RE: The killer app for encryption
At 08:18 PM 12/19/03 -0500, Tyler Durden wrote: [on onion routing POTS] trace that call, or payment for that matter. So if bin Laden were feelin' lonely one day and signed onto the network, you could give him a call, without him worrying about the missles falling within a few minutes. -TD If you ran voice analysis over every POTS call and then directed your missile at the customer demarc you'd get your man. A good reason to decrypt to analog the voice at the endpoint, eh?
RE: The killer app for encryption
I'm not certain, but I think there are some MS certified modems which have a generalized A/D-D/A capability sufficient to handle voice. They do. And I'm not so sure POTS is going to be where things will be the most interesting...cable modem telephony might be where things get interesting. As for the Telcos allowing a call to be terminated on their copper, they'll never let this happen without going through the 5ESS, and recent legislation means they probablyt won't have to let you use some higher frequency band either. I've heard of some P2P startups that leverage the discovery mechanisms in P2P networks in order to setup a SIP session for telephony. It's interesting to consider the possibility that, depending on the P2P system, it's conceivable that one could call another user without having any way to trace that call, or payment for that matter. So if bin Laden were feelin' lonely one day and signed onto the network, you could give him a call, without him worrying about the missles falling within a few minutes. -TD From: Steve Schear [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: The killer app for encryption Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 16:42:01 -0800 At 03:47 PM 12/18/2003, Major Variola (ret) wrote: At 08:16 PM 12/18/03 +, Jim Dixon wrote: What exactly do you mean by peered IP telephony? What I'd like to see is a P2P telephony that also supports end-user gateways to the POTS. I'm not certain, but I think there are some MS certified modems which have a generalized A/D-D/A capability sufficient to handle voice. Although it opens up the possibility of end-user eavesdropping some of this might be thwarted by randomizing user node selection and detecting/reporting line impedance changes (indicating an extension going off-hook) to the 'client' wising to use the POTS. I suggested this idea to Jeff Pulver, now a VoIP champion, in 1999 but he thought it was too out of the mainstream to be interesting. Now that P2P is beginning to branch out from file sharing maybe this is no longer a far out idea. steve _ Tired of slow downloads? Compare online deals from your local high-speed providers now. https://broadband.msn.com
RE: The killer app for encryption
At 12:16 PM -0800 12/18/03, Jim Dixon wrote: Voice telephony requires delays measured in tens of milliseconds. A bit difficult if you also want encryption, anonymity, etc. Voice memo (messaging) systems are a way around this limitation. I don't know of any that exist. (Encrypted to receivers(s), mixed, and signed for strong pseudo-anonymity) Cheers - Bill - Bill Frantz| There's nothing so clear as a | Periwinkle (408)356-8506 | vague idea you haven't written | 16345 Englewood Ave www.pwpconsult.com | down yet. -- Dean Tribble | Los Gatos, CA 95032
RE: The killer app for encryption
At 08:16 PM 12/18/03 +, Jim Dixon wrote: What exactly do you mean by peered IP telephony? Voice telephony requires delays measured in tens of milliseconds. A bit difficult if you also want encryption, anonymity, etc. The problem handling the delay comes with the network, not the encryption. The encryption can be symmetric, and must be used in a mode that tolerates drops, but its not a big cost when sending 8kbytes/sec.
RE: The killer app for encryption
Because it means you can complete call to the POTs with no company-controlled switch involved, meaning no where to serve a court order. Since the call could be routed through a few intermediate nodes and I see. So, in the real world, X uses this to make telephone threats, your POTS gets picked up by random selection as the outgoing node, and gets traced back to from the victim's telephone, LEA visits you and you say ... I know nothing. Yes, I can see it working and widely adopted. Looks like someone is pumping dumbing gas into cpunks homes. = end (of original message) Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows: __ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/
RE: The killer app for encryption
At 06:14 PM 12/18/2003, Morlock Elloi wrote: What I'd like to see is a P2P telephony that also supports end-user gateways to the POTS. I'm not certain, but I think there are some MS However, I don't see people letting others use their POTS lines, nor I see them using their own for this purpose. Yes, this would essentially eliminate long distance charges for those so equipped ... but if A and B have these gateways and use them, what is the chance of them not being AT the gateway (ie. not having laptops) at any given moment - why bother using POTS in the loop in the first place ? VoIP companies are already doing this and the cost is quite low (calling cards) - why bother? Because it means you can complete call to the POTs with no company-controlled switch involved, meaning no where to serve a court order. Since the call could be routed through a few intermediate nodes and still not have too much latency traffic analysis could take longer than short calls. Since the last gateway could be selected from a potentially large group, in major cities anyway, obtaining a phone tap in time could be come problematic. Also, if long distance charges don't drop to zero soon, it means participating residential users could actually resell their POTS. steve
RE: The killer app for encryption
At 03:47 PM 12/18/2003, Major Variola (ret) wrote: At 08:16 PM 12/18/03 +, Jim Dixon wrote: What exactly do you mean by peered IP telephony? What I'd like to see is a P2P telephony that also supports end-user gateways to the POTS. I'm not certain, but I think there are some MS certified modems which have a generalized A/D-D/A capability sufficient to handle voice. Although it opens up the possibility of end-user eavesdropping some of this might be thwarted by randomizing user node selection and detecting/reporting line impedance changes (indicating an extension going off-hook) to the 'client' wising to use the POTS. I suggested this idea to Jeff Pulver, now a VoIP champion, in 1999 but he thought it was too out of the mainstream to be interesting. Now that P2P is beginning to branch out from file sharing maybe this is no longer a far out idea. steve
RE: The killer app for encryption
At 07:57 PM 12/18/2003, Morlock Elloi wrote: Because it means you can complete call to the POTs with no company-controlled switch involved, meaning no where to serve a court order. Since the call could be routed through a few intermediate nodes and I see. So, in the real world, X uses this to make telephone threats, your POTS gets picked up by random selection as the outgoing node, and gets traced back to from the victim's telephone, LEA visits you and you say ... I know nothing. Yes, I can see it working and widely adopted. Looks like someone is pumping dumbing gas into cpunks homes. I'd have no problem letting my phone be so used. What's the difference between that and allowing unknown others using your WiFi? It provides plausible deniability when you decide to do the calling yourself. steve
RE: The killer app for encryption
What I'd like to see is a P2P telephony that also supports end-user gateways to the POTS. I'm not certain, but I think there are some MS I don't get what does this have to do with crypto. Outside crypto, this didn't quite work with (almost) public fax gateways of '90s. In theory, you could send e-mail that would be rasterized and faxed using gateway that was in local calling area and presumably did not incur any charge from the local POTS monopoly. However, I don't see people letting others use their POTS lines, nor I see them using their own for this purpose. Yes, this would essentially eliminate long distance charges for those so equipped ... but if A and B have these gateways and use them, what is the chance of them not being AT the gateway (ie. not having laptops) at any given moment - why bother using POTS in the loop in the first place ? VoIP companies are already doing this and the cost is quite low (calling cards) - why bother? = end (of original message) Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows: __ Do you Yahoo!? New Yahoo! Photos - easier uploading and sharing. http://photos.yahoo.com/
RE: The killer app for encryption
Uh...I assume you're quoting somebody here? The last point is actually a very good one, but getting there requires hacking through gobbledeegook. What's this all businessmen silliness? And using vpns WITHIN a company? As an employee of a major Wall Street firm, I can tell you that's completely wrong. But the interesting thing, which again is obvious is, How will P2P Networks morph into something like blacknet? I'm very interested in hearing about whether any P2P networks support encrypted transactions of any sort yet (ie, can one yet pay for some files via P2P)? Are there any P2P Networks being designed deliberately to support anything/everything, including peered IP Telephony? -TD From: James A. Donald [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: The killer app for encryption Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2003 10:47:14 -0800 -- Encryption is a defense against threats. For people to adopt encryption, they need to be threatened. All businessmen are guilty of insider trading and destruction of evidence. In consequence all businessmen use encrypted vpn internally within companies, but not, however, in external communications, rendering a public key infrastructure quite useless. For widespread tax evasion to take off, we would like widespread use of public keys. Now the entire population is guilty of file trading. Pretty soon, therefore, the entire population will be using encryption, but it is far from clear that this encryption will enable all the potential uses of encryption that cypherpunks foresaw. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG 5fFQJC040+P9QrkF8BhWR4nUBWhNmexs1EH0ej6o 4a8EuzGFht8mQloFG16q2B76njPoWM/jVAzYAxKoQ _ Working moms: Find helpful tips here on managing kids, home, work and yourself. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/workingmom.armx
RE: The killer app for encryption
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003, Tyler Durden wrote: I'm very interested in hearing about whether any P2P networks support encrypted transactions of any sort yet (ie, can one yet pay for some files via P2P)? Are there any P2P Networks being designed deliberately to support anything/everything, including peered IP Telephony? What exactly do you mean by peered IP telephony? Voice telephony requires delays measured in tens of milliseconds. A bit difficult if you also want encryption, anonymity, etc. -- Jim Dixon [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel +44 117 982 0786 mobile +44 797 373 7881 http://jxcl.sourceforge.net Java unit test coverage http://xlattice.sourceforge.net p2p communications infrastructure
