From: Toto <toto@sk.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 22 Feb 1997 12:57:50 -0800 (PST)
To: Earle Ady <earle@zero.genx.net>
Subject: Re: DES Crack Hype
In-Reply-To: <199702221715.MAA07384@zero.genx.net>
Message-ID: <330F7A0C.634E@sk.sympatico.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Earle Ady wrote:
> 
> # > > > For instance, New Media Laboratories provides no source code for their
> # > > > software, nor any type of documentation to track what it 'should' be
> # > > > doing vs. what it 'is' doing. 
>   Source code was initially released on a very early version of the
>   RC5-client, after a half dozen or so rogue clients started up, we
>   decided to quickly strop distributing source code until the whole
>   client->server protocol could be devised "the right way".. 

   I didn't get a rogue client. I got a client off of your ftp server.
And I have no idea what it is doing.

>   Well documentation for what it is doing?  It's uh, doing some math
>   or something; that's retarded.

  Is it doing the kind of math that cracks encryption? Or the kind of 
math
that fucks up hard-drives and operating systems?
  It seems to like to access the hard drive for two solid minutes for no
apparent reason while it is connected to your server and, according to
the message, "sleeping." A lot of things can be done in two minutes of
access to a hard drive.
 
>   Now that there actually seems to be extensive
>   participation in this, we're doing a FAQ on the website.  Hopefully this
>   will alleviate alot of this.

  I can appreciate that you seem to have been playing in the backyard
with friends when the whole neighborhood decided to show up and play
with you, but you should realize that if you are serious about gaining
enough support to take your best shot at the DES Crack, that you will
have to provide strangers with enough info to feel comfortable about
running your software on their machines and those of their employers,
etc.
  Some of my readers have sent me email asking if they should be 
concerned about running this-or-that software on their business
boxes, and I tell them, "You should be concerned about everything
you run on your business machine."
   "It's uh, doing some math or something..." isn't a very good basis
for people to run the software on a few million bucks worth of hardware.

>   as soon as it hit's mailing lists or newsgroups, someone has
>   opinions about it, as well as "a better way of doing it".  Well whatever,
>   it's all just a monumental waste of bandwidth.

  I don't think it is a waste of bandwith to question whether people
should feel comfortable downloading and running applications which
provide neither source code nor documentation that can be used to
judge the competence and/or integrity of those producing it.

> # >   However, I am referring to the stats that I get on my own machine after
> # > the keys have been 'checked'. I had one message telling me, "Keyspace
> # > exhausted in 243.12 minutes." The only problem is that it actually took
> # > slightly under an hour. If it is wrong about the time, then how can I
> # > be expected to believe that it is right about the keys being checked?
> 
>   This is due to the fact that you have a bum client :)

  Yet you still call me a fucking retard for wanting to be able
to verify that your software isn't going to turn my machine into
a toaster?

>   New clients,
>   (all compiles are being verified by me before put online) are becomming
>   available now.  Proxies for all of the platforms we're supporting will
>   be available too; caching proxies underway as well.

  This doesn't matter for shit if you have nothing in place to provide
info in this regard for those participating in your group effort.
  
>   I'm getting more and more distressed about this utter waste of bandwidth
>   the further down I get here.

  Since my efforts have led to me finding out that I have a "bum client",
the bandwidth is serving my purpose very well.
 
> # >   I was impressed with the genx homepage and the number of platforms to
> # > which the software had been ported. The software itself was ported to
> # > Win95 with at least enough competence to do 'something', as opposed to
> # > requiring me to reinvent the wheel in order to get it to run.
> # >   But I still don't know what it does, in fact, do, or if I am just
> # > pissing in the wind by running it. (Or if it was written by the same
> # > guys who killed Kennedy).
> # >
> # >   So, although I appreciate your efforts, until I find a basis for
> # > deciding otherwise, I will be using the Orange Crayola to connect
> # > you on my chart to the bad-guys on the X Files.
> 
>   The client allows you to participate in the RC5-56 contest (at no unfair
>   advantage or disadvantage).  That is the bottom line.  If you wish to
>   participate, we'd greatly welcome any instructions you can spare.  If
>   you don't, that's fine too, best of luck.

  Does this include us 'retards' who are 'wasting bandwidth'?

  I am sure that you all are taking great pains to develop the best
possible software for this endeavor, but unless you take care of the
'information' end of the spectrum, you will lose the participation of
those people who require a certain level of assurance that your 
softare meets a decent standard of competence, and that someone is
actually in charge and paying attention.

Toto
-- 
   "A long time ago, being crazy meant something.
  "Now, everybody's crazy."
                              Chuck Manson