a secure channel, but it is inefficient, expensive, or there is 
some other reason that it can't be used often. This method can be used to 
transfer keys and then RSA used over unsecure channels from then on. 
Second, both parties can have secure channels with a third party. This 
was discussed in the documentation for PGP, where he discusses this idea 
in full.
                                        -Hagopes
From: bsy+@CS.CMU.EDU (Bennet Yee)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Primitive Polynomials (Mod 2)
Keywords: Primitive Polynomials (Mod 2)
Date: 11 Jan 93 22:20:07 GMT
Article-I.D.: cs.C0pnDp.KLD.2
Reply-To: bsy+@cs.cmu.edu
Organization: Cranberry Melon, School of Cucumber Science

In article <C0Jtyt.3HH@chinet.chi.il.us>, schneier@chinet.chi.il.us (Bruce Schneier) writes:
>I have two questions about primitive polynomials (mod 2):
>
>1)  I was under the impression that if the feedback sequence of a LFSR is
>a primitive polynomial (mod 2), then the period of the LFSR is 2^n - 1, where
>n is the degree of the polynomial.  I recently got a copy of Zierler and
>Brillhart's paper:  "On Primitive Trinomials (mod 2)," Information and 
>Control, 13 (1968), 541-554.  The article implies that this is not the case:
>"Those n where 2^n - 1 is completely factored, but for which the periods of
>the irreducable T_n,k(x) have not as yet been determined...."
>
>2)  Near as I can tell, if x^p + x^q + 1 is a primitive trinomial (mod 2), then
>so is x^p + x^(p-q) + 1.  Does this property extend to polynomials with more
>coefficients?  Assuming that x^p + x^q + x^r + 1 is primitive, what other
>polynomial is necessarily primitive?  Assuming that x^p + x^q + x^r + x^s + 1
>is primitive, what other polynomial is necessarily primitive?
>
>Bruce

As for (1), I don't have a copy of Zierler & Brillhart, but what you
quote is not a contradiction.

A primitive polynomial p over a ring R is an irreducible polynomial
the root of which is a primitive element in the extension field, i.e.,
the root \alpha has the property that R[x]/(p)=R(\alpha).

This property is important to LFSRs because of what we get when we
take R=Z_2 and look at the sequence 1, x, x^2, ..., x^k, ..., etc, all
modulo p.  Since in extension fields we identify the indeterminate x
with \alpha, we see that the sequence is exactly what \alpha will
generate, which is the entire field when E=Z_2[x]/(p), p a primitive
polyn.  Since we know that [E:Z_2] = n = deg(p), E has 2^n elements in
it.  Excluding the zero polyn, we see that the period must be 2^n-1 --
the sequence must cycle through all elements of E except for 0 (x^m
can not be 0, because otherwise x=\alpha would be a zero divisor,
contradicting the fact that E is a field).  An LFSR generates just the
coefficient to the x^0 term of this sequence.

Does anyone know if there's a proof that the low coefficient of this
2^n-1 period sequence also has the same period?

If T_{n,k}(x) are just irreducible but not nec'y primitive, then we
don't know the period of the LFSR -- that would depend on the initial
conditions, since there is more than one cycle.

Dunno about (2).

-bsy

ps: while this is not (yet) a cryptography question, at least it's not
patent flamage or some such, and the mathematics can have
cryptographic applications.  The signal-to-noise of sci.crypt has been
really low lately....

-- 
Bennet S. Yee		Phone: +1 412 268-7571		Email: bsy+@cs.cmu.edu
School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
From: cme@ellisun.sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Encyclopedia Britannica Cryptology article
Date: 11 Jan 93 16:06:23 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: ellisun.sw.stratus.com


I was in a book store browsing yesterday and saw the new Encyclopedia
Britannica on display, so I scanned the Cryptology article.  It's a very
good introduction for beginners to crypto -- something I wish I had read
back in the old days.


-- 
-- <<Disclaimer: All opinions expressed are my own, of course.>>
-- Carl Ellison						cme@sw.stratus.com
-- Stratus Computer Inc.	M3-2-BKW		TEL: (508)460-2783
-- 55 Fairbanks Boulevard ; Marlborough MA 01752-1298	FAX: (508)624-7488