December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

your site
by ilin748＠yahoo.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We'll Submit Your Site To Over 900 Search Engines, Directories, & Indices For A "One Time Cost" Of Only $ 39.95 *** 100% Money Back Guarantee *** *** Immediately Increase Your Sites Exposure *** For Less Than 4 Cents Each We Will Submit Your Web Site To Over 900 Of The Net's Hottest Search Engines, Directories & Indices. If your site isn't listed in the Search Engines, how can people find you to buy your products or services? For just $39.95 we'll take the work load off your back instead of you trying to do it manually which can take days to do. We're the professionals that are here to help you have a shot at having a successful marketing experience with the internet. You know as well as we that your time is best utilized managing your business and not sitting at some keyboard hours upon hours trying to save less than 4 cents for each submission. See how it's kind of crazy to try to tackle this on your own. It's just not cost effective to try to do this yourself to save just $39.95. See why thousands and thousands of businesses world wide both large and small have come to us to utilize our services. Hotels, Motels, On-Line Stores, Travel Agents, Colleges, Universities, Governments, Fortune 500 companies, Movie Studios, Chambers Of Commerce and many, many more. Shouldn't you give us a call now? To Learn More, Call Us At The Numbers Below. Call us toll free at (800) 771-2003 in the USA and Canada or outside the USA at (916) 771-4739 and we'll provide you with all the necessary information to get you submitted Right Away. To be removed from our mailing list, please respond with the word remove in the subject.

1 0

your web site
by hu8473＠yahoo.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We'll Submit Your Site To Over 900 Search Engines, Directories, & Indices For A "One Time Cost" Of Only $ 39.95 *** 100% Money Back Guarantee *** *** Immediately Increase Your Sites Exposure *** For Less Than 4 Cents Each We Will Submit Your Web Site To Over 900 Of The Net's Hottest Search Engines, Directories & Indices. If your site isn't listed in the Search Engines, how can people find you to buy your products or services? For just $39.95 we'll take the work load off your back instead of you trying to do it manually which can take days to do. We're the professionals that are here to help you have a shot at having a successful marketing experience with the internet. You know as well as we that your time is best utilized managing your business and not sitting at some keyboard hours upon hours trying to save less than 4 cents for each submission. See how it's kind of crazy to try to tackle this on your own. It's just not cost effective to try to do this yourself to save just $39.95. See why thousands and thousands of businesses world wide both large and small have come to us to utilize our services. Hotels, Motels, On-Line Stores, Travel Agents, Colleges, Universities, Governments, Fortune 500 companies, Movie Studios, Chambers Of Commerce and many, many more. Shouldn't you give us a call now? To Learn More, Call Us At The Numbers Below. Call us toll free at (800) 771-2003 in the USA and Canada or outside the USA at (916) 771-4739 and we'll provide you with all the necessary information to get you submitted Right Away. To be removed from our mailing list, please respond with the word remove in the subject.

1 0

about your site
by ji4481＠yahoo.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We'll Submit Your Site To Over 900 Search Engines, Directories, & Indices For A "One Time Cost" Of Only $ 39.95 *** 100% Money Back Guarantee *** *** Immediately Increase Your Sites Exposure *** For Less Than 4 Cents Each We Will Submit Your Web Site To Over 900 Of The Net's Hottest Search Engines, Directories & Indices. If your site isn't listed in the Search Engines, how can people find you to buy your products or services? For just $39.95 we'll take the work load off your back instead of you trying to do it manually which can take days to do. We're the professionals that are here to help you have a shot at having a successful marketing experience with the internet. You know as well as we that your time is best utilized managing your business and not sitting at some keyboard hours upon hours trying to save less than 4 cents for each submission. See how it's kind of crazy to try to tackle this on your own. It's just not cost effective to try to do this yourself to save just $39.95. See why thousands and thousands of businesses world wide both large and small have come to us to utilize our services. Hotels, Motels, On-Line Stores, Travel Agents, Colleges, Universities, Governments, Fortune 500 companies, Movie Studios, Chambers Of Commerce and many, many more. Shouldn't you give us a call now? To Learn More, Call Us At The Numbers Below. Call us toll free at (800) 771-2003 in the USA and Canada or outside the USA at (916) 771-4739 and we'll provide you with all the necessary information to get you submitted Right Away. To be removed from our mailing list, please respond with the word remove in the subject.

1 0

Attract Opposite SEX Like Never Before!
by brutal＠brutalsex.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

WELCOME TO THE BRUTAL SEX SITE ~~~Lesbian Orgy Gang Bang Video...Right Here!~~~ Check out the Huge Archive of XXX Hardcore Photos and View from an INCREDIBLE amount XXX Adult Films with SOUND!!! Do You Like LIVE 18-21 yr old girls? You can direct the action .. Explore all this and more 24 hours a day 7 days a week!!! CLICK HERE Go To http://www.BrutalSEX.com 18+ Only. Reply with remove in subject to be removed. mediaweb ann arbor mi 48103 (734)669-8570

1 0

AD:Family Reunion T Shirts & More
by print4ever＠micronet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Message sent by: Kuppler Graphics, 32 West Main Street, Maple Shade, New Jersey, 08052, 1-800-810-4330. This is a one time mailing. This list will NOT be sold. All addresses are automatically added to our remove list. Hello. My name is Bill from Kuppler Graphics. We do screenprinting on T Shirts, Sweatshirts, Jackets, Hats, Tote Bags and more! Do you or someone you know have a Family Reunion coming up? Kuppler Graphics would like to provide you with some great looking T Shirts for your Reunion. Kuppler Graphics can also provide you with custom T's and promotional items such as imprinted magnets, keychains, pens, mugs, hats, etc. for your business or any fundraising activity (church, school, business etc.) We are a family owned company with over 15 years of experience. All work is done at this location. No middle man. Our prices are great! Please click reply to email us to receive more info or call 1-800-810-4330 Thanks for your interest Bill Kuppler Graphics

1 0

ADV:Valentine's for the Very Special!
by sender04＠mail.usa.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

For Your Valentine!! Scrumptious, dried fruit and nut packs artistically arranged in a variety of designer boxes normally featured at Neiman Marcus, Saks Fifth Avenue, Harrods of London and other prestigious stores. Now available DIRECT from the source: Torn Ranch of California, quietly supplying exquisite fruit and nut packs for 40 years to prestige outlets. Send a Valentine gift that is a touch above the ordinary. Fancy and extra-fancy grade, moist fruits. Chocolate dipped Australian apricots in designer arrangements. Jumbo nuts and fresh-baked mini-biscotti. Make an endearing impression for $10 or $20. Check out our selections and place an order this week to surprise your Valentine! http://204.238.155.37/ca2/tornranch Reply with remove to be removed MediaWeb AnnArbor MI 7346698570

1 0

adv....ATTENTION : INVESTORS...HOT press release on developing mining company!
by goldpromo＠investormail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

NOTE: Your name was added to our list because you have shown an interest in smart investing. If your name was added erroneously or you no longer wish to be on our mailing list, simply send "remove" to the "from address". For further information regarding this investment opportunity: Phone: (604) 681-6186 The Board of Directors of El Misti Gold Limited is pleased to summarize current diamond drill results for its wholly owned Sinchao Project in northern Peru located some 450 km north of Lima and 30 km from the Yanacocha Mine, South America's largest gold producer. These results confirm the presence of a large copper-gold-zinc-silver system with potentially economic grades amenable to open pit mining. The deposit remains open laterally in all directions and there is potential for several hundred million tonnes of mineralization. The analytical results were provided by Intertek Testing Services (Bondar Clegg). The quality assurance for all aspects of the diamond drill program has been provided by Howe Chile Ltda., a subsidiary of ACA Howe Ltd. Drill holes SDH-10, SDH-5, SDH-6 and SDH-7 have delineated mineralization over a length of 640 metres and a width of 300 metres with an average thickness of 478 metres. Preliminary test work indicates a specific gravity of 2.6. These measurements indicate a potential for a mineralized zone of approximately 239 million tonnes at a grade of 1.45g/t gold equivalent (Cu equiv. 0.84%). This includes 163 million tonnes at a grade of 1.70 g/t gold equivalent (Cu equiv. 0.99%) which includes 111 million tonnes at a grade of 2.18 g/t gold equivalent (Cu equiv. 1.27 %). The mineralization is polymetallic whose value is derived approximately 38% from copper, 24% from gold, 23% from zinc and 15% silver. The accompanying map (not available in e-mail format, please check the Company's web site) shows the area of mineralization defined by the current diamond drill results. Additional results for drill hole SDH-10 and previously released results are set out in Table 1 and are summarized below. Gold and copper equivalent grades have been calculated for each of the significant mineralized intercepts on the basis of in-ground values using the following metal prices: US $287/oz gold, US $5.55/oz silver, US $0.72/lb copper, and US $0.52/lb zinc. Hole SDH 10: 490 (1,181 feet) metres of mineralized intercept at a gold equivalent grade of 1.61 g/t (Cu equiv. 0.94 %). Hole SDH-5: 495 (1,636 feet) metres of mineralized intercept at a gold equivalent grade of 1.59 g/t (Cu equiv. 0.92 %). Hole SDH-6: 602 (1,850 feet) metres of mineralized intercept at a gold equivalent grade of 1.22 g/t (Cu equiv. 0.71 %). Hole SDH-7: 592 (1,810 feet) metres of mineralized intercept at a gold equivalent grade of 1.36 g/t (Cu equiv. 0.79 %). At Sinchao, to date, the Company has undertaken geological mapping, geochemical sampling and ground geophysics followed by drilling. During 1997, twelve RC holes (1,768 metres) were drilled and during 1998, seven RC holes (1,174.5 metres) and ten diamond drill holes (5,176.25 metres) were drilled. The Board is highly encouraged with the mineralization and potential of the Sinchao project and has retained well known and highly respected independent geologist Lindsay R. Bottomer, P. Geo to review all Sinchao project data and help the Board formulate the appropriate next steps for 1999. NOTE: We strive to comply with all laws and to send information to interested parties only. This message is not intended for, nor was it intentionaly sent to Washington state residents. Mistigold has paid a fee of $500.00 for advertising on 2-14-1999 For further information regarding this investment opportunity: Phone: (604) 681-6186

1 0

Re: DNS queries
by jose 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanx 4 da help, but it isnt the answer to ma question. I tray to know, ..... All the pc's on Internet use a server (Remote o local ; named ,etc ) that resolve the queries 4 non ip's domains, like www.microsoft.com 4 example 200.37.129.2 ---- use 207.17.220.2 to resolve the queries (of the domains ) in internet. I like to know if there be a program that say me Remotly that 200.37.129.2 use 207.17.220.2 to resolve the domain ( 4 da Internet ) queries. Best wishes Jose A. Freyre Security Admin - UNI - Networks

1 0

Problems of anonymous posts
by nobody＠soda.berkeley.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- (This is from Hal; I still can't post from Portal.) After going to enormous efforts to create a network of anonymous remailers, we are hoist by our own petard, as our list receives strange, irrelevant, and argumentative posts through our own anonymous remailers. (Not all anonymous posts are like this, but there have been quite a few in the last few weeks which fall into these categories.) This should challenge us to reconsider the value of anonymity and remailers. Are we working only to make the net safe for the immature and incoherent? I would say not, but these posts should remind us of how incomplete is the infrastructure needed for successful use of anonymity. A brief recap of the benefits of anonymous mail: presently, on the net, all mail is tagged with the sender and destination. This means that not only the recipient, but any net snoopers and sysops at systems through which the mail passes, may be able to know that person A is sending mail to person B. This kind of information can be used to build up dossiers of who talks to whom. Worse, as we move into an era of electronic commerce, more and more of our lives may begin to take place on the net. We may shop, find entertainment, do business, even work for a living across the network. This will open up even more opportunities for collecting data about how we live our lives. In my opinion, the best way to preserve our privacy is to make it impossible to collect this data. Anonymous remailers, and their cousins, IP bouncers (which perform an analogous function for telnet-type connections), can prevent the collection of this kind of information by hiding exactly who is communicating with whom. These services can serve as the basis for the other privacy-protecting technologies we've been discussing, such as digital cash. There's not much point in using digital cash to prevent tieing customers to vendors if monitoring the net will provide that information anyway. This isn't just a futuristic concern, either. Already today the government is taking steps which could, under some not-so-far-fetched extrapolations, get people on the list in trouble. Many people on this list have communicated with Phil Zimmermann, for example. What if email logs were used to track all those people down, and they became suspects in this criminal investigation that the government seems to be pursuing? It's not even impossible that the government could someday try to paint the cypherpunks themselves as a subversive organization. Think how much more difficult any such diabolical attack would be if people subscribed to the list via remailers, under digital pseudonyms. These days, with the shaky legal status of cryptography, we of all people should be able to see the benefits of anonymous communication. The problem is, then, how to gain the benefits of anonymity, while avoiding the abuses. One solution which we have long discussed is reputations and pseudonyms; another is making people pay to use remailers. The way reputations work is that people would digitally sign their anonymous postings. This way someone could post anonymously and build up a reputation by means of a series of postings signed under the same name. As time went on, they would no more want to damage the reputation of their pseudonym than they would want to damage their reputation under non-anonymous posting. To make this work, people need to be able to easily filter their mail on the basis of the pseudonym it came from, rather than the (irrelevant) anonymous remailer which sent it. Then they can choose to accept and read mail from anonymous posters who have built up a good reputation while ignoring that from those who have ruined their good (pseudo) name. Karl Barrus has done some experiments along these lines. He described some time back a system he had for working with the elm mail reader, one of the most common Unix-based mail agents. The software will display the true originator of PGP-signed posts (anonymous or not). This allows readers to apply the same standards to signed anonymous mail as to regular mail. It raises anonymous posters to the same level, and holds them to the same standards, as other posters. This software could allow anonymous posters to build up their reputations, encouraging more responsibility on their part. The other solution, pay-for-use remailers, has also been pioneered by Karl. His idea is to make the remailer a little harder to use by forcing the user to include some digital postage (based, I think, on what Tim May called "poor man's postage stamps"). This could help reduce the volume of anonymous mail and make it less likely that joke or trivial messages would be posted. (We could even consider applying Karl's approach to the list as a whole; people would have to apply ahead of time for posting tokens in order to post. This might force people to take a little more care and time in their postings.) I don't think Karl's efforts have been sufficiently appreciated here. He is quietly working to create the tools needed to allow anonymity to be a useful and important part of the net architecture rather than the annoying sideshow that it sometimes seems to be becoming. We need to support Karl, work to bring his innovations into other remailers and other mail agents, if we want to gain the benefits from what we have done so far. Hal Finney hfinney(a)shell.portal.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLMFf3qgTA69YIUw3AQEp9QP/UyEvuQgM6GKiKdkZtHJw4/NhMwQDihrs 2D8weSeUQpKHPpxEnXiDEG6qswI0B4auq+hK3EDYIzccA6c6/+0Xa7SzESsujtjs VDRY7BNphAQ8ix6vd4Ti2vuk8sWa7IHasuAF+UytJrUXPaMbJgH1u/84M9HstA4t kNQ3venrgh4= =CFWw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

5 4

Re: ANON: mail concerns
by nobody＠alumni.cco.caltech.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >:: >Request-Encryption-To: X > >If user ID X is on the remailer's pubkey ring, the outgoing message is >encrypted to X. This could be usefull for anonymous return-address blocks. Encryption should be the default. Err on the side of caution. Eternal!Optimist(a)anon.penet.fi (copyright 1993, Eternal Optimist [Ha Ha Ha]) 0) 0) =:()]-< <na26436(a)anon.penet.fi> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3 iQCVAgUBLNgXzIjvfLxJbYYtAQEK4AP9HrSaMSOnlsxzEjgLbAgvsCSw3vMxLJ4u 856ZbKI2cZTNLoPzyWLNW68gZ7kcNeaF7MHKzWbI9tLEDePpWN34sB11wBlpfzcf WzcYVLI6JBLVERq2seyKU3cqAhWuxldSDeAlsKkMsrzI0tGgOaLkxCxhxn9weZf8 58mZeANd3sg= =8F9u -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Article V - an analysis
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ARTICLE V. [Constitution: how amended; proviso.] The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as Part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legislatures of three fourths of the several States, or by Conventions of the three fourths thereof, as the one or the other Mode of Ratification may be proposed by the Congress; Provided that no Amendment which shall be made prior to the Year One thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any Manner affect the first and fourth Clauses in the Ninth Section of the first Article; and that no State, without its Consent, shall be deprived of it's equal Suffrage in the Senate. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Congress can propose amendments if 2/3 of both houses agree Or when Congress is directed by 2/3 of the state legislatures a convention can be called for *proposing* amendments Irrespective of which of the above two processes causes an amendment to be considered a part of the Constitution when 3/4 of the state legislatures vote for it, or by the constitutional conventions called in 3/4 of the state agree on it. The decision of which method to use may be *proposed* by Congress. It's after 1808 and we're not considering state representation in the Senate so I'll skip the last two phrases. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The only sticky wicket I see is the ...proposed by Congress. Does this mean that Congress can decide which of the two it will recognize? Or does it mean that Congress can merely express its desire? Or does this apply only to the bills that were developed in the Congress? There's no time line for Congress to decide, could this be used to hinder such a process? Note that it's important to recognize that we're talking about 3/4n conventions and not a single convention attended by 3/4n representatives of the states. The tense of the sentence leaves no doubt. ____________________________________________________________________ Technology cannot make us other than what we are. James P. Hogan The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

3 2

Changing to Moderated Cypherpunks -- How?
by James F. Marshall 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Too much noise in the unedited list. How does one change to the moderated list? - -- James F. Marshall, Esq., Pasadena, California Subject "JFM Public Key" for PGP Public Key - -- OS/2 is to Windows as Stradivarius is to Yamaha -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNNf8UjbjGennrhqZAQETXgP/WFshRowrhi7qMnUZHUIADA7cCV0fEYFA WiAlynovwU9dyvc/gygz9N6aeJO/ghqiQl2/NqCSsKn5H1nTr1MHbK2iYJwt6AXh ZhMSfz5p1QzVWwm9lIFETipPayuJ+WzCkaakMZP3PPZXG8XUT/48NZG5hJgjfIM7 vqzMkCcHr+A= =2N5t -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

6 5

Re: Fwd: Big Brother Sees through walls (from the spyking list)
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: sunder <sunder(a)brainlink.com> > > 1)From: "George Martin" <gmartin(a)kic.or.jp> > Subject: News Release: High-Tech Surveillance > > Here's a sampling of how state and federal agencies are using this > terrifying technology to spy on Americans: > > * In North Carolina, county governments use high-resolution spy satellite > photographs to search for property improvements that might increase > property tax assessments. Was this cost authorized by taxpayers? > * On the Mexican border, police use a "gamma ray scanner" to check > tanker trucks for contraband, scanning right through the vehicle's metal > sides. Good!!! CM excerpt: # Those rumor-level stories about our government encouraging # drugs to reach the inner cities were weird. # # Remember, we've been having a Drug War for four decades now. # # I guess there is a certain logic to it. Obviously the government is into # hysteria on the matter: it is then possible that they would want to continue # having a drug problem so they could continue the hysteria. # # Even the Attorney General was drooling over drug forfeiture dollars, to the # point of shunting aside other cases. # # # Recently... # # : CBS 60 Minutes, Steve Croft reporting. # : # : Remember that story of the hero customs agent snagging a tanker truck full # : of cocaine? There is a strange twist to the story. # : # : The Federal agent's manager repeatedly tried to interfere with him making # : the bust. # : # : The agent's dog had flagged the truck; the agent weighed it and found a # : discrepancy. His manager said it must be in the tires. You can only check # : the tires for drugs he was told. # : # : But the agent persisted, and made the bust. His manager let the driver # : of the truck leave. The driver literally fled on foot back to Mexico. # # What the hell was that about??? # # Was it a single corrupt Federal agent? # # : CBS 60 Minutes, Steve Croft reporting. # : # : Standing at a fence about a hundred feet from the U.S. Customs lanes, # : Steve Croft and an ex-agent with a walkie-talkie tuned to the right # : frequency began videotaping the border crossings. # : # : Truck after truck drove right through the individual Customs lanes, # : not even stopping. "Nafta express lanes" explained the ex-agent. # : # : Truck after truck drove straight into the U.S. unmonitored. # : # : Then a message came through the walkie-talkie: "We got some cameras # : watching, better get out there and cover traffic". # : # : Suddenly several Customs agents came out of the booths and started # : inspecting trucks. # # That makes at least five people at a minimum! # # What the hell is going on??? # # # IF the rumor is true, THIS looks like it would be the smoking gun. # # How did our country get so twisted around that they can invade our # bodies to drug test, yet allow truck after truck after truck to # just wander right in knowing HUGE drug shipment after HUGE drug # shipment is crossing? Gosh, there's no drug problem with Mexican # police, military and even their president. # # * The New York Times, February 19 1997 # * # * Brig. General Jesus Gutierrez Rebollo, Mexico's top Military Drug War # * point man, was arrested on charges of receiving payoffs from Jaurez # * cartel kingpin Amado Carrillo Fuentes, Defense Minister Enrique Cervantes # * announced. # * # * U.S. Drug Czar Gen. Barry McCaffrey had weeks earlier called General # * Gutierrez "a guy of absolute unquestioned integrity." # # # And what if some terrorists wanted to sneak in an atom bomb? # # Put a NAFTA sticker on it and drive right on in, y'all. Welcome to the USA. # # If you want to really be certain, hide the A-bomb in a truck full of cocaine. # # If a terrorist nuclear bomb ever goes off in this country, # it drove in from Mexico. # # Meanwhile, Los Alamos National Laboratories developed technology that # allows an officer walking or driving down the street, as shown on MSNBC TV # 6/9/97 www.TheSite.com, to determine whether anyone on the sidewalk is # carrying a gun. # # The priorities are all out of whack. # # Apply Military technology towards securing the border, not by spending # billions and billions and billions each year to secure each and every # one of us. # # We don't put governing-monitors on all car engines to control speeding. # Get an Operations Research clue. # # # Is our government perpetuating the availability of drugs? # # The 60 Minutes report sure makes it look like it is. # # How could letting unchecked Mexican truck after unchecked Mexican truck # through not be? # # ! FBI Director Louis J. Freeh, Senate Judiciary Committee, June 4, 1997 # ! # ! NEW CORRIDORS HAVE OPENED TO CONTINUE THE FLOOD OF DRUGS INTO AMERICA. # # No shit, Sherlock! Ya don't nafta say another word. # # Every single truck can be checked using Military technology. # # But no, massive monitoring of people suspected of no crime is the # appropriate response. # # They were just warming us up for the CALEA telephone monitoring bill. # # ---- # # Here is part of the story on why we let trucks full of cocaine and # heroin just roll right into the United States. # # * "Diminished U.S. Role Below Border Plays Into Traffickers' Hands" # * # * By Molly Moore and John Ward Anderson # * Washington Post Foreign Service # * Sunday, September 8 1996; Page A01 # * The Washington Post # * # * Due to their new 'Mexicanization policy': # * Mexico became the main gateway into the United States for illegal # * narcotics, with the amount of cocaine making the journey climbing to # * an estimated 210 tons last year. # * # * Mexico's drug arrests plunged nearly 65 percent, from 27,369 the year # * before the policy changes to 9,728 last year, according to data that # * the Mexican government supplied to the State Department. # * # * Cocaine seizures in Mexico were cut in half, dropping from more than # * 50 tons in 1993 to slightly more than 24 tons in each of the last two # * years -- the smallest amounts since 1988, Mexican government figures # * show. # * # * The GAO report charges that Mexico's greatest problem is, in # * fact, the "widespread, endemic corruption" throughout its law # * enforcement agencies. Earlier this month, in an indictment of his own # * department, Attorney General Lozano fired 737 members of his federal # * police force -- 17 percent of his entire corps -- saying they did not # * have "the ethical profile" required for the job. In a recent meeting # * with foreign reporters, Lozano said it could take 15 years to clean up # * the force. # * # * In November 1993, President Clinton signed Presidential Decision Directive # * No. 14, shifting U.S. anti-drug efforts away from intercepting cocaine as # * it passed through Mexico and the Caribbean, and, instead, attacking the # * drug supply at its sources in Colombia, Bolivia and Peru. # # The President himself ordered them to stop checking!!! This is in the same # leadership vein as Reagan declaring himself a "Contra". # # And why did President Clinton change strategy? [snip] > * The Naval Surface Warfare Center has developed an "ion sniffer," > a metal box that analyzes the chemical makeup of the air -- and can detect, > for example, traces of cocaine through the skin days after drug use. Bad. > * In Georgia, the state's Department of Revenue will start using > NASA satellites to examine the state's 58,910 square miles for illegal > timber cutting. Good. > * In New Jersey, California, and other states, police use thermal > imaging devices to scan houses for unusual heat sources that could indicate > indoor marijuana growing operations. Houses can be scanned while police sit > in their cruisers on the street. Bad. CM excerpt: # Here is a more detailed example of how government expands surveillance # (and thus control) in a seemingly never-ending manner...consider this when # talking about a National ID Card: # # Is it okay for the government to look at your property while walking by and # if the officer spots marijuana plants growing to get a search warrant? # # Of course it is. # # * "The Right To Privacy", ISBN 0-679-74434-7, 1997 # * By Attorneys Ellen Alderman and Caroline Kennedy # * # * ...then the Supreme Court ruled that if the yard was big enough that "An # * individual may not legitimately demand privacy for activities conducted # * out of doors in fields," the Court wrote, "except in the area immediately # * surrounding the home." # * # * ...then the Supreme Court ruled that a barn sixty yards from a farmhouse # * was too far away from a house to expect privacy. # * # * ...then the Supreme Court ruled that aerial surveillance did not constitute # * a Fourth Amendment search. # * # * ...then the Supreme Court ruled that a "precision aerial mapping camera" # * that was able to capture objects as small as one-half inch in diameter did # * not constitute a Fourth Amendment search. # # ...then courts ruled that infrared surveillance of homes was permissible. # # # What is this? # # * Subject: Re: Law Enforcement Aviation # * From: aufsj(a)imap2.asu.edu # * Date: 1996/12/27 # * Newsgroups: rec.aviation.military # * # * What interests me is how new technologies will be interpreted. I recently # * inquired at the local Law School about the courts views towards the use # * of impulse radar, and they said "Impulse what the heck?" # * # * Basically it is a radar that "sees through" things (like, say, your # * house). # * # * Their capabilities vary widely, but the feds are already using # * them and I know that Hughes corp. is designing a low-cost set up # * specifically for major police departments. # * # * They are driving towards a unit that can be mounted on a police helicopter. # * # * Will the police need a warrant? Who knows. Since they are allowed # * to do airborne infra-red analysis of your house, why not an take an # * airborne "x-ray" equivalent? # * # * --------------------------------------------------------------------- # * Steven J Forsberg at aufsj(a)imap2.asu.edu Wizard 87-01 > * And in Arizona, the state's Department of Water Resources uses > spy satellite photographs to monitor 750,000 acres of state farmland, and > compares the images to a database to discover which farmers don't have > irrigation permits. Good, I guess. > Even worse: The federal government will spend another $4.5 million > this year to develop even more intrusive surveillance equipment. Bad. > Currently under development by the Justice Department: A "super > x-ray" -- combining traditional x-ray technology, ultra-sound imaging, > and computer-aided metal detectors -- to reveal items hidden under clothes > from up to 60 feet away. Bad. > The courts are currently wrestling with the implications of the new > technology, debating the limits of the government's power to "search" > individuals from a distance with high-tech gadgets. Several contradictory > court decisions have already emerged, for example, about whether > thermal-imaging searches are Constitutional. > > Meanwhile, Republican and Democratic politicians continue to look > for new uses of the technology -- with some government officials already > talking about using satellite surveillance to track items as small as > backyard porches to check for zoning violations and construction permits. Smart cards are transponders. Never forget that. > "In the name of fighting crime, politicians seem eager to obliterate the > protections against unreasonable search, with equipment that Americans used > to only read about in Tom Clancy technothrillers," said Dasbach. "It's time > for the American public to wake up and realize that Big Brother is here > today -- and he's got a gamma ray scanner in his hand." No amount of control over the population is enough for the U.S. Government. ---guy

3 2

I was auto-outed by an IMG tag in HTML spam
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just had my on-line pseudonym outed to my company's VP of marketing, with potentially serious internecine political consequences. It didn't even take an AOL customer service rep to do the dirty deed. Here's how it happened. I have an account unconnected with work, for personal mail, on a machine run by a friend in my wife's department at the local college. From this account, I speak my mind about my political views, my employer's spamming of their rather loosely defined lists of "customers", etc. I don't do that from my work account because I don't want any confusion about whether I am speaking for the company or not. Evidently my mention of my displeasure with my company's spamming hit a nerve with marketing. They sent a message to my off-site address (along with those of other critics about whom they wanted to know more). It was an HTML message with an embedded IMG tag. Last night about midnight, I downloaded my off-site mail with Netscape. (I was still at work because our team is debugging some killer database problems.) When Netscape saw that IMG tag, it happily connected to marketing's "customer" tracking server, and downloaded the keyed graphic. My boss just let me see the log he got from the marketing VP, showing clearly that my workstation read the message. The log was attached to a strident call for my head from the VP. Luckily, my boss agrees with my attitude, as do all of my co-workers on the engineering side of the house, and thinks I was in the right to use an off-site account. But the political fallout could be interesting. Beware "live" message content. If you don't, you may end up having to get your company's entire marketing force fired to protect yourself. Use mail readers that don't automatically process HTML and connect to image servers, accept cookies, or run javascripts. You are being watched by tricky defective, er, detective types. es.

5 6

What's up in SASEBO, or Don't Tug The Beard
by David Honig 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From: "George Martin" <gmartin(a)usonet.ne.jp> >To: "honig(a)otc.net" <honig(a)otc.net> >Date: Sat, 04 Apr 98 22:25:07 +0900 >Reply-To: "George D. Martin" <gmartin(a)usonet.ne.jp> >Priority: Normal >X-Mailer: PMMail 1.95a For OS/2 >Subject: > >>4)From: David Honig <honig(a)otc.net> >>Subject: Illegal export of pgp.zip by .mil > >>http://braggbbs.bragg.army.mil/libs/utils.htm >>has a link to ftp://bbs.bragg.army.mil/library/utils/pgp262.zip > >>Someone (from Europe, ideally) should clue these people >>in. Maybe cc the media. > >Maybe you should've checked out the url to see if it was >valid before you shot your mouth off in public... The file >was removed quite a few months ago and was never download >by anyone outside of the .mil domain. Take your >troublemaking somewhere else. I of course informed him that he was mininformed or uninformed. honig(a)alum.mit.edu ------------------ "Are we going after their tax returns? I can only hope that we are, frankly, doing a little persecuting" ---Nixon to Erlichman, on tax audits of wealthy Jewish contributors to the Democrats. -LA Times 1.4.98

2 1

Finally... a One-Time-Pad implementation that works!!!
by Geoffrey C. Grabow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- TriStrata has announced that is has a product that provides OTP without the pad distribution problem. The product also has a unique key-recovery system. Check out: http://www.tristrata.com for details. **************************************************************************** ************* PGP 5.5.3 Fingerprint: 15B3 DDC1 93BB 4BDF 4DFD 1B27 12A1 E0C4 **************************************************************************** ************* -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.5.3i for non-commercial use <http://www.pgpi.com> iQEVAwUBNZVo5dc2wHb8nZI1AQFqngf/bCJVbMQX/5sYb181CLONmqWjPzhQ66Ef HoyPqxRzEyq4FSWnIuQODH/YTeyyQROUqCZGhC19v8PCiZpI1ynSvn4i+Zcjv9I0 OZBThzKayNoMne7TkNr49Ah9BwDK6XuwS9bns1xM65zfKLpvKP2gboWkADD52K4w eUuJx/cTaR7PgdO/q6nrVRNq1jlaJsFBKGt2q5E1S12ZK1nA+mpKAS95XMgr2IMx 5/wJ+jsOIUTn2gWR64nhluOgmcACeIVsiRlsGqfUdL8gJHAl0gaQ7E1+HSOBx60K Ur5x5MzQKBKlWcoDaEXB1AsICW2enwdGVOxPBklq1CbcQxFXdBj1DQ== =vZmi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3

Re: FBI calls for mandatory key escrow; Denning on export ctrls
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The on-line NYT's claim today that everyone except the administration is opposed to its crypto policy is daring hyperbole. What's your take on that? http://jya.com/crypto-tops.htm

6 5

New GAK Bill
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

5 September 1997, MSNBC: FBI Director Louis Freeh floats a new proposal at a congressional hearing to outlaw non-breakable crypto products. A radical shift in crypto debate Proposed bill outlaws non-crackable crypto products, restrict imports By Brock N. Meeks, MSNBC WASHINGTON -- The White House would likely be very sympathetic to a controversial new bill that would outlaw all encryption software that doesn't allow law enforcement agencies to immediately decode scrambled messages, an administration official told MSNBC. The new bill, still in draft form, is quietly circulating among members of the House and Senate. Although the administration hasn't formally endorsed any provisions of the bill, MSNBC has learned that the White House has been providing what is called technical drafting assistance to members of Congress writing the bill. William Reinsch, the Commerce Department undersecretary for export administration, confirmed the White House involvement for MSNBC on Thursday night. The draft bill was already in the hands of some members of the Senate's Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government Regulation when FBI Director Louis Freeh outlined its basic provisions while testifying before the panel Wednesday. Freeh said "we would recommend" that legislation be written requiring all encryption software or services made in or imported to the United States to have a feature "which would allow for the immediate, lawful decryption" of any scrambled messages used for illegal purposes or in a national security matter. NATION AT RISK? The White House, FBI and intelligence agencies claim that the proliferation of unbreakable encryption products puts the nation at risk. Criminals and terrorists are increasingly using unbreakable encryption products, Freeh testified Wednesday. U.S. makers of encryption software claim that any government-mandated decoding features would make their products unacceptable to clients in the global marketplace. The new proposals outlined by Freeh also drew the ire of civil liberties groups, which fear that any government controls on encryption products raise serious First Amendment and privacy concerns. Placing such government-mandated controls on the domestic use and manufacture of encryption software, as well as on the import of encryption products, stands in marked contrast to current White House crypto policies. Currently, the United States places strict regulations on the export of any encryption products that do make decoding keys available to law enforcement agencies. However, the administration has steadfastly maintained throughout the often contentious public debate over encryption policies that it would not place any restrictions on the domestic use of encryption software, nor would it restrict the import of encryption products. Despite Freeh's testimony and the draft legislation written with White House assistance, Reinsch said the administration's policy on encryption hasn't changed. "I want to emphasize that [in providing drafting assistance] we are responding to committee requests," he said. "And those requests have been fairly directive, such as: 'Give us some examples of how we can better accommodate law enforcement needs.' " Currently, the White House is backing an encryption bill in the Senate called the Secure Public Networks Act, also known as S. 909. This bill would encourage the use of and set up guidelines for encryption software products with decoding keys. Under this plan, all coded messages would spin off a decoding key that would be stored with a government-approved third party. Law enforcement agencies, foreign or domestic, would be allowed access to those keys if they obtained a court-ordered warrant. The bill would not restrict or require any encryption software used in the United States, or restrict the import of any foreign crypto products. However, MSNBC has learned that the draft bill now circulating among members of the House and Senate specifically outlaws the "manufacture, distribution or import" of any encryption software product or communication device that does not "allow the immediate decryption" of all scrambled messages or communications "if used for illegal purposes." The bill also targets "network services," such as Internet Service Providers, that provide encryption capabilities to their clients. BAN WOULD GO INTO EFFECT IN 1999 Under this proposed bill, if such encryption services are offered by a company like ISP, the service provider must build in a provision to allow for immediate decryption of any scrambled messages, according to several sources that have seen the draft language. The software ban would go into effect in January 1999. Reinsch told MSNBC he wasn't sure that Freeh's testimony "accurately reflected" the language the White House offered in its technica drafting for congressional committees. However, he indicated the administration was interested in Freeh's proposal. "I'll be blunt about it," Reinsch said. If such a bill were approved by a congressional committee, the administration "would look very seriously at it and I imagine we would be very sympathetic to it," he said. Opponents of proposals to require key for all encryption software blanched at Freeh's statements. "This proposal crosses a line that hasn't been crossed before in the area of domestic controls on crypto," said Alan Davidson, policy analyst for the Center for Democracy and Technology. Davidson said a government mandate to provide immediate decryption capabilities would be like "forcing everyone to live in a glass house." It also "trashes the Fourth Amendment," which guarantees a right to be protected from unlawful search and seizure, Davidson said. Freeh told the Senate panel Wednesday that he isn't looking to expand law enforcement's investigative powers. Rather, he said, he is only looking for a "Fourth Amendment that works in the Information Age." ------

4 5

Re: House National Security committee guts SAFE, worse than no b
by Lizard 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:00 PM 9/9/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Michael, you once again fail to note the important political issues here. >Sometimes civil liberties, freedom, and constitutional rights must be >ignored in favor of pragmatism. It is important at all costs to remain a >player in the game. > No, it isn't. You end up being more concerned with being in the game than with achieving your goals. Sometimes, you have to kick the board over. I think it is more important to make the laws unenforceable (and make such workarounds useful to the average netizen), than it is to try to keep the government from passing laws. The work of people like Jim Ray and Phillip Baker is crucial here. The government is unlikely to pass laws to limit its own authority, on any issue -- even those who might not want to use a particular power would still want to keep it around 'just in case'. We cannot count on government to protect our freedoms. Therefore, we must make it irrelevant to the exercise of those freedoms. >Instead of opposing bad crypto legislation, we should instead work inside >the process, to gain a seat at the table. That is why it is highly >significant that both Commerce and FBI want to rid us of our freedom but >would do it in subtly different ways. Not really, know. It's unlikely that a "Let's you and him fight" strategy would prove effective, since this isn't just an interdepartmental turf squabble. They will strip our freedoms first, and argue over who gets the thumbscrews second.

2 1

Please Remove
by contest 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please remove setzer(a)wl.net from this mailing list

2 1

No Subject
by MIS Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dan, You have a .forward file here at mis that points to toad.com. Do you have a .forward there? I received several compalints from people who are getting your mail at cosmos(a)microserve.net. -Jeremy ~---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Abuse & Security Department MicroServe Information Systems, Inc. security(a)admin.microserve.net 100 North Wilkes-Barre Boulevard abuse(a)admin.microserve.net Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania 18702 http://www.naISPa.org (717)821-5964 FAX (717)821-5968 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

2 3

Please send me some info
by Chiu Ngan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am a student of the University of New South Wales in Australia, as I am going to do a research about my informayion system assignment, I am mailing to request for some information. My assignment is regarding to the current examples of "use of computers to commit fraud; use of computer to commit sabotage; false advertising/ claims for computer products; degradation of work as a result of computerisation; failures in computerising the workplace" ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

2 1

Re: democracy?! (Re: Terrorism is a NON-THREAT
by mark＠unicorn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate wrote: >If we as individuals can't make our own decisions about what is best for us, >what makes you think some stranger will do any better? Indeed. Yet in a democracy, any two other members are assumed to know better than me, and any 51% to know better than the other 49%. >Every form of government other than democracy assumes a >priori that noble oblige is prima facia. To paraphrase an old questions of >politics, who governs the governors? Or do you feel we have found angels in >the form of kings? Democracy is merely the scoundrel's last attempt to maintain the divine right of kings by coverting it into the divine right of the elected. >Which means we should have the lowest number of incarcerated individuals >instead of the most. Indeed, thereby proving that democracy *doesn't* work. >Doesn't work what way? Midnight raids, anti-drug laws, all the examples you just gave of the evils of democracy, etc, etc. >Consider, other than democracy, that every form of >government has an implicit assumption that there is some base sets of >activities that citizens should be permitted and they will be happy. Someone (Churchill?) once said that democracy is the best form of goverment. Amusingly he considered this a defence of democracy, not a damning indictment of the entire concept of government. >In a >democracy the people are given the opportunity to make up their mind what to >do with their lives and property without having to obtain permission from >some authority. Medical licensing, drivers licenses, pilots licenses, export restrictions, gun licenses (in various democracies), concealed weapons permits... do I have to go on? This doesn't seem to bear any resemblance to the reality of democracy. >Paying a government to keep the park clean and mowed and the lights on at >night or my streets well paved and de-iced in winter And a government does this better than a private corporation because? >is not quite the same >thing as having black-suited ninja wann-be's kicking my door in at 2AM >because I choose to smoke a joint or even grow my own weed; Again, this is a clear example of the failure of democracy. A big difference between democracy and anarcho-capitalism[1] is that in an anarcho-capitalist society the cops will be too busy making money to launch such raids on their customers, and most customers will be too self-interested to pay cops to raid their neighbors. >There is a reason behind the madness of "Congress shall make no law...". Indeed; such a shame they put all those other words into the Constitution. That phrase sounds like a pretty good conception of government to me. Mark [1] See, for example, 'The Machinery of Freedom', by David Friedman: excerpts on the Web at http://www.best.com/~ddfr/

4 3

None Gary Burnore, Paul Pomes, and the DataBasix Gang (was: Re: Remailer hating Nazis)
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

nobody(a)REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) wrote: > >I'm familiar with the role of Gary Burnore <gburnore(a)netcom.com> and that > >of his DataBasix associates Belinda Bryan <eridani(a)ix.netcom.com> and Billy > >McClatchie (aka "Wotan") <wmcclatc(a)primenet.com> in getting the Mailmasher > >and Huge Cajones remailers shut down. Jeff Burchell posted a public > >expose' of their harassment to Usenet back in June, apparently catching the > >DataBasix folks off-guard. But what's the story with Paul Pomes? What has > >he done? > > Paul Pomes was complaining about Jeff Burchell's huge cajones remailer to Jeff > Burchell's upstream and employers about the same time the rest of the Databasix > gang was doing it. Paul Pomes appears to be a part of the Databasix gang. It's sort of ironic that these anti-privacy, anti-anonymity Nazi wannabes complain about remailers which give their users privacy, then somehow expect that their own complaints will be kept hidden. I rather syspect that Gary Burnore, Belinda Bryan, and Paul Pomes were rather shocked when Jeff Burchell decided to tell the whole story (unfortunately AFTER shutting down the Huge Cajones remailer). Maybe the next time Gary, Linda, or Paul send a remailer operator a complaint, the operator will know what to expect next. I'm wondering if that's at least part of what's behind the faux spam-baiting that's underway, with messages to varios MMF, MLM, and alt.sex.* NGs whose title and body consist of randomly- chosen words, followed by a list of bogus e-mail addresses in the body. The thing that's not so random is the high percentage of words that are related to DataBasix, such as "DataBasix", "Burnore", and "Wotan". I'm almost waiting for Gary Burnore to give the remailer and mail2news operators a "helpful" suggestion that they could curb most of this "abuse" by simply blocking any anonymous posts containing any of those three keywords. <g> Or perhaps he's done so and politely been turned down. Perhaps the next wave of attacks on remailers will not consist of attempts to shut them down altogether but to progressively cripple them by getting certain features disabled, one by one. This seems to have already started. The strategy seems to be to fabricate a form of "abuse", anonymously through remailers, for which the seemingly "logical" solution is to disable a certain feature. This has already proven successful with header pasting, for example. Now you can't post to Usenet and set the From: address to that of your own 'nym. I'm not even certain that you can set a Reply-To: address any more. If the "camel" can get his nose under the tent and convince operators to start filtering on the *CONTENT* of the Subject: line or body of usenet posts, the anti-privacy nuts will have scored a major victory. In fact, from reading Jeff Burchell's posts, it looks like Gary and his DataBasux-ers had initially convinced Jeff to do exactly that. But, in a symbolic victory for freedom of speech, he removed those filters for a week before he finally shut down Huge Cajones altogether. > >Perhaps the best thing that can be done with people like Burnore is to put > >together an FAQ about their tactics, similar to what his "fans" have done > >for the "Rev." Steve Winter. Then when Burnore tries to stir up trouble by > >first fabricating anonymous "abuse" and then demanding that it either be > >stopped and the culprit(s) identified (knowing in advance that's > >impossible), or else that the remailer be shut down, someone can forward > >that FAQ to the remailer's upstream provider, or whoever is being pressured > >to pull the plug. And if Paul Pomes engages in the same dishonest tactics, > >that needs to be done with him as well. > > Gary Burnore had a mongo page at http://www.netscum.net/burnorg0.html. > So did Paul Pomes, Belinda Bryan, and the rest of the Databasix gang. > Too bad it's down for now, but it'll be back. It's already back, for the time being. The new URL is: http://www.spambusters.dyn.ml.org/www.netscum.net/burnorg0.htm I'll go look for Paul Pomes' page at that site. Thanks for the tip! Let's see how long that site stays in operation before the self-styled "Thought Police" attempt to shut it down. -- Without censorship, things can get terribly confused in the public mind. -- General William Westmoreland

2 1

Re: cryptx spam - des-based program.
by Ian Grigg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bill Stewart said: > I got spammed by someone selling Cryptx, a DES-based encryption program. Sheez, not only spam, but perverting our good name! Cryptix is good strong stuff, they are simply hoping to confuse customers by dropping a vowel. -- iang systemics.com FP: 1189 4417 F202 5DBD 5DF3 4FCD 3685 FDDE on pgp.com

4 5