From: David Chessler Area: Public Key Encryption To: L P 14 Mar 95 01:24:00 Subject: Internet gateway & fido UpdReq On 03-11-95 (07:05), L P, in a message to All about "INTERNET GATEWAY & FIDO", stated the following: LP>According to docs from FidoNet and node 1:1/31, I may not send >encrypted mail to or receive encrypted mail from the Internet by >way of the 1:1/31 gateway without prior permission. I wrote a letter >to "Postmaster" at 1:1/31 about getting permission, but never got >a response. LP>Is there somewhere or some addressee better to write in order to >get an answer? Is there a gateway through which I can send and >receive encrypted mail? Are clear signed messages considered to be The other gateway is 1:109/42 >"encrypted mail"? What's the deal with FidoNet anyway -- do the >people at the gateway (and other sysops with respect to routed >netmail) have nothing better to do than read people's private mail >- -- and are they so hooked on it that they don't want to >let any of it past? Send a letter to JOE KEENAN at 1:109/42 and ask. LP>Is there another FidoNet technology network that gates to the >Internet and permits encrypted correspondence? -- ___ __ david.chessler@neteast.com d_)--/d chessler@capaccess.org chessler@trinitydc.edu * SLMR 2.1b * E-mail: ->132 1:109/459 david.chessler@neteast.com 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Shawn McMahon Area: Public Key Encryption To: Zorch Frezberg 17 Mar 95 12:09:32 Subject: In response to bye!/2 UpdReq Despite the stern warnings of the tribal elders, Zorch Frezberg said this to Ian Hebert: ZF> InterNet access is a gee-whiz technical phenomenon, but the ZF> growing trend is towards a technology that Joe Average ZF> cannot afford. InterNet access is becoming elitist. I've sat and looked at this paragraph for a couple of minutes now, thinking that I must be missing something; it can't possible say what it says. Zorch, you're completely 180 degrees wrong. InterNet access is becoming easier, cheaper, and "more cool" every day. As late as a year ago, none of the computer rags told you how to access the 'net, and software to do so could only be FTPed or mail ordered in most cities. Now, all the rags have semi-regular features about the 'net, and not only can you buy the software in any software store or large book store (even here in Ada, population 15,000) but it's beginning to come free with the operating systems! Also over the past year, every major online service (and most of the minor ones) has added Internet access. Hell, you saw the same stats I did, about how the majority of posters in many newsgroups are @aol.com. Internet programmers have developed protocols like SLIP and PPP, that let any dip with a modem get a full 'net connection. They've developed programs like UQWK to let people use their familiar BBS paradigms when reading mail. *FREE* access is available in many areas where *NO* access was available a year or two ago. In every major city there are *MULTIPLE* local providers today. Universities are opening their sites up to locals. Sure, there are specific counter-examples to any of these; but hell, you never used Clovis' temporary loss of their Net as proof that Fidonet was declining in membership, did you? Your local provider is a counter-example, Zorch. ZF> In order to use Windows now, the major InterNet access ZF> methodology, you need a 386. No. ZF> Despite the hype and media play, it still costs money to ZF> upgrade from anything less to anything more...and there are ZF> quite a few 286s and less down there below our lofty ZF> perches. A 386SX40 motherboard costs around $80 on the street. Enough SIPP-to-SIMM converters to get your memory over brings the cost to just over $100, for most people. Only the truly destitute can't upgrade to a 386. But it isn't necessary; as you should know, Windows isn't in any way necessary for joining the Internet. There are many ways to get Internet access, and the way I do it (a shell account) can be emulated by anybody with a dumb terminal and a modem. If you want WWW access, you need more; but WWW ain't the entire Internet. ZF> The InterNet is an elitist playing field. FidoNet is not. And yet, they outnumber us 10-to-one, and are growing faster than we are. I've worked with a number of locals recently who are using their several new routes of access to the Internet, but have no idea what Fidonet is. Accessing Fidonet (except for users of somebody else's system that's already done this) requires special programs available through channels that, to the average guy on the street, are quite arcane. But that big "Internet in a Box" package is sitting right there in front of his face at the local Hasting's or B. Dalton's, and he probably got 3 packages to join AOL with his computer and/or in the mail. If he's running OS/2 he got the stuff for free. If he buys Windows 95 (some time in 1996 or '97 when it comes out) he'll get it for free, also. What operating system includes a free Fidonet mailer? ZF> FidoNet is and will be grass-roots. It can survive without ZF> InterNet, though it should not. It may well be time for a ZF> new and clearer vision of what FidoNet should be in the ZF> future...perhaps a new symposium on a new FTSC. ZF> But it cannot, nor should it be allowed to die. All of this is true. 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Shawn McMahon Area: Public Key Encryption To: Lowell Barger 17 Mar 95 11:46:30 Subject: RSA inquiry ... UpdReq Despite the stern warnings of the tribal elders, Lowell Barger said this to All: LB> What is the difference between RSA and PGP? Is PGP much better than RSA? RSA is an encryption algorithm. PGP is a program that uses several encryption algorithms; among them is RSA. Which is better; tires or a car? :-) 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: John Moser Area: Public Key Encryption To: Alan Pugh 16 Mar 95 18:29:48 Subject: Re: PGPBLUE/RamDisk UpdReq JM> * Oddly, this function works ok in a similar installation on my JM> 386DX40. The only real difference is that the swap and work JM> directories are NOT on a RAM disk. AP> AP> i'm running a ram disk as well. maybe the program has some kind of AP> problem with them. i'll try to test this hypothesis. i don't think AP> the cpu is it. im on a 486/25 running dos 6.3. (soon to be 7.0 - i AP> can't wait to implement some of my os/2 rexx scripts on my dos AP> machine) AP> It's the RAMDISK!! I also reconfigured, changing nothing but the location of the "work" directory - from a RAM disk (G:\) to a hard drive sub-directory (E:\E-MAIL\BWAVE\WORK\". .... and it worked GREAT. Now everything works... ... except, how do you get it to read and verify the signature on a clearsigned message. There's no Menu selection for that, and the DECRYPT option says it's "not an encrypted or key file". I can go to DOS and do a PGP check of the file, and PGP reads the signature, compares it with my PUBRING.PGP file, and let's me know if it's OK. ... Should be a way to do it automagically from the PGP Blue menu (?!!!) By the way, I've attached my Public Key, in case you might want it. Look forward to hearing how your setup works... ... Discoveries are not made by following instructions. -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: John Moser 1:124/3208 john.moser@chrysalis.org mQCNAi4UI4wAAAEEAM0H6WkUutEPMTDjEF4XqwtogQNC9Ai6tuLQt4ONgrBLGlun qkLiTcGzaPLdDHlMmjAyPQciOnxZJWUn2fd6FcV0OimLSFJynajuUFsY/TpRgnOr 7CvgXRABGW+Pcf2ieUc0KqZuhRkCGc9BMYZ38/rk2UzrajtQWQgIwO/IUAqdAAUR tDdKb2huIE1vc2VyIFdBNUIgPGpvaG4ubW9zZXJAY2hyeXNhbGlzLm9yZz4gPDE6 MTI0LzQyMTQ+ =K3Mi -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- ~~~ PGPBLUE 3.0 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Tom Klein Area: Public Key Encryption To: Bruce Davis 16 Mar 95 15:56:10 Subject: Re: PGP and QEDIT / MACRO UpdReq Jumping in to comment on Thursday - March 16, 1995 ****************************************************************************** *On Tue. 03-14-95 SHAWN LEARD wrote BRUCE DAVIS about "Re: PGP and QEDIT / MAC ****************************************************************************** SL> -=> Quoting Bruce Davis to All <=- SL> BD> Is anyone aware of any macros for Qedit that will allow it to utilize > BD> PGP from within the editor? > BD> -- SL> I have one for TSE (The Semware Editor) that might work for you > with some minor changes. > The password is hello Even though TSE is the successor to Qedit it may require major changes to make it work. Here is one for Qedit to clear sign a message. //************************************************************************* //************************************************************************* Qedit macro to PGP encrypt and sign a file It needs work since is uses a RamDisk that the user may not have or the RamDisk is a different logical drive. Also filenames need work('aa' and 'bb' filenames have been picked out of the air). \\\...tak =========================================================================== Date: 01-30-94 From: JORJ STRUMOLO Subj: Qedit macro for PGP --------------------------------------------------------------------------- * plaintext message signed/encrypted with PGP (whole msg) @F11 MacroBegin SetScreenOff SaveFile UnMarkBlock WriteBlock "d:\aa" Return Dos "pgp -se" Return Return BegFile MarkLine EndFile Cut ReadBlock "d:\bb" Return UnMarkBlock EndFile Find "END PGP" Return "b" Return EndLine DelCh 2 Writes/reads from a ramdisk. Obviously the -se part can be changed to just -s or just -e to sign *or* decrypt, and not both, or Input or something stuck in to grab a choice of switches. //************************************************************************* Qedit macro for PGP 02/02/94 //************************************************************************* I think that JORJ STRUMOLO has many more and better Qedit macros. You might what to leave him a message and ask for the macros. I use TSE so do not keep track of Qedit happenings. > \\\...tak Thursday - March 16, 1995 at 1554 hrs > Team TSE - The Semware Editor, successor to Qedit > INTERNET tom.klein@chrbbs.sccsi.com OR tom.klein@lunatic.com --- * QMPro 1.53 * Keyboard: A device for entering misteaks into a computer. 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718 From: Dave Hodgins Area: Public Key Encryption To: Lowell Barger 16 Mar 95 03:09:00 Subject: RSA inquiry ... UpdReq LB> LB> What is the difference between RSA and PGP? Is PGP much better than RSA? Every message encrypted by pgp uses the IDEA algorithm, using a randomly generated 128 bit key. The only known attack, for the IDEA algorithm is brute force. PGP uses the RSA public key encryption algorithm, to encrypt the key used for the IDEA key, and prepends the rsa encrypted key, on the front of each message. Unlike IDEA, the RSA algorithm is potentially subject to factoring, as a method of attack, and as such, needs much larger keys, to achieve the same level of safety. Hope this helps, Regards, Dave Hodgins. --- * RM 1.3 00820 * Internet:Dave.Hodgins@Canrem.com Rime->118 Fido(1:229/15) 201434369420143436942014343694201434369420143436942014343694718