From extropians-request@extropy.org Wed Feb 23 21:29:39 1994 Return-Path: extropians-request@extropy.org Received: from usc.edu (usc.edu [128.125.253.136]) by chaph.usc.edu (8.6.4/8.6.4) with SMTP id VAA24981 for ; Wed, 23 Feb 1994 21:29:25 -0800 Received: from news.panix.com by usc.edu (4.1/SMI-3.0DEV3-USC+3.1) id AA02199; Wed, 23 Feb 94 21:29:08 PST Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Received: by news.panix.com id AA29852 (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for more@usc.edu); Thu, 24 Feb 1994 00:00:30 -0500 Date: Thu, 24 Feb 1994 00:00:30 -0500 Message-Id: <199402240500.AA29852@news.panix.com> To: Extropians@extropy.org From: Extropians@extropy.org Subject: Extropians Digest #94-2-235 - #94-2-246 X-Extropian-Date: February 24, 374 P.N.O. [00:00:07 UTC] Reply-To: extropians@extropy.org Errors-To: Extropians-Request@gnu.ai.mit.edu Status: RO Extropians Digest Thu, 24 Feb 94 Volume 94 : Issue 54 Today's Topics: Blue Goo Background [1 msgs] Digest Archives [1 msgs] ENVIROBIZ: Costs of a green business... [2 msgs] MEME - RAW dead HOAX (fwd) [1 msgs] NIST Crypto Update (fwd) - a Feb 4 doc we somehow missed... [1 msgs] NIST Fed. Info. Processing Standard for EES (Clipper/Skipjack)[1 msgs] Question on Vitamin E and rancid oil [1 msgs] R.A.W. dead? [1 msgs] Rush's Dynamic Optimism (hee hee hee) [1 msgs] Study: Cut population or else [1 msgs] the lamest possible news - R.A.W. dead [1 msgs] Administrivia: Note: I have increased the frequency of the digests to four times a day. The digests used to be processed at 5am and 5pm, but this was too infrequent for the current bandwidth. Now digests are sent every six hours: Midnight, 6am, 12pm, and 6pm. If you experience delays in getting digests, try setting your digest size smaller such as 20k. You can do this by addressing a message to extropians@extropy.org with the body of the message as ::digest size 20 -Ray Approximate Size: 55137 bytes. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: Bo Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 10:48:55 -0700 (MST) Subject: [#94-2-235] ENVIROBIZ: Costs of a green business... There are green businesses...and there are Green Businesses. For example... There has been much ado lately about "Re-Cycled" Paper, mostly to do with "post-consumer" content. Some R-CP is made of mostly scraps left over from manufacturing processes mixed with new pulp. This _is_ recycling of a type...not post consumer, though. But _all_ your "stock" is more or less "virginal". ;-) When you muck with truly pre-used R-CP, you have to deal with inks, carbon particles, staples, and a host of assorted contaminants. It's not easy to make it work...as Ray found out. :-) The problem is to make the process energy efficient and useful. Calculating energy efficiency is pretty complex...how do you put a value on a process that puts less contaminants into the environment? Is it worth making paper that doesn't use chlorine compounds if the paper is useless for general writing purposes? What about making wrapping paper with it? A lot of Re-Cycling Companies are not doing well because of economics. It is cheaper to make new glass than re-use old. The cost of sorting plastics is prohibitive to economically sound re-cycling of them. R-CP has its problems... Short term is difficult, costly and questionably economical. Long term is an absolute necessity. Tha answer IMHO is that _everybody_ needs to bite the bullet. More ecologically sound production, regardless of financial cost..._some_ consumer price increases....changing our ideas of what's acceptible...it's a slow process and upon close examination doesn't seem to be working. But the big picture has a slightly better outlook...at least the problems are being identified and solutions are being thrown out. The _right_ solution is just a little more difficult to determine... ~~~~~ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bo the Bohemian....disregarding conventional standards and behavior. *****************************[ "Narrow-mindedness is a rampant disease.....help stamp it out!!!" ****************%%%%Bo@bohemia.metronet.org%%%%********************** ------------------------------ From: Eric Watt Forste Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 11:18:55 -0800 (PST) Subject: [#94-2-236] ENVIROBIZ: Costs of a green business... On Wed, 23 Feb 1994, Bo wrote: > Short term is difficult, costly and questionably economical. Long term is > an absolute necessity. Tha answer IMHO is that _everybody_ needs to bite > the bullet. "Absolute necessity"? I don't think the state of the evidence warrants the use of words like these. > _some_ consumer price increases Why do you feel this is necessary? Do you feel that companies currently making these materials from scratch are not already internalizing their environmental "externalities" in the form of lawsuit payments and cost of regulation, etc? ------------------------------ From: fnerd@smds.com (FutureNerd Steve Witham) Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 14:00:50 EST Subject: [#94-2-237] Blue Goo Background Reading the Extropy reprint of the debate on blue goo, I noticed two things worth pointing out about where Drexler and Miller (and Dean Tribble) are coming from. I get this inside knowledge mostly from conversations with MarkM going back a couple of years. I'm not sure where he, Erik and Dean stand relative to what I remember or to each other. I'm going to blur them together and call them DM&T (alphabetically). One idea is the idea of rule of law. Hayek, (or was it Mises?) whom DM&T and many of us admire, was aparently big on this. If you have a simple, fixed, impartially-enforced set of laws, this is supposed to be better than rule by people, which involves all sorts of bad feedbacks, corruption, Kafka made odiously relevant, and interference in life. Rule of law means people know where they stand, so they can plan. The other background idea is "biology vs. economy." What DM&T mean by this is that in biology, you can just eat your neighbor. Predation is a--almost the--way of life. Protection against it is up to each individual. In a "true" economy, however, protection of lives and property is taken care of by a specialized agency, and the normal activity of people is voluntary, value-for-value trading. This means that much more effort is going into productive work (and once again, planning is possible) instead of the "war of all against all." DM&T collaborated on some chapters on "agoric" systems in a cool book called "The Ecology of Computation." In designing systems where little software agents compete and evolve to provide computing and information services, it's important to set up a base that guarantees "economic" instead of "biological" competition (Lenat's Eurisko, eg, suffers from constant corruption of its priority mechanism, because heuristics keep evolving to exploit loopholes and give themselves priority rather than do useful work--because he didn't forsee the need to make Eurisko "economic.") These related ideas--rule of law, and that economic life needs a (prior) basis of protection against predation-- are pretty basic to libertarianism. So maybe this is a chance for us anarchists and polyarchists to look at whether and how we depart from libertarianism, and if so, what principles to offer as alternatives. My idea of good ~government~ is that the definitions of rights and property have always been somewhat market-determined and -adjusted, and their defense user-initiated and -funded, and they should continue to be. -fnerd quote me - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - We shall have to evolve Problem solvers galore As each problem they solve Creates ten problems more. --Piet Hein -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a aKxB8nktcBAeQHabQP/d7yhWgpGZBIoIqII8cY9nG55HYHgvt3niQCVAgUBLMs3K ui6XaCZmKH68fOWYYySKAzPkXyfYKnOlzsIjp2tPEot1Q5A3/n54PBKrUDN9tHVz 3Ch466q9EKUuDulTU6OLsilzmRvQJn0EJhzd4pht6hSnC1R3seYNhUYhoJViCcCG sRjLQs4iVVM= =9wqs -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------ From: plaz@netcom.com (Geoff Dale) Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 11:55:57 -0800 Subject: [#94-2-238] R.A.W. dead? This is an unsubstantiated rumour. See the end of this mesage for a counter-rumour from Keith Henson. I really don't know much more than the rest of you, but: I originally saw the post by Steve Jackson (reposted to ExI-Bay by Lefty). I talked to sj(@io.com). Don Webb is the same guy who "informed" Steve Jackson of RAW's "death", so we still only have one source. Steve passed it on without thinking to confirm it. He was pretty annoyed that he may have inadvertantly perpetrated a hoax. Does anyone have yesterday's LA times? >Sent from: 0004200716@mcimail.com (Don Webb) > > [mod's note: This is truly sad news (unless it's a conspiracy- > driven hoax...) RIP...] > >Dear Friends, > >I am sad to see him go. He owes me a letter. >Now I will have to wait a long time and I am not a >patient man. > >Don Webb >donw@io.com > > >>Subject: >>RAWilson dead! >>Date: 22 Feb 94 01:59:22 GMT > >_Noted Sci-Fi Author Found Dead in Home_ >(From the Feb 22 Los Angeles Times) > > Noted science fiction author Robert Anton Wilson was > found dead in his home yesterday, apparently the victim > of a heart attack. Mr. Wilson, 63, was discovered by > his wife, Arlen. > > Mr. Wilson was the author of numerous books, including > the co-authorship of the cult classic _The Illuminatus! > Trilogy_. He was noted for his libertarian viewpoints, > love of technology, and off the wall humor. During his > lifetime he authored more than 20 books. > > Mr. Wilson is survived by his wife and two children. >From Keith's Henson's msg: >I called Tim Leary after getting this. Tim said he had called Robert >today, and got a weird answering message indicating RAW's demise. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Is Robert the originator of this hoax? Or has Robert's PacBell MessageCenter account been hacked? Inquiring minds want to know. >About ten minutes later RAW called Tim back, indicating either that >the above rumor is untrue, or communication from the beyond (I have >not yet reached RAW or family to confirm.) >However, this episode has >galvanized me to put some serious effort into getting Robert signed up >for being frozen. Luna Wilson (his daughter) is in suspension, and he >really should be there in the future to greet her. Yikes! I thought he already had a freezer contract. It would be truly sad to lose this man forever. Why do I suddenly feel like a Babylon-5 Soul Hunter? _______________________________________________________________________ Geoff Dale -- Cypherpunk/Extropian -- Plastic Beethoven AnarchyPPL - Anarch (Adjudicator) ExI-Freegate Virtual Branch Head plaz@netcom.com 66 Pyramid Plaza plaz@io.com Freegate, Metaverse@io.com 7777 "Subvert the domination paradigm!" ------------------------------ From: Craig Zimmermann Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 16:04:02 EST Subject: [#94-2-239] Digest Archives I have just joined the Extropian mailing list. I'm an interested in knowing whether an archive of digest back issues exists? I already have a number of comments on what I've read but would like to browse some older digests in order to get a feel for the thread of conversations occuring. Note, I am aware of the Exi-Essay archive and have already download everything present. Thanks in advance... Craig ------------------------------ From: Stanton McCandlish Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 16:57:50 -0500 (EST) Subject: [#94-2-240] NIST Crypto Update (fwd) - a Feb 4 doc we somehow missed... Forwarded message: >From jet@nas.nasa.gov Tue Feb 22 19:22:07 1994 Date: Tue, 22 Feb 94 16:22:33 -0800 From: jet@nas.nasa.gov (J. Eric Townsend) Message-Id: <9402230022.AA27791@boxer.nas.nasa.gov> To: mech@eff.org In-Reply-To: 's message of Tue, 15 Feb 1994 11:55:00 GMT Subject: NIST Crypto Update [From the NIST Computer Security Bulletin Board] (EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE: 3:00 P.M., Friday, Feb. 4, 1994) Fact Sheet NIST Cryptography Activities Escrowed Encryption Standard On April 16, 1993, the White House announced that the President approved a directive on "Public Encryption Management." Among other items, the President directed the Secretary of Commerce, in consultation with other appropriate U.S. agencies, to initiate a process to write standards to facilitate the procurement and use of encryption devices fitted with key-escrow microcircuits in federal communications systems that process sensitive but unclassified information. In response to the President's directive, on July 30, 1993, the Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) announced the voluntary Escrowed Encryption Standard (EES) as a draft Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS) for public comment. The FIPS would enable federal agencies to procure escrowed encryption technology when it meets their requirements; the standard is not to be mandatory for either federal agency or private sector use. During the public review of the draft standard, a group of independent cryptographers were provided the opportunity to examine the strength of the classified cryptographic algorithm upon which the EES is based. They found that the algorithm provides significant protection and that it will be 36 years until the cost of breaking the EES algorithm will be equal to the cost of breaking the current Data Encryption Standard. They also found that there is no significant risk that the algorithm can be broken through a shortcut method of attack. Public comments were received by NIST on a wide range of issues relevant to the EES. The written comments submitted by interested parties and other information available to the Department relevant to this standard were reviewed by NIST. Nearly all of the comments received from industry and individuals opposed the adoption of the standard. However, many of those comments reflected misunderstanding or skepticism about the Administration's statements that the EES would be a voluntary standard. The Administration has restated that the EES will be a strictly voluntary standard available for use as needed to provide more secure telecommunications. The standard was found to be technically sound and to meet federal agency requirements. NIST made technical and editorial changes and recommended the standard for approval by the Secretary of Commerce. The Secretary now has approved the EES as a FIPS voluntary standard. In a separate action, the Attorney General has now announced that NIST has been selected as one of the two trusted agents who will safeguard components of the escrowed keys. Digital Signature Standard In 1991, NIST proposed a draft digital signature standard as a federal standard for publiccomment. Comments were received by NIST on both technical and patent issues. NIST has reviewed the technical comments and made appropriate changes to the draft. In order to resolve the patent issues, on June 3, 1993, NIST proposed a cross-licensing arrangement for a "Digital Signature Algorithm" for which NIST has received a patent application. The algorithm forms the basis of the proposed digital signature standard. Extensive public comments were received on the proposed arrangement, many of them negative and indicating the need for royalty-free availability of the algorithm. The Administration has now concluded that a royalty-free digital signature technique is necessary in order to promote widespread use of this important information security technique. NIST is continuing negotiations with the aim of obtaining a digital signature standard with royalty-free use worldwide. NIST also will pursue other technical and legal options to attain that goal. Cooperation with Industry During the government's review of cryptographic policies and regulations, NIST requested assistance from the Computer System Security and Privacy Advisory Board to obtain public input on a wide range of cryptographic-related issues, including the key escrow encryption proposal, legal and Constitutional issues, social and public policy issues, privacy, vendor and business perspectives, and users' perspectives. The Board held five days of public meetings. Comments obtained by the Board were useful during the government's review of these issues. In addition, NIST met directly with many industry and public interest organizations, including those on the Digital Privacy and Security Working Group and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. As directed by the President when the key escrow encryption initiative was announced, the government continues to be open to other approaches to key escrowing. On August 24, 1993, NIST also announced the opportunity to join a Cooperative Research and Development Agreement (CRADA) to develop secure software encryption with integrated cryptographic key escrowing techniques. Three industry participants have expressed their interest to NIST in this effort; however, the government still seeks fuller participation from the commercial software industry. NIST now is announcing an opportunity for industry to join in a CRADA to develop improved and alternative hardware technologies that contain key escrow encryption capabilities. Additionally, the Administration has decided to strengthen NIST's cryptographic capabilities in order to better meet the needs of U.S. industry and federal agencies. 2/4/94 -- Stanton McCandlish * mech@eff.org * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist F O R M O R E I N F O, E - M A I L T O: I N F O @ E F F . O R G O P E N P L A T F O R M O N L I N E R I G H T S V I R T U A L C U L T U R E C R Y P T O ------------------------------ From: Stanton McCandlish Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 17:11:20 -0500 (EST) Subject: [#94-2-241] NIST Fed. Info. Processing Standard for EES (Clipper/Skipjack) Forwarded message: >From jet@nas.nasa.gov Tue Feb 22 19:23:04 1994 Date: Tue, 22 Feb 94 16:23:34 -0800 From: jet@nas.nasa.gov (J. Eric Townsend) Message-Id: <9402230023.AA27798@boxer.nas.nasa.gov> To: mech@eff.org Subject: FIPS 185 - EES [From the NIST Computer Security Bulletin Board] FEDERAL INFORMATION PROCESSING STANDARDS PUBLICATION 185 1994 February 9 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE/National Institute of Standards and Technology ESCROWED ENCRYPTION STANDARD CATEGORY: TELECOMMUNICATIONS SECURITY U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Ronald H. Brown, Secretary NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY, Arati Prabhakar, Director Foreword The Federal Information Processing Standards Publication Series of the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) is the official series of publications relating to standards and guidelines adopted and promulgated under the provisions of Section 111(d) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 as amended by the Computer Security Act of 1987, Public Law 100-235. These mandates have given the Secretary of Commerce and NIST important responsibilities for improving the utilization and management of computer and related telecommunications systems in the Federal Government. The NIST, through the Computer Systems Laboratory, provides leadership, technical guidance, and coordination of Government efforts in the development of standards and guidelines in these areas. Comments concerning Federal Information Processing Standards Publications are welcomed and should be addressed to the Director, Computer Systems Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. James H. Burrows, Director Computer Systems Laboratory Abstract This standard specifies an encryption/decryption algorithm and a Law Enforcement Access Field (LEAF) creation method which may be implemented in electronic devices and used for protecting government telecommunications when such protection is desired. The algorithm and the LEAF creation method are classified and are referenced, but not specified, in the standard. Electronic devices implementing this standard may be designed into cryptographic modules which are integrated into data security products and systems for use in data security applications. The LEAF is used in a key escrow system that provides for decryption of telecommunications when access to the telecommunications is lawfully authorized. Key words: Cryptography, Federal Information Processing Standard, encryption, key escrow system, security. FIPS PUB 185 Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 185 1994 February 9 Announcing the Escrowed Encryption Standard (EES) Federal Information Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUBS) are issued by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) after approval by the Secretary of Commerce pursuant to Section 111(d) of the Federal Property and Administrative Services Act of 1949 as amended by the Computer Security Act of 1987, Public Law 100-235. Name of Standard: Escrowed Encryption Standard (EES). Category of Standard: Telecommunications Security. Explanation: This Standard specifies use of a symmetric-key encryption (and decryption) algorithm (SKIPJACK) and a Law Enforcement Access Field (LEAF) creation method (one part of a key escrow system) which provides for decryption of encrypted telecommunications when interception of the telecommunications is lawfully authorized. Both the SKIPJACK algorithm and the LEAF creation method are to be implemented in electronic devices (e.g., very large scale integration chips). The devices may be incorporated in security equipment used to encrypt (and decrypt) sensitive unclassified telecommunications data. Decryption of lawfully intercepted telecommunications may be achieved through the acquisition and use of the LEAF, the decryption algorithm and the two escrowed key components. One definition of "escrow" means that something (e.g., a document, an encryption key) is "delivered to a third person to be given to the grantee only upon the fulfillment of a condition" (Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary). The term, "escrow", for purposes of this standard, is restricted to this dictionary definition. A key escrow system, for purposes of this standard, is one that entrusts the two components comprising a cryptographic key (e.g., a device unique key) to two key component holders (also called "escrow agents"). In accordance with the above definition of "escrow", the key component holders provide the components of a key to a "grantee" (e.g., a law enforcement official) only upon fulfillment of the condition that the grantee has properly demonstrated legal authorization to conduct electronic surveillance of telecommunications which are encrypted using the specific device whose device unique key is being requested. The key components obtained through this process are then used by the grantee to reconstruct the device unique key and obtain the session key which is then used to decrypt the telecommunications that are encrypted with that session key. The SKIPJACK encryption/decryption algorithm has been approved for government applications requiring encryption of sensitive but unclassified data telecommunications as defined herein. The specific operations of the SKIPJACK algorithm and the LEAF creation method are classified and hence are referenced, but not specified, in this standard. Data for purposes of this standard includes voice, facsimile and computer information communicated in a telephone system. A telephone system for purposes of this standard is limited to a system which is circuit switched and operating at data rates of standard commercial modems over analog voice circuits or which uses basic-rate ISDN or a similar grade wireless service. Data that is considered sensitive by a responsible authority should be encrypted if it is vulnerable to unauthorized disclosure during telecommunications. A risk analysis should be performed under the direction of a responsible authority to determine potential threats and risks. The costs of providing encryption using this standard as well as alternative methods and their respective costs should be projected. A responsible authority should then make a decision, based on the risk and cost analyses, whether or not to use encryption and then whether or not to use this standard. Approving Authority: Secretary of Commerce. Maintenance Agency: Department of Commerce, National Institute of Standards and Technology. Applicability: This standard is applicable to all Federal departments and agencies and their contractors under the conditions specified below. This standard may be used in designing and implementing security products and systems, which Federal departments and agencies use or operate or which are operated for them under contract. These products may be used when replacing Type II and Type III (DES) encryption devices and products owned by the government and government contractors. This standard may be used when the following conditions apply: 1. An authorized official or manager responsible for data security or the security of a computer system decides that encryption is required and cost justified as per OMB Circular A- 130; and 2. The data is not classified according to Executive Order 12356, entitled "National Security Information," or to its successor orders, or to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. However, Federal departments or agencies which use encryption devices for protecting data that is classified according to either of these acts may use those devices also for protecting unclassified data in lieu of this standard. In addition, this standard may be adopted and used by non-Federal Government organizations. Such use is encouraged when it provides the desired security. Applications: This standard may be used in any unclassified government and commercial communications. Use of devices conforming to this standard is voluntary for unclassified government applications and for commercial security applications. Implementations: The encryption/decryption algorithm and the LEAF creation method shall be implemented in electronic devices (e.g., electronic chip packages) which are protected against unauthorized entry, modification and reverse engineering. Implementations which are tested and validated by NIST will be considered as complying with this standard. An electronic device shall be incorporated into a cryptographic module in accordance with FIPS 140-1. NIST will test for conformance with FIPS 140-1. Conforming cryptographic modules can then be integrated into security equipment for sale and use in a security application. Information about devices that have been validated, procedures for testing equipment for conformance with NIST standards, and information about approved security equipment are available from the Computer Systems Laboratory, NIST, Gaithersburg, MD 20899. Export Control: Implementations of this standard are subject to Federal Government export controls as specified in Title 22, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 120 through 131 (International Traffic of Arms Regulations - ITAR). Exporters of encryption devices, equipment and technical data are advised to contact the U.S. Department of State, Office of Defense Trade Controls for more information. Patents: Implementations of this standard may be covered by U.S. and foreign patents. Implementation Schedule: This standard becomes effective thirty days following publication of this FIPS PUB. Specifications: Federal Information Processing Standard (FIPS 185), Escrowed Encryption Standard (EES) (affixed). Cross Index: a. FIPS PUB 46-2, Data Encryption Standard. b. FIPS PUB 81, Modes of Operation of the DES c. FIPS PUB 140-1, Security Requirements for Cryptographic Modules. GLOSSARY: The following terms are used as defined below for purposes of this standard: Data - Unclassified voice, facsimile and computer information communicated over a telephone system. Decryption - Conversion of ciphertext to plaintext through the use of a cryptographic algorithm. Device (cryptographic) - An electronic implementation of the encryption/decryption algorithm and the LEAF creation method as specified in this standard. Digital data - Data that have been converted to a binary representation. Encryption - Conversion of plaintext to ciphertext through the use of a cryptographic algorithm. Key components - The two values from which a key can be derived (e.g., KU1 ~ KU2). Key escrow - The processes of managing (e.g., generating, storing, transferring, auditing) the two components of a cryptographic key by two key component holders. LEAF Creation Method - A part of a key escrow system that is implemented in a cryptographic device and creates a Law Enforcement Access Field. Type I cryptography - A cryptographic algorithm or device approved by the National Security Agency for protecting classified information. Type II cryptography - A cryptographic algorithm or device approved by the National Security Agency for protecting sensitive unclassified information in systems as specified in section 2315 of Title 10 United States Code, or section 3502(2) of Title 44, United States Code. Type III cryptography - A cryptographic algorithm or device approved as a Federal Information Processing Standard. Type III(E) cryptography - A Type III algorithm or device that is approved for export from the United States. Qualifications: The protection provided by a security product or system is dependent on several factors. The protection provided by the SKIPJACK algorithm against key search attacks is greater than that provided by the DES algorithm (e.g., the cryptographic key is longer). However, provisions of this standard are intended to ensure that information encrypted through use of devices implementing this standard can be decrypted by a legally authorized entity. Where to Obtain Copies of the Standard: Copies of this publication are for sale by the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA 22161. When ordering, refer to Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 185 (FIPS PUB 185), and identify the title. When microfiche is desired, this should be specified. Prices are published by NTIS in current catalogs and other issuances. Payment may be made by check, money order, deposit account or charged to a credit card accepted by NTIS. Federal Information Processing Standards Publication 185 1994 February 9 Specifications for the ESCROWED ENCRYPTION STANDARD 1. INTRODUCTION This publication specifies Escrowed Encryption Standard (EES) functions and parameters. 2. GENERAL This standard specifies use of the SKIPJACK cryptographic algorithm and a LEAF Creation Method to be implemented in an approved electronic device (e.g., a very large scale integration electronic chip). The device is contained in a logical cryptographic module which is then integrated in a security product for encrypting and decrypting telecommunications. Approved implementations may be procured by authorized organizations for integration into security equipment. Devices must be tested and validated by NIST for conformance to this standard. Cryptographic modules must be tested and validated by NIST for conformance to FIPS 140-1. 3. ALGORITHM SPECIFICATIONS The specifications of the encryption/decryption algorithm (SKIPJACK) and LEAF Creation Method 1 (LCM-1) are classified. The National Security Agency maintains these classified specifications and approves the manufacture of devices which implement the specifications. NIST tests for conformance of the devices implementing this standard in cryptographic modules to FIPS 140-1 and FIPS 81. 4. FUNCTIONS AND PARAMETERS 4.1 FUNCTIONS The following functions, at a minimum, shall be implemented: 1. Data Encryption: A session key (80 bits) shall be used to encrypt plaintext information in one or more of the following modes of operation as specified in FIPS 81: ECB, CBC, OFB (64), CFB (1, 8, 16, 32, 64). 2. Data Decryption: The session key (80 bits) used to encrypt the data shall be used to decrypt resulting ciphertext to obtain the data . 3. LEAF Creation: A Family Key (e.g., KF-1) shall be used to create a Law Enforcement Access Field (LEAF) in accordance with a LEAF Creation Method (e.g., LCM-1). The security equipment shall ensure that the LEAF is transmitted in such a manner that the LEAF and ciphertext may be decrypted with legal authorization. No additional encryption or modification of the LEAF is permitted. 4.2 PARAMETERS The following parameters shall be used in performing the prescribed functions: 1. Device Unique Identifier (UID): The identifier unique to a particular device and used by the Key Escrow System. 2. Device Unique Key (KU): The cryptographic key unique to a particular device and used by the Key Escrow System. 3. Cryptographic Protocol Field (CPF): The field identifying the registered cryptographic protocol used by a particular application and used by the Key Escrow System (reserved for future specification and use). 4. Escrow Authenticator (EA): A binary pattern that is inserted in the LEAF to ensure that the LEAF is transmitted and received properly and has not been modified, deleted or replaced in an unauthorized manner. 5. Initialization Vector (IV): A mode and application dependent vector of bytes used to initialize, synchronize and verify the encryption, decryption and key escrow functions. 6. Family Key (KF): The cryptographic key stored in all devices designated as a family that is used to create a LEAF. 7. Session Key (KS): The cryptographic key used by a device to encrypt and decrypt data during a session. 8. Law Enforcement Access Field (LEAF): The field containing the encrypted session key and the device identifier and the escrow authenticator. 5. IMPLEMENTATION The Cryptographic Algorithm (i.e., SKIPJACK) and a LEAF Creation Method (e.g., LCM-1) shall be implemented in an electronic device (e.g., VLSI chip) which is highly resistant to reverse engineering (destructive or non-destructive) to obtain or modify the cryptographic algorithm, the UID, the KF, the KU, the EA, the CPF, the operational KS, and any other security or Key Escrow System relevant information. The device shall be able to be programmed/personalized (i.e., made unique) after mass production in such a manner that the UID, KU (or its components), KF (or its components) and EA fixed pattern can be entered once (and only once) and maintained without external electrical power. The LEAF and the IV shall be transmitted with the ciphertext. The specifics of the protocols used to create and transmit the LEAF, IV, and encrypted data shall be registered and a CPF assigned. The CPF (and the KF-ID, LCM-ID) shall then be transmitted in accordance with the registered specifications. Various devices implementing this standard are anticipated. The implementation may vary with the application. The specific electric, physical and logical interface will vary with the implementation. Each approved, registered implementation shall have an unclassified electrical, physical and logical interface specification sufficient for an equipment manufacturer to understand the general requirements for using the device. Some of the requirements may be classified and therefore would not be specified in the unclassified interface specification. The device Unique Key shall be composed of two components (each a minimum of 80 bits long) and each component shall be independently generated and stored by an escrow agent. The session key used to encrypt transmitted information shall be the same as the session key used to decrypt received information in a two-way simultaneous communication. The Lead Creation Method (LCM), the Cryptographic Protocol Field (CPF), and the Family Key Identifier (KF-ID) shall be registered in the NIST Computer Security Object Register. This standard is not an interoperability standard. It does not provide sufficient information to design and implement a security device or equipment. Other specifications and standards will be required to assure interoperability of EES devices in various applications. Specifications of a particular EES device must be obtained from the manufacturer. The specifications for the SKIPJACK algorithm are contained in the R21 Informal Technical Report entitled "SKIPJACK" (S), R21-TECH- 044-91, May 21, 1991. The specifications for LEAF Creation Method 1 are contained in the R21 Informal Technical Report entitled "Law Enforcement Access Field for the Key Escrow Microcircuit" (S). Organizations holding an appropriate security clearance and entering into a Memorandum of Agreement with the National Security Agency regarding implementation of the standard will be provided access to the classified specifications. Inquiries may be made regarding the Technical Reports and this program to Director, National Security Agency, Fort George G. Meade, MD 20755-6000, ATTN: R21. -- Stanton McCandlish * mech@eff.org * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist F O R M O R E I N F O, E - M A I L T O: I N F O @ E F F . O R G O P E N P L A T F O R M O N L I N E R I G H T S V I R T U A L C U L T U R E C R Y P T O ------------------------------ From: sjw@liberty.demon.co.uk (Stephen J. Whitrow) Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 21:52:05 GMT Subject: [#94-2-242] the lamest possible news - R.A.W. dead Tick one of the following, as applicable: a) "Don Webb" works for the LA Times. b) The conspirators made a mistake with the times and date. c) LA Times stories are often leaked before 6 p.m. local time on the day prior to publication. d) The earth's spin was reversed whilst I was asleep. e) Precognition is a scientific phenomenon. f) I'm actually an insane brain in a vat, programmed by the simulators to believe I can count up to 22, when the true laws of math are totally different / I've been abducted by aliens and lobotomised. It was supposed to be still Feb 21 EST and barely Feb 22 GMT when Don Webb "knew" about the Feb 22 news item. ------------------------Forwarded message-------------------------------- >From pacoid@IO.COM Tue Feb 22 22:07:08 1994 Message-Id: <199402230300.VAA09214@illuminati.IO.COM> To: mech@IO.COM From: fringeware@IO.COM (FringeWare Inc) Date: Mon, 21 Feb 94 23:14 EST ^^ Subject: RAW dead Sent from: 0004200716@mcimail.com (Don Webb) [...] >Subject: >RAWilson dead! >Date: 22 Feb 94 01:59:22 GMT ^^ ^^ _Noted Sci-Fi Author Found Dead in Home_ (From the Feb 22 Los Angeles Times) ^^ Noted science fiction author Robert Anton Wilson was found dead in his home yesterday, apparently the victim [...] --------------------------------the end--------------------------------- The same alleged press copy was sent to Libernet. Steve Whitrow sjw@liberty.demon.co.uk ------------------------------ From: davisd@nimitz.ee.washington.edu Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 14:35:01 -0800 Subject: [#94-2-243] Question on Vitamin E and rancid oil Just what is the poop on Vitamin E and rancid oil? Pearson and Shaw recommend against oil based vitamin e gel caps because they say the oil is often rancid. Is it just the packing oil which is bad, or does the vitamin E also decompose into something harmful? Is the amount of rancid oil worth worrying about, if one eats processed foods anyway? Please describe the problems involved with the vitamin e gel caps, describing the bad and nasty things and how they do harm. Much thanks. Buy Buy -- Dan Davis ------------------------------ From: Stanton McCandlish Date: Wed, 23 Feb 1994 17:47:51 -0500 (EST) Subject: [#94-2-244] MEME - RAW dead HOAX (fwd) So kick me. Forwarded message: >From pacoid@IO.COM Wed Feb 23 01:36:52 1994 Message-Id: <199402230630.AAA18719@illuminati.IO.COM> To: mech@IO.COM From: fringeware@IO.COM (FringeWare Inc) List-Server: fringeware-request@io.com Errors-To: fringeware-owner@IO.COM FringeWare-Msg-ID: 908 Reply-To: jonl@indial1.io.com (Jon K Lebkowsky) Subject: MEME - RAW dead HOAX Date: Tue, 22 Feb 1994 21:11:22 -0600 (CST) Sent from: jonl@indial1.io.com (Jon K Lebkowsky) Robert Anton Wilson has reported that the news of his death is was overblown. His clock's still ticking, we wuz HOAXED! We sense the hand of the illuminati in this! jon23 -- ******************************************************************** Jon Lebkowsky Prez, FringeWare, Inc. Co-editor, Fringe Ware Review Cyborganic Jivemeister, bOING-bOING Magazine "States of Mind" ed., Millennium Whole Earth Catalog ******************************************************************** -- Anti=Pope= Apparattus Norvegicus, AIC, Ethical Multiversity of ChaOrder (Bugs Bunny Cabal) * mech@eff.org * Electronic Frontier Found. OnlineActivist F O R M O R E I N F O, E - M A I L T O: I N F O @ E F F . O R G O P E N P L A T F O R M O N L I N E R I G H T S ------------------------------ From: kqb@whscad1.att.com Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 15:30 EST Subject: [#94-2-245] Rush's Dynamic Optimism (hee hee hee) Ray (rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu) writes: > JUMP IN THE FIRE writes: > > I agree that I don't want >2 billion people on any planet I'm on > > (unless it's a Dyson sphere), but meaningless scare tactics are a > > bad long term idea -- and this is definitely a long-term problem. > > How do you propose to get rid of them? Hypothetically, what if > an anti-aging gene-treatment was discovered tommorow which gave us > virtual immortality (or lets say cryonics is perfected) How do you > propose to lessen the population? Even zero births wouldn't do much without > a much higher accidental death rate. You'll have to outlaw both > children and long life. Ray, Unfortunately, it may become easy to reduce greatly the world's population within a decade or two. This is because it's a lot easier to kill people than to prolong their lives. I fear that some of the biotechnology for curing diseases can also be turned around to cause them. Designer diseases of the 21st Century may wipe out most of the people on the planet. Don't forget that the world is full of groups of people who hate each other, and have built up animosities over the centuries. When weapons of mass destruction become cheap and readily available, watch out! "It's fun! It's easy! It's effective! Do it to your neighbor before he does it to you!" Note: What has saved us so far is that any chemical- or bio-weapon that can kill your enemy also can just as easily kill you, and nobody has yet been able to control which side gets zapped. I expect much finer control to be developed in the next few decades. Furthermore, I expect that most of the information "haves" will be able to develop defenses and survive, but fear that the masses of clueless unfortunates of the third and fourth world may get snuffed out during the waves of new plagues. The MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction) strategy that was used for countering the nuclear threat won't work here, because everyone will be able to build a new plague in his basement. I'm not worried about overpopulation. Kevin Q. Brown INTERNET kqb@whscad1.att.com or kevin_q_brown@att.com ------------------------------ From: rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu (Ray) Date: Wed, 23 Feb 94 20:52:27 WET Subject: [#94-2-246] Study: Cut population or else > SAN FRANCISCO (AP) -- Earth's land, water and cropland are > disappearing so rapidly that the world population must be slashed > to 2 billion or less by 2100 to provide prosperity for all in that > year, says a study released Monday. > The alternative, if current trends continue, is a population of > 12 billion to 15 billion people and an apocalyptic worldwide scene > of ``absolute misery, poverty, disease and starvation,'' said the > study's author, David Pimentel, an ecologist at Cornell University. > In the United States, the population would climb to 500 million > and the standard of living would decline to slightly better than in > present-day China, Pimentel said at the annual meeting of the > American Association for the Advancement of Science. > Even now, the world population of 6 billion is at least three > times what the Earth's battered natural resources and depleted > energy reserves would be able to comfortably support in 2100, > Pimentel said. > Pimentel defines ``comfortably support'' as providing something > close to the current American standard of living, but with wiser > use of energy and natural resources. Under his scenario, then, if > the world's population dropped to 2 billion, most people's standard > of living would improve. > ``If people do not intelligently control their own numbers, > nature will. That we can count on,'' he said. > Although a decline to 1 billion or 2 billion people over the > next century sounds nearly impossible, it could be done by limiting > families around the world to an average of 1.5 children, Pimentel > said. > Currently, U.S. women have an average of 2.1 children, as do the > Swedes. The average birthrate in Rwanda is 8.5; Saudi Arabia, 6.4; > Bolivia and Mongolia, 4.6; Argentina, 2.8; Germany, 1.5; Hong Kong, > 1.4; Italy 1.3, according to the United Nation's State of the World > Population report. > Depletion of coal, oil and natural gas, along with uranium > reserves, are one important limit on the number of people that can > survive comfortably on Earth, he said. > The other two key limiting factors are cropland and water for > irrigation, he said. Each of the three factors, considered > separately, leads to a calculation of a comfortably sustainable > population of 1 billion to 2 billion in 2100, Pimentel found. > Sandra Postel of the Worldwatch Institute noted that until 1978, > the amount of irrigated farmland around the world was growing > faster than population. But in 1978, population growth began to > outstrip the growth of irrigated land. > ``That raises a red flag for food security in the future,'' she > said. ``The water constraints are going to be a major factor.'' > Many others have taken the Malthusian view that population will > soon outstrip resources. But advances in technology, such as the > development of new higher-yielding crop varieties in the 1960s, > forestalled catastrophe. > Pimentel argues, however, that there are no more technological > solutions to be found. [here is where he really trips himself up] > ``There's no way out of it. There are just insufficient > resources for these people to live like we do today,'' he said. > ``There is no technology I know of for creating more fossil fuel.'' > Pimentel's study also says that land degradation will lead to a > 20 percent drop in world food production during the next 25 years; > world reserves of coal, oil, natural gas and uranium will be mostly > depleted by 2100; and most countries are consuming ground water > several times faster than it is replenished. If I had the money, I'd bet this guy $10,000 that by the year 2019 world food production will be up, not down. Anyway, these type of people are going to become scary when cryonics starts being taken seriously. Forget nanarchy, we immortalists need an active defense to save us from green goo. The best defense is to isolate ourselves from the biosphere by going off world, but that option won't be available in the near term. Unfortunately, like Kevin Brown noted, it is all too easy to engineer a biological weapon which targets indescriminely. It probably won't take much money to develop either so any eco-nut group could release it. The great fear of the next millenium will be annhilation via green goo instead of nuclear holocaust. -Ray -- Ray Cromwell | Engineering is the implementation of science; -- -- rjc@gnu.ai.mit.edu | politics is the implementation of faith. -- ------------------------------ End of Extropians Digest V94 #54 ********************************