December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Lotus Notes
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:13 PM 1/30/96 -0500, Futplex wrote: >Bill Frantz writes: >> One other small advantage I can see to using Lotus's crippled encryption. >> It disguises the fact that a message is actually (double) encrypted with >> PGP. Attackers have to break the 40 bits before they see the PGP encrypted >> data. > >I don't understand. Are you saying that there's a special benefit to doing >superencryption (GAK encryption over non-GAK encryption) when the GAK layer >is Lotus Notes ? Tim May had it exactly right in his post entitled "Silver Linings and Monkey Wrenches" (thanks Tim). The only thing I can add is that forcing them to attack a 40 bit key is better than giving them the whole key thru some LEAF scheme ala Clipper. As long as you can cut and paste, PGP (at least the Mac version) is hard to lock out and minimally usable. Bill

2 1

Re: [NOISY] Your own Zundelsite in five minutes or less
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 23:07 1/30/96, Rich Graves wrote: [...] >> We won't have won until they restore the routes to Webcom. > >Here I have trouble with the word "we," and what we're trying to >accomplish. > >Censorship has clearly lost. Germany is simply not going to block >stanford.edu, cmu.edu, mit.edu, upenn.edu, aol.com, and so on, not to >mention AFS. But they succeeded in blocking Webcom. Until the block is removed, we haven't won. Do 'we' agree that the block should be removed? >I do not believe that the battle to get people to read and care about >Zundel himself is ours. Amen. I just wished that the people who's names mark some of the milestones in the fights for our rights (i.e, Miranda, as in Miranda Rights) were people whose causes I can support. Having seen concentration camps, I can not possibly sympathize with Mr. Zündel's views. But he still has a right to free speech. If he loses it, we lose it. It all comes down to this: First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me. by Rev. Martin Niemoller, 1945. [...] >I do not want to allow the Nazis to associate themselves with "us." >Please see article <DM0Fsn.5GC(a)freenet.carleton.ca> for a little on what >they're trying to claim credit for. Note they are calling for mirror >sites nearly three days after they popped up, with no involvement on >their part whatsoever. I can imagine what they wrote. "The world is supporting our cause...." No, I do not support their cause. I despise their cause. And I still support their rights. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

3 2

Re: Java Sniffer (Was: Re: FV Announces That The Sky Is Falling)
by lyalc＠ozemail.com.au 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Much more likely, IMHO, than a Java sniffer is a Java Trojan horse that pops >up an innocuous dialog box and asks you to enter some sensitive piece of >information, then sends it off somewhere. About all it takes to write that is >a modicum of skill in user interface design. You could write it in any >programming language, but in Java it may be particularly effective, since >people may come to expect to be prompted for sensitive info over the net by >Java apps. Maybe the Java folks who just left Sun decided to seize the >opportunity ;> > >Futplex <futplex(a)pseudonym.com> > A very realistic scenario - any comments or reasons it can't happen ?? second question: How can you be sure you receive the applet that you "think" you've requested ? Any illuminating comments to assit my awareness of java ? lyal

2 1

Re: [FACTS] Germany, or "Oh no not again"
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A message claiming to be from > SANDY SANDFORT allegedly wrote: >> Isn't there something in U.S. Code about crossing state lines >> for immoral purposes? >No relevance here. Originally enacted to combat the "white >slavery" trade, it was probably used more to prosecute unmarried >lovers for sexual activity outside of marriage. I don't even >know if it's still on the books, but as I said, no relevance in >the current debate. There's a lot of US law about transporting various materials across state lines or using interstate carrier services or in ways that _might_ affect interstate commerce. Politically incorrect language or imagery (obscenity for adults; indecency for children), politically incorrect vegetable products, politically correct but economically incorrect vegetable and animal products, geographically incorrect humans, mathematically correct but politically incorrect image-manipulation bitstreams all are affected. While the German censorship is evil, immoral, and impractical, I have to agree with Dr. Vulis that many American laws are similarly wrong, and the Germans are at least trying, in their inadequate and immoral way, to fight genuine evils that are far worse than the stuff the US government is attempting to censor. BTW, today's "Recorder" (Bay Area legal newspaper) reports that the US 6th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Thomases' conviction. 96 C.D.O.S 609. ABTW, they didn't need those laws to fight "white slavery"; kidnapping and rape were already illegal, but any opportunity to make a law.... #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

2 1

Re: [Fwd: Netscape, CAs, and Verisign]
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:55 PM 1/29/96 -0500, Peter Williams wrote, in response to Alex: >>I'd like to see a less centralized CA that's tied into the existing system >>of notaries. The idea is to make it necessary to spoof a notary in order >>to spoof the CA. That won't make spoofing the CA impossible (nothing >>will), but it will make spoofing the CA illegal. ... >I dont understand how you intend to make CA spoofing illegal. Who >who perform the enforcement? (By illegal, I assume you mean that >there is a criminal offence involved, rather than a tort.) Is providing false documents to a notary criminal fraud, or only civil? >>Fees for the whole procedure ought to be less than $30. The CA ought to >>operate off of the fees from the agents as a non-profit organization, and >>the agents ought to keep the fees paid by the people requesting the >>certificates. >Notary fees might be best controlled by the notary, not the CA. >Seems an unreasonable restriction of trade to price-fix, even at the low-end. Notary fees can be agreed contractually between the notary and the CA; if they want to do a list price / street price system, or a non-profit, or a dog-eat-capitalist-running-dog competitive system, the market can let you pick your favorites. >There is indeed a large body of legal ramifications in this >area. The best way to learn about it is to become a CA and do it. Risk >taking is part of being in the CA business, however you operate it, >even for free. >>Morevover, although I don't think it's reasonable to expect Netscape to >>agree to include a non-existent CA in their browsers sight unseen, at the >>same time it doesn't seem smart to sink money into setting up the CA >>without some indication from Netscape that they're willing to give the >>idea good faith consideration. >Navigator betas seem to already facilitate users configuring their own >trust points in a manner rather similar to adding a key to your >personal PGP keyring. Letting the user decide whom to trust certainly seems like the best approach, and makes it possible to build a Web of Trust on top of Netscape rather than being stuck with hierarchical certifications. Meanwhile, if Netscape wants to sell the top two slots in their CA list to the highest-bidding advertiser like they do with searchers, they still can. #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

1 0

Re: CONTEST: Name That Program!
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:45 AM 1/30/96 -0500, Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb(a)nsb.fv.com> wrote: > In fact, I'd settle for getting onto 10% of the machines, although I > suspect I could get onto more like 80% without raising a sweat. You've alleged that Macs and Unixen should be about as easy as Windows machines to crack with your CardShark. I disagree - most Mac users I know have been using virus protectors more consistently and reliably than DOS/Windows users. However, if their virus software only stops known viruses, rather than anything modifying critical resources, you might get away with it for long enough to surf some numbers. Unix is a much tougher case - while there have been a couple of viruses, they don't spread very well, even when everyone uses the same binary formats. B2 helps, of course; B1 configured reasonably should also work. ... >Case closed. Your argument would hold a lot more weight if you could >convince me that the average Internet consumer was going to rebuild his >UNIX kernel every few weeks. I suspect a machine that gets rebuilt every week may be _more_ at risk :-) #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

2 1

[flippant reply] Re: [rant] A thought on filters and the V-Chip
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:26 AM 1/29/96 -0500, you wrote: >The cypherpunks relevance of all this is that it should soon be possible to >create completely mediated environments for ourselves and our children. >Through the use of implants and real-time VR processing, it will be possible >to edit our "interface" with the Real World such that unpleasant aspects are >edited out. We will be able to change the attire, hair, facial expressions, >voice, and even smell of those around us to conform to our own esthetic >desires. Likewise with our physical surroundings. Safety may discourage >making a complete transformation in one's surroundings, but one can >certainly soften the edges. Meanwhile, rose-colored glasses are available, or scratched-up hard contact lenses if that's the reality you'd prefer .... Bill, who spends an hour or two wearing headphones on the train several days a week.... #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

1 0

Re: your bogus post
by Robert A. Rosenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:08 1/30/96, watson(a)tds.com wrote: >On Tue, 30 Jan 1996, Paul Graham wrote: > >>... >> A company capable of doing such irresponsible things is not one >> that we would trust with users' money. >> ... > >Some of you must have missed the superbowl ads where people and frogs >were getting frozen to beverage cans, and movie actors moved the grand >canyon with a horse. I think that there is a MAJOR difference between the two types of Marketing. The Superbowl adds are not designed with the intent to imply that what is being shown is Reality (how many viewers would think that what was being shown was a REAL [as opposed to symbolic] effect of the product?) while the FV is intended to play on the technical ignorance of the reader/audience and give a false [or at least slanted] view of reality.

1 0

EFF Compromises, as described in "Wired"
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If Eric Hughes can break his silence to comment on the FV "discovery" of keystroke-capture programs (funny, I've had a couple on my Mac for years, for error recovery), then I guess I can break my silence about "Wired" articles. This afternoon I sat in a bookstore and skimmed the article on what happened at the EFF, about the Digital Telephony compromise that was approved by the EFF board (our own John Gilmore was reported to have been the sole negative vote), and about how the EFF was effectively "chased out of town" as a result of trying to be a political entity. I can't comment on this outlook, as I am nowhere near the inner circles of the EFF. But it underscores a belief I have: that if you play _their_ game, they have already won, and you just don't know it. What's the alternative? Get them to play _your_ (_our_) game, and maybe they won't win. I'm still a member of the EFF, but the more I read about their problems, including a $200,000 debt, the more convinced I am that the Cypherpunks model is a better place to devote one's efforts and hopes to. We're still going strong after almost three and a half years, with no debt (no assets except ourselves, of course) and no "relocations" from Boston to Washington to San Francisco. So, maybe we're doing OK. --Tim Boycott espionage-enabled 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, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: more RANTING about NSA-friendly cpunks
by Bruce Baugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:41 PM 1/29/96 -0800, "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri(a)netcom.com> wrote: >when you choose to be in fear of it, the bureacrats win. On the contrary. Fear is a right and proper response to irrational demands made by people with lots more force and public support than me. Fear becomes bad only in our response to it. If I get scared into inaction, _then_ the bureaucrats win. If I take the fear as motivation to improve my own security and reduce my dependence on the whims of others, then the bureaucrats lose. It is fear of the risks I run in an unsecured state that motivates me to work on my own privacy, and to pass the info I learn on to others. But fear, in this case, is merely the acknowledgement of the vast potential for harm. Denying it is just foolish. >sheep on the planet, all the way up to the head sheep TCM, who writes >long explanations of why the police state is inevitable and nothing >we can do will stop it, You must be reading an alternate universe's version of Cypherpunks - check to make sure that your quantum stabilizers are in order. In _my_ universe, Tim May is a prominent advocate for freedom and self-government, who has written well on why the collapse of the police state (and all states) is inevitable, and what we can do in the meantime. Side note to list owner: perhaps we need a majordomo hack to check this cross-universe traffic problem. It seems to be becoming increasingly common. Bruce Baugh bruceab(a)teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~bruceab

1 0

The FV Problem = A Press Problem
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This morning I read with bemusement (and amusement) the announcement of FV's discovery of keystroke capture programs. Bemusement because we discussed these in a Cypherpunks physical meeting a couple of years ago (and on the list, too). Many of us even have them installed deliberately, for error recovery. Amusement because it looked like much ado about nothing. Then I went out for the day--contrary to popular belief, I do occasionally leave my Internet connection and venture outside--and happened to read the local newspaper. There, in a major new story by Simson Garfinkel, was the FV story plastered all over the newspaper. FUD, indeed. But, it occurred to me, this is just part of the larger syndrom. Simson's article was practically written from the FV press release. While he interviewed some "security experts," clearly the timing of his article (this morning) and the announcement by Nathaniel of his discovery (this morning) suggests the cozy relationship involved. The larger syndrome is that software deals, alliances, mergers, and problems are all based on hype. Nathaniel Borenstein issues press releases, Sameer Parekh issues press releases, and maybe even I would issue press releases if only I knew how to. Every day the business news is dominated by stories of alliances and partnerships between Microsoft, MCI, Intel, Apple, Sun, Verifone, DirectTV, Newscorp, Sprint, AT&T, BT&T, CT&T, and all the rest. And a lot of it is hype, posturing. Much of the supposed future will never emerge (anyone remember Satellite Business Systems?) Journalists seem to love this, because the press releases write the stories. Companies like it, too, because they can get free newspaper space. Everyone is scratching each other's back. And those wacky Cypherpunks, with their t-shirts and their strange ideas, are always good for a quick quote, too. --Tim May Boycott espionage-enabled 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, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

Handy WWW anonymizer proxy *and* translator!
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Not only does it prevent the nasties from logging where you're coming from, but it also translates to Canadian on the fly, eh? -rich ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 1996 00:32:36 -0500 From: John R. Covert <covert(a)covert.enet.dec.com> Newgroups: alt.revisionism, alt.politics.white-power, alt.internet.media-coverage, alt.censorship, comp.org.eff.talk, soc.culture.german Subject: Re: Simon Wiesenthal Center Did Not Attempt to Censor Internet In article <declanmDLzvJ8.8MK(a)netcom.com>, declanm(a)netcom.com (D B McCullagh) wrote: >If the German government forces Deutsche Telekom to block access to web >servers at Carnegie Mellon University, MIT, and Stanford University, it >will be slicing off communications with three of the most respected >universities in the United States. It will be interesting to see if they do. At first, I refused to believe that they would do it to WebCom. I just thought I'd mention another technique for dealing with this problem. It doesn't require dedicating disk space to specific sites; instead, it relays through to any site you specify. For an example, see "The Great Web Canadianizer" at http://www.io.org/~themaxx/canada/can.html To thwart censorship of specific sites, people who have a bit of bandwidth to spare could set up cgi scripts like this one (without the text modification the Canadianizer does -- that's its hack). (Zundel's stuff is no less offensive after the Canadianizer adds a bunch of "eh?"s and "hosers" and changes all the "-ing"s to "-in'".) /john

2 1

Re: PGP Shell Integrity
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:13 PM 1/29/96 -0800, you wrote: >Firstly, if this is viewed as "Noise" rather than "Signal", please accept my apologies. Looks like a real technical discussion instead of a flame - obviously the wrong list :-) >The matter at hand concerns my concern over my inability to check the > "integrity" of a PGP windoze shell written by Michael R. Lyman at Aegis Research Corp. > >I worry that since the shell has access to my secret ring that it might > be sending it somewhere without my knowledge. I don't know that package, but most of them act as wrappers around DOS PGP rather than filtering keystrokes or doing PGP internals. There are several risks - getting your secret ring, getting your passphrase, getting the RSA parameters without the passphrase itself. Obviously, having your secret key ring file leak is not good, but the fun parts _are_ IDEA-encrypted using your passphrases, so it's not too much of a risk. Having the passphrase or the raw keys stolen would obviously be worse. DOS/Windows is _not_ a secure operating system, if you believe that there's more than one person in the universe. (DOS doesn't believe that, so in some sense it's perfectly secure. :-) Nathaniel Borenstein's recent postings are a good reminder that keystrokes can be stolen, easily, in that environment. >The freeware was, according > to Mr.Lyman, developed "Project Manager, Forward Air Missile Defense, > United States Army Missile Command". That gvt. affiliation gives me > considerable pause as regards back doors and other ways my secret ring > and pass phrase could be compromised. > >Does anyone have any familiarity with this freeware? I do not think > I am being paranoid.. just careful. Lastly, if I am not a programmer, > what sort of inspection can I perform on the software to make sure it is not "bugged"? Without source code, if you're not a programmer, the things to look for are circumstantial evidence - is the copy of the program you got off the server PGP-signed by the purported author? Or by any programmers you trust? That doesn't tell you the program is trustable, but it does tell you if it's a fake replacing the real thing. Is the real thing trustable? (Well, probably...) There's also the problem of leaking your key back to the Bad Guys, but that's easy - the program could leak it out in your PGP messages (either obviously, as a second recipient, or in subtle nasty ways like playing with the system clock on timestamps.) #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

1 0

Sad state of affairs
by bofur＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It's a pretty sad statement of how poorly this list is functioning when the RC2 source can be publically released but people would rather sling mud over glorified keystroke trappers and rant about Nazi deathcamps. Our friends at the NSA must be pleased with the slow death of this group. Sadly, Bofur. -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bofur bofur(a)alpha.c2.org PGP available from PGP key servers Key fingerprint = 81 0C 8F 88 0A 4F 67 3F ED 52 DE 3C 55 34 26 25

4 4

Re: Opinion piece in NYT; responses needed
by andreas＠horten.artcom.de 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> "Rich" == Rich Graves <llurch(a)networking.stanford.edu> writes: Rich> Is DT going to block TCP port 80 and UDP ports 7000-7029 Rich> from every machine in the world? We'll see. I told the Admin of dfn.de nicely that his routing seems to be broken. If he responds with pointing to the Zuendel site, I'll send him the other URLs and ask him to stop routing to these sites as well. Andreas P.S.: I need some fodder. Anyone else mirroring the site? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.4, an Emacs/PGP interface iQCVAgUBMQ3XXUyjTSyISdw9AQEvgQP+MyHBlF7JmcIBHEceFCxECnyMbuPHBnPa MvoHGdLZwIxWmEpa8YwTHb06mQ5J3oO2AiWNWLgw480krWGV10R8bhMIOBP51Htz 7Odl6S1S1NLtxE/yyzkSH4D4AukFT4BrMviPWVDGnArGwS8XioTyyxhYC4JKyjfu ahrCdu9nha8= =SWyn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: The Politics of Mistrust
by Robert A. Rosenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 13:31 1/28/96, John Young wrote: > > While not directly related to technical crypto, a number > of findings parallel discussions here about the diminution > of personal and economic security. Samples: My personal reason for mistrusting the Government is that it uses Coercive Power to steal money from me (via "taxes" such as FICA) claiming that I am buying Benefits for myself such as SS and Medicare yet it does not meet the obligation to supply these services under the promised terms when I need/want them. If SS and Medicare were run by a private company and operated the way the Government changes the rules, all of Top Management would be in Prison for Fraud (and a number of other charges). Any Benefits program that the Government uses its coercive power to force me to join and pay for should be REQUIRED to maintain the terms in place when the payments were collected (ie: There should be no unilateral alteration of the terms by the Government). The ONLY program that I can think of where this has even partly occurred is with IRAs (all payments prior to year X are treated under the original tax rules while payments into an IRA after that date have a new tax status). All other programs are subject to rules modification (ie: reductions of promised/paid-for Benefits) or Congress defunding at a moments notice.

1 0

Re: [rant] A thought on filters and the V-Chip
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:38 PM 1/26/96 -0800, Rich Graves wrote: >On Fri, 26 Jan 1996, jim bell wrote: >> On the other hand, this would be an EXCELLENT "argument" to bring in front >> of a Congressional committee considering the adoption of any V-chip type >> proposal. Once they discover that a ratings system could be used for the >> diametrically opposite reasons of their reason for having it in the first >> place, they'll try to modify their proposal to prevent this. >> >> If we're lucky, this'll have the effect of killing the whole concept of >> government-sponsored (required?) V-chip-type technology. >> >> OTOH, I agree with other posters who think that truly voluntary content >> selection would be an excellent addition to television: In effect, an >> automatic, programmable TV-Guide search engine. > >While it's hard to find a general theme here, I think I disagree. What? You mean you LIKE to read TV guide every week, cover to cover, in advance, to scedule your TV viewing habits? >Anyway, >I don't think that even truly voluntary content selection is a good idea, >because it reduces art to numbers, which is wrong. Aw, admit it. You're just still pissed 'cause I called you a f------ statist. <G>> Me, I'd like to be able to tell my "TV-Guide search engine" to: 1. Look for this particular show or movie. 2. Look for this particular star, director, or other participant.. 3. Follow a subject thread, say on the news. 4. etc. Maybe even a more complex (artificially intelligent) agent that "knows" me well enough to anticipate my desires. > lead to a balkanization that diminishes the common >culture. I think it was good the way network TV was limited to the lowest >common denominator, but with variety. People who wanted something with a >little more flavor than WonderBread [tm] were able to find it, but they >did have to look, which often involved *meeting other people* with common >interests, and they still tuned in to Ed Sullivan to see what the Joneses >were watching. Give people 1024 bits' worth of channels to choose from, >classified by arbitrary criteria involving no human contact, and you get >something entirely different. I'm not sure what's happening now, but I >don't think I like it. You're entitled to NOT like it. But I'm equally entitled to use modern technology to sift through 60+ cable channels, or 300+ DSS-type channels.

1 0

Re: Over-reacting?
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:38 PM 1/28/96 -0800, jim bell wrote: >At 05:42 PM 1/28/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >>We already have enough traffic here, and don't need replies from a bunch of >>other lists, be they libertarian lists, digital commerce lists, human >>rights lists, or java lists. >> >>The latest example of this is the rantfest invvolving these players: > >I really don't know why I'm being "killed" by May in this way. He cites a >rant by a local (Portland, Oregon) crackpot named "Jack Hammer." I even >took the time to apologize for his existence, while I do claim a certain >lack of responsibility: Basically, I'm being targeted because Hammer can't >stand my essay. (Whether May will even see my apology is in doubt, I >suppose...) While May certainly has the right to "killfile" whomever he >wishes, it might be a bit more logical to do this in a graduated fashion, >"killing" Hammer and then waiting to see if the rest of us follow in his >habits. The reason for the killfiling is your habit of adding multiple additional mailing list into the To: and cc: list. I have seen more than one post where you have added a Libritarian list and the "Democracy Now Channel 2' list into the fray, not to mention other individuals. THAT is why you are getting the golden killfile, not your association with Jack "Acid" Hammer. (Though that may help...) The only individual I have killfiled (so far) is Dr. Fred. (At least on mailing lists. Usenet is another matter...) Alan Olsen -- alano(a)teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction `finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ Is the operating system half NT or half full?

1 0

NOISE: Borenstein's Fatal Spam (Was: Plonk, Dr. Fred)
by P.J. Ponder 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

please don't try to make sensible replies to this type of tar-baby garbage. What's the point in arguing with someone who only wants you to argue with them and make sure you spell their name right? First Virtual, you lost a lot of ground with me. (sounds like others feel the same way, too). ... that sucking sound is your reputation capital being snarfed off your keyboard and encrypted by tempest-bots lurking just under your tinfoil helmet. I'd be worried. The corrupted keyboard buffer of "W. Kinney" <kinney(a)bogart.Colorado.EDU> wrote: . . . > Followed by an hysterical essay on how FV has "discovered" the keyboard > sniffer. Oh, please. You people should be ashamed of yourselves. To which FV's own replied: I trust you've seen by now that we made no claim to have discovered keyboard sniffers. Please read our claims more carefully, and I'd be delighted to discuss them rationally. -- Nathaniel ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ delighted to discuss them at all, I would bet. Anyone interested in a discussion of whether or not keyboard sniffers work? a pox on your virtual house for a bad spam, poorly aimed at this list, in particular. NEVER TYPE CYPHERPUNKS(a)TOAD.COM IN THE TO: LINE

2 1

AOL privacy (not)
by Edgar Swank 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

AOL RECORDS USED TO SOLVE MURDER CASE Fairfax County, Va. police recently obtained a search warrant for electronic files relating to participants in an American Online chat room in an effort to solve a murder in New Jersey. The victim had met his alleged assailant through a "men for men" chat room, and investigators say several other chat room participants helped in disposing of the body. One of them, a 24-year-old woman, is now charged with tampering with the evidence. An AOL spokeswoman said that it is the company's policy to comply with subpoenas, and that although it does not keep records from chat rooms, it does keep records of e-mail for five days before they are purged. "We certainly respect and abide by our customers' right to privacy, but we are also going to follow the law. We have 4.5 million customers -- that's the size of a city. When we have some problems, we have to deal with it responsibly." (St. Petersburg Times 28 Jan 96) *************************************************************** EDUPAGE is what you've just finished reading. (Please note that it's "Edupage" and not "EduPage.") To subscribe to Edupage: send a message to: listproc(a)educom.unc.edu and in the body of the message type: subscribe edupage Emmitt Smith (assuming that your name is Emmitt Smith; if it's not, substitute your own name). ... To cancel, send a message to: listproc(a)educom.unc.edu and in the body of the message type: unsubscribe edupage. (Subscription problems? Send mail to educom(a)educom.unc.edu.) -- edgar(a)Garg.Campbell.CA.US (Edgar Swank) The Land of Garg BBS -- +1 408 378-5108

1 0

PGP commercial usage
by Dave Roberts 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have read and reread the documentation that is included with the PGP distribution (although my copy is over a year old now), and am still trying to work out if commercial use of 2.6ui is allowed outside the USA. Could someone elaborate for me, or perhaps point me to some up to date reference documentation. TIA - Dave. Dave Roberts | "Surfing the Internet" is a sad term for sad people. Unix Systems Admin | Get a board, find a beach, surf some REAL waves and SAA Consultants Ltd | get a *real* life. Plymouth, U.K. | -=[For PGP Key, send mail with subject of "get pgp"]=-

2 1

PoM 3: Angry Females
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Today's third article of The Washington Post series on "The Politics of Mistrust" is: "Angry Female Voters a Growing Force." Remember angry white males? Well, hear now from the women. They are more likely than men to have become anxious about the economy and distrustful of govermnent. But what separates men from women in this worried segment of the electorate is that they seem less concerned with their own plight than they are with the economic prospects for their children and their neighbors, including the poor. Next: The anti-government electorate. Series to date available at: http://www.replay.com/young/

1 0

x-app/pgp-encrypted
by gorkab＠sanchez.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know of a web server that uses PGP instead of SSL or STT or whatever is the new acronym of the week for secure web transactions? A server would have its public key available for anyone get. All transactions that need encrypting would be encrypted to the server by using the public key. PGP 3.0's API would make this even easier (or so I've heard). The reverse could also be implemented. By using some identifying characteristic of the user (maybe a user defined name) and the corresponding PGP key, data could be transmitted securely to the user. ---------- Brian Gorka Key fingerprint = ED 7D 78 7E 95 E8 05 01 27 01 A1 74 FA 4B 86 53

1 0

Re: KOH "Helpful" Crypto Virus
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 21:29 1/30/96, Laszlo Vecsey wrote: >> While you are at it, you might also want to pick up their famous collection >> CD-ROM full of virus code, live viruses, virus creation engines, etc. From >> their catalog: "For starters, you get a fantastic virus collection >> consisting of 574 families [...] about 3700 carefully tested and cataloged >> viruses in all...$99 + $5 S&H. >> > >I take it its completely legal to set up a Virus ftp site then? AFIK, in the US it is legal to set up a virus ftp site. I don't know if someone has actually done it. Don't count on it lasting. Some European countries have already outlawed virus (read knowledge) distribution. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

Re: CONTEST: Name That Program! -- ESCROW
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ESCROW - Easily Stolen Creditcard Recorder Or Whatever Easily Stolen Creditcard Recording {Obnoxious, Obsequious, Obscure, Obfuscator } Widget (one objective is to find a way to insult the "Key Escrow" people, of course. And besides, this _is_ escrow - you're giving your credit card number to your trusted computer to hold on to and deliver to someone else.) BCCI - Basic Credit Card Interceptor CIA - Card Intercepting Agent NSA - Nathaniel's Security Attack, Network Stealing {Agent, Accessory}, Not Secure Anough Bill Stewart, 2555 W. Middlefield Rd #882, Mountain View CA 94043 T-Shirt Size: XXL Cash Size: Small Unmarked Bills or anonymous digital cash? #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

1 0