HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ptrei@bistromath.mitre.org (Peter Trei)
Subject: Re: Any way to *CREATE* Vcr+ (VCR PLUS) codes??? (please read)
Organization: The MITRE Corporation
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 1993 19:30:20 GMT

In article <29287@oasys.dt.navy.mil> curt@kcwc.com (Curt Welch) writes:
>In sci.crypt, strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>>Finally, there seem to be two sets of codes. One, of up to six digits,
>>is for the standard start times (on the half-hour) and lengths (multiples
>>of 30 minutes). A second, of more digits, seems to be for the exception
>>cases.

>I'm one of the people the "broke" the codes.  It isn't that simple.

>The algorithm starts out being quite simple for single digit codes, and
>gets more and more complex for each digit you add.
[...]
>You don't have to collect published codes, you can just sit down with the
>VCR Plus+ device and start punching in numbers.  But there are 9,999,999
>7 digit codes (and each one requires 9 button presses to test), so it can
>take a long time to get enough numbers.

>This is at least part of why we stopped working on the codes.  It was
>taking too much time.

      Wasn't Gemstar also threatening to sic rabid lawyers on you? Or
did that only come later?

      I got one of these devices for Christmas (though I usually use a
CP8 programmable remote, which is far more versatile, if not quite as
user-friendly). Since some of my cable channels don't have TV Guide
listings, I'd like to be able to generate my own codes.

      When I looked in the front of TVG, I found that the numbers are
claimed to be *copyright* by Gemstar. I suspect that selling the
numbers to TVG and other publications is another revenue stream for
them.  (Can you really copyright a number?  Intel is calling it's new
chip the "Pentium" since it can't copyright 586, any more than it
could 286, 386, or 486).

      A possibly relevant note appears in John Dvorak's column in the
Jan 12 PC Magazine. To summarize:

      Sega sued Accolade, which was making Sega Genesis game
cartridges without getting licensing from Sega. This suit was settled
in Accolade's favor with a ruling that:

 * Accolade could make Genesis games without asking Sega's permission.
 * Accolade could reverse engineer the Sega software needed to let the
   cartridge talk to the machine.
 * Accolade could use a Sega cartridge as a model for the reverse engineering.

   Dvorak says: "Who says you can't look at the code of the product
you're reverse engineering? ... This means that software code of a
competitor now can be examined for the purposes of reverse
engineering."

       I'm not a lawyer (and neither is Dvorak), but I suspect that
this ruling means that a lawsuit from Gemstar against someone who
published an algorithm which produced codes with the same values as
the VCR+ device would fail, and quickly.

							Peter Trei
							ptrei@Mitre.org


Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.ripem
From: Marc VanHeyningen <mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu>
Subject: Re: Zimmermann's responses to Sidelnikov's PGP critique
X-Quoted: 33%
Organization: Computer Science Dept, Indiana University
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 19:35:16 -0500

Thus said strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight):
>I notice that one RIPEM public key in the public server file has its
>first 34 characters identical to my ripem public key. Perhaps this is
>related. It seems an unlikely coincidence, given that the two keys
>were generated by different individuals, apparently on different
>computers, and very likely at different clock times.

From the RIPEM distribution "todo" file:

#=== Documentation ===
#
#-- Explain that all keys start with a PKCS identifier, so people won't
#think RIPEM has a bug that makes all keys similar.

This probably explains much, if not all, of the similarity.
-- 
Marc VanHeyningen    mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu    MIME & RIPEM accepted
Kirk:  I won't hurt you.
Alien: You hit me!
Kirk:  Well, I won't hit you again.
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: hanche@ams.sunysb.edu (Harald Hanche-Olsen)
Subject: Re: MD5 description and software?
Organization: University at Stony Brook, NY
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 1993 00:01:15 GMT

>>>>> In article <1ivck0INNhlg@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca>, unruh@physics.ubc.ca (William Unruh) writes:

<> where can I get a description of MD5 ( or the other MD's as well)
<> Thanks
<> Bill Urnuh
<> unruh@physics.ubc.ca

Please get Archie and learn to use it.  I got too many hits to post
here, but it says the one nearest you is on your own host!

iskut.ucs.ubc.ca:/pub/internet-drafts/draft-rsadsi-rivest-md5-02.txt

BTW, it used to be on rsa.com -- but now there is a message there
saying they made it part of RSAREF, which stops many of us from
getting it from them.  Never mind, it's in zillions of places :-)

- Harald
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Any way to *CREATE* Vcr+ (VCR PLUS) codes??? (please read)
From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin)
Date: 5 Jan 93 17:12:32 GMT
 <C0CED1.60H@metaflow.com> <1iaa91INNhgr@agate.berkeley.edu> <1993Jan04.223520.29065@rchland.ibm.com>
Organization: Beckman Instruments, Inc.
Keywords: VCR+ patent

In <1993Jan04.223520.29065@rchland.ibm.com> lwloen@rchland.vnet.ibm.com (Larry Loen) writes:

>Has anyone thought to call their local TV station or a local newspaper that
>publishes VCR+ codes?

>I would imagine the manufacturer doesn't care a fig if the algorithm is
>published.  They would only care to license the production of the _hardware_
>in actual VCRs.  It would be in their interest, I would think, to _give away_
>the encoding algorithm to TV stations and any producer of TV listings, such
>as a newspaper.  Perhaps later on, they will try & get revenue out of the
>guides, but at first they surely gave it away and still may be doing so. . .

>I could be wrong, but for those who care, a phone call or two ought to
>do it if my guess is correct.

To add to another reply, they have a 900 number to get codes for new
programs.  (I don't know if it's voice or tone -- as I only have an
academic interest in VCR+, being able to program my VCR without it, I am
not willing to pay a significant amount in research costs to investigate.)
--
Arthur L. Rubin: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (work) Beckman Instruments/Brea
216-5888@mcimail.com 70707.453@compuserve.com arthur@pnet01.cts.com (personal)
My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.
My interaction with our news system is unstable; please mail anything important.
From: pcl@ox.ac.uk (Paul C Leyland)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Any way to *CREATE* Vcr+ (VCR PLUS) codes??? (please read)
Date: 7 Jan 93 11:17:06 GMT
	<29342@oasys.dt.navy.mil>
Organization: Oxford University Computing Services, 13 Banbury Rd Oxford OX2
	6NN
In-reply-to: curt@kcwc.com's message of 6 Jan 93 22:04:08 GMT

In article <29342@oasys.dt.navy.mil> curt@kcwc.com (Curt Welch) writes:

   You can copyright anything.  The question is whether it would
   hold up in court or not.  No copyright on just a number would hold up in
   court however.

   But you can Copyright a table of numbers and show times that you publish
   (which is what they do).  However, it's questionable if they could claim
   infringment if you copied some of those numbers and times and re-publilshed
   them.  I'm sure however, that Gemstar would take you to court if they could
   prove that you copied one of they copyrighted listings, and let the court
   decide. 

A similar case was decided in the UK about a year ago.  TV listing
used to be the perogative of the broadcasting companies, so there were
only two magazines: one by the BBC and the other by the independents
acting in concert.  Recently, it was held that this was monopolistic,
and so now anyone can publish listings.

Paul

--
Paul Leyland <pcl@oxford.ac.uk>          | Hanging on in quiet desperation is
Oxford University Computing Service      |     the English way.
13 Banbury Road, Oxford, OX2 6NN, UK     | The time is come, the song is over.
Tel: +44-865-273200  Fax: +44-865-273275 | Thought I'd something more to say.
Finger pcl@black.ox.ac.uk for PGP key    |
Xref: sparky sci.crypt:6597 alt.security.pgp:483 alt.security.ripem:83
From: mrr@scss3.cl.msu.edu (Mark Riordan)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp,alt.security.ripem
Subject: Re: Zimmermann's responses to Sidelnikov's PGP critique
Date: 10 Jan 1993 01:23:17 GMT
Organization: Michigan State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: scss3.cl.msu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]

Marc VanHeyningen (mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu) wrote:
: >I notice that one RIPEM public key in the public server file has its
: >first 34 characters identical to my ripem public key. Perhaps this is
: >related. It seems an unlikely coincidence, given that the two keys
: 
: #=== Documentation ===
: #
: #-- Explain that all keys start with a PKCS identifier, so people won't
: #think RIPEM has a bug that makes all keys similar.
: 
: This probably explains much, if not all, of the similarity.

Yes, I really ought to make this point in the documentation.
RIPEM uses MD5 is a pseudo-random-number generator in producing
keys (both keypairs and message keys).  MD5 makes a very high-quality
PRNG.  RIPEM keys are encoded according to OSI's Distinguished
Encoding Rules, using PKCS identifiers.  This puts a lot of constant
bytes at the beginning of the key, so a program can tell exactly
what it's dealing with.  If the key format is changed in the
future, RIPEM will be able to figure out that a given key was
in an old format and (presumably) adjust accordingly.
See the "pkcs" documents
available from rsa.com.

/mrr
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: RSAREF and RIPEM
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 23:36:26 GMT


In response to Bob Heuman, I am coming around to the pragmatic view
that since the violation of U.S. law is exporting controlled material,
the violator is the person who downloaded it, not the person who
put it on a bulletin board. I'm uncomfortable with this, for obvious
reasons, but never mind.

If so, and if the downloader is outside the U.S., he is likely
outside the reach of U.S. law, and pragmatically speaking, unless
U.S. authorities want to go around taking names and putting them
on lists for visa applicant checking, or research funding, there's
little the U.S. government can do.

We next come to the point of whether the act is a violation of the
national laws in the country where the downloader is. From what
responses I've seen so far to that inquiry, it probably is in France,
Germany, maybe Italy, Canada, and the U.K., not the Netherlands, and not
Finland.  I'd like more hard information on this point, though, from
those who can quote the national laws directly.

That's where my understanding is as of today.

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

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: schneier@chinet.chi.il.us (Bruce Schneier)
Subject: Re: How fast is DES?
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Distribution: sci
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 05:54:17 GMT

In article <TODD.93Jan11151650@palomar.tivoli.com> todd@palomar.tivoli.com writes:
>
>In <1494@eouk9.eoe.co.uk>, Andrew Haley (ahaley@eoe.co.uk) writes
>
>> Another possibility is using a hash function such as MD4 as a stream
>> cipher generator.  One advantage of using stream ciphers is that the
>> stream can be generated offline, so that when you want to transmit a
>> message it can be done instantly.  The total processing time to
>> encrypt will not be any less, but the stream can be generated while
>> the processor would otherwise be idle, effectively reducing the
>> encryption overhead to zero.
>
>I'm not sure how practical this technique is, I believe that IBM owns
>a patent on it.  And it won't be expiring for even further in the
>future than the RSA patents!!!
>
Does anyone know if this is true or not?  If it is true, does anyone have
a patent number?

Bruce
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: wright@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov (Ted Wright)
Subject: Re: KH-11 pictures -
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 18:49:53 GMT

In article <willmore.726856133@kiev.gis.iastate.edu> willmore@iastate.edu (David Willmore) writes:
>From: willmore@iastate.edu (David Willmore)
>Subject: Re: KH-11 pictures -
>Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 16:28:53 GMT
>lrk@k5qwb.lonestar.org (Mr. Lyn R. Kennedy) writes:
>
>>It seems it would be more feasable to take several pictures by the same 
>>satellite at slightly different locations and combine them 
>>electronically. I'm not sure I understand the limits of this but I've 
>>been led to beleive that it works. A similar method is being used with 
>>radio-telescopes, recording the information simultaneously at several 
>>sites and then combining the data to get better resolution.
>
>There are a few differences.  The wavelength of the radio waves in
>question are much longer than the light waves.  Therefore, the precision
>with which the image receivers must be places is more stringent for the
>optical methods.  It's just not too easy.  I'm not saying that it 
>can't or isn't being done.  It's just difficult to accomplish.
>
>--David Willmore
>willmore@iastate.edu

A few years ago on a television program (NOVA, I think) I saw something
like this. Some people at the Jet Propulion Lab took a couple of digitized
satellite pictures, crunched them in a computer for a while, and ended up
with a 3D model of the subject area (San Francisco, I think) in their
computer.

They could "fly" around the city (between building, etc) and view
objects from different perspectives. I don't think the were increasing
the resolution, but they were extracting the 3rd dimension information
from 2D images.  

Ted Wright (wright@lims01.lerc.nasa.gov)
-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.0

mQCNAiqvp90AAAEEAO0VFsrmnZhmALDOZEG6vPlTwB5jqM5swOkhDqJIOHOtyNug
2ZfCpsQUYcrVCKjGs4zaivEoiQxi+538mwNhL9HXQK+I3HR2xESzpJEoLiv62kMI
cwVbEw9QAuxY7Z01KHi+bNYhYQvzBczaVttPJdOTvNpbUCzWIeKXEM95WINbAAUR
tChUZWQgV3JpZ2h0IDx3cmlnaHRAbGltczAxLmxlcmMubmFzYS5nb3Y+
=uu9S
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
From: martin@biostat.washington.edu (Don Martin)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Bombe,Enigma, ULTRA
Date: 4 Jan 93 20:49:44 GMT
Article-I.D.: shelley.1ia7t8INNogc
Organization: Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Univ. of Wash.
NNTP-Posting-Host: beast.biostat.washington.edu

The Smithsinian had a bombe on display in November and
it may still be on display. There was no attempt to
describe the operation.

Don Martin
Dept. of Biostatics, Univ. of Wash.
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.ripem
From: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Subject: Re: Complete ITAR Available
Reply-To: jkp@cs.HUT.FI (Jyrki Kuoppala)
Organization: Helsinki University of Technology, Finland
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 14:33:08 GMT

In article <WCS.93Jan12005718@rainier.ATT.COM>, wcs@anchor (Bill Stewart +1-908-949-0705) writes:
>More precisely, RIPEM depends on having subroutines with the RSAREF interface 
>which implement RSAREF functionality - RIPEM itself could be exported,
>and some of those sinister foreigners could reimplement RSAREF,
>as long as they stick to the interfaces, and then we could probably use RIPEM
>for cross-border mail (assuming key-certification issues can be resolved),
>without having to export RSAREF itself (which violates the RSAREF licenses,
>as well as inviting problems from the ITAR-vogons.)

Here in Finland, I stumbled on something which looks very much like
RIPEM+RSAREF.  I haven't looked at the package more closely or
untarred it, because of all the FUD about the issue,

(by the way, I have seen posted that the author of RIPEM requests that
RIPEM not be distributed outside USA - unless he changes his mind I
think it might be a good idea to be polite and comply with the
request)

>Has anybody read the RSAREF license carefully enough to determine
>whether the interface definitions can be distributed without license?

but I guess that if the package indeed contains RSAREF it might be
possible for me to examine the package and describe the interface on
this newsgroups - I certainly do not intend to sign or comply to a
license as described here so I don't think the license would be a
problem.

Also, depending on what the copyright status of the RSAREF code is, it
might be perfectly OK for people outside USA to distribute and use the
RSAREF code itself.  Could someone clarify the copyright issue wrt
RSAREF?  The license seems to require commitment not to distribute
RSAREF, but I guess that's irrelevant for people who have not signed
the license.  I don't know whether publishing something by ftp implies
permission to further distribute (republish) the package, but if not
and there's no notice saying permission for distribution is given then
it probably wouldn't be OK to put RSAREF for ftp here.

>If it's ok to distribute the interface, one could also contend that an
>interface definition isn't software, it's just documentation.

I can't think of any reason for me to not be able to publish
information about the interface.  The Finnish copyright law doesn't
cover interfaces.  Also, as I haven't signed any license I don't see
what would prevent me from examining RSAREF.  Any other thoughts?

//Jyrki

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: karn@servo.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
Subject: Re: KH-11 pictures -
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 07:05:08 GMT

In article <1993Jan10.122415.20405@bernina.ethz.ch> caronni@nessie.cs.id.ethz.ch (Germano Caronni) writes:
>Isn't there a possibility to place some mirrors up there, align their 
>positions by measuring distances between them with laser or whatsoever,
>and then computationally combine the so won pictures ?

I thought about this some time ago, because it would be the only way
to overcome the fundamental limits on what you can do from orbital
altitude with something that can fit inside the payload fairing of a
launcher like the Titan (commonly used to launch spy payloads out of
Vandenburg).

To get better resolution, you'd have to increase the effective
diameter of your telescope -- there's no way around this. You'd have
two basic approaches: a folding mirror of some kind, and the coherent
combining through some sort of signal processing of the light
collected by multiple telescopes spaced some distance apart.

In the first case, you'd have to build a folding mirror that could
deploy automatically in space and maintain alignment to a small
fraction of an optical wavelength. Ground telescopes have been built
from multiple mirrors, each under computer control, and I understand
it works. But considering the severe weight constraints and the
constant thermal stress from the 90 minute day/night cycling in polar
orbit, this seems like a tall order.

In the second case, you'd have to record the actual phase of the
incident photons on each telescope so you could combine them
coherently (i.e., simulate what happens in a single, large telescope).
I don't think the technology is ready for this yet. Remember that the
Space Telescope came from the same industrial base as builds these
things...

This is not to say that it's *impossible*, only that it's probably not
feasible or cost-effective with present technology. You also have to
ask what the use would be of all this extra resolution. One of the
problems they already have with spy satellites is sifting through the
flood of information they produce, and doubling the resolution
quadruples the amount of data they have to deal with.

And you have to consider the competition, such as a stealth airplane
designed specifically for reconnaissance. Airplanes can get a lot
closer to the subject than satellites, and they let you easily change
the instruments to suit the mission. They can also loiter in one spot
for a long time.

Now if you could keep the existence of such a plane secret, perhaps by
retiring your known spy airplanes with great fanfare and issuing a
cover story about how they've been completely replaced by satellites,
then you might actually be able to use it repeatedly before your
adversary even begins to suspect you have it. Of course, you might
have to make up another cover story to explain all those sonic booms
heard on a regular basis here in Southern California...

I know, this is getting pretty far afield from cryptography...

Phil

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: bjork@telebit.com (Steven Bjork)
Subject: Academic Freedom, NOT when it comes to funding
Organization: Telebit Corporation; Sunnyvale, CA, USA
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 20:03:24 GMT

In article <1993Jan6.150338.9271@ulysses.att.com>,
 smb@research.att.com (Steven Bellovin) writes:

>market isn't that big, as yet.  Universities, on the other hand, have
>much less to lose, and have a tradition of academic freedom to uphold.

Not Stanford University, when it comes to money.

The Stuart Reges affair proves that.

--Steven
From: jkreznar@ininx.UUCP (John E. Kreznar)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: RIPEM and RSAREF available by anonymous ftp !!!
Summary: If you believe Perry's message is fascist, then...
Date: 10 Jan 93 09:18:15 GMT
Organization: Independence Industries, Los Angeles

In article <1993Jan7.230942.12698@netcom.com>, strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:

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

Ah!  Is this what you call a ``collegial way'' to pursue this
discussion?

Fascism: ``Any program for setting up a centralized autocratic
national regime with severely nationalistic policies, exercising
regimentation of industry, commerce, and finance, rigid censorship,
and forcible suppression of opposition.'' --- Webster's New
Collegiate Dictionary.

Can you explain how you conclude that Perry's message is ``fascist''?

On the other hand, can you explain how export controls are _not_ an
example of fascism?

> His message speaks for itself.

Exactly.  And so does yours.

 |  Voting in government elections, or petitioning government, or willfully  |
 |  accepting government ``benefits'' when it's feasibly avoidable (thereby  |
 |  generating demand for taxation), accelerate the supplanting of personal  |
 |  choice by collective dictate,  making these most serious crimes against  |
 |  humanity.  ---John E. Kreznar, jkreznar@ininx.com, uunet!ininx!jkreznar  |

-- 
        Relations among people to be by mutual consent, or not at all.
         ---John E. Kreznar, jkreznar@ininx.com, uunet!ininx!jkreznar