648 lines
24 KiB
Plaintext
648 lines
24 KiB
Plaintext
|
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93 17:27:05 PDT
|
||
|
Reply-To: <surfpunk@osc.versant.com> Return-Path: <cocot@osc.versant.com>
|
||
|
Message-ID: <surfpunk-0080@SURFPUNK.Technical.Journal>
|
||
|
Mime-Version: 1.0
|
||
|
Content-Type: text/plain
|
||
|
From: surfpunk@osc.versant.com (nepuvir ohooyrf)
|
||
|
To: surfpunk@osc.versant.com (SURFPUNK Technical Journal)
|
||
|
Subject: [surfpunk-0080] BUBBLES: talk radio; _A New Age_; clipper chip
|
||
|
|
||
|
// Subject: Archive Bubbles
|
||
|
From: gt1274b@prism.gate
|
||
|
ch.edu (Dan Puckett) To:
|
||
|
surfpunk@osc.versant.com
|
||
|
Date: Thu, 22 Apr 93
|
||
|
|
||
|
Archive
|
||
|
Bubbles
|
||
|
Calendar
|
||
|
Door
|
||
|
EEPROM
|
||
|
Funding
|
||
|
Gateway
|
||
|
Hell
|
||
|
I
|
||
|
JMP
|
||
|
Kill
|
||
|
Local
|
||
|
Memory
|
||
|
Null
|
||
|
Object
|
||
|
Pulse
|
||
|
Quote
|
||
|
Revise
|
||
|
Stack
|
||
|
Telephone
|
||
|
User
|
||
|
Virtual
|
||
|
Wastebasket
|
||
|
XOFF
|
||
|
Yes
|
||
|
Zero
|
||
|
|
||
|
Now I know my ABC's.
|
||
|
Won't you come and play with me?
|
||
|
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1993 13:13:19 -0700 (PDT)
|
||
|
From: Kwan-Seng Low <kwan@osc.versant.com>
|
||
|
|
||
|
Here's something I got from the net, did anyone play with this before?
|
||
|
care to comment/discussion?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Kwan
|
||
|
|
||
|
.....
|
||
|
.....
|
||
|
.....
|
||
|
Radio Free VAT is an experiment being run by the folks that are
|
||
|
working on IP multicasting. They have set up an IP multicast backbone
|
||
|
that goes all over the place. You can use programs to connect to
|
||
|
various sessions that are transmitting audio or slow frame video
|
||
|
across the multicast connections. Radio Free VAT is one such session
|
||
|
where people sign up for slots where they can broadcast whatever. In
|
||
|
the past, they've used this for broadcasting various meetings, such as
|
||
|
the IETF meetings.
|
||
|
.....
|
||
|
.....
|
||
|
Internet Talk Radio is a bunch of audio files that Carl Malamud has
|
||
|
put together. He's been interviewing folks and junk like that. Its
|
||
|
interesting. I only know of it through the world wide web (www) - you
|
||
|
can find a handy web page for it at
|
||
|
http://www.ncsa.uiuc.edu/radio/radio.html, if you have access to the
|
||
|
web.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
From: surfpunk <strick>
|
||
|
Subject: Internet Talk Radio
|
||
|
|
||
|
Kwan, I meant to assemble more info on this, but didn't get
|
||
|
around to it. Perhaps someone can assemble us a precis on
|
||
|
Internet Talk Radio. Here's the page from the web. If you don't
|
||
|
have access to the web, notice how I telnet to port 80 and then
|
||
|
type capital GET followed by the tail end of the path in order to
|
||
|
get the page. You should be able to read through this markup language.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Archie can find "vat", and the IP multicasting package.
|
||
|
On a sparcstation you should be able to play the .au files by
|
||
|
catting into /dev/audio, right?
|
||
|
|
||
|
This is something I haven't built/heard yet, either. strick
|
||
|
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Script started on Thu Apr 22 16:48:48 1993
|
||
|
$ telnet www.ncsa.uiuc.edu 80
|
||
|
Trying 141.142.4.5 ...
|
||
|
Connected to rs5.ncsa.uiuc.edu.
|
||
|
Escape character is '^]'.
|
||
|
GET /radio/radio.html
|
||
|
<TITLE>Internet Talk Radio</TITLE>
|
||
|
<H1>Internet Talk Radio</H1>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<H2>General Information</H2>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<UL>
|
||
|
<LI> <A NAME=9 HREF="ITRintro.readme.txt">Introduction</A> to Internet Talk Radio.
|
||
|
<LI> <A NAME=10 HREF="ITRgeek.readme.txt">Overview</A> of Geek of the Week.
|
||
|
</UL>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<H2>April 21, 1993</H2>
|
||
|
|
||
|
Here's the <A HREF="042193_geek_ITR.readme.txt">overview</A> of the
|
||
|
April 21 edition of Internet Talk Radio. <P>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<UL>
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="042193_geek_01_ITR.au">Steve Deering, Part 1</A> (5.6 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="042193_geek_02_ITR.au">The Incidental Tourist</A> (1.6 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="042193_geek_03_ITR.au">Steve Deering, Part 2</A> (6.0 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="042193_geek_04_ITR.au">Book Byte</A> (0.7 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="042193_geek_05_ITR.au">Steve Deering, Part 3</A> (5.4 megs)
|
||
|
</UL>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<H2>April 14, 1993</H2>
|
||
|
|
||
|
Here's the <A HREF="041493_geek_ITR.readme.txt">overview</A> of the
|
||
|
April 14 edition of Internet Talk Radio. <P>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<UL>
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="041493_geek_01_ITR.au">Daniel Lynch, Part 1</A> (5.7 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="041493_geek_02_ITR.au">The Incidental Tourist</A> (0.9 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="041493_geek_03_ITR.au">Daniel Lynch, Part 2</A> (5.5 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="041493_geek_04_ITR.au">Legal Stuff</A> (0.2 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="041493_geek_05_ITR.au">Daniel Lynch, Part 3</A> (3.4 megs)
|
||
|
</UL>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<H2>April 7, 1993</H2>
|
||
|
|
||
|
Here's the <A HREF="040793_geek_ITR.readme.txt">overview</A> of the
|
||
|
April 7 edition of Internet Talk Radio. <P>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<UL>
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="040793_geek_01_ITR.au">Dr. Erik Huizer, Part 1</A> (5.4 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="040793_geek_02_ITR.au">The Incidental Tourist</A> (1.5 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="040793_geek_03_ITR.au">Dr. Erik Huizer, Part 2</A> (4.8 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="040793_geek_04_ITR.au">Book Byte</A> (0.7 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="040793_geek_05_ITR.au">Dr. Erik Huizer, Part 3</A> (5.9 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="040793_geek_06_ITR.au">Name That Acronym</A> (0.5 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A HREF="040793_geek_07_ITR.au">Dr. Erik Huizer, Part 4</A> (5.2 megs)
|
||
|
</UL>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<H2>March 31, 1993</H2>
|
||
|
|
||
|
Here's the <A NAME=8
|
||
|
HREF="033193_geek_ITR.readme.txt">overview</A> of the March 31
|
||
|
edition of Internet Talk Radio. <P>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<UL>
|
||
|
<LI> <A NAME=1 HREF="033193_geek_01_ITR.au">Dr. Marshall Rose, Part 1</A> (5.6 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A NAME=2 HREF="033193_geek_02_ITR.au">The Incidental Tourist</A> (1.5 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A NAME=3 HREF="033193_geek_03_ITR.au">Dr. Marshall Rose, Part 2</A> (5.1 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A NAME=4 HREF="033193_geek_04_ITR.au">Book Byte</A> (0.6 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A NAME=5 HREF="033193_geek_05_ITR.au">Dr. Marshall Rose, Part 3</A> (5.6 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A NAME=6 HREF="033193_geek_06_ITR.au">Name That Acronym</A> (0.5 megs)
|
||
|
<LI> <A NAME=7 HREF="033193_geek_07_ITR.au">Dr. Marshall Rose, Part 4</A> (4.2 megs)
|
||
|
</UL>
|
||
|
|
||
|
<ADDRESS> <A NAME=29
|
||
|
HREF="http://hoohoo.ncsa.uiuc.edu/ncsa-people.html#andreessen">marca@ncsa.uiuc.edu</A>
|
||
|
</ADDRESS>
|
||
|
Connection closed by foreign host.
|
||
|
$
|
||
|
script done on Thu Apr 22 16:49:17 1993
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 93 21:10 GMT
|
||
|
From: Don Webb <0004200716@mcimail.com>
|
||
|
To: ARCANA <ARCANA%UNCCVM.BITNET@pucc.princeton.edu>
|
||
|
To: Fringeware <fringeware@wixer.cactus.org>
|
||
|
To: surfpunk <surfpunk@osc.versant.com>
|
||
|
Subject: _A New Age_
|
||
|
|
||
|
Dear Folk,
|
||
|
|
||
|
I don't know why I didn't think of this earlier. Wayne Edwards
|
||
|
runs a a wonderful series called _A New Age_ in which various
|
||
|
members of differing faiths and philosophies each write up their
|
||
|
own belief system. The packets are 66 pages long, 8.5 x 11
|
||
|
tri-punched and shrink wrapped. They are currently two. I
|
||
|
strongly recommend both the packets, (Why not send off for
|
||
|
packet one today? - it's $4.75). and the practice.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Send to:
|
||
|
|
||
|
Merrimack Books
|
||
|
_A New Age_
|
||
|
PO box 158
|
||
|
Lynn, IN 57355-0158
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
0004200716@mcimail.com
|
||
|
Don Webb
|
||
|
The Secret of magic is to transform the magician.
|
||
|
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 22:57:41 -0400
|
||
|
From: gt0269b@prism.gatech.edu (David D. Clark)
|
||
|
To: surfpunk@osc.versant.com
|
||
|
Subject: The Clipper Chip: Technical Info (From comp.risks)
|
||
|
|
||
|
[ "Fine with me. Post anywhere." -- Dorothy ]
|
||
|
|
||
|
I'm sure this will be all over everywhere on the net being discussed, but
|
||
|
this seems like a pretty good summary.
|
||
|
Original author: denning@cs.cosc.georgetown.edu (Dorothy Denning)
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
THE CLIPPER CHIP: A TECHNICAL SUMMARY
|
||
|
Dorothy Denning
|
||
|
Revised, April 21, 1993
|
||
|
|
||
|
INTRODUCTION
|
||
|
|
||
|
On April 16, the President announced a new initiative that will bring
|
||
|
together the Federal Government and industry in a voluntary program
|
||
|
to provide secure communications while meeting the legitimate needs of
|
||
|
law enforcement. At the heart of the plan is a new tamper-proof encryption
|
||
|
chip called the "Clipper Chip" together with a split-key approach to
|
||
|
escrowing keys. Two escrow agencies are used, and the key parts from
|
||
|
both are needed to reconstruct a key.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
CHIP CONTENTS
|
||
|
|
||
|
The Clipper Chip contains a classified single-key 64-bit block
|
||
|
encryption algorithm called "Skipjack." The algorithm uses 80 bit keys
|
||
|
(compared with 56 for the DES) and has 32 rounds of scrambling
|
||
|
(compared with 16 for the DES). It supports all 4 DES modes of
|
||
|
operation. The algorithm takes 32 clock ticks, and in Electronic
|
||
|
Codebook (ECB) mode runs at 12 Mbits per second.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Each chip includes the following components:
|
||
|
|
||
|
the Skipjack encryption algorithm
|
||
|
F, an 80-bit family key that is common to all chips
|
||
|
N, a 30-bit serial number (this length is subject to change)
|
||
|
U, an 80-bit secret key that unlocks all messages encrypted with the chip
|
||
|
|
||
|
The chips are programmed by Mykotronx, Inc., which calls them the
|
||
|
"MYK-78." The silicon is supplied by VLSI Technology Inc. They are
|
||
|
implemented in 1 micron technology and will initially sell for about
|
||
|
$30 each in quantities of 10,000 or more. The price should drop as the
|
||
|
technology is shrunk to .8 micron.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
ENCRYPTING WITH THE CHIP
|
||
|
|
||
|
To see how the chip is used, imagine that it is embedded in the AT&T
|
||
|
telephone security device (as it will be). Suppose I call someone and
|
||
|
we both have such a device. After pushing a button to start a secure
|
||
|
conversation, my security device will negotiate an 80-bit session key K
|
||
|
with the device at the other end. This key negotiation takes place
|
||
|
without the Clipper Chip. In general, any method of key exchange can
|
||
|
be used such as the Diffie-Hellman public-key distribution method.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Once the session key K is established, the Clipper Chip is used to
|
||
|
encrypt the conversation or message stream M (digitized voice). The
|
||
|
telephone security device feeds K and M into the chip to produce two
|
||
|
values:
|
||
|
|
||
|
E[M; K], the encrypted message stream, and
|
||
|
E[E[K; U] + N; F], a law enforcement field ,
|
||
|
|
||
|
which are transmitted over the telephone line. The law enforcement
|
||
|
field thus contains the session key K encrypted under the unit key U
|
||
|
concatenated with the serial number N, all encrypted under the family
|
||
|
key F. The law enforcement field is decrypted by law enforcement after
|
||
|
an authorized wiretap has been installed.
|
||
|
|
||
|
The ciphertext E[M; K] is decrypted by the receiver's device using the
|
||
|
session key:
|
||
|
|
||
|
D[E[M; K]; K] = M .
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
CHIP PROGRAMMING AND ESCROW
|
||
|
|
||
|
All Clipper Chips are programmed inside a SCIF (Secure Compartmented
|
||
|
Information Facility), which is essentially a vault. The SCIF contains
|
||
|
a laptop computer and equipment to program the chips. About 300 chips
|
||
|
are programmed during a single session. The SCIF is located at
|
||
|
Mykotronx.
|
||
|
|
||
|
At the beginning of a session, a trusted agent from each of the two key
|
||
|
escrow agencies enters the vault. Agent 1 enters a secret, random
|
||
|
80-bit value S1 into the laptop and agent 2 enters a secret, random
|
||
|
80-bit value S2. These random values serve as seeds to generate unit
|
||
|
keys for a sequence of serial numbers. Thus, the unit keys are a
|
||
|
function of 160 secret, random bits, where each agent knows only 80.
|
||
|
|
||
|
To generate the unit key for a serial number N, the 30-bit value N is
|
||
|
first padded with a fixed 34-bit block to produce a 64-bit block N1.
|
||
|
S1 and S2 are then used as keys to triple-encrypt N1, producing a
|
||
|
64-bit block R1:
|
||
|
|
||
|
R1 = E[D[E[N1; S1]; S2]; S1] .
|
||
|
|
||
|
Similarly, N is padded with two other 34-bit blocks to produce N2 and
|
||
|
N3, and two additional 64-bit blocks R2 and R3 are computed:
|
||
|
|
||
|
R2 = E[D[E[N2; S1]; S2]; S1]
|
||
|
R3 = E[D[E[N3; S1]; S2]; S1] .
|
||
|
|
||
|
R1, R2, and R3 are then concatenated together, giving 192 bits. The
|
||
|
first 80 bits are assigned to U1 and the second 80 bits to U2. The
|
||
|
rest are discarded. The unit key U is the XOR of U1 and U2. U1 and U2
|
||
|
are the key parts that are separately escrowed with the two escrow
|
||
|
agencies.
|
||
|
|
||
|
As a sequence of values for U1, U2, and U are generated, they are
|
||
|
written onto three separate floppy disks. The first disk contains a
|
||
|
file for each serial number that contains the corresponding key part
|
||
|
U1. The second disk is similar but contains the U2 values. The third
|
||
|
disk contains the unit keys U. Agent 1 takes the first disk and agent
|
||
|
2 takes the second disk. Thus each agent walks away knowing
|
||
|
an 80-bit seed and the 80-bit key parts. However, the agent does not
|
||
|
know the other 80 bits used to generate the keys or the other 80-bit
|
||
|
key parts.
|
||
|
|
||
|
The third disk is used to program the chips. After the chips are
|
||
|
programmed, all information is discarded from the vault and the agents
|
||
|
leave. The laptop may be destroyed for additional assurance that no
|
||
|
information is left behind.
|
||
|
|
||
|
The protocol may be changed slightly so that four people are in the
|
||
|
room instead of two. The first two would provide the seeds S1 and S2,
|
||
|
and the second two (the escrow agents) would take the disks back to
|
||
|
the escrow agencies.
|
||
|
|
||
|
The escrow agencies have as yet to be determined, but they will not
|
||
|
be the NSA, CIA, FBI, or any other law enforcement agency. One or
|
||
|
both may be independent from the government.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
LAW ENFORCEMENT USE
|
||
|
|
||
|
When law enforcement has been authorized to tap an encrypted line, they
|
||
|
will first take the warrant to the service provider in order to get
|
||
|
access to the communications line. Let us assume that the tap is in
|
||
|
place and that they have determined that the line is encrypted with the
|
||
|
Clipper Chip. The law enforcement field is first decrypted with the
|
||
|
family key F, giving E[K; U] + N. Documentation certifying that a tap
|
||
|
has been authorized for the party associated with serial number N is
|
||
|
then sent (e.g., via secure FAX) to each of the key escrow agents, who
|
||
|
return (e.g., also via secure FAX) U1 and U2. U1 and U2 are XORed
|
||
|
together to produce the unit key U, and E[K; U] is decrypted to get the
|
||
|
session key K. Finally the message stream is decrypted. All this will
|
||
|
be accomplished through a special black box decoder.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
CAPSTONE: THE NEXT GENERATION
|
||
|
|
||
|
A successor to the Clipper Chip, called "Capstone" by the government
|
||
|
and "MYK-80" by Mykotronx, has already been developed. It will include
|
||
|
the Skipjack algorithm, the Digital Signature Standard (DSS), the
|
||
|
Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA), a method of key exchange, a fast
|
||
|
exponentiator, and a randomizer. A prototoype will be available for
|
||
|
testing on April 22, and the chips are expected to be ready for
|
||
|
delivery in June or July.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND DISTRIBUTION NOTICE. This article is based on
|
||
|
information provided by NSA, NIST, FBI, and Mykotronx. Permission to
|
||
|
distribute this document is granted.
|
||
|
---
|
||
|
David D. Clark: With a middle name like Darwin how can I not be an athiest?
|
||
|
"We only want a quiet place to finish working while God eats our brains."
|
||
|
--Bruce Sterling Fnord. gt0269b@prism.gatech.edu
|
||
|
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 93 20:02:28 -0700
|
||
|
From: Eric Hughes <hughes@soda.berkeley.edu>
|
||
|
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
|
||
|
Subject: a cypherpunk's clipper reaction
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Fellows:
|
||
|
|
||
|
I will, in the coming weeks have much more to say on the matter of
|
||
|
this Clipper chip proposal. For now, however, I have only one thing
|
||
|
to say.
|
||
|
|
||
|
No compromises.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Eric
|
||
|
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 93 23:05:23 PDT
|
||
|
From: "Martin Hellman" <hellman@isl.stanford.edu>
|
||
|
Message-Id: <9304180605.AA22827@ISL.Stanford.EDU>
|
||
|
To: <bunches-o-net-people>
|
||
|
Subject: Clipper Chip
|
||
|
|
||
|
[ Notice the authors's request:
|
||
|
------- Forwarded Message
|
||
|
|
||
|
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 93 11:41:42 PDT
|
||
|
From: "Martin Hellman" <hellman@isl.stanford.edu>
|
||
|
To: smb@research.att.com
|
||
|
Subject: Re: Clipper Chip
|
||
|
|
||
|
It is fine to post my previous message to sci.crypt
|
||
|
if you also post this message with it in which:
|
||
|
|
||
|
1. I ask recipients to be sparse in their requesting further info
|
||
|
from me or asking for comments on specific questions. By
|
||
|
this posting I apologize for any messages I am unable to
|
||
|
respond to. (I already spend too much time answering too much
|
||
|
e-mail and am particularly overloaded this week with other
|
||
|
responsibilities.)
|
||
|
|
||
|
2. I note a probably correction sent to me by Dorothy Denning.
|
||
|
She met with the person from NSA that
|
||
|
I talked with by phone, so her understanding is likely to
|
||
|
better than mine on this point: Where I said the transmitted
|
||
|
info is E{ E[M; K], E[K; UK], serial number; SK}
|
||
|
she says the message is not double encrypted. The system
|
||
|
key (or family key as she was told it is called) only encrypts
|
||
|
the serial number or the serial number and the encrypted
|
||
|
unit key. This is not a major difference, but I thought it
|
||
|
should be mentioned and thank her for bringing it to
|
||
|
my attention. It makes more sense since it cuts down
|
||
|
on encryption computation overhead.
|
||
|
|
||
|
------- End of Forwarded Message
|
||
|
|
||
|
]
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
Most of you have seen the announcement in Friday's NY Times,
|
||
|
etc. about NIST (National Institute of Standards & Technology)
|
||
|
announcing the "Clipper Chip" crypto device. Several messges
|
||
|
on the net have asked for more technical details, and some have
|
||
|
been laboring under understandable misunderstandings given
|
||
|
the lack of details in the news articles. So here to help out
|
||
|
is your friendly NSA link: me. I was somewhat surprised Friday
|
||
|
to get a call from the Agency which supplied many of the missing
|
||
|
details. I was told the info was public, so here it is (the cc of this
|
||
|
to Dennis Branstad at NIST is mostly as a double check on my
|
||
|
facts since I assume he is aware of all this; please let me know
|
||
|
if I have anything wrong):
|
||
|
|
||
|
The Clipper Chip will have a secret crypto algorithm embedded in
|
||
|
Silicon. Each chip will have two secret, 80-bit keys. One will be the
|
||
|
same for all chips (ie a system-wide key) and the other will be unit
|
||
|
specific. I don't know what NIST and NSA will call them, but I will
|
||
|
call them the system key SK and unit key UK in this message.
|
||
|
The IC will be designed to be extremely difficult to reverse so
|
||
|
that the system key can be kept secret. (Aside: It is clear that
|
||
|
they also want to keep the algorithm secret and, in my opinion,
|
||
|
it may be as much for that as this stated purpose.) The unit key
|
||
|
will be generated as the XOR of two 80-bit random numbers K1
|
||
|
and K2 (UK=K1+K2) which will be kept by the two escrow
|
||
|
authorities. Who these escrow authorities will be is still to be
|
||
|
decided by the Attorney General, but it was stressed to me that
|
||
|
they will NOT be NSA or law enforcement agencies, that they
|
||
|
must be parties acceptable to the users of the system as unbiased.
|
||
|
When a law enforcement agency gets a court order, they will
|
||
|
present it to these two escrow authorities and receive K1 and
|
||
|
K2, thereby allowing access to the unit key UK.
|
||
|
|
||
|
In addition to the system key, each user will get to choose his
|
||
|
or her own key and change it as often as desired. Call this key
|
||
|
plain old K. When a message is to be sent it will first be
|
||
|
encrypted under K, then K will be encrypted under the unit key UK,
|
||
|
and the serial number of the unit added to produce a three part
|
||
|
message which will then be encrypted under the system key SK
|
||
|
producing
|
||
|
|
||
|
E{ E[M; K], E[K; UK], serial number; SK}
|
||
|
|
||
|
When a court order obtains K1 and K2, and thence K, the law
|
||
|
enforcement agency will use SK to decrypt all information
|
||
|
flowing on the suspected link [Aside: It is my guess that
|
||
|
they may do this constantly on all links, with or without a
|
||
|
court order, since it is almost impossible to tell which links
|
||
|
over which a message will flow.] This gives the agency access to
|
||
|
|
||
|
E[M; K], E[K; UK], serial number
|
||
|
|
||
|
in the above message. They then check the serial number
|
||
|
of the unit and see if it is on the "watch list" for which they
|
||
|
have a court order. If so, they will decrypt E[K; UK] to obtain K,
|
||
|
and then decrypt E[M; K] to obtain M.
|
||
|
|
||
|
I am still in the process of assessing this scheme, so please do
|
||
|
not take the above as any kind of endorsement of the proposed
|
||
|
scheme. All I am trying to do is help all of us assess the scheme
|
||
|
more knowledgably. But I will say that the need for just one court
|
||
|
order worries me. I would feel more comfortable (though not
|
||
|
necessarily comfortable!) if two separate court orders were
|
||
|
needed, one per escrow authority. While no explanation is
|
||
|
needed, the following story adds some color: In researching
|
||
|
some ideas that Silvio Micali and I have been kicking around,
|
||
|
I spoke with Gerald Gunther, the constitutional law expert
|
||
|
here at Stanford and he related the following story: When
|
||
|
Edward Levi became Pres. Ford's attorney general (right
|
||
|
after Watergate), he was visited by an FBI agent asking
|
||
|
for "the wiretap authorizations." When Levy asked for
|
||
|
the details so he could review the cases as required by
|
||
|
law, the agent told him that his predecessors just turned
|
||
|
over 40-50 blank, signed forms every time. Levi did not
|
||
|
comply and changed the system, but the lesson is clear:
|
||
|
No single person or authority should have the power to
|
||
|
authorize wiretaps (or worse yet, divulging of personal
|
||
|
keys). Sometimes he or she will be an Edward Levi
|
||
|
and sometimes a John Mitchell.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Martin Hellman
|
||
|
|
||
|
------- End of Forwarded Message
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
From: tcmay@netcom.com (Timothy C. May)
|
||
|
Subject: Explanation of Clipper Chip Name
|
||
|
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
|
||
|
|
||
|
In the days before Xerox machines, one provided copies of
|
||
|
correspondence to others by using sheets of carbon paper to make
|
||
|
duplicates when typing.
|
||
|
|
||
|
This is the origin of "cc" or "cc:" on memos and correspondence.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Henceforth, "cc" refers to the automatic carbon copy provided by the
|
||
|
"cc" chip, the Clipper Chip. BB (Big Brother) gets a CC of everything.
|
||
|
|
||
|
(I know, it's a voice encryption standard, and it's voluntary, but a
|
||
|
quick look at the "Capstone" chip reveals it's a complete crypto
|
||
|
package, containing the DSS government signature standard, and lots of
|
||
|
other stuff. The Wiretap Chip will be used for more than just voice,
|
||
|
I'll be willing to bet.)
|
||
|
|
||
|
-Tim
|
||
|
|
||
|
--
|
||
|
..........................................................................
|
||
|
Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money,
|
||
|
tcmay@netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero
|
||
|
408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets,
|
||
|
W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments.
|
||
|
Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available.
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
The SURFPUNK Technical Journal is a dangerous multinational hacker zine
|
||
|
originating near BARRNET in the fashionable western arm of the northern
|
||
|
California matrix. Quantum Californians appear in one of two states,
|
||
|
spin surf or spin punk. Undetected, we are both, or might be neither.
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
Send postings to <surfpunk@osc.versant.com>, subscription requests
|
||
|
to <surfpunk-request@osc.versant.com>. MIME encouraged.
|
||
|
Xanalogical archive access soon. Received: by osc.versant.com (4.1/SMI-4.1)
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
________________________________________________________________________
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
# ) The Clipper Chip contains a classified single-key
|
||
|
# ) 64-bit block encryption algorithm called
|
||
|
# ) "Skipjack." The algorithm uses 80 bit keys
|
||
|
# ) (compared with 56 for the DES) and has 32 rounds
|
||
|
# ) of scrambling (compared with 16 for the DES). It
|
||
|
# ) supports all 4 DES modes of operation. The
|
||
|
# ) algorithm takes 32 clock ticks, and in Electronic
|
||
|
# ) Codebook (ECB) mode runs at 12 Mbits per second.
|
||
|
#
|
||
|
# What's it take to crack DES with keys twice as
|
||
|
# big? [timeOfDES]^2, which is about ten minutes
|
||
|
# nowadays. Worthless encryption, doubly so with
|
||
|
# the NSA backdoor. It will provide a good
|
||
|
# platform for EE hackers to work off of to create
|
||
|
# truly secure crypt chips though.
|
||
|
|
||
|
You're going to have to argue a bit to convince
|
||
|
me that an 80-bit-key 32-round DES-like
|
||
|
encryption is crackable in 10 minutes. Even
|
||
|
without chaining, which everyone uses anyway.
|
||
|
|
||
|
How do you figure that?
|
||
|
|
||
|
12 MBit/second ECB, div 64 bits/cypherblock, is
|
||
|
like 188,000 blocks/sec. Say we're within a
|
||
|
magnitude, and call it 2^18 = 262000 per second.
|
||
|
|
||
|
Now you've got to attempt 2^80 keys. So you need
|
||
|
2^(80-18) = s^62 = 4611686018427387904 seconds to
|
||
|
try all keys with one of these chips runing at
|
||
|
the above rate. That converts to 3598381724740
|
||
|
years, a little more than 10 seconds. Just for
|
||
|
one cypherblock. Which is hardly enough to
|
||
|
determine *the* key, since the key is so many
|
||
|
more bits than the cypherblock, you'll find
|
||
|
billions of keys that all decypher it correctly,
|
||
|
and still won't be able to distingusih the
|
||
|
correct decyphtering from billions of other
|
||
|
equally plausible decypherings. What were you
|
||
|
thinking?
|
||
|
|
||
|
Q. Which brand of DES does PGP use for DEK,
|
||
|
anyways? Probably 56-bit-key DES in either CBC
|
||
|
or PCBC mode, right?
|
||
|
|
||
|
TAB
|
||
|
TAB
|
||
|
TAB
|
||
|
TAB
|
||
|
s LIKE
|
||
|
t OKAY
|
||
|
r LIKE
|
||
|
i OKAY
|
||
|
c LIKE
|
||
|
k OKAY
|
||
|
BANG
|
||
|
UMMM
|
||
|
|