December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Rural Datafication (Was Re: Edited Edupage, 9 May 1996)
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"tcmay(a)got.net" 15-MAY-1996 02:31:15.60 >A consequence is that many customers leapfrog right over local cable and go >directly for satellite dishes. While the local community cable systems and >their government partners could (and did) keep out other cable competitors, >this became less and less possible with satellite dishes. Zoning laws were >used to limit BUDs (Big Ugly Dishes, the big 8-foot and larger C-band >dishes). But as the Ku-band dishes (mentioned favorably in my 1988 Crypto >Anarchist Manifesto, interestingly enough) became available, even the most >restrictive zoning ordinances became unenforceable....dishes could be in >attics, on balconies, even covered with fake boulders! The courts are also (sensibly) seeing zoning laws attempting to outlaw such small dishes as being completely ridiculous. >In my own case, I skipped cable and installed a DSS dish...150 or more >channels, at least 20 movies on at any given time (not even counting the >Pay Per View movies, of which there are at least 30-40), financial news, >CNN, etc. Plus, a digital output connector for (Real Soon Now, they claim) >a PageSat-type Usenet and Web page feed, using phone links for the back >link. I submit this as an example of where the free market is providing a >better solution than "community access cable" did. In fact, the >socialization of cable held cable back. I've gone even farther than that - I don't bother with having a TV, I just get my info from the net. There is the problem with the satellite net links that it tends to concentrate data production & distribution into relatively few hands, from which it can easier be taken by government and other forces. Larger corporation, despite the influence their size gives them, can be easier to pressure than the small ones. Look at Compuserve in Germany, for instance - they were having pressure from Christian Coalition types, etcetera, and used the German investigation as an excuse. On the other hand, this is also a very good argument against rural subsidies being necessary - if people want net access and are educated and smart enough to afford it (and thus be able to use it properly), they can get it even if they're in the wilds of Montana. -Allen

1 0

Re: Edited Edupage, 9 May 1996
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:11 PM 5/15/96 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote: >As long as this is now CypherCesspit and not CypherPunks, I might as >well play the game. I've been trolled too. >Perhaps its this sort of thing, and the fact that the literacy rate >was higher BEFORE public education, that lead me to believe that we >don't need any more "assistance" from the friendly neighborhood >government. We need less, a lot less, and as fast as possible. Since I am basically conservative (small c, original meaning), I always look for ways to ease into change. In the case of public schools (and specifically in California), I see that the top 10% can stand proudly next to the best of the private schools, and the bottom 10% are cesspools. We should start by issuing education vouchers to the parents of students in the bottom 10% of the schools for the state aid their districts would have otherwise gotten. We can monitor indicators such as the juvenile crime rate and standardized tests to see how the experiment is progressing. If the experiment is wildly successful, it will be extended quickly by popular demand. If it is mildly successful, it should be extended to more schools, but more slowly (perhaps the lowest 25% next), and monitored. In any case, when it reaches the top 10%, it ain't broke, schools, they will have had time to adapt to the change in funding. I should note that if I were sending my children to primary/secondary school today, I would still send them to the local public schools in Los Gatos. >Do you prefer using the U.S. Postal Service, or Federal Express when >you absolutely positively have to get the package there? Actually I use the USPS. They deliver to places I have to send things that FX does not (Some rural parts of the USA). However, since I am not sending life-saving medicine, I really don't "absolutely positively have to get the package there". ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

[NOISE] Re: Edited Edupage, 9 May 1996
by mccoy＠communities.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hmmm... this is getting fun. Now I have something to take out my frustration at 3Com shipping me a broken 100baseTX hub... Perry writes: > Food is of paramount importance to society. Why do we have no > government run feeding stations to replace these evil supermarkets, > then? I guess that farm subsidies, school lunches and the infamous "government cheese" are all figments of our imagination... > Heat is of paramount importance to society -- in New England you can't > survive the winter without it. Why, then, do we not have government > operated and financed oil companies to replace the evil private ones. Are you aware of the fact that it is next to impossible to disconnect gas/electricity for poor customers during the winter in these areas? Have you ever wondered why the services rep asks you questions regarding your income when you sign up for phone or electrical/gas services? > Communications are of primary importance to society. Would you swap > our phone system for the phone system in Greece, or even the one in > France, which are publically subsidized and run by the government? Gee, I seem to remember when the only phone system of any consequence in the US was the Bell System. A heavily regulated monopoly with the government overseeing almost all aspects of the services offered. > Do you prefer using the U.S. Postal Service, or Federal Express when > you absolutely positively have to get the package there? Can FedEx send a 1 oz. letter to anywhere in the world for 32 cents? A classic example of cherry-picking among private companies. > If you had a choice, would you go to a V.A."hospital" or see a private > physician? A private physician who must adhere to governement standards and who could not practice medicine without the permission of the government? [okay, you sort of have a point on this one but you were really shooting blanks on the other issues.] > Actually, I believe most people on this list argue for no government > or so little that its decisions hardly matter. Yes, but you should give better examples. This is not an issue which is easily argued using the "sound bites" you are trying to give us. jim

1 0

RE: Java & signed applets
by Gregg Weissman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Well,that day is not all that far off, when there is trusted h/w, or trusted components, on the desktop. This will be the usual two-edged sword .... ---------- From: Lyal Collins[SMTP:lyalc@ozemail.com.au] Sent: Thursday, May 16, 1996 8:02 AM To: E. ALLEN SMITH Cc: Cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: Java & signed applets Signing anything is somewaht a waste of time, unless the verification siftware is highly trusted, and there is good intergity/authenticity control of the root public key(s). So, in geneal - ho hum - until trusted hardware is available on the desktop. lyal -- All mistakes in this message belong to me - you should not use them!

1 0

Pointer to CFV for comp.security.pgp.*
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please do not redistribute the actual CFV. I'm sure the group will pass; this just FYI, in case there's anyone here interested in a forum for discussing cryptography. See article <832200127.21555(a)uunet.uu.net> in news.announce.newgroups. -rich

1 0

Zimmermann v. Viacrypt
by Mark Voorhees 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There is a story @ http://infolawalert.com/stories/051796a.html describing how Phil Zimmermann is trying to retrieve all the rights to PGP from ViaCrypt in order to jump start his new venture, PGP, Inc. He's taking a sell out or get sued approach with ViaCrypt, which until recently has not had much success marketing PGP. Mark ** Mark Voorhees ** Information Law Alert ** mark(a)infolawalert.com ** http://infolawalert.com ** + 1 718 369 0906 ** + 1 718 369 3250 (fax) ************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

1 0

Re: Why does the state still stand:
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"unicorn(a)schloss.li" "Black Unicorn" 15-MAY-1996 18:59:01.44 >For these a company running at a constant net operating loss could be >formed to purchase cars for resale (funny how no one ever buys them) and >manage property (which no one seems to ever lease). But won't such a company run into tax problems? In other words, the IRS is going to look with some suspicion on a company that keeps showing no profits (and thus no taxes) but keeps going anyway. They're going to think that the owners are making a profit anyway but concealing it - which is the case. I'm not sure how to handle this one, other than not owning major property (rental et al). -Allen

2 1

Re: SEVERE undercapacity, we need more remailer servers FAST
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"jamesd(a)echeque.com" 16-MAY-1996 00:44:57.85 >What do I need to do to support a remailer that posts to non binary >newsgroups? (I do not have root control on a unix machine other than my >employers machine, for which I am unlikely to receive approval to use >in this fashion.) Well, there are some mail-to-news gateways; I believe someone posted on them a while back. You could write to the operators and ask them for a copy of the software. I would suggest only accepting messages from mixmaster remailers; this would reduce the likelihood of successful lawsuits against you for the logs, since they won't give any information. -Allen

1 0

Re: S-Tools 4 now available
by Matts Kallioniemi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 17:41 1996-05-13 CST, Roy M. Silvernail wrote: >> You will need either Windows 95 or Windows NT (at least v3.51) to use >> this, and all further releases of S-Tools (Win32s is not sufficient). ><sigh> >I suppose this is market pressure, but it means you are alienating a >number of potential users (including myself). Some of us are working >toward being Microsoft-free, you know. It's not just marketing, it's a fact of life. 16 bit operating systems are not supported any more. Just as 8 bit OSes haven't been supported for quite a while either. There will come a day when 64 bits are considered the minimum for useful software (large database systems are already there). You just can't stick with 16 bits forever, MS-free or not. Face it. Matts

3 2

Re: RSAREF for Mac?
by timd＠consensus.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:26 PM 5/14/96, Jay Haines wrote: >It seems that I have seen this question asked before, but as I had no need for >the answer at that time, I trashed it. So, without further ado: > >Can anyone point in the direction of RSAREF for the Macintosh? Sorry for the delay. RSAREF for Mac is the same as any other RSAREF; RSAREF is distributed as fairly portable C source. For a recent project, I just added the sorce files to a Metrowerks project and built and it worked fine. It compiles without errors or warnings on all the Mac platforms I've tried thus far (it does generate "possible unintended assignment" warnings (for assignments inside of if statements) if you've got that turned on). If you're having problems, feel free to drop me a note. - Tim Tim Dierks -- timd(a)consensus.com -- www.consensus.com Head of Thing-u-ma-jig Engineering, Consensus Development

1 0

Re: Why does the state still stand:
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"jf_avon(a)citenet.net" 15-MAY-1996 19:11:14.65 >But here, I think that AP would be the single most important factor >ruling the socio-economical behavior of individuals or entities in >the world. It already works that way in many countries of the >world, especially in south america. In many places, you don't screw >around too much or you get killed. As a friend of mine who lived in >the jungle told me "if a guy fools around with you wife, you just >shut up and take it, but if a guy fools around with your girlfriend, >you have the sorcerer mix you a beverage... One of my friend had >one and he died within ten days..." However, this is depending on being able to target the people involved. Anonymnity kind of prevents that, if it's enough to avoid governmental intervention. -Allen

1 0

Re: (Fwd) New Anonymous Remailer
by attila 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Addressed to: dsmith(a)prairienet.org Cypherpunks <cypherpunks(a)toad.com> ** Reply to note from David E. Smith <dsmith(a)midwest.net> 05/15/96 11:33am -0600 Is this for real --with an intialial address of ARL.MIL So, does this mean we now have a fourth option for a NSA dummy remailer besides the three the scuttlebutt says they already operate? = ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- = From: privacy(a)interlink-bbs.com = Subject: New Anonymous Remailer = Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 06:34:02 GMT = To: info-pascal(a)ARL.MIL = = = = = You may be familiar with anon.penet.fi, which give you an = anonymous account. = = Our service allows YOU to choose what the return address will be! = = Please write for more info. -- "the slammer and the firing squad are just stones on the road to freedom." --attila

1 0

Re: crosspost re remailers
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"frantz(a)netcom.com" 15-MAY-1996 18:54:28.83 >I thought the statement that remailers are supposed to be ephemeral and >common was the answer. If one is shut down, a dozen spring up in its >place. Advertising new remailers does become an issue. What mechanisms >are in place for new remailers to advertise themselves? Emailing to Raph Levien (sp?) would seem to be the current way to do it, as well as announcements on cypherpunks. If we do get increased remailer turnover, Raph's increasing the frequency of such postings (possibly with moving the increased-frequency ones to a dedicated mailing list for the subject) would be advisable. >I find it interesting that this remailer is being shut down by private >action and not by government. (Yes, they are threatening government >action, but if they couldn't do that they would find some other threat.) It does look like governments really haven't noticed remailers much, at least publically. I'm sure the NSA, etcetera know about them, but I would guess they see no reason to give remailers publicity. -Allen

1 0

Re: Fingerprinting annoyance
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"unicorn(a)schloss.li" "Black Unicorn" 15-MAY-1996 00:00:25.51 >On Tue, 14 May 1996, Timothy C. May wrote: >> At 3:22 PM 5/14/96, Matthew Williams wrote: >> >Although knowingly providing a fake social security number when one >> >has any expectation of gain is, I believe, a felony. >> >42 USC. sec. 408. >Note the key provisons, for gain, and when submitted to those entitled to >the number legally. But is "entitled to the number legally" meaning anyone who _must_ have the number legally (IRS & other government agencies, those dealing with the IRS, etcetera), or anyone who can require it as a condition of doing business? There is a difference between the two, at least according to the Social Security Number FAQ that I last read. -Allen

2 1

Re: Fingerprinting annoyance
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"unicorn(a)schloss.li" "Black Unicorn" 15-MAY-1996 19:40:34.88 >It means essentially the IRS and banks. Even banks have little recourse. >They make you sign a piece of paper that says you gave them the right SSN, >but practically speaking no one cares. >Equifax (a credit reporting agency) refuses to take bank records as >evidence of SSN's because they KNOW the banks don't care or enforce and >that people lie to or make mistakes to the bank on a daily basis. Fascinating. I would think the IRS would care - that's how they know how to tax interest. They don't put any pressure on the banks to get the right one? I seem to recall showing the bank a driver's license or some such with a SSN on it the last time I opened an interest-bearing account. As I recall, government branches are authorized to get SSNs - if they show you the privacy act paperwork. If they forget, I would suppose that lying to them is perfectly permissible. What about if they do? -Allen

1 0

Re: Any DLL's that handle Public Key Encryption or Key Exchange?
by pgut001＠cs.auckland.ac.nz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tall men in dark suits made draven(a)infi.net (Greg Morgan) write: >I'm in the process of writing a freeware IRC client in Visual Basic 3 and >wanted to encorporate a secure variant of DCC chat. Trouble is I can't find a >precompiled library that has either RSA or DH in it. This doesn't do me much >good as I don't even own a Windows C compiler... (is that a crime in some >countries? :) ) The next release of my encryption library (currently available as ftp://garbo.uwasa.fi/pc/security/crypl110.zip) will contain a nice fast RSA implementation. It includes 16 and 32-bit DLL's. Actually the current version has support for it, but I took out the code because the key management routines weren't ready yet. There are two things worth noting, the first is that RSA itself isn't much use without a *lot* of key management code (which is what's holding up the RSA-enabled version). The second is that if you're in the US you're probably going to run into legal hassles using this code unless someone wants to do an alternative RSAREF implementation which you can plug in in place of the existing RSA code. Peter.

1 0

Re: (Fwd) New Anonymous Remailer
by David E. Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > Do we se a problem here? No? Then read on... > > > You may be familiar with anon.penet.fi, which give you an > > anonymous account. > > > Our service allows YOU to choose what the return address will be! > > > Please write for more info. > > Well, well, well. Let's see: > Yes, we are familiar with anon.penet.fi... And all of the better > options available. Heh... it gets better. I very foolishly sent off for more info; among their requirements: you pay $5 a month for the service; you can't receive mail, only send it (which anyone can spoof for free!); you can't send to anyone in the domain of *.whitehouse.gov. Would somebody please just mailbomb or spam these hosers into oblivion, please? dave ---- David Smith Box 324 Cape Girardeau MO USA 63702 http://www.prairienet.org/~dsmith dsmith(a)prairienet.org Reality is only for those lacking in true imagination... Send mail w/'send pgp-key' in subject for PGP public key

2 1

Re: The Crisis with Remailers
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:37 PM 5/15/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >A much richer ecology of remailers is sorely needed. A factor of at least >10 or 20 more (100-300 remailer sites), less reliance on specific sites, an >"everyone a remailer" capability (which has many elegant advantages!), more >traffic, temporarily instantiated sites, digital postage, greater ease of >use (especially with crypto and chaining), and such things as nominal >terminal remailers choosing to add their own hops (so as to lessen their >own target potential). Having some of these improvements will be a big >help. Perhaps what is needed is a non-profit, charitable 501c foundation to encourage anonymous communication. Those who support the idea could make tax deductible contributions which would be used for grants, public education etc. etc. to encourage anonymous communication. It could be called, "The Federalist Foundation" because the Federalist Papers were published anonymously. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

No Subject
by di40349＠goodnet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

#!/bin/csh setenv PATH /bin:/usr/bin set username=`id | sed -e 's/).*//' -e 's/.*(//'` set homedir=~$username set tmpfile=$homedir/.mailtmp.$$ cat > $tmpfile if ( { egrep -q '^Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com' \ $tmpfile } ) then rm -f $tmpfile exit 67 endif (rm -f $tmpfile; exec /bin/mail -d $username) < $tmpfile |"IFS=' '&&exec csh /documents/.forward #covacks"

1 0

Re: Java & signed applets
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:02 AM 5/16/96 -0700, Lyal Collins wrote: >Signing anything is somewaht a waste of time, unless the verification >siftware is highly trusted, and there is good intergity/authenticity >control of the root public key(s). >So, in geneal - ho hum - until trusted hardware is available on the >desktop. A bootable CD-ROM from a reliable source to verify signatures would be much safer than no signatures at all. Even just running the signature verification program from CD-ROM would make an attacker's problem more difficult. BTW - The problem is not trusted hardware. It is software that can isolate untrusted programs and protect itself. Anything with an A or B NCSC security rating would certainly be attractive. Trusted signature verification hardware accessed by a compromised system can't be trusted. (How do you know what was given to the hardware to be verified? How do you know that the answer came from the hardware?) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Re: Past one terabit/second on fiber
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

One problem with the development of such high-end technologies is that they tend to increase economies of scale to the point where it's impractical to have anything but a monopoly or ogliopoly. As well as concerns about the degree of control such an organization may be able to exert in and of itself (acting like a government, in essence), there's also that such an organization is easier to pressure than a lot of small providers. Anyone have a suggested solution, or reasons that I shouldn't be so worried? -Allen

1 0

Re: Edited Edupage, 9 May 1996
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:09 PM 5/15/96, Doug Hughes wrote: >environment, lack of education, lack of money, lots of factors. Nobody >is holding a gun to anybody's head saying "Don't Read". But improving >literacy is a goal that needs to be undertaken. Do you not agree that >low literacy is a bad thing and needs to be taken care of? If not, why >not? Naturally, you can't force someone to read who doesn't want to. No, I don't think "low literacy" in some subcultures is something that "needs to be taken care of." If members of that subculture think it a bad thing that their kids (not to mention themselves) are not readers and are not sufficiently literate to thrive in a high-tech world, then they need to take steps to change the basic values of their subculture. As I mentioned, many subcultures--too numerous to name, actually--have a strong belief in literacy, learning, and success, and are doing extremely well in modern American society. Other subcultures do not, and are seeing the fruits of their bad values realized. (One notable subculture currently has 40% of its adult male population either in prison, on parole, under indictment, or otherwise involved with the legal system in a debilitating way. This same subculture now has close to an 85% illegitimacy rate.) There is nothing "I" can do about such subcultures. Loads of tax dollars have not helped. As Charles Murray points out in "Losing Ground," the loads of tax dollars and special giveaways to some subcultures have very likely made the situation much worse than it was 30-40 years ago when the programs started. >Some people on this list argue that the current representative govt >system is bad, and that true democracy is better. You can't have true >democracy without education. (You can, but it would be very bad). >True democracy relies on people being educated, the more the better. >(Actually, education benefits the entire society.) "True democracy" is actually much worse than what we have now. The advantage of what we are doing with strong cryptography is that it undermines democracy. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

No Subject
by remailer＠2005.bart.nl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: tilman(a)berlin.snafu.de (Tilman Hausherr) > Newsgroups: alt.religion.scientology > Subject: fwd: Major Domo > Date: Wed, 15 May 1996 17:36:49 GMT > Organization: Xenu's Ranch > Lines: 28 > Approved: xenu(a)galactic.org > Message-ID: <319a0a59.33945517(a)news.snafu.de> > Reply-To: tilman(a)berlin.snafu.de > NNTP-Posting-Host: pppx179.berlin.snafu.de Does Lieberman believe that Major Domo is scamizdat ? 14 Q I see. So there's something called a 15 Cypherpunks list? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Who maintains that? 18 A Major Domo. [majordomo] 19 Q Major Domo is an individual? 20 A No, no. Major Domo is a bot. 21 Q A what? 22 A A bot. 23 Q What's a bot? 24 A A robot like. It's short for robot. 25 Q Uh-huh. And this robot is obviously maintained 26 by somebody, right? 0050 01 A Not very much. In fact, it's hardly ever 02 touched. 03 Q Where does it sit? 04 A I don't know at this point. It was a year ago, 05 which was about the last time I was reading the 06 Cypherpunks list, it was on Hoptoad. 07 Q How would one go about getting the Cypherpunks 08 list? 09 A Subscribe Cypherpunks.

2 1

Re: Why does the state still stand:
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"unicorn(a)schloss.li" "Black Unicorn" 15-MAY-1996 20:46:58.17 >So what, pray tell, is the IRS going to do? Impose a "we see no income" >fine and seize property? >They can audit, but audits are winable too. An offshore company simply >keeps dropping cash into the local business. That's not a crime. The >local business is losing money like crazy, but who is to say they are >defrauding per se? Bad business judgment is hardly tax fraud, and how do >you know (with a properly blinded ownership) that the assets that are >pouring into this company with all these expenses are taxible in the U.S. >in the first place? Well, the IRS could ask the very sensible question of where is all this property going to? It's not going to be on the lot of someone is renting it via ecash. You could claim it had been destroyed, although there are supposed to be tracking mechanisms for cars. For land, houses, etcetera, they're going to be suspicious when they find someone living in them. Now, they may not have enough to prosecute on - but they can keep an eye on the business' employees + the people driving those cars around or living on that property to try to catch them doing something illegal; sort of a reverse Al Capone. If enough people are doing this, this surveilance does become impractical. But the transitional period is important. -Allen

1 0

COMPLETELY ANONYMOUS POSTING & E-MAIL (fwd)
by William Knowles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Posted in one of the sex newsgroups... In article <4n02a7$ime(a)newsbf02.news.aol.com> shhhnet(a)aol.com (ShhhNet) writes: From: shhhnet(a)aol.com (ShhhNet) Subject: COMPLETELY ANONYMOUS POSTING & E-MAIL Date: 10 May 1996 14:35:51 -0400 COMPLETELY ANONYMOUS POSTING & E-MAIL Send and receive E-Mail and Post to newsgroups with TOTAL anonymity As you must know the government is getting ready to crack down on freedom of speech on the internet. Already people are being fined and imprisoned. Your service providers are being asked to turn over records and they are cooperating. Even if they don't want to cooperate the can be forced by the courts to release records to the authorities. Our New Service let's you send and receive E-Mail and post to newsgroups with no fear of your messages ever being traced to you. Not even a Federal Court Order will result in your identity being revealed. Finally total safety for your most confidential or controversial electronic messages. ShhhNET Will begin operating in late June and you can be a part of the only truly secure way to send and receive E-Mail or post to UseNet Newsgroups. For a limited time ShhhNet will be offered for only $50.00 per Year. If you are interested, Please send E-Mail to ShhhNet(a)AOL.Com We will respond with information about how our service works and how you can be totally secure in your Internet transactions.

2 1