HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lucio@phyrql.Alt.ZA (Lucio de Re)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Date: 23 Dec 92 17:31:40 GMT
Article-I.D.: phyrql.1992Dec23.173140.10779
Reply-To: lucio@proxima.Alt.ZA
Organization: MegaByte Digital Communications

strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:

>In Europe, where I have never argued RSA's patents apply, and I have
>never argued the U.S. Munitions laws apply, I argue the ethics of
>taking an invention without compensation.  Like most such discussions
>here, these arguments have evolved as we learn from each other. That
>argument also applies in the U.S.

[ ... deletions ... ]

>In the case of Vesselin, specifically, I suggest he check out
>the German crypto and Munitions laws, since that's where he
>apparently has PGP on a computer. If he's planning to use it
>in Bulgaria, he may also wish to check out those laws.

In South Africa (that's where I'm at), there have been no changes to the
anti-communist paranoia of the early apartheid era and data encryption
is taboo, almost in all forms.  I used the opportunity to needle a couple
of spooks (National Intelligence Service) about PGP when they were
attending a course in adjacent offices.  I must admit that they managed
to keep a straight face.

On the other hand, I agree with Phil Zimmermann's feelings that the
public is entitled to protection from the state and PGP provides such
protection.  Like other weapons (and it can be labelled a defense
weapon) it can fall in the hands of miscreants, but, like for South
Africa, the era of Secret Service paranoia is past and PKP's strangle-
hold on Public Key encryption is superfluous and counterproductive.

I'd like to put the entire matter into perspective, but too many issues
have been confused together.  One that I would like to bring up is
David Sternlight's claim that the inventors of RSA deserve compensation.

(a) They probably have already received a fair amount, following
    publication: publicity, job offers,...

(b) Their research, I understand, was produced under Gov't grant. Thus
    they were paid to deliver the goods, at the tax-payers' expense.

The bottom line is that I have little use for PGP but will make it
available to those around me who may find it useful.  I may even find
it essential to use it to sign my NetNews postings in solidarity
with use worldwide.  It is a shame that US nationals may not use it
and I believe the correct approach may be to lobby for changes to
legislation and other legal activities that will remove the obstacles.

If any person or organisation is prepared to tackle PKP and/or the
State Department on these issues, they can count on what little
support may be available for me to provide.
-- 
Lucio de Re (lucio@phyrql.Alt.ZA)
The supernatural does not exist, but it gives me the creeps...
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: PGP as a World Standard
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 18:30:08 GMT


Paul Leyland posts a good suggestion if the existence of my key in
Bontchev's key file were a crime to be remedied. It is not. It is an
inconvenience to Vesselin, according to his posts, and he thinks an
inconvenience to others. What is more, I did not export my key,
someone took it outside the US.

Using Vesselin's own arguments, there's nothing illegal about my key
circulating outside the U.S. As I read the section of the Munitions
Act I quoted much earlier, there's even nothing illegal about
exporting keys (though I didn't). It's the software, algorithms,
flowcharts that are mentioned in the regulation.

Thus for me to use PGP in the U.S. to revoke the key (which I assert
would be a violation), would be committing a violation in order to
cure an inconvenience that isn't illegal.

Anyone who wishes to remove my key from his key ring as a result of
this correspondence may do so. If they fear there's some 'real'
Sternlight lurking somewhere who is being spoofed by this message,
that's got to be their problem, not mine.

-- 
David Sternlight
RIPEM key on server
From: dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin) 
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on P
Date: 23 Dec 92 19:29:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Advanced Computer Concepts BBS, New Rochelle, NY 914-654-1981
Reply-To: dick.zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Dick Zeitlin) 

DS> .Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
  > .From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
  > .Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
  > .Message-ID: <1992Dec21.075152.13537@netcom.com>
  > .Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 07:51:52 GMT


DS> .Jyrki (apt name) posts another anti-U.S. screed in which he says that

Is it necessary for you to resort to ad-hominem attacks?  This is
inappropriate in any setting, but especially for someone that has
attempted to present himself as representing the high ground of
morality, legality, etc.

FWIW, I consider many of Jyrki's posts to be more representative of the
attitudes that this country _should_ (and did, once upon a time) espouse
than your posts.

        D/
---
 . QMPro 1.0 41-3345 . Bring back A-N airways!!    Dick.Zeitlin%acc1bbs@ssr.com
                                                                                                   
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Spies using PGP
From: jim.wenzel@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (Jim Wenzel) 
Date: 19 Dec 92 21:43:00 GMT
Reply-To: jim.wenzel@grapevine.lrk.ar.us (Jim Wenzel) 
Distribution: world
Organization: The GrapeVine BBS *** N. Little Rock, AR *** (501) 753-8121



Shaen Bernhardt * It's real  hard for me  to understand why  this hasn't
                  been asked yet:
                                 = = =

  I'm afraid I  don't have the answer for this.  And doubt that we would
  find out either.

  The main reason  for my reply is that my  parents name is Bernhardt as
  well and your last name caught my eye..

  please reply via EMAIL  to jim.wenzel@grapevine.lrk.ar.us I would like
  to compare lineage.

---
 * SM 1.06 A0059 * I have integrity.  Just ask my parole officer.
                                                                 
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: schneier@chinet.chi.il.us (Bruce Schneier)
Subject: Primitive Polynomials mod 2
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 00:28:53 GMT

I would like to include a list of primitive polynomials mod 2 in my book.
I have the list from _Numberical_Recipes_, but would like other polynomials
and polynomials of higher degrees.

Does anyone have any lists of primitive polynomials mod 2?  Even if the lists
are short, I would like to compile whatever is out there into a comprehensive
table.

Does anyone have a copy of S.W. Golumb's book:  _Shift_Register_Sequences_?
Are there lists in there?  If so, could someone photocopy the pages for me.
Does anyone have copies of the Zierler and Brillhart articles in _Info._and_
_Control_ (vol 13, p 541-554 and vol 14, p 566-569)?  They are supposed to
have lists or primitive polynomials.

What I really want is primitive polynomials for degrees just less than
multiples of 32 (for easy software implementation):  118-128, 150-160,
182-192, 214-224, and 246-256.

Anyone out there have any ideas?

Bruce
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum)
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 08:49:16 GMT
Reply-To: piet@cs.ruu.nl (Piet van Oostrum)
Organization: Dept of Computer Science, Utrecht University, The Netherlands
Followup-To: sci.crypt

>>>>> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) (DS) writes:

DS> In Europe, where I have never argued RSA's patents apply, and I have
DS> never argued the U.S. Munitions laws apply, I argue the ethics of
DS> taking an invention without compensation.

Have you ever used quicksort, LALR parsing, C, Pascal, B trees. If so did
you compensate Hoare, DeRemer, Ritchie, Wirth, Bayer or McCreight?
The list could be extended almost indefinitely. If you ever used any of
these without compensating the inventors you are a hypocrit.
-- 
Piet van Oostrum <piet@cs.ruu.nl>
From: mcbeeb@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (Brian Mcbee)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: [legality of PGP etc.
Date: 26 Dec 92 02:01:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: leela.1hgedgINNbn0
Organization: Computer Science Outreach Services - Oregon State University
NNTP-Posting-Host: atlantis.cs.orst.edu

I have heard mention several times here the possibility of forcing a test
case with PKP over PGP.  I don't believe this is possible.  I think PKP
has to sue an infringer.  It is therefore totally up to PKP as to whether
this ever goes to court.
Xref: sparky sci.crypt:6111 alt.security.pgp:396
From: bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de (Vesselin Bontchev)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
Subject: Re: Legal Stuff!
Date: 23 Dec 92 11:24:30 GMT
Reply-To: bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de
Organization: Virus Test Center, University of Hamburg

smb@research.att.com (Steven Bellovin) writes:

> I just asked a patent attorney I know.  Importing a patented device
> into the U.S. constitutes infringement, as does making, selling, or using
> the device.  Lots of other obvious loopholes are covered as well.

Very interesting... Thanks for clearing this up. So, the next time I
visit the States, I should be careful with my dentbrush... It's a
special model that might be patented there... I'd better check with a
lawyer... :-))

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: kudzu@netcom.com (Michael Sierchio)
Subject: Re: RSA patent suit by PKP
Followup-To: misc.int-property
Organization: True Love, and Home-Grown Tomatoes
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 17:48:29 GMT

In article <FRIEDMAN.92Dec21185527@nutrimat.gnu.ai.mit.edu> 
	friedman@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Noah Friedman) writes:

[drivel about how bad software patents are]

This ill-informed drivel against software patents belongs in another 
newsgroup -- where I've directed it.  

-- 
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|  Michael Sierchio                          1563 Solano Avenue, Suite 123 |
|  kudzu@netcom.com                                Berkeley, CA 94707-2116 |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: ted@nmsu.edu (Ted Dunning)
Subject: Drivel
Reply-To: ted@nmsu.edu
Organization: Computing Research Lab
Distribution: sci
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 00:50:34 GMT



sci.crypt used to be a group that had something to do with its name.


no more.


a pity.


count me out, i may check back in a couple of months, but i would
guess that the motor-mouths will still be in control.

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: Owen.Lewis@purplet.demon.co.uk (Owen Lewis)
From:  Andrew Cadach <kadach@isi.itfs.nsk.su>
Subject: Re: sci.crypt.science
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 17:19:21 GMT
Reply-To: kadach@isi.itfs.nsk.su
Organization: Institute of Informatics System

> Anyone besides me sick of all the political discussions?  How about splitting
> this into sci.crypt.science and sci.crypt.politics?  Or booting all of the
> political talk to alt.security--and having someone moderate this newsgroup to
> ensure compliance?  My kill file is bulging.
>
> Bruce

Agreed.  So  far  as  I  can see, there's 2  different  items to
discuss. People who interesting  politics can call to  lawer  to
clear  the  water, I  believe.   Algo/program   legality   usage
discussion seems to  be too  incompetent  (IMO).  Sure,  there's
very  interesting and important questions, but  (IMO), sci.crypt
is wrong place to talk about. There's a lot of  other newsgroups
(misc.legal.computing for example) to do. Try this.

According to  name ("sci.crypt")  of the newsgroup, it's purpose
is  to discuss crypt science  problems. Not an US  laws.

I hope people will move towards correct newsgroups for  politics
discussions.  Another  decision  proposed by Bruce,  if somebody
think  that  it  is "sci.crypt"  the  very   place  to  politics
discussions. Well, let's leave  "sci.crypt" for  them and create
another newsgroup to descuss SCI CRYPT.

--- 
  Andrew Cadach                      kadach@isi.itfs.nsk.su
  Institute of Informatics Systems   +7 (323) 035-5067
  Kronos Research Group              Lavrentiev ave., 6
  Novosibirsk, Russia                630090

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: Crys@cave.tcp.com (Crys Rides)
Subject: RSA vs. RSAREF Curiosity
Organization: Someone here is supposed to organize?
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 23:53:58 GMT

Could someone perhaps eludicate to me what exactly the difference
besides legality is between the RSAREF routines and the RSA
used in the notorious PGP program?  Loopholes, weaknesses?
Any comments appreciated.

CrysRides
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Non-U.S. crypto laws
Date: 21 Dec 92 20:39:15 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)


I've been reading a number of messages by those outside the U.S.
who claim PGP is legal there.

I'm curious. What are the crypto laws in the U.K., Germany, and
Finland, from which most of the posts come. Is it really true
that PGP is legal there, or do such countries also have laws
about import, posession, or use of cryptographic software,
which have conveniently not been mentioned in this discussion?

Is it, rather, that PGP has not yet come to the attention of the
authorities in those countries? I'm not referring to the patent
laws, but to munitions-type, COCOM, ITAR, or other domestic
crypto and security laws on those countries.

David
From: cme@ellisun.sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: sci.crypt.research
Date: 30 Dec 1992 17:43:57 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: ellisun.sw.stratus.com

In article <1992Dec30.141110.6932@linus.mitre.org> bs@fatima.mitre.org (Robert D. Silverman) writes:
>In article <scottj-301292083214@iamac-1.dml.georgetown.edu> scottj@magic.dml.georgetown.edu (John L. Scott) writes:
>:> sci.crypt. (Not that I'd want to be moderator- are there volunteers?)
>:
>:Of course not!  No volunteers, just grousers.
>
>I volunteer, but I am likely to be more strict than some would like.


I, too, would volunteer, although I'd happily let Bob do it.  I have no
fear of his strictness.

-- 
-- <<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
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: smb@research.att.com (Steven Bellovin)
Subject: Re: DES, PKP
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 03:51:35 GMT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories

In article <scs.725162283@wotan.iti.org>, scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons) writes:
> Those two sentences sound contradictory to me.  Don't IEEE and ANSI
> require all the technologies involved in a standard to be in the public
> domain?

No, they don't.  They simply want the assurances given in the document,
that access be reasonably-priced and non-discriminatory.  Want a good
example?  DES and Ethernet were patented.  (The DES patents have since
expired, and carried no license fee in any event.  Technically, though,
I think one needed a license, and I've heard rumors (that I never
confirmed) that one could get a license if and only if one agreed to
use only the four standard modes of operation.)

Yes, it surprised me, too, when I learned that proprietary technologies
could be blessed by ANSI and IEEE.  Then I thought a bit more.  These
are organizations that serve *businesses*, not universities.
Businesses, in general, do not object to paying reasonable fees for
services rendered; after all, they themselves charge for similar
services.  Now, they may disagree as to the validity of particular
patents, or even about the principle behind certain patents (though
businesses rarely have principles, per se, as opposed to bottom lines),
but paying for designs and specifications is quite common in the business
world.  Academe is different, of course; there, free software, educational
discounts, etc., are the norm.

Even the IAB has blessed RSA for PEM, for the simple reason that no
alternative seemed feasible.  And yes, a reasonable license fee is
being charged, though a substantial portion of it is for the certification
hierarchy, rather than for patent royalties.
Xref: sparky sci.crypt:6221 news.admin:8775 news.groups:24930
From: alain@elevia.uniforum.qc.ca (W. A. Simon)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,news.admin,news.groups
Subject: (redirected) sci.crypt.research
Date: 27 Dec 92 23:17:00 GMT
Followup-To: news.groups

PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWUP-TO HEADER

In <9212272117.AA16102@NMSU.Edu>
ted@nmsu.edu
disagrees with my previous (hasty) piece:

>> [ ... ]
>> NO 	to sci.crypt.research
>> YES	to talk.crypt
>> YES	to keeping sci.crypt as is
>> NO	to moderating either

> this is all well and good, but creating a new group has the advantage
> of leaving all the talkers behind.  since they won't hear the fact
> that there is a new place to blather, they will continue to pollute
> the group.
> it might work if there were a moderator who forwarded all talk posts
> to talk.crypt

	I should have written talk.politics.crypt, but let's find
	out if YAG (yet another group) is going to resolve the basic
	problem:

	talk.politics.crypt is just a narrower debate in the larger
	freedom of thoughts/speech debate which is well covered in
	alt.* and talk.politics.*.  This would militate against the
	creation of YAG, but it favors posting elsewhere.

	We may dislike the "pollution" of our forum by "unscientific"
	threads, but the debate is relevant to the subject since
	cryptography is so politically charged, and it is important
	to us since it may affect our right to exchange ideas on the
	subject, in this very same "sci" forum.  So, maybe we should
	not have YAG and maybe we should stick to sci.crypt.

	Maybe we could ENCOURAGE the philosophers and politicians to
	use the "Followup-To:" header so the thread can move by itself
	to the proper grounds.  There would - I am sure - be nothing
	wrong in x-posting the initial piece in sci.crypt, if only
	to alert us to the existence of a possibly interesting thread
	in a talk or alt group.  Screaming about being "sick and tired"
	and advocating moderation (if not outright policing) is not
	sustainable.  Pretending that our "talkers" are just blathering
	is downright stupid.  Finally, treating the "talkers" as if they
	had no right to talk is not productive either.  We all have a "n"
	key as well as a kill file.  Let's use them.  No need for YAG
	if we do.  Maybe.

	Since we are talking about "talkers", I should mention that
	I have a real interest in both the political impacts of
	cryptography and its scientific aspects; I am however not
	too keen on sifting through the noisier groups just to find
	a few rare items of very specialized interest.  Therefore,
	the creation of YAG may be a good compromise to satisfy
	the need for an open debate on a subject that sorely needs
	it without exposing the reader to low signal to noise ratii,
	and it will help reduce the unscientific contents of the sci
	group.  As to the idea of moving our tents every time we don't
	like the new neighbours, it penalizes those who move...

-- 
 William "Alain" Simon
 514 / 934 6320                                     alain@uniforum.qc.ca

--
 Alain - Canadian Patent #1310575
 [ ... usual disclaimer... ]
From: marc@tanda.isis.org (Marc Thibault)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: sci.crypt.research
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 14:17:44 EST
Reply-To: marc@tanda.isis.org
Distribution: na
Organization: Thibault & Friends

Gentlefolk,

        From what I have seen in usenet (as well as bars, clubs and
        social history), the only way to successfully partition
        sci.crypt will be for those with the incentive to make the
        move to make it. (Do the groups with the most dots in their
        names represent the frontiers of the cyberverse?)

        Making a sci.crypt.research|theory group will give the Verner
        Von Braun segment (vunz ze rockets go up, who cares verr zey
        komm down?) a place to have mature scientific discussions
        without interruptions from the real world. :-)

        It would seem appropriate for one of the mature scientists to
        paddle a RFD down to news.groups.

        FLAME ON:
        I'm not sure who used the word, but "hobbyist" is not the
        only alternative to "scientist" and it's an inappropriate
        discount. There are a bunch of us non-specialists here who
        have a serious professional interest in the _application_ of
        cryptography. You may recognise us as the people who
        ultimately provide the justification for your cryptology by
        providing a context for your cryptography. For us, the
        politics and logistics are just as important as the science
        and, without us, cryptology papers are write-only memory.
        :FLAME OFF

        I hope the specialists will continue to hang around to discuss
        these issues, whether or not a new group is formed. Maybe we
        can all make a New Year's Resolution to leave the guns and
        pederasts out of it.

        Happy New Year,

                        Marc

---
 Marc Thibault        |  Automation Architect        |  All we are saying
 marc@tanda.isis.org  |  R.R.1, Oxford Mills,        |  is give global
 CIS:71441,2226       |  Ontario, Canada  K0G 1S0    |  warming a chance.
 NC FreeNet: aa185    |                              |

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.0

mQBNAiqxYTkAAAECALfeHYp0yC80s1ScFvJSpj5eSCAO+hihtneFrrn+vuEcSavh
AAUwpIUGyV2N8n+lFTPnnLc42Ms+c8PJUPYKVI8ABRG0I01hcmMgVGhpYmF1bHQg
PG1hcmNAdGFuZGEuaXNpcy5vcmc+
=HLnv
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

                        
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
From: rwirthli@nyx.cs.du.edu (Ralph Wirthlin)
Subject: Re: ARJ encryption
Organization: University of Denver, Dept. of Math & Comp. Sci.
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 14:55:41 GMT

rwirthli@nyx.cs.du.edu (Ralph Wirthlin) writes:

>	I was wondering if anyone knows the algorithm used in arj for
>the encryption scheme.  It appears to XOR the compressed text with some
>permutation of the password string (I suspect this is XOR'd with something
>else as well).  If anyone knows, please email and I'll summarize, otherwise
>I'll just figure it out myself.

Thanks to all those who responded.  I was able to figure out how ARJ does 
it's encryption.  It was simpler than I suspected.  ARJ adds a single
byte constant to each character in the password and then does an XOR
with this new password to generate the encrypted, compressed file.
  I suspect that this constant is generated from the system clock, but
that doesn't really matter, since ARJ stores this constant in the
local file header at offset 0xb.
  



					Ralph

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: a7657@mindlink.bc.ca (Stephen H. Kawamoto)
Subject: Re: The PGP debate: Is it legal?
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 22:39:38 GMT

Phil K. mentioned in an aside:

PK> I've heard of at least one patent attorney who has been
PK> known to explain the difference between an "algorithm"
PK> (which is not patentable) and a "method" (which is) as
PK> follows:
PK>
PK> "There's a vital difference. 'Algorithm' begins with an 'A'
PK> while 'Method' begins with an 'M'."

Ah! Now, what's the patent attorney's explanation in Legalese?


--
address Email to reach me: <a7657@mindlink.bc.ca>||<an3364@anon.penet.fi>
    "It is the very mind itself
     That leads the mind astray;
     Of the mind,
     Do not be mindless."
     (an old Japanese folk song)