September 2001 - cypherpunks-legacy

Why I'm Not Writing Impassioned Essays in Defense of Crypto and Privacy
by Tim May 15 Sep '01

15 Sep '01

When I see the calls for giving up the Fourth and First Amendments, the calls for backdoored crypto, the claims that Cypherpunks must put on "CypherAngels" red berets and join Curtis Sliwa and the San Francisco Police Academy in using their skills to narc out evil persons who choose not to escrow their diaries with the local and federal police, I am nauseated. (I have written half a dozen posts suggesting some of these people simply be killed by any means possible, but I have deleted most of them before sending. Frankly, I see a war coming and I see that hundreds of thousands of "them" need to be exterminated. But I digress.) I don't have the desire, energy, or patience to write the kinds of essays I wrote in 1992-95 (and even earlier, 1988-1991, before the Cypherpunks list). I wrote then about the implications of privacy, about the First and Fourth Amendments, about the technologies that were inexorably changing the landscape of fhe world. A lot of others did as well. (I guess I'm sort of glad, for nostalgic reasons, that my friend Eric Hughes wrote his "elegiac" piece...except I fell asleep after a few paragraphs of the Kennedyesque say-nothing-but-say-it-eligiacally article. Note to Eric: get some fire back in your belly, boy! This is war, and I don't mean war against some Arabs.) Newcomers like "Nomen Nescio," "Aimee Farr," and "chefron" are now whining about what some of them call "moral crypto" and are calling for "cooperation" with the government. Sort of like "moral hotel rooms," where every hotel videotapes room activities and "only shares when government shows a good reason." Or like calls for "ink escrow," where potential subversives, and everybody in fact, escrows their journal and letter writings just in case O'Brien feels a need to look at the writings of Lucky Green, Winston Smith, or Tim May. Feh, this is well-trod ground. Why am I not writing impassioned defenses of crypto? Because it was all said back in 1992-3 when the Clipper issue arose. (Clipper was leaked in April 1993. Very longterm subscribers may remember that I took an article written by Dorothy Denning (yes, _that_ Denning!) to likely mean a proposal was being considered to require government backdoors for all crypto. I wrote an artcle for sci.crypt entitled "A Trial Balloon To Ban Crypto?" which generated something like 500 responses on the Usenet, plus discussion on the brand-new Cypherpunks list and the Extropians list. This was in October 1992, almost 9 years ago. Deja/Google does not go back this far, nor do the Cypherpunks archives currently on the Web. But, I assure you, this happened.) I lack the patience to re-write the defenses of privacy and crypto I and others wrote so many years ago. I have probably averaged a few posts per day for 9 years, or, perhaps ten thousand or more posts. Some were just followups, but many launched threads. Perhaps 100 or so were major essays. Whatever, if I have not said it by now, a few more posts to try to convince Aimee Farr (who seems to read nothing of past discussions) or "chefron" or "Nomen Nescio" will obviously not make a difference. The 2001 debate is shaping up to be just a super-fast-forward version of the 1993 debate. Frankly, I have lost patience in many ways. I think most _active_ enemies of liberty should simply be killed. Lined up against the wall if there are ever trials, or killed en masse in their dens if necessary. Nothing is to be gained by arguing with them. I don't care if newbies to the issue are "put off" by my lack of patience. Others can play the role of high school teachers explaining the basics of the Constitution. And the archives exist, even if not all the way back to 1992-5. My own Cyphernomicon exists, from 1994, in (apparently) enough pieces that even the New World Order cannot stamp it out. The new Ludlow book, "Crypto Anarchy, Pirate Utopias, etc." (title similar to this) has some articles written by several of us that are better than anything we could write from scratch to use in argument with "chefron:" and "Nomen Nescio." Finally, I have finally received the proof copy of my chapter in Vernor Vinge and Jim Frenkel's long-delayed re-issue of "True Names." My chapter is entitled "True Nyms and Crypto Anarchy" and makes my strongest case. Unfortunately, I wrote the chapter several years ago, expecting publication by 1998 at the latest. The project was delayed and delayed and then I heard nothing and then it was announced and then delayed and...you get the picture. Jim Frenkel is urgently seeking minor corrections, with the final contract FedExed to me a few days ago, just in time to get caught in the WTC grounding! Talk about irony. I really don't care if Nomen Nescio and Jim Choate and Agent Farr like or dislike what is inevitably coming. It is coming, and millions will pay the price for their criminality. Hundreds of millions more will learn what freedom means. --Tim May

4 3

SIG: Linux Today - GNU-Darwin authentication and encryption position paper
by Jim Choate 15 Sep '01

15 Sep '01

http://linuxtoday.com/news_story.php3?ltsn=2001-09-15-004-20-OP-CY-SW -- -- ____________________________________________________________________ natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks Matsuo Basho The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

[Fwd: Great article about afghanistan/taliban/bin laden] (fwd)
by measl＠mfn.org 15 Sep '01

15 Sep '01

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 15:32:41 -0700 From: Imran Qureshi <qureshi(a)cisco.com> To: nanog(a)merit.edu Subject: [Fwd: Great article about afghanistan/taliban/bin laden] One of our colleague posted the following article and it really shows the plight of the real afghans. Regards, Imran > > > Dear Friends, > > > The following was sent to me by my friend Tamim Ansary. Tamim is > >an Afghani-American writer. He is also one of the most brilliant people > >I know in this life. When he writes, I read. When he talks, I listen. > >Here is his take on Afghanistan and the whole mess we are in. > > > -Gary T. > > > > > > > > > Dear Gary and whoever else is on this email thread: > > > > > > I've been hearing a lot of talk about "bombing Afghanistan back to > >the Stone Age." Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that this > >would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with > >this atrocity, but "we're at war, we have to accept collateral damage. > >What else can we do?" Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing > >whether we "have the belly to do what must be done." > > And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard because > >I am from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here for 35 years I've > >never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who > >will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing. > >I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There is no > >doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity > >in New York. I agree that something must be done about those monsters. > >But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even > >the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant > >psychotics > >who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political criminal > >with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think Bin > >Laden, think Hitler. And when you think "the people of Afghanistan" think > >"the Jews in the concentration camps." It's not only that the Afghan > >people had nothing to do with this atrocity. > >They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult if > >someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rats > >nest of international thugs holed up in their country. > > Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban? The > >answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, suffering. > >A few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are 500,000 > >disabled orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy, no food. > > > There are millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying these > >widows alive in mass graves. The soil is littered with land mines, the > >farms were all destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons > >why the Afghan people have not overthrown the Taliban. > > >We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone > >Age. Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it already. > >Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their houses? > >Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their > >hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from >medicine > >and health care? Too late. Someone already did all that. > > > > > New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they at > >least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the >Taliban > >eat, only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and hide. > >Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans, they don't > >move too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul > >and dropping bombs wouldn't really be a strike against the criminals > >who did this horrific thing. Actually it would only be making common > >cause with the Taliban--by raping once again the people they've been > >raping all this time > > > So what else is there? What can be done, then? Let me now speak with > >true fear and trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is to go in there > >with ground troops. When people speak of "having the belly to do what > >needs to be done" they're thinking in terms of having the belly to kill > >as many as needed. Having the belly to overcome any moral qualms about > >killing innocent people. Let's pull our heads out of the sand. What's > >actually on the table is Americans dying. And not just because some > >Americans > >would die fighting their way through Afghanistan to Bin Laden's hideout. > > It's much bigger than that folks. Because to get any troops to > >Afghanistan, > >we'd have to go through Pakistan. Would they > >let us? Not likely. The conquest of Pakistan would have to be first. > >Will other Muslim nations just stand by? You see where I'm going. We're > >flirting with a world war between Islam and the West. > > And guess what: that's Bin Laden's program. That's exactly what he >wants. > >That's why he did this. Read his speeches and statements. It's all right > >there. He really believes Islam would beat the west. It might seem > >ridiculous, > >but he figures if he can polarize the world into Islam and the West, > >he's got a billion soldiers. If the west wreaks a holocaust in those > >lands, that's a billion people with nothing left to lose, that's even > >better from Bin Laden's point of view. He's probably wrong, in the end > >the west would win, whatever that would mean, but the war would last > >for years and millions would die, not just theirs but ours. Who has the > >belly for that? Bin Laden does. Anyone else? > > > > > Tamim Ansary > > > >

1 0

Sick Wacko in the Whitehouse
by An Metet 15 Sep '01

15 Sep '01

The evening news says Dubbya is asking Congress for 20 billion for his little war, and it sounds like the moron is actually going to try to invade Afganistan. I hope, in one respect, they actually do it. It will be amusing to watch the body bags coming home as the Afgans kick Yankee butt just like they did Ivan's. How did you people ever allow this delusional sub-normal wacko to become your leader? For those of us old enough to remember, he sounds more and more like Adolf Hitler. God help us all.

8 9

Re: "Attack on America" - a Personal Response (fwd)
by Jim Choate 15 Sep '01

15 Sep '01

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 21:20:22 -0500 I can tell you one group that must get the shudders every time Bush or anyone else in the administration says, "These attacks are Acts of War." Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that both standard property and life insurance policies specifically exempt claims due to acts of war. Think about the fun and games in the courtrooms of America on THAT issue!

8 12

seems like old times
by mattd 15 Sep '01

15 Sep '01

Sat Sep 15 08:10:39 2001 -- BOMB BOMB! proffr1@etc : none : - Hi ya'll.Homeland defense slipping? Missing a few police? Set up a motherfucking grand jury mike.You might be the all american hero. (michael K allen spent your hard earns on chasing me.Brer rabbit,matt stephen taylor) But all thats ancient history now,aint it jerkweed? You got a real SITUATION there. Read this and weep... Why george bush must die. (english) by proffr1(a)nospambutfuckmicrosoft.com 3:31am Sat Sep 15 '01 Well...we all gotta go sometime.Kill the head and the body will die. Im a really loving guy but Ive got a job to do too. Dubya is clearly not up to snuff,like a bison leading a herd to a terrible escarpment he should be shot.Operation soft drill,the real 'operation of the century'nominates the shrub."Id buy that for a dollar" The secret service know where I live,fuck them. Crimes against humanity need an effective system of international justice. Assasination politics has as much claim for consideration as any other. At least as long as there is something called freedom (of speech) FREEDOM numero uno,remember? Afghanistan's where old empires go to die. Eat your dirty heart out amerikkka. Attack on america? HA! You aint seen nuthin yet. FUCK America and all who sail in her. Never forget 79,the entire east coast nearly became uninhabitable for 250,000 years.(I was in the US then)

1 0

Re: Re: On Internet and social responsibility
by Jim Choate 15 Sep '01

15 Sep '01

On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Vadim Antonov wrote: > I'm not calling in question their right to publish; what i'm saying that > this crap was going on for years, and nobody cared. > > BTW, if you look at the First Ammendment protections closer, they are not > guaranteeing absolute right of free speech. Learn the American law before > you invoke it to defend your point of view. Bullshit, you fucking anti-American revisionist.... Amendment I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. -- ____________________________________________________________________ natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks Matsuo Basho The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: On Internet and social responsibility
by Rthugo1＠aol.com 15 Sep '01

15 Sep '01

In a message dated 9/15/01 1:10:11 AM Central Daylight Time, avg(a)exigengroup.com writes: << Subj: Re: On Internet and social responsibility Date: 9/15/01 1:10:11 AM Central Daylight Time From: avg(a)exigengroup.com (Vadim Antonov) Sender: owner-nanog(a)merit.edu To: baptista(a)pccf.net CC: nanog(a)merit.edu, cypherpunks(a)lne.com Oh yeah, Einstein.......Its the fault of Bush and those EEEEVVVVVVIIIILLLL Republicans, once again!! Get a grip, dude........this is no time for political rhetoric either! As far as the interpretation of the First Amendment, I wouldn't expect a socialist to understand the concept of FREEDOM! Scary thought, huh Stalin! Rob Hugo Joe -- I'm not calling in question their right to publish; what i'm saying that this crap was going on for years, and nobody cared. BTW, if you look at the First Ammendment protections closer, they are not guaranteeing absolute right of free speech. Learn the American law before you invoke it to defend your point of view. I'm tired of absolutists who cannot see that there's no such thing as absolute good or absolute evil. Speech can be very dangerous. This is a conflict of ideologies, not nations or religions. What do you think is ideology - if not speech? How do you suppress ideology if you let it spread unhampered? Violence is bad? Vote for dissolution of police, if you _really_ mean that. But don't take the "my hands is clean" high moral ground. It is _your_ guilt, too, for being lazy to learn what is going on, and failing to elect a goverment with a clue, not the bumbling idiot with a Texan accent and vocabulary of a fifteen-years-old. That site was spreading lies for a long time and is well-known in Russia as an example of American hypocrisy. I was reminded of it when i looked at today's very sarcastic piece by one poplular TV commentator (Mike Solovyev, the anchor of "Odnako" ("But..") prime-time daily show watched by a hundred million people). [Transcript follows] ...Besides, Shamil Basaev is not only a cannibal, but also a very keen politologist making in his cave precise analysis of political situation. <video of Shamil Basaev leaving in a bus with hostages> The web-site Kavkaz.org published a special message from Shamil Basaev regarding the air attacks on Washington and New-York. Mr. Basaev says that "Russia is behind this terrorist attack. The goal of this attack is to undermine might of USA, discredit the idea of the national anti-missile defense initiative, and cause USA to lose its status of super-power." Chechen politologists are wishing to provoke clash of America and Russia: just for a second imagine that everyone believed this Chechen propaganda about "hand of Moscow" - what should be the answer from the other side of the ocean? You know. [allusion to the nuclear war, for those unfamiliar with Soviet idiomas -- avg]. After what happened, the Western authorities should've knocked that site down, it is physically located in the America, and change their view of Chechen propaganda in general. Because otherwise it seems that bin Laden is a cannibal, with any means good to get him down, but his Chechen comrades-in-arms still need delicacy and respect. This is the message we get by watching this site staying up after September 11th. ... This Wednesday I expressed concern that after the initial shock they'll talk, talk, and forget the whole thing - you know, deeds are forgettable, body's fattening. But now it looks like everything is funnier. To forget something you need to learn something first. Judging by dithering of various officials they didn't learn anything, so they have nothing to forget. [end of transcript] Here's how America looks from outside. A bunch of incompetents and hypocrites. And i am tired of telling my Russian correspondents to stuff their "they asked for it" postures you know where. Because i know that Americans are not really hypocritic, just terribly ignorant. --vadim On Fri, 14 Sep 2001 baptista(a)pccf.net wrote: > > Vadim - I think in american we call it free speech. The content of the > message is not the issue - it is the right to publish it and one's > opinion which is the issue here guranteed by the U.S. constitution. > > regards > joe > > On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Vadim Antonov wrote: > > > > > > > Found on a website hosted in US by a US service provider: > > > > > Manpower resources of > > > Muslims and powerful ideological stimulus of resistance, the > > > control above the basic power resources of the world, the > > > geographical position and an area of movement, finally will > > > destroy USA. War will come in the house of each American. > > ******************************************************** > > > > > And it already will be the collapse of that America, which we > > > know and which is realized by Americans. The first disturbing > > > symptoms of arising enmity and split of America already is > > > available. > > > > This is from the inverview with the spokesman of well-known terrorist > > Shamil Basaev, known for personally taking hostage hundreds of patients in > > a hospital, among other things (the spokesman is Movladi Udugov, the guy > > who threatened to drop an airplane on Kremlin). > > > > http://www.kavkaz.org/english/news/2001/09/14/news4.htm > > > > Hosted by XO Communications - do not bother them, i already alerted their > > staff. > > > > Guys, why should a North American provider give a place for this > > propaganda? Call FBI, have them trace the connections of whoever pays for > > that site. > > > > [If you decide to read the entire article - the "so-called peacemaker" > > Boris Nemtsov mentioned there is a prominent pro-Western politican in > > Russia, and (used to be, changed his mind after WTC attack) a leading > > proponent of negotiations with Chechen militants. A shining illustration > > of what you get for trying to negotiate with terrorists.] > > > > Please, if you host websites, take a closer look at what you are hosting; > > you may help to find leads for the investigation. > > > > --vadim > > > > -- > The dot.GOD Registry, Limited > > http://www.dot-god.com/

1 0

SIG: Technology Review - It's Time for Clockless Chips
by Jim Choate 15 Sep '01

15 Sep '01

http://www.techreview.com/magazine/oct01/tristramall.asp -- -- ____________________________________________________________________ natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks Matsuo Basho The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Flight 93 Questions
by Matthew Gaylor 15 Sep '01

15 Sep '01

2 1