Cryptography-Digest Digest #515, Volume #11 Sat, 8 Apr 00 18:13:01 EDT
Contents:
How To Make Money Quick and Easy!!! No SCAM!!!! ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Cost-effective computing? (Jim Gillogly)
Re: Q: Entropy (Johann Hibschman)
RC-5 modification (Pred.)
Re: Cost-effective computing? (Paul Rubin)
Re: GSM A5/1 Encryption (Thomas Pornin)
cnn on air now - cryptography program (jungle)
Re: RC-5 modification (Tom St Denis)
Re: How To Make Money Quick and Easy!!! No SCAM!!!! (Tom St Denis)
Re: OAP-L3: Semester 1 / Class #1 All are invited. (Taneli Huuskonen)
Cryptanalysis-what is it?? ("A.Hofmans")
Re: Cost-effective computing? (Guy Macon)
Re: GSM A5/1 Encryption (Guy Macon)
Pre-whitening? (Was: RC-5 modification) (Guy Macon)
Re: Is AES necessary? (Terry Ritter)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: How To Make Money Quick and Easy!!! No SCAM!!!!
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000 20:18:12 PDT
How To Make Money Quick and Easy!!! No SCAM!!!!
Posted by Frank on March 30, 2000
HOW TO MAKE MONEY QUICK AND
EASY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THIS REALLY CAN MAKE YOU EASY MONEY!! IT WORKS!! ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS FOLLOW THE
LETTER FOR IT TO WORK!!
A little while back, I was browsing through news groups, just like you are now, and
came across an article to this that said you could make thousands of dollars within
weeks with only an initial
investment of $6.00! So I thought," Yeah, right, this must be a scam", but like most
of us, I was curious, so I kept reading. Anyway, it said that you send $1.00 to each
of the 6 names and address stated in the article. You then place your own name and
address in the bottom of the list at #6, and post the article in at least 200 news
groups. (There are thousands) No catch, that was it. So after
thinking it over, and talking to a few people first, I thought about trying it. I
figured what have I got to lose except 6 stamps and $6.00, right? Like most of us I
was a skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked
it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161) they confirmed that it is indeed
legal! Then I invested the measly $6.00. Well GUESS WHAT!!... within 7 days, I started
getting money in the mail! I was shocked! I figured it would end soon, but the money
just kept coming in. In my first week, I made $25.00. By the end of the second week I
had made a total of over $1,000.00! In the third week I had over $10,000.00 and it's
still growing. This is now my fourth week and I have made a total of just over
$42,000.00 and it's still coming in rapidly. It's certainly worth $6.00, and 6 stamps,
I have spent more than that on the
lottery!! Let me tell you how this works and most importantly, why it works....also,
make sure you print a copy of this article NOW, so you can get the information off of
it as you need it. STEP 1: Get 6 separate pieces of paper. Now get 6 US $1.00 bills
and place ONE inside EACH of the 6 pieces of paper so the bill will not be seen
through the envelope to prevent thievery. Next, place one paper in each of the 6
envelopes and seal them. You should now have 6 sealed envelopes, each with a piece of
paper and a $1.00 bill. What you are doing is creating a service by this. THIS IS
ABSOLUTELY LEGAL! Mail the 6 envelopes to the following addresses:
<<<***NOTES***>>
THIS PROGRAM IS INTERNATIONAL, SO IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT CORNER OF THIS PLANET YOU
OCCUPY - YOU CAN INSTANTLY PARTICIPATE AND MAKE YOURSELF MILLIONAIRE, THIS WORKS
OFCOURSE WITH THE HELP OF 3-RD EYE.
BE SURE TO CONCEAL THE 1$ IN THE NON-TRANSPARENT PAPER SO NOBODY COULD STEAL
IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
#1) O.Steinebach,
Brühlerstr. 30,
50968 Cologne,
Germany.
#2) M. Humphries
114 E. 91st Street
Los Angeles,CA 90003
USA
#3) D.Trickett
RR# 7
Brantford,Ontario
Canada N3T 5L9
#4) J. Wood
155 Normandy Crescent
Cowley, Oxford. OX4 2TN
England
e-mail: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
#5) Serafima Zouev
Haim 15 str.
Haifa 33144
Israel
e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
#6) A.G.CANTARA
VIA FONTE ROMANA 145,
65124 PESCARA
ITALY
STEP 2: Now take the #1 name off the list that you see above, move the other names up
(6 becomes 5, 5 becomes 4, etc...) and add YOUR Name as number 6 on the list. STEP 3:
Change anything you need to, but try to keep this article as close to original as
possible. Now, post your amended article to at least 200 news groups. (I think there
are close to 24,000 groups) All you need is 200, but remember, the more you post, the
more money you make!
---DIRECTIONS -----HOW TO POST TO NEWSGROUPS------------
STEP 0 - DOWNLOAD THE BEST PROGRAM for posting to newsgroups called Netcontact:
ftp://ftp.sunsite.org.uk/Mirrors/simtel.coast.net/coast/win95/internet/nc6016.exe
Step 1) You do not need to re-type this entire letter to do your own posting. Simply
put your cursor at the beginning of this letter and drag your cursor to the bottom of
this document, and select 'copy' from the edit menu. This will copy the entire letter
into the computers memory.
Step 2) Open a
blank 'notepad' file and place your cursor at the top of the blank page. From the
'edit' menu select 'paste'. This will paste a copy of the letter into notepad so that
you can add your name to the list.
Step 3) Save your new notepad file as a .txt file. If you want to do your postings in
different sittings, you'll always have this file to go back to.
Step 4) Use Netscape or Internet explorer and try
searching for various news groups (on-line forums, message boards, chat sites,
discussions.)
Step 5) Visit these message boards and post this article as a new message by
highlighting the text of this letter and selecting paste from the edit menu. Fill in
the Subject, this will be the header that everyone sees as they scroll through the
list of postings in a particular group, click the post message button. You're done
with your first one! Congratulations...THAT'S IT! All you have to do is jump to
different news groups and post away, after you get the hang of it, it will take about
30 seconds for each news group! **REMEMBER, THE MORE NEWSGROUPS YOU POST IN, THE MORE
MONEY YOU WILL MAKE!! BUT YOU HAVE TO POST A MINIMUM OF 200** That's it! You will
begin receiving money from around the world within days! You may eventually want to
rent a P.O.Box due to the large amount of mail you will receive. If you wish to stay
anonymous, you can invent a name to use, as long as the postman will deliver it.
**JUST MAKE SURE ALL THE ADDRESSES ARE CORRECT.
------------------------------
From: Jim Gillogly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Cost-effective computing?
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000 18:42:06 +0000
What is the cheapest way to buy a great deal of processing power for
a fairly general cryptanalysis computing system? For example, I'd like
to see a configuration for a mega-computing environment that could be
used for factoring (given suitable software) or for fairly extensive
experiments on symmetric algorithms -- but not as severely focussed as
Deep Crack.
My guess is that a large Beowulf cluster would be the way to go --
but what do you use for components? Have custom multi-processor
systems built to mount in racks? Use SGI eight-processor PIII's?
Get a large pile of I-Openers from before they started epoxying
the flash, and Beowulf them? Or is Beowulf/Linux too general, and
I should be thinking of runtime-configurable hardware of some sort?
What's the best approach to a cheap supercomputer?
--
Jim Gillogly
Trewesday, 18 Astron S.R. 2000, 18:32
12.19.7.1.18, 3 Edznab 1 Pop, Second Lord of Night
------------------------------
From: Johann Hibschman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Q: Entropy
Date: 08 Apr 2000 11:45:31 -0700
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mok-Kong Shen writes:
> I am afraid that because of my poor knowledge I am yet far from a
> proper understanding of your argumentation.
> The card is an ace has 0.391 bits.
> The card is not an ace has 0.115 bits.
> Now whether the card is an ace or not can be considered to be
> a binary decision. How could the sum 0.391 + 0.115 = 0.506
> be less than 1?
It's because you already know what the most likely answer is.
Odds are, if you guess "not an ace", you'll be right.
The entropy (or equivocation, I suppose) of a binary message is
1 bit only if both messages are equally likely.
--
Johann Hibschman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Pred. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: RC-5 modification
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000 19:21:52 GMT
Hi,
I'm looking into ways to make RC-5 more efficient for handling huge
amounts of data. The way I see it, the choices are:
1. Make the algorithm more efficient
2. Alter the algorithm (i.e. leave out parts)
As for the first alternative, I can't see any ways to do this.
Concidering pt. 2; what consequences would it have to drop the IV
xor'ing part? Would it make RC-5 "just a little bit weaker"?
---
Thanks,
- Pred.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Rubin)
Subject: Re: Cost-effective computing?
Date: 8 Apr 2000 19:34:23 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Jim Gillogly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>What is the cheapest way to buy a great deal of processing power for
>a fairly general cryptanalysis computing system? For example, I'd like
>to see a configuration for a mega-computing environment that could be
>used for factoring (given suitable software) or for fairly extensive
>experiments on symmetric algorithms -- but not as severely focussed as
>Deep Crack.
>
>My guess is that a large Beowulf cluster would be the way to go --
>but what do you use for components? Have custom multi-processor
>systems built to mount in racks? Use SGI eight-processor PIII's?
>Get a large pile of I-Openers from before they started epoxying
>the flash, and Beowulf them? Or is Beowulf/Linux too general, and
>I should be thinking of runtime-configurable hardware of some sort?
>
>What's the best approach to a cheap supercomputer?
See "The Supercomputer Toolkit" by Sussman, Abelson, Wisdom et al,
complete citation at:
http://www-swiss.ai.mit.edu/projects/mac/bibliography.html
They built a hardware and software toolkit for assembling special
purpose supercomputers for astronomical calculations. Sussman and
Wisdom used an earlier version of the hardware to prove that the
orbit of Pluto is chaotic. Neat stuff.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Thomas Pornin)
Subject: Re: GSM A5/1 Encryption
Date: 8 Apr 2000 19:37:38 GMT
According to David A. Wagner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> It is hard to imagine design constraints so fierce that the designers
> could not have afforded the extra cost of a 128-bit A5/1.
Oh, yes, of course. What I wanted to say is that the general design
looks good to me, and I recommand its use, provided that a larger
internal state is used (at least 128 bits).
--Thomas Pornin
------------------------------
From: jungle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: cnn on air now - cryptography program
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000 15:45:53 -0400
------------------------------
From: Tom St Denis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RC-5 modification
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000 19:59:39 GMT
"Pred." wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm looking into ways to make RC-5 more efficient for handling huge
> amounts of data. The way I see it, the choices are:
>
> 1. Make the algorithm more efficient
> 2. Alter the algorithm (i.e. leave out parts)
>
> As for the first alternative, I can't see any ways to do this.
>
> Concidering pt. 2; what consequences would it have to drop the IV
> xor'ing part? Would it make RC-5 "just a little bit weaker"?
No IV is xored with RC5. If you are talking about the 'pre-whitening'
step, that is generally a good thing to keep as it increases the
difficulty of an attack without much extra cost [note DESX]. It's not a
place to optimize the algorithm.
What platform are you on? A x86? Well try a x86 asm routine, the best
I think I heard was 25 cycles/byte with 12 rounds. Which isn't too too
bad... :)
Tom
------------------------------
From: Tom St Denis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: How To Make Money Quick and Easy!!! No SCAM!!!!
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000 20:02:52 GMT
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> How To Make Money Quick and Easy!!! No SCAM!!!!
Right.
>
> Posted by Frank on March 30, 2000
Hi frank.
> HOW TO MAKE MONEY QUICK AND
> EASY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> THIS REALLY CAN MAKE YOU EASY MONEY!! IT WORKS!! ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS FOLLOW THE
>LETTER FOR IT TO WORK!!
This letter works on it's own? Cool.
> A little while back, I was browsing through news groups, just like you are now, and
>came across an article to this that said you could make thousands of dollars within
>weeks with only an initial
> investment of $6.00! So I thought," Yeah, right, this must be a scam", but like most
>of us, I was curious, so I kept reading. Anyway, it said that you send $1.00 to each
>of the 6 names and address stated in the article. You then place your own name and
>address in the bottom of the list at #6, and post the article in at least 200 news
>groups. (There are thousands) No catch, that was it. So after
> thinking it over, and talking to a few people first, I thought about trying it. I
>figured what have I got to lose except 6 stamps and $6.00, right? Like most of us I
>was a skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked
>it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161) they confirmed that it is indeed
>legal! Then I invested the measly $6.00. Well GUESS WHAT!!... within 7 days, I
>started getting money in the mail! I was shocked! I figured it would end soon, but
>the money just kept coming in. In my first week, I made $25.00. By the end of the
>second week I had made a total of over $1,000.00! In the third week I had over
>$10,000.00 and it's still growing. This is now my fourth week and I have made a total
>of just over $42,000.00 and it's still coming in rapidly. It's certainly worth $6.00,
>and 6 stamps, I have spent more than that on the
> lottery!! Let me tell you how this works and most importantly, why it works....also,
>make sure you print a copy of this article NOW, so you can get the information off of
>it as you need it. STEP 1: Get 6 separate pieces of paper. Now get 6 US $1.00 bills
>and place ONE inside EACH of the 6 pieces of paper so the bill will not be seen
>through the envelope to prevent thievery. Next, place one paper in each of the 6
>envelopes and seal them. You should now have 6 sealed envelopes, each with a piece of
>paper and a $1.00 bill. What you are doing is creating a service by this. THIS IS
>ABSOLUTELY LEGAL! Mail the 6 envelopes to the following addresses:
> <<<***NOTES***>>
>
> THIS PROGRAM IS INTERNATIONAL, SO IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT CORNER OF THIS PLANET YOU
>OCCUPY - YOU CAN INSTANTLY PARTICIPATE AND MAKE YOURSELF MILLIONAIRE, THIS WORKS
>OFCOURSE WITH THE HELP OF 3-RD EYE.
>
> BE SURE TO CONCEAL THE 1$ IN THE NON-TRANSPARENT PAPER SO NOBODY COULD STEAL
>IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yaddadadaa this is the same letter I got 8 years ago when I was new to
newsgroups. You guys really have to change this around a bit once in a
while. Also what possible connection does "make money quick scam" have
todo with cryptography? Is it possible you are a dumb-dolt who just
spammed 100,000 groups to try and make a penny? This interesting thing
called "a job" is what you should really be looking for.
On behalf of my entire species.... "SHAME ON YOU".
Tom
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Taneli Huuskonen)
Crossposted-To: talk.politics.crypto
Subject: Re: OAP-L3: Semester 1 / Class #1 All are invited.
Date: 8 Apr 2000 22:50:13 +0300
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE=====
Hash: SHA1
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> James Felling
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
>Then given an output value B=100*B1+10*B2+B3 we can conclude the following.
>then the actual output of the 3 streams call it S=100*S1 +10*S2+ S3
>was either B, B+256, or B+512. this allows us to conclude the following
>S3= either B3, (B3 -6) Mod 10, or (B3-2) mod 10
>S2= either B2, (B2-5) mod 10, or (B2-1) mod 10
>and S1 = either B1, (B1-2) mod 10, or (B1-5) mod 10. in addition
>0<=S1<=7 so we can always eliminate at least 1 possible form the
>valuse of S1, in addition since S1 determines which values get droped
>any ability we get to guess at S1 also means that we
>get closer to guessing where the droped values fall.
A minor correction: S is either 3*B, 3*B+1, or 3*B+2. Besides, you
forgot about the carry. However, these conclusions are basically sound.
Taneli Huuskonen
=====BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE=====
Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use
Charset: noconv
iQA/AwUBOO+NaV+t0CYLfLaVEQLpnACfW4j2qwd4T/AC9ZKCwn/4FJ1PmgwAn2NI
n5Fng3Te14sOOuwN8ZxqVACv
=b8kB
=====END PGP SIGNATURE=====
--
I don't | All messages will be PGP signed, | Fight for your right to
speak for | encrypted mail preferred. Keys: | use sealed envelopes.
the Uni. | http://www.helsinki.fi/~huuskone/ | http://www.gilc.org/
------------------------------
From: "A.Hofmans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Cryptanalysis-what is it??
Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2000 09:44:46 +1200
Hi
I am curious about Cryptanalysis
Please could you answer answer a few questions I have
-what is the definition of Cryptanalysis?
-what does it do?
-what is it for?
-when was it developed?
Thanks for your time
Jason
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Guy Macon)
Subject: Re: Cost-effective computing?
Date: 08 Apr 2000 17:46:45 EDT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Gillogly) wrote:
>
>What is the cheapest way to buy a great deal of processing power for
>a fairly general cryptanalysis computing system? For example, I'd like
>to see a configuration for a mega-computing environment that could be
>used for factoring (given suitable software) or for fairly extensive
>experiments on symmetric algorithms -- but not as severely focussed as
>Deep Crack.
>
>My guess is that a large Beowulf cluster would be the way to go --
>but what do you use for components? Have custom multi-processor
>systems built to mount in racks? Use SGI eight-processor PIII's?
>Get a large pile of I-Openers from before they started epoxying
>the flash, and Beowulf them? Or is Beowulf/Linux too general, and
>I should be thinking of runtime-configurable hardware of some sort?
>
>What's the best approach to a cheap supercomputer?
For crypto it's the following. See end of post for two other fast
and cheap supercomputers
********************************************
http://www.distributed.net/
RC5-64 / Overall Project Stats
117.24 gigakeys per second
Total Blocks to Search: 68,719,476,736
Total Blocks Tested: 15,093,864,177
Keyspace Checked: 21.964%
Total Keys Tested: 4,051,728,313,155,059,712
Time Working: 898 days
Overall Rate: 52,221,608 KKeys/sec
41,075,795 blocks were completed yesterday (0.060% of the keyspace)
at a sustained rate of 127,618,053 KKeys/sec!
The odds are 1 in 1,306 that we will wrap this thing
up in the next 24 hours. (This also means that we'll
exhaust the keyspace in 1,306 days at yesterday's rate.)
********************************************
http://setiathome.ssl.berkeley.edu/
Total CPU time used: 244130.83 years
Total computations done: 2.068e+20 Floating Point Operations
Current computation rate: 1.817e+13 Floating Point Operations per second
********************************************
http://stonesoup.esd.ornl.gov/
performance-to-price ratio: Infinite
********************************************
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Guy Macon)
Subject: Re: GSM A5/1 Encryption
Date: 08 Apr 2000 17:54:56 EDT
In article <8cnq2j$kjs$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (David A. Wagner) wrote:
>
>In article <8clt2n$skh$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> A Silent Frame is a Silent Frame regardless if the cipher is strong or
>> week, and will provide plaintext to the cryptoanalyst....My question
>> was, how to avoid that?
>
>With a (modern) strong cipher, there's no need to avoid it,
>because (modern) strong ciphers are supposed to remain unbreakable
>even if the adversary has some known plaintext.
I disagree based on philosophy. One should do both. Use a cipher
that is believed to be resistant to known plaintext attacks, *AND*
avoid having known plaintext in case you are wrong. In general,
avoiding standard beginning and ending texts (From: Guy Macon and
most 4 line sigs come to mind) is cheap insurance. I usually add
a random number of random bytes at the beginning and end of my
plaintext and don't bother with a removal method on the other
end - any human reading it can tell when the random stops. This
is also very cheap insurance.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Guy Macon)
Subject: Pre-whitening? (Was: RC-5 modification)
Date: 08 Apr 2000 18:04:07 EDT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Tom St Denis) wrote:
>If you are talking about the 'pre-whitening'
>step, that is generally a good thing to keep
>as it increases the difficulty of an attack
>without much extra cost [note DESX].
Could someone give a simple explaination or link
about this? Is it something that one could use
when noodling around with ciphersaber variants
as a learning tool?
Please note that my ciphersaber variant that turned
out to be a really slow way of turning plaintext to
the same plaintext has NEVER had it's internal
structure derived by cryptoanalysis... :)
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Ritter)
Subject: Re: Is AES necessary?
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2000 22:08:59 GMT
On Sat, 08 Apr 2000 17:34:04 GMT, in
<g4KH4.43134$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in sci.crypt
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>[...]
>My point was that in industry today (the people the federal encryption
>standard are designed for :) there are two common scenarios.
>
>1. They have a vast amount of confidential information that they'd
>like to store on encrypted disks. (Historical records, off-site
>backups, trade secrets, etc) For terabytes of information, the speed
>of the cipher is important.
I think the issue really isn't the amount of data in store, but the
bandwidth one wants to achieve in and out, compared to the processing
available to do it. If we have a multiple-server front end dealing
with common store, then it seems like it is the cycles in the front
end -- not store processing or amount of store -- which matter.
>2. They have vast amounts of confidential data online and traversing
>the wire. They know it's a risk, but they really need to link the
>computer systems in Akron and Moscow. Depending on the size of the
>link, speed is also an issue.
Again, depending upon how many horses we've got pulling that data,
either we have some extra or not. If we do have extra, we can run
ciphering. The whole issue is thus the processing bandwidth vs cost.
Using crypto means our server is going to get overloaded before it
would otherwise, so we always have to upgrade earlier. But not using
crypto does not mean we will not have to upgrade in a few months
anyway.
But neither of these cases is what I take to be the best use of
crypto: Individual personal use on an individual processor for storage
or end-to-end communications, where we generally have plenty of cycles
to spare.
---
Terry Ritter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.io.com/~ritter/
Crypto Glossary http://www.io.com/~ritter/GLOSSARY.HTM
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and sci.crypt) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
End of Cryptography-Digest Digest
******************************
