HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tenney@netcom.com (Glenn S. Tenney)
Subject: Re: Legal Stuff!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 07:04:34 GMT

In article <BzvAs7.sI@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> hrubin@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (Herman Rubin) writes:
> ...
>RSA may seem miraculous to those who do not know mathematics, but not to
>those who do; I suspect the Patent Office to be staffed by those in the
>former class.  A BS in mathematics does not mean knowing much, if any,
>non-computational mathematics, and certainly not the number theory and
>knowledge of computational complexity needed to appreciate what has been
>done by the promoters.  As a professor for a long time, I must question if
>many are really "skilled in the art", as the patent laws put it.

This is a major piece of the problem.  The people I've met and
dealt with (librarians, examiners, up to commissioner) are very
sharp, and are quite competent!   One examiner I met had his
BSCS, four years out of school, four years with the PTO, one
of the most senior examiners, and was earning in the low $30s.
Maybe things are different here in silicon valley, but that is
VERY low pay for a BSCS 4 years out of school.

Remember, that these are government pay positions.  The PTO just
can't afford to hire and keep the people they need.  First, a
recent grad has a low salary to look at.  Secondly, after four
years (or is it five?) an examiner can leave and become a patent
agent with no exam needed -- this is a career path outside of the
PTO that can pay much MUCH more than does an examiner.

Of course, the other part of the problem is the lack of easily searchable
prior-art.  But that is, I understand, begining to be dealt with.


-- 
Glenn Tenney
voice: (415) 574-3420      fax: (415) 574-0546
tenney@netcom.com          Ham radio: AA6ER
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: caronni@nessie.cs.id.ethz.ch (Germano Caronni)
Subject: Re: help - recommend a crypto book.
Keywords: crypto book code cipher DES etc
Organization: Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 00:11:17 GMT

In article <85743@ut-emx.uucp> vax@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Vax) writes:
>Could someone recommend a book about cryptograhy (specifically computer
>related) to someone of the following qualifications?


Contemporary Cryptology - The science of Information Integrity
(c) 1992 - IEEE Press NY. IEEE Order Number: PC0271-7
ISBN: 0-87942-277-7

This is no educative book, but contains some good to read
introductions, and in depth explanations about some topics.
It's merely a collection of papers with LOTS of pointers to
other literature which will help you to enlarge your understanding
Contains:
Massey: Introduction into Cryptology
Smid&Branstad: DES - Past and Future
Rueppel:Stream Ciphers (and rng's)
Diffie:First 10 Years of Public Key Cryptology
Nechvatal: Public Key Cryptography
Oorschot: Comparison of PKC's basedon Integer factorizing & discr. logs.
--
Mitchell,Piper&Wild:Digital Signatures
Simmons:A survey of Information Authentication
--
Feigenbaum:Interactive Proof-Systems and 0-Knowledge
Simmons:Intro to shared Secret and/or Shared Control
--
Brickwell&Odlyzko:Cryptanalysis:A survey of recent results
Moore:Protocol Failures in Cryptosystems
--
Guillou,Ugon,Quisquater:The smart cart...
Simmons:How to insure that data acquired to verify treaty compliance are trustworthy

total 630 pages: ranges from 'understandable' to 'highly mathematical'

But I suppose some lectures first on Information Theory and Number Theory
and eventually Statistics could help.

Friendly greetings,
	gec
-- 
Instruments register only through things they're designed to register.
Space still contains infinite unknowns.

Germano Caronni    caronni@nessie.cs.id.ethz.ch
Xref: sparky sci.crypt:6057 alt.sources:2853
From: karn@servo.qualcomm.com (Phil Karn)
Subject: Re: The PGP debate: Is it legal?
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 02:02:13 GMT

In article <1992Dec28.190457.12206@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>[...] As many here have pointed
>out, algorithms cannot be patented. What they have is a patent on
>a method [...]

I've heard of at least one patent attorney who has been known to
explain the difference between an "algorithm" (which is not
patentable) and a "method" (which is) as follows:

"There's a vital difference. 'Algorithm' begins with an 'A' while
'Method' begins with an 'M'."

--Phil
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: norstar@tnl.com (Daniel Ray)
Subject: Re: sci.crypt.research
Organization: The Northern Lights
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 08:25:46 GMT

I think the best idea would be to:

1. Vacate and cancel sci.crypt, and, at the same time
2. Create 2 new groups sci.crypt.general and sci.crypt.theory

This keeps both groups at the same level of bifurcation in the hierarchy,
which is much more convenient in terms of setting up newsfeeds and sys files.

Also it forces people to come to an understanding regarding which group
is for what purpose.

dan ray
-- 
The Northern Lights, Troy NY                                 |     
tnl dialins: +1 518 237-2163 @ 1200-2400 bps 8N1 $free     ` | /   
-------------------------------------------------------  --- * --- 
Internet: norstar@tnl.com                                  / | .   
Sysop of TNL Public Access UNIX                              |     
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp,alt.security.ripem
From: eoliver@ralph.cs.haverford.edu (Erik Oliver)
Subject: Re: Legal Stuff!
Organization: Haverford College Computer Science Department
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 19:54:10 GMT

At the risk of getting myself into deep **** (choose the word of your
choice), I must say, that I see the import and installation of PGP on my
machines and my usage of it as a form of protest.

By privately maintaining floppies with source code as well as installing
PGP on my machine, I am guaranteeing my ability to securely use my
computer without pryihng eyes reading my files.  Also, I am protesting
the idea that software/algorithms are patentable.  Modern Computer
technology is changing way too rapidly for a 17 year lock on a market.
For example, I am given to understand that IBM has some sort of patent
on the blinking cursor in PC BIOSes (I am not certain of this and
reserve the right to be wrong.)  clearly, this is an utterly rediculous
patent, yet manufacturers of other computers must pay IBM patent
royalties.  OR how about that Patented Hayes Modem escape sequence,
+++<pause>, there's a real zinger.

My point is that the Patenet system just isn't awarding
software/algorithm patents for the right reasons, and 17 years is way to
long.  The 17 year protection is fine in markets where even 17 years
later there will still be a market, NutraSweet, drugs,machinery, etc.
But, just 2 years from now, the computer industry will be so drastically
different from today, that grantin patent protection for 17 years is
questionable at best.

Lastly, I object to the idea that my freedom of speech ends when I try
to send my speech out of the country.  I feel that the munitions act is
overly broad and most likely unconcsitutional because of the limits it
tries to place on my free speech.

Well, with all that said, hope those of you who celebrate christmas are
having a good one.

-Erik
eoliver@ralph.cs.haverford.edu
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: schneier@chinet.chi.il.us (Bruce Schneier)
Subject: Re: Real question re DES vs IDEA cipher
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 00:21:52 GMT

In article <1hcp41INNdi4@rave.larc.nasa.gov> palmer@icat.larc.nasa.gov (Michael T. Palmer) writes:
>What size key does IDEA use?  Is the length sufficient to stand up against
>brute force attacks?  I mean, if you can brute force it then why bother
>encrypting the session key with RSA (as in PGP and RIPEM)?  Nobody has to
>worry about the public key stuff, they can just go right after the plain
>text.
>
>Since I've seen here that IDEA might end up in an update of RIPEM, I was
>just wondering if it offered more security than DES (in CBC mode).  Please,
>forgo the legal asides concerning the algorithms and respective export or
>patent laws.  I'm just interested in what key sizes the different ciphers
>use.

IDEA uses a 128-bit key, compared to DES's 56-bit key.  There isn't time
left before the heat death of the universe to mount a brute-force attack
against IDEA.

Now, for the caveat.  IDEA is still a new algorithm.  It is possible that 
there is an attack against the algorithm that is significantly better than
brute force.  Several academic institutions, and the militaries of several
countries, are examining the algorithm.  So far no one has found anything,
or at least no one has publicly admitted to finding anything.  IDEA looks
real good, but it's too soon to make any confident statements.

I am more confident with triple-DES (112-bit key), but that takes a whole
lot longer than IDEA.

Bruce
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: isc40019@nusunix1.nus.sg (THAI LING)
Subject: perfect secrecy
Organization: National University of Singapore
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 12:16:56 GMT

I think this is a neat folder to discuss topics on cyptography.
I am currently doing a course on it and there are some questions 
on my mind.Can anyone help?

Does anyone know how to prove the following :

Q1 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Definition : M = the message space
             K = the key space
             C = the cytogram space 
 ! ! means the cardinality of

Given that !M! = !K! = !C! then perfect secrecy is achieved if

(1) all the keys are equiprobable
(2) there is exactly one transformation ( i.e one key ) from a given
    message to a given cyptogram

Q2 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

how can the key space be increased by using a combination of keys are
encryption instead of a single key replacement?
i.e instead of A   ......  B
               .          .
               .          .
               .          .
               .          .
               Z           K

to try        AB  .......   CD
               .          .
               .          .
               .          .
               .          .
              AZ   ......   WE  ...etc
 
Thanks in advance !!!!!

Linda
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: sci.crypt.research
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 18:48:58 GMT


I, too, agree with those who want this group split. I'm mostly replying
to others here, and don't choose the original venues. A reply elsewhere
would seem to miss the audience for the original message, and be at
least somewhat pointless. Basically, I agree (without knowing
this group's original charter) that judging only from the title, this
group ought to be about scientific and technical matters, not law, policy,
licensing, and ethics of crypto.

It seems to me that there has been a very vigorious discussion here
which is crypto-specific, but on law, policy, ethics, etc, and not at
all about science. Perhaps there should be a newsgroup called
"crypto.general" or some such, which doesn't fall in the "sci"
heirarchy.  People mis-posting here can then be directed there.

Since the crypto.general material is so crypto specific, one fears it
will get lost in the noise (no wise remarks, please) of other, for example,
civil liberties discussions if it went to a non-crypto group.

David
-- 
David Sternlight
RIPEM Public Key on server  --  Consider it an envelope for your e-mail
From: bz223@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Danny Guy Frezza)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Federal Taxes -- Online? Encrypt/Decrypt part of the Package?
Date: 2 Jan 1993 19:03:29 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: bz223@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Danny Guy Frezza)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


	I have a question:  for some who may use a modem to receive their
tax refunds from the Federal Government, does the Government employ 
some form of encryption/decryption utility in the delivering/sending of
sensitive information? It would seem to me they do, but I haven't spoken to
anyone who has used the modem to receive their refund(s) or other information
regarding the sensitive nature of taxes, which is private business?
	
	
-- 

Dan Frezza
Internet: bz223@cleveland.Freenet.Edu

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: Legal Stuff!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 01:57:13 GMT


In my previous message I meant, of course, that PGP is covered by the
Munitions Act as far as importing it is concerned, not PKP.

Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: erc@unislc.uucp (Ed Carp)
Subject: Re: PGP as a World Standard
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Organization: Unisys Corporation SLC
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 00:43:43 GMT

Vesselin Bontchev (bontchev@fbihh.informatik.uni-hamburg.de) wrote:

: 2) If you have indeed commited a crime when using PGP (which I
: sincerely doubt), then the fact that you were not aware of the law
: does not make you innocent.

True, but the fact that someone discontinues any illegal act when they
discover that it *is* illegal (without threat or fear of discovery) may
be used as an affirmative defense to prosecution in some jurisdictions.

Not that I consider using PGP to be an illegal act...
-- 
Ed Carp			erc@apple.com, erc@saturn.upl.com	801/538-0177

Who and what would you be if you went beyond your deepest fears?
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: scottj@magic.dml.georgetown.edu (John L. Scott)
Subject: Re: sci.crypt.research
Followup-To: sci.crypt
Organization: J. Random Misconfigured Site
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 13:33:36 GMT
X-Posted-From: iamac-1.dml.georgetown.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

In article <1hrovdINNkgp@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca>, unruh@physics.ubc.ca (William
Unruh) wrote:
> But yes, a moderated sci.crypt.serious group would be a good idea, with
> the moderator pushing discussions, reiterations, flames etx into
> sci.crypt. (Not that I'd want to be moderator- are there volunteers?)

Of course not!  No volunteers, just grousers.

John L. Scott
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: pmetzger@snark.shearson.com (Perry E. Metzger)
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Organization: /usr/local/lib/news/organization
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 22:17:50 GMT

strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>Felix Gallo posts what I read as a sincere and partly moving
>message. Unfortunatly, I have difficulty with part of his central
>logic, which essentially argues that the law should be what he
>thinks it should be, rather than what the elected representatives
>of the people made it.

Adolf Hitler was put into power entirely by constitutional means under
an elected parliamentary government. Presumably, this means that you,
as a good Nazi, would have sent Jews off to the gas chamber, following
the "law", which, of course, was set by the duly and constitutionally
selected authorities.

It has long been understood by most, of course, that morality
transcends law. After all, you, David Sternlight, have hypocritically
stated on a number of occassions that you don't care if PGP is legal
in europe under their laws, because you consider its use "unethical".
That means that you yourself do not believe the arguments you are
making. Your statements tend to be inconsistant. For instance, you
make legalistic arguments and proceed to then claim not to be arguing
law but ethics. Then when people argue that ethics and law are indeed
seperate, you turn around and say that people are somehow ethically
obligated to follow the law no matter what it says, which, we presume,
contradicts your previous position on ethics as the laws of some
European country might, say, make PGP use manditory, thus placing you
in an odd ethical bind.

In any case, it does not appear that your arguments are coherent or
consistant enough to hold up terribly well.

--
Perry Metzger		pmetzger@shearson.com
--
Laissez faire, laissez passer. Le monde va de lui meme.
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp,alt.security.ripem
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: [legality of PGP etc.
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 23:00:13 GMT


Owen Lewis posts an interesting message in which he seems to think
that the genie is out of the bottle with respect to PGP. We shall
see.

Meanwhile, noting his Canute remark, this would be a good time to
point out that all my messages have been about the law as I
understood it, and ethics as I believe it.

In none of my messages have I taken a view on whether a legal
and ethical use of PGP would be a good thing or a bad thing. Those
with the wit to read between the lines will have understood that I
support legal public key cryptography.

Many of the attacks have taken  the form of attempting to demonize
my views, RSA, or other parties at interest. Some of the attacks
have been, uh, er, um, highly inappropriate.

Now that a new year is starting, I suggest we return to rational
discourse.

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

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: jeremym@ravel.udel.edu (Jeremy A Moskowitz)
Subject: Any way to *CREATE* Vcr+ (VCR PLUS) codes??? (please read)
Organization: University of Delaware
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 14:35:29 GMT



I was wondering - my cable listings dont provive codes for
Comedy Central, channel 39. Drat. I always want to tape
Mystery Science Theatre 3000 on Friday Evenings and
Saturday Mornings.

I was furious when I called Gemstar and asked them how to
get to program the numbers myself. They told me to screw off.

So, I did a little figurin'.

I played for an hour with the box, and realized something.

Year (operater) code = Channel, Time, and Length
BUT! Many times, the DATE will USUALLY still be the same. Hm...

So, I was wondering if anyone WROTE a program that'll
let you input today's date, the channel you want, the time and 
length, and the VCR Plus code would be spit out.

Let me know, I am really curious.
I have never even attempted to crack any other code in my life,
but am willing to learn!!

Also, I did finally get the code out of the guy. It took 30 minutes of
badgering and pleading. But that code is only good for next week, unless
I say I want it EVERY week with the weekly button. 
-- 
     // Email: jeremym@brahms.udel.edu------\  Monitor of---------------\
    //  Registered Commodore Amiga Developer|  Comp.sys.amiga.EMULATIONS| 
\\ //   "I'm spellunking."- BAB   "There's medicine you can take for that." - BB
 \X/           My Life Needs Cheap Dubbed in Sound Effects - Anon.
From: jani.patokallio%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Jani Patokallio) 
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: PGP - Legal?
Date: 26 Dec 92 16:30:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Advanced Computer Concepts BBS, New Rochelle, NY 914-654-1981
Reply-To: jani.patokallio%acc1bbs@ssr.com (Jani Patokallio) 

OK folks, here's the PGP question of the day.

I am a Finnish citizen with diplomatic immunity residing in the United States.
I'm not sure about this, but I think PGP and RSA are legal in Finland.

I recently stumbled into a copy of PGP 2.1 on a local BBS.  Now,
hypothetically, if I obtained this program, would I be breaking the law?
My house is rented and thus not extraterritorial property.  How about
if I took it to a house owned by the Finnish government, and thus legally
considered not a part of the US?

Also, suppose I had gotten my PGP in Europe.  Could I legally bring it to
the U.S.?  How about the U.N. via the U.S.?  

Third, suppose I had a copy of PGP.  Could I take it to the
U.S.?  To other Finnish/non-American citizens here?  To the Finnish Embassy,
which is extraterritorial?

And a final question.  If any of the above were illegal, could PKP
sue me?  Could the U.S. government do more than declare me a
persona non grata and request the Finnish government to try me?

Thank you in advance.

--
Jani Patokallio                  |  "Ignorance is the soil in which belief
acc1bbs!jani.patokallio@ssr.com  |   in miracles grows."  -R. G. Ingersoll

---
 . AME 1.07 . 
                                                                                           
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: gardner@convex.com (Steve Gardner)
Subject: Re: Legal Stuff!
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 01:19:23 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

In article <VRZVB4NZ@cc.swarthmore.edu> eoliver@ralph.cs.haverford.edu (Erik Oliver) writes:
>Well, David, I'm glad you feel I have integrity behind my statement, I
>suppose it comes from a sense, in which I feel that my whole life is a
>form of protest.  As a gay male living in this country, I feel like
>every moment since I cam out 4 plus years ago has been a protest to get
>the rights I deserve.
	You are not alone.  Your struggle is everyone's struggle.  Those of
	us who are not gay realize that "first they came for the gays. . ."
	if I might paraphrase Pastor Niemoller.  And your alienation from
	the current system of "intellectual property" is shared by others too.
	

>So, now, with all that lifted off my shoulder in an unloading of a year
>of anger and hostility towards this country, I do feel better.  I would
>however, love to help someone organize a challenge against the munitions
>act and PKP patent.
	I think that this act of yours is very useful.  Just like coming out
	it makes it "okay" for others and makes others who share your 
	alienation more courageous.  One thing leads to another and pretty
	soon it snowballs.  Even though each individual is limited in what
	he or she can do the collective action of many like minded people
	can move mountains.  Thank you. 


						smg



Xref: sparky sci.crypt:6041 alt.security:5206 alt.security.pgp:365
From: marti@nugget.inf.ethz.ch (Robert Marti)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security,alt.security.pgp
Subject: Re: PGP as a World Standard
Date: 22 Dec 92 15:22:48 GMT
Organization: Dept. Informatik, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology (ETH), Zurich, CH

In article <MOORE.92Dec18101541@defmacro.cs.utah.edu>, moore@cs.utah.edu
(Tim Moore) writes:
|> In article <aZHZVB15w165w@mantis.co.uk> mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk>
|> writes:
|> >  PGP does not use any techniques which are patented in the EC.
|> 
|> The IDEA cipher is patented in Switzerland.  I admit that I don't
|> know if Switzerland is considered part of the EC or not.

Switzerland is NOT part of the EC at the present time.  Switzerland
is not even a member of the EES (European Economic Space).  However,
note that international patents for IDEA are pending.

Disclaimer:  Even though I happen to be employed by the institution
where IDEA was developed, I have had nothing to do with it.

-- 
Robert Marti                    |  Phone:    +41 1 254 72 60
Informationssysteme             |  FAX:      +41 1 262 39 73
ETH-Zentrum                     |  E-Mail:   marti@inf.ethz.ch
CH-8092 Zurich, Switzerland     |
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp