HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: hal@harbor.mitre.org (Hal Feinstein)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Oh hell, here we go again!
Date: 16 Dec 92 15:01:46 GMT
Organization: Malox Corporation, Vienna, VA


Warning: This message is almost all /* FLAME */

I've got to say that I'm just sick and tired of reading the muck
thats being posted to this group over and over, every day. When I
started reading sci.crypt I wanted to see what crypto researchers and 
implementors were doing. That's the only reason I continue trying to read 
it. But, I   havn't seen anything to do with the technology for days. 
This group has turned into  a junk yard.  And I'm not the only reader who 
thinks do, maybe just more vocal. 

Is the government taking over the world? Are patent laws rip offs? Is NSA
part of the Illuminati? Are your absolute rights being usurped?  Is the 
electronic police state right around the corner?  Is DSS a government plot?
Was DES trapdoor a psychological operation lauched by the government to 
keep if from being used?  Hell!  

There are literally dozens of newgroups dedicated to consider every shade of
opinion. Why not post to them?  And stop cross posting to sci.crypt
this just duplicates stuff going on in other groups  and it
just chews up bandwidth.  Maybe, just maybe we can get back to the 
original  subject: cryptography
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: robert.heuman@rose.com (robert heuman)
Subject: PKP/RSA comments on P
Organization: Rose Media Inc, Toronto, Ontario.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 07:26:50 GMT
X-Gated-By: Usenet <==> RoseMail Gateway (v1.70)


Date Entered: 12-18-92 02:15
strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes (lines adjusted for screen)

S(> Now a word to my colleagues all over the world. Though you may be 
S(> able to (or think you may be able to) use PGP with impunity, why 
S(> not voluntarily send RSA a reasonable contribution for their invention
S(> --think of it as a shareinvention fee analogous to a shareware fee. 
S(> Say $20. A large number of such gestures might change the context of 
S(> the situation overnight. Note that this is my personal suggestion, and 
S(> I have not discussed it with anyone.

I do not believe that an previously published algorythm can be patented, 
nor that use of prime number factoring is anything other than use of 
mathematics, which I feel to be in the public domain. 

I for one would NEVER, under any circustances, permit a US company to 
blackmail me into paying for the 'right' to use public key, if I am 
outside the US, and I also do not believe that a 'shareware' type fee 
should be given as a reward to a company that has been doing such a 
disservice to the world-wide community.  The US and its citizens have to 
accept that we now live in an interconnected international society, and 
that rules that are unacceptable outside the US can only hurt the US and 
its interests world-wide if this type of suggestion, which amounts to 
extortion (itself illegal, David, and even extraditable in some cases) is 
supported by anyone sending money to RSA. [BTW, Canada too has some silly
rules, not to put too fine a point on it.  I am NOT a US basher.]

Bob Heuman <robert.heuman@rose.com>
---
   RoseReader 1.70 P001886: This Canadian has an Opinion...His Own!
   RM 2.00 : RoseNet<=>Usenet Gateway : Rose Media 416-733-2285
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 23:18:11 GMT


mathew corrects me by saying, in effect, that PKP aren't bending
over backwards to get non-U.S. users free public key software,
as they are for U.S. users by licensing RSAREF for ripem, since
RSAREF cannot be exported.

True.

Of course non-U.S. users have already created PGP, and can
just as well create a clone of RSAREF if they choose to continue
such things.

I'm not advocating, just commenting.

David
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: gerben@rna.indiv.nluug.nl
Subject: alt.security.pgp
Organization: G.R.O.S.S.
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 18:13:05 GMT

I don't see any group called alt.security.pgp here, nore does the European  
backbone.

What gives?

-- 
Gerben Wierda                 Tel. (+31) 35 833539
  "If you don't know where you are going, any road will take you there."
  From the Talmud(?), rephrased in Lewis Carroll, "Alice in Wonderland".

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: cbarkley@alex (The DarkMage)
Subject: Digital Signatures
Reply-To: cbarkley@tusol.cs.trinity.edu
Organization: Computer Science, Trinity University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1992 21:56:18 GMT

Greetings.

     I am pretty comfotable with encryption, but I do not really
understand digital signatures.  Could someone reccommend a text to
me that might discuss this subject?  Or, if it is actually something
simple that I've missed, could you alternatively mail me some info.
directly.

     Thanks!

-- 
Christopher Barkley
The DarkMage
cbarkley@tusol.cs.trinity.edu
Reality is a State of Mind
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security
From: moore@cs.utah.edu (Tim Moore)
Subject: Re: PGP v. 2.1 Released
In-reply-to: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com's message of 16 Dec 92 17:26:48 GMT
Organization: University of Utah CS Dept
	<palmer.724096180@news.larc.nasa.gov>
	<19921214.055706.262@almaden.ibm.com> <1glvofINNc0o@roche.csl.sri.com>
	<a_rubin.724526808@dn66>
Date: 18 Dec 92 09:51:53

In article <a_rubin.724526808@dn66> a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com (Arthur Rubin) writes:
   >  2) The legality of PGP is not being seriously debated.  It's illegal. 
   [...]
     It may have some code
   "contaminated" with some RSA code, in violation of copyright and/or trade
   secret. 

I have never seen this claim before.  Could you elaborate?   PKP
alleges that Zimmerman may have stolen ideas from MailSafe because he
had a copy in 1986, but that is extremely debatable (and Zimmerman
denies it.)

pgp 2.x does contain RSADSI code for the MD5 digest algorithm.  This
code is licensed to all under very generous terms (you have to mention
that your code contains RSADSI's code or is derived from it.)

--
Tim Moore                    moore@cs.utah.edu {bellcore,hplabs}!utah-cs!moore
"Wind in my hair - Shifting and drifting - Mechanical music - Adrenaline surge"
	- Rush
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: scs@iti.org (Steve Simmons)
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Organization: Industrial Technology Institute
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 13:41:34 GMT

ckd@eff.org (Christopher Davis) writes:

>DS> == David Sternlight <strnlght@netcom.com>

> DS> Moreover, others have had over 15 years to try to overthrow [the RSA
> DS> patent] and have not succeeded.

>Since US patents, as I recall, expire in 17 years after the date of issue,
>without means of renewal, is this a sign that the patent status of RSA will
>soon become merely a historical curiosity?

I just spoke to our corporate lawyer who is an expert in such stuff.
U.S. patents expire 17 years after issue, with no renewal.  Thus if
it's been out there 15 years, it's only go two years to go.  Wait
it out.
-- 
	"You can't get here from here."
Xref: sparky sci.crypt:5726 alt.security.pgp:200
From: crespin@nadir.uucp (Rudy Crespin)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
Subject: RSA Question (was Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality)
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 21:50:21 -0800
Organization: UUCP San Diego, CA

In <1992Dec14.190615.13954@macc.wisc.edu> stevens@vms.macc.wisc.edu (PAul STevens - MACC - 2-9618) writes:
>    For the record I am going to publish a number I
>    want to keep secret.  I am going to raise it to the power of
>    three modulo 91 which is the product of two primes.  The
>    result is 34.  My wife knows the factors of 91 and will be able
>    to decode this message.  

Please excuse my ignorance, but, how can "your wife" decode the message
knowing 34, 91, 7, and 13?

i.e. I have a number
  (X^3) moulo 77 (product of two primes) = 48
what is my number? and how did you get the answer?

Thanks,
Rudy Crespin

-- 
                                                      _           _
   ---   O       | Rudy Crespin                    | / \ |\ | __ / \ |\ |
   --   <^-      | crespin@nadir.uucp              | \_/ | \|    \_/ | \|
  --  -\/\       | crash!nadir!crespin             | 
  ---     \      |                                 |- No-No, it is On-On.
Xref: sparky sci.crypt:5926 alt.security.pgp:307
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Date: 19 Dec 92 00:21:10 GMT
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)

I said that government takes cryptographic violations of munitions
laws much more seriously than the building of airplane models.

Steve Gardner's response that nobody is harmed by cryptography is
appalling. Consider the lives lost or saved through cryptographic
activities during wars, anti-terrorism, drug enforcement, etc.

David
Xref: sparky sci.crypt:5666 comp.org.eff.talk:7640 alt.privacy:2615
From: bd@fluent@dartmouth.EDU (Brice Dowaliby)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy
Subject: Re: drug dealers on the high seas (was Risks of Using PGP 2.0)
Date: 14 Dec 92 12:03:58 GMT
Reply-To: bd%fluent@dartmouth.EDU
Distribution: usa
Organization: Fluent Inc., Lebanon NH

tleylan@pegasus.com (Tom Leylan) writes:

>se_schn@pavo.concordia.ca (Ranfry) writes:
>>
>> 	Name one country where cocaine is legal.
>
>Well the U.S. comes to mind.  You need a license but there are people with
>them mostly researchers.  Just because you need a license doesn't define
>something as illegal.

Ear, Nose and Throat M.D.s use it too, as a local
anesthetic for nasal surgery.  They buy it from medical 
suppliers in small quantities (half-gram?) and have to keep
records for every milligram they dispense.
-- 
   Brice Dowaliby, Fluent Inc., 10 Cavendish Court, Lebanon, NH  03766
                         bd%fluent@dartmouth.edu        
             I don't speak for them, they don't speak for me
                              DoD # 0698
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: stevens@vms.macc.wisc.edu (PAul STevens - MACC - 2-9618)
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Organization:  University of Wisconsin Academic Computing Center
Date: 16 DEC 92 06:40:34    

In article <9212150707.AA08219@chaos.intercon.com>, amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker) writes...
>Mark ......
            .....   now has the explicit blessing of RSA and PKP (cf. 

       Glory to God in the highest!  
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: cme@ellisun.sw.stratus.com (Carl Ellison)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
Subject: Re: PGP v. 2.1 Released
Date: 15 Dec 1992 16:48:33 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering
NNTP-Posting-Host: ellisun.sw.stratus.com

In article <101547@netnews.upenn.edu> yee@mipg.upenn.edu (Conway Yee) writes:
>>Would it be possible to to devise a public key
>>encryption program that would, when used to encrypt a message with
>>someone's private key, emit a series of bytes that would appear to be
>>essentially random?  
>
>If a series of bytes were to be random, no message could possibly be
>encoded within it.

Sorry, but this is nonsense.  (also sorry if my reply is redundant with
others - -  my news feed is a bit delayed lately)


If a modern ciphertext is detectably non-random, then the encryption
algorithm is *broken*.

I haven't proved that if you detect a statistical non-randomness then you
have a means of breaking the cipher, but I wouldn't be surprised if such a
proof were done.  I have seen similar proofs.

Meanwhile, if you have a totally random stream of bytes, you can use it
as a one-time pad, encrypting a message within it, and the resulting
ciphertext is a totally random stream of bytes.  This one I can prove
-- and so can you -- assuming you discard the original random stream.

-- 
-- <<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
Xref: sparky sci.crypt:5618 alt.security.pgp:146
From: robert.heuman@rose.com (robert heuman)
Subject: PGP v. 2.1 Released
Organization: Rose Media Inc, Toronto, Ontario.
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 07:45:07 GMT
X-Gated-By: Usenet <==> RoseMail Gateway (v1.70)


Date Entered: 12-18-92 02:40
amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker) writes

A(> Examples of these safeguards might include:
A(> 
A(>  - detailed logs of all transfers
A(>  - excluding non-US Internet domains and IP networks
A(>  - requiring explicit requests for access, which would be kept on file
A(> 
A(> and so on.

However, the ITARs make it legal to export DES, etc., (crypto) to 
Canada, so maybe the non-US Internet domains has to be changed to 
non-US, non-Canadian... and then, of course, it becomes both US and 
Canadian authorities who have to control the further spread...

Bob Heuman <robert.heuman@rose.com>
---
   RoseReader 1.70 P001886: This Canadian has an Opinion...His Own!
   RM 2.00 : RoseNet<=>Usenet Gateway : Rose Media 416-733-2285
Xref: sparky sci.crypt:5882 alt.security.pgp:290
From: mathew <mathew@mantis.co.uk>
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 92 15:49:24 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: Mantis Consultants, Cambridge. UK.

strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
> When mathew asks where he can get his free copy of RSAREF I fear he
> is being both misleading and disingenuous.

You said PKP were "bending over backwards" to help me get free, legal
software to do RSA encryption.  If this is the case, how can I get this
software?

I don't consider PKP's telling me to throw away the perfectly good software I
have and re-write it from scratch to be a very good way of "bending over
backwards to help".


mathew
-- 
Lung cancer and arteriosclerosis.
For people who like to smoke.

Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 00:23:47 GMT

Tim Moore asks a lot of definitional questions about the Munitions
Act. He should read the entire law--the terms are defined in it and
RSA's interpretation is consistent with them, as I read it.

By the way, the Japanese modelmakers would have violated the export
laws if the dimensions of the F-15 were not published here by the Air
Force. More likely they took a photograph of the plane with a man next
to it from Aviation Week, and scaled it.

In any case, the goverment may choose not to prosecute model makers
but that's no assurance they won't prosecute crypto issues,
particularly given their concern about those issues and the much
greater damage secure cryptography can do to intelligence collection,
compared to the damage from airplane models.

David

Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: RSA Data Security Not All Bad
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 22:16:52 GMT

In article <SOWA.92Dec17133825@netcom.com> sowa@netcom.com (Erik Sowa) writes:
>
>Then the export restriction isn't protecting much, either.
>
referring to piracy of products overseas.

I don't know if I understand him correctly, but it seems to me
that's arguing that if there are lots of thieves one shouldn't
bother with locks.

David
From: pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: Chosen crypto-text attack on RSAREFRESH
Date: 14 Dec 92 15:03:25 GMT
Reply-To: pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Paul Crowley)
Organization: Edinburgh University

Quoting strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) in article <1992Dec11.195931.8855@netcom.com>:

>Perhaps someone who knows and is not in the U.K. might like to summarize
>or quote the offending material in "Spycatcher" that caused the ban
>in Britain.
>
>If so, perhaps they'd like to do so by starting another topic, os
>U.K. readers don't inadvertently import that material.

Don't worry about it; first, it's our law and so our problem, and second
I really don't think that they would raise the whole embarrasing case to
stomp on the net.  Post away.  As it happens, I read Spycatcher anyway
when it first came out; our headmaster brought a copy across the pond
and it was briefly in the school library until the security services
started growling.

As a result, I learned that you can make more sense of a phone tap if
you simulate stereo with a delay in one ear, and that MI5 never found a
way to covertly open a letter sealed at every edge with clear sticky
tape.
  __                                _____
\/ o\ Paul Crowley pdc@dcs.ed.ac.uk \\ //
/\__/ "I'm the boy without a soul."  \X/ 
Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security
From: jbuck@messier.berkeley.edu (Joe Buck)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Date: 17 Dec 1992 22:46:47 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: messier.berkeley.edu

I cannot post to alt.security.pgp since we do not get it; others are
welcome to forward this.

In article <1992Dec17.220115.2371@netcom.com> strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight) writes:
>Just a small factual correction for Steve Simmons. My understanding
>is that some PKP patents expire in 1997 and others in about 2000.

Correct.  Here's the list of PKP patents, from an archive maintained by
the League for Programming Freedom:

4,200,770
Cryptographic Apparatus and Method
filed 9/6/77
granted 4/29/80
inventors Hellman, Diffie, Merkle
assignee Stanford University
Exponential, and all other forms of, secret key exchange.
This is the "Diffie-Hellman" patent.
Public Key partners has exclusive sublicensing rights.

4,218,582
Public Key Cryptographic Apparatus and Method
filed 10/6/77
granted 8/19/80
inventors Hellman, Merkle
assignee The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University
Knapsack, and all other forms of, public key cryptography.
This is the "Hellman-Merkle" patent.
Public Key partners has exclusive sublicensing rights.

4,405,829
Cryptographic Communications System and Method
filed 12/14/77
granted 9/20/83
inventors Ronald Rivest, Shamir, Adleman
assignee Massachusetts Institute of Technology
The RSA public key cryptosystem, and any communication system that evaluates
a polynomial modulo a prime number.
This is the "RSA" patent.
Public Key partners has exclusive sublicensing rights.

4,424,414
Exponential Cryptographic Apparatus and Method
filed 5/1/78
granted 1/3/84
inventors Hellman, Pohlig
assignee Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University
A conventional cryptosystem that performs modular exponentiation.  Not as
important as the other 3 cryptography patents (Diffie-Hellman,
Hellman-Merkle, and RSA).
This is the "Hellman-Pohlig" patent.
Public Key partners has exclusive sublicensing rights.
--
Joe Buck	jbuck@ohm.berkeley.edu
Xref: sparky sci.crypt:5707 alt.security.pgp:191
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: PGP as a World Standard
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 09:42:53 GMT


nobody@nowhere.mil (in other words somebody who's hiding--perhaps
because he has something to hide) calls attention to my PGP
signature floating around.

This signature was created when I first saw PGP, and before I
had a conversation with Jim Bidzos, who convinced me of the
illegality of PGP in the U.S.

I no longer use PGP and the signature is no longer valid. When
PGP becomes permissible in the U.S., perhaps through one of the
mechanisms I suggested in a recent post, I will have a PGP signature
again.

David
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: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 09:46:13 GMT


Steven Bellovin calls attention to the anonymous sleaze who posted
an old key I used for PGP before I found it was illegal in the U.S.
I don't use it, and haven't except for generating the key. Note
that the date of the key is September 24, 1992, well before I discovered
that PGP is illegal here.

Newsgroups: sci.crypt
From: amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker)
Newsgroups: sci.crypt
Subject: Re: PKP/RSA comments on PGP legality
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 07:07:08 -0500
Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation
Distribution: world
Reply-To: amanda@intercon.com (Amanda Walker)
NNTP-Posting-Host: chaos.intercon.com
X-Newsreader: InterCon TCP/Connect II 1.1b23

Marc VanHeyningen <mvanheyn@whale.cs.indiana.edu> writes:
> That was part of why Mark Riordan quietly withdrew RPEM when it was 
> challenged even though he didn't believe it infringed PKP's patent.  I 
> suppose you think him a wimp who does nothing but "talk talk talk" 
> because of that, but it may have been the right decision for the time. 

Mark is far from "a wimp who does nothing but talk talk talk."  It's 
precisely because he has done more than talk that he has reason to be far 
more cautious than most of the people posting polemics to sci.crypt.  And by 
using RSAREF for RIPEM, he now has the explicit blessing of RSA and PKP (cf. 
article <1992Dec13.025901.2625@msuinfo.cl.msu.edu>).


Amanda Walker
InterCon Systems Corporation


Newsgroups: sci.crypt,alt.security.pgp
From: strnlght@netcom.com (David Sternlight)
Subject: Re: Legal Stuff!
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 21:14:05 GMT


an3596@anon.penet.fi asks why PGP is available outside the U.S.
but ripem won't be so distributed.

PGP was coded outside the U.S. and incorporates IDEA, which is a
non-U.S. encryption method. (By the way, it would be a delicious piece
of irony against those who are taking RSA's invention without
compensation by using pgp, if IDEA were well and truly broken by the
NSA, the Japanese, the French, the British, the Tibetans, and your
commercial competitors.) Thus PGP does not violate the restriction
against exporting DES since it doesn't use DES, though it cannot be
imported legally into the U.S. where it violates RSA's patents. Some
argue it can't be imported into the U.S. without a Munitions Act
license either.

ripem was coded in the U.S. and uses DES. DES cannot be exported
outside a few specific countries without a license which will not be
granted by the U.S. authorities. Thus ripem is not legally available
there. Since ripem's use of RSA's patented technology is licensed by
RSA, it does not violate their patents in the U.S.

By the way, I like the phrasing I came up with for this message: "using
RSA's invention without compensation".  I think even those who argue
that they're doing nothing wrong since RSA's patents don't apply in
most countries would agree that the phrasing is accurate. I think even
those who argue that software or algorithms shouldn't be patented will
agree that the phrasing is accurate. And the notion in that phrasing
is at the core of my ethical argument, with which (to save replies)
I acknowledge some disagree.

David
Newsgroups: sci.crypt