🚀 go-pugleaf

THIS UNWANTED GARBAGE ORIGINATED FROM AND BROUGHT TO YOU COURTESY OF:

PATRICK PARIS -- GET OUT NOW YOU FILTHY SON OF A BITCH PEDOPHILE!
PATRICK PARIS -- I RUB MY COCK IN YOUR FILTHY STINKING FACE. GET OUT NOW PEDOPHILE!
PATRICK PARIS -- GET OUT YOU FILTHY SON OF A WHORE PEDOPHILE!
PATRICK PARIS -- YOU FILTHY SON OF A BITCH PEDOPHILE, GET OUT!



In article <20051020174227.2806917093@mail.cypherpunks.to>
Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer <nobody@cypherpunks.to> wrote:
>
> It's surprising to see such venom in reply to a simple question. Are
> you sure you are not Secure Beer?
>
> I dont think it was Frogs word for whatever it was that SB did. I
> seem to recall several people on the group agreeing that SB had done
> something not quite kosher.
>
> I am just curious about what it was.
>
> Wait. Are you Bluejay???
>

If he was Bluejay he'd have gone into a misinformed rant about how
homosexuals are responsible for global warming or something.

Eelbash if you want to attempt to blacken Secure Beer's name, I
suggest you come up with something better than "I seem to recall
several people said he did something bad".

Subject: PATRICK PARIS -- MORALLY BANKRUPT STINKING PERVERT PEDOPHILE GET OUT! 01.02.08 19.03.02

George Orwell wrote:

> RSA-640 has now been factored in 5 months with just 80 Opteron CPU's.
> http://mathworld.wolfram.com/news/2005-11-08/rsa-640/
> 
> Mixmaster uses 1024bit RSA keys, and so does Tor. Isn't it time to move to
> at least 2048bits? Hardly anybody uses 1024bits for anything these days.
> Why are we?

I wouldn't get too panicked just yet. Each additional bit roughly doubles
the factoring time, so a 641 bit key would be 10 months, 642 = 20 months,
643 = 40 months... 1024 = something like 1.00E+120 months (a guesstimate,
check the math).

I suppose it's all about how long you want your data to be safe. There's
no such thing as a "forever" cypher unless you consider the OTP, but
they're impractical in most real life applications. So every common
encryption scheme is a compromise. For real time communications like Tor
where information generally looses value quickly, a "buffer" of a few
million years is more than sufficient for now I'd say. ;)

Not that it doesn't bear watching mind you. Computing power can double in
a year, and costs per calculation can drop dramatically. It's always good
to be aware of the state of things, but it's important not to shift into
"sky is falling" mode every time someone makes another step forward. It
just means things are evolving as expected. No surprises. It's assumed
that keys of a given size will become less secure over time, and any
anomaly in that time line would be a red flag. Even if the anomaly were
larger keys *not* being factored. Worst case scenario, such a thing might
indicate a flaw in the methods we use to factor, and make all previous
results invalid... place us in a state where we have no *clue* about the
security of our encryption algorithms. :(

-- 
     _?_      Outside of a dog, a book is a man's best friend.
    (@ @)         Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read.
-oOO-(_)--OOo-------------------------------[ Groucho Marx ]--
    grok!              Registered Linux user #402208

Subject: PATRICK PARIS -- FILTHY HATEFUL HUMAN MAGGOT PEDOPHILE, GET OUT NOW! 01.02.08 19.03.02

On 9 Nov 2005, Anonymous <Use-Author-Supplied-Address@[127.1]> wrote:
>In article <ON39M7SC38664.6647337963@twistycreek.com>
>Anonymous-Remailer@See.Comment.Header (Howard) wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, 08 Nov 2005, Eelbash Admin <admin@eelbash.yi.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> BTW, twisty was concerned with altering the content of mail, not the issue
>> >> of permitting floods.
>> >
>> >No kidding? I could have sworn he blocked me because I announced I had put
>> >in filters to block floods - nothing about altering the content of mail
>> >
>> >Maybe twisty misunderstood what he read. Or did I phrase it confusingly?
>> >
>> >Well, here it is again:
>> >
>> >Agressive flood filters are in place. If you send too many messages
>> >in too rapid succession to the same email address or newsgroup, some
>> >of them may not make it. Sorry about that, but, the psychos have
>> >been busy and I am sure you will understand the need to keep them
>> >from disrupting newsgroups or preying on individuals
>> >
>> >
>> >I don't see anything there that talks about altering the content of email,
>> >but that's the notice that twisty reacted to.
>> >
>>
>> I happen to be a close friend of twisty. You can tell by my other posts
>> today. Here is what my friend wrote:
>
>Cool it. You are sounding suspiciously like a sock puppet.

I caught holy hell last night. My lips are sealed.

Howard M.