December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Quantum teleportation and communication
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May writes: > Imagine a pair of photons sent in opposite directions. With different > polarizations, but "tangled." Observer A measures a polarization of "1." > > He then knows that Observer B will measure "0." > > All that is revealed is a _correlation_, a kind of structure built into the > Universe. Interesting, but not so weird as it seems. (And this is not any > kind of "action at one site instantaneously changing the state far away." > No more so than sending two envelopes out, one with a "1" inside and the > other with a "0" inside changes things instantaneously.....) > > No signal sending is possible because neither observer can "change" the > polarization of a photon. Tim May knows no more about quantum mechanics than he does about cryptography. He is wrong about the nature of the correlation between the two photons. Bell's theorem shows that if local realism (a technical concept which is hard to deny) holds, then when Observer A changes the way he performs his measurements, what Observer B sees does change. It is completely mistaken to think of the "two envelope" analogy as applying to quantum correlations. There is something much stranger going on here. Don't trust what Tim May writes. He is not only a hypocrite (complaining about chemistry discussions while adding to an equally off-topic physics thread), but a fool as well.

2 1

Re: hackers and minick
by SteffenHo＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a message dated 98-01-29 15:44:07 EST, kes21(a)chat.ru writes: << Hello there!!! I send this letter because i want to know anything about hackers Kevin Mitnick please send more information about these topics my E-mail kes21(a)chat.ru >> www.mitnick.com or www.kevinmitnick.com

1 0

Re: Interesting Chemical Reaction (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 17:36:28 -0500 > From: ghio(a)temp0200.myriad.ml.org (Matthew Ghio) > Subject: Re: Interesting Chemical Reaction > Here's something to ponder: > > Consider two objects initially at the same temperature. One is at the > focus of a hemispherical mirror. An elliptical mirror with both objects > at its foci encloses the remaining space. > > Because of the spherical mirror, the first object reabsorbs most of its > heat lost by radiation, but most of the second object's radiated heat is > reflected upon the first. Hence the first object becomes warmer relative > to the second. > > The entropy here appears to decrease, but according to thermodynamics that > is impossible. Can anyone explain how it is that the total entropy would > not decrease? > Because the thermodynamics assume a *closed* model. The base assumption of your model is that it is closed. This means that not only the mirror, and the two focii are in the system, but also the light source. When taken as a whole the entropy is constant. Now if you allow the light to pass through the mirror from outside an initial axiomatic assumption, a closed system, is broken. This is the reason that thermodynamic arguments against evolution fail, the Earth is most certainly *not* a closed system. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

Re: EPR, Bell, and FTL Bandwidth (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: Eric Cordian <emc(a)wire.insync.net> > Subject: Re: EPR, Bell, and FTL Bandwidth (fwd) > Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 15:53:28 -0600 (CST) > >> Someday in the future, I open my cookie, and instantly know what > >> Lucky will see when he opens his. > > > True, but your opening your cookie does not *force* Lucky to open his > > at the same time. This is one fault with this model. The 'state' of > > the cookies are not inter-dependant as the polarization of the photon > > pairs are. > > While it is true that my examining my cookie does not force Lucky to > examine his, the same can be said of a photon experiment, where the > photons can remain in flight for an arbitrary period of time before > being measured. Um, actualy no. Since the photons are coupled we know that the second photon has actualy changed it's polarization, either that or your original assumption they are coupled is not true. The polarization between the two photons *must* be zero. Otherwise you arent' playing with our physics. > The state of the cookies is highly correlated, since they have > opposite values. The polarization of the photon pairs is similarly > correlated, as they have equal values. Correlation is not a function of any quantity conservation operation. The values of the photons are actualy opposite and therefore sum to zero. Foo is not the inverse of Bar, as is the case for horizontal and vertical polarization. > > It isn't instantanous, the correlation existed when they were printed > > and doesn't change. > > And indeed in the photon case, the entanglement exists when two > photons with correlated wavefunctions are created. True, but the swap of polarization was *not*. That occured later and is what changes instantly irrespective of distance. > > If I destroy one of the cookies it doesn't destroy the other > > spontaneously as would happen in a correlated photon-pair. > > Nope. Destroying one of a pair of entangled photons does nothing to > the other. Yes, it causes the correlation to be destroyed. You are not taking into account the correllation or polarization dependency between the two photons. Our base assumption is that when photon A is horizontal then photon B is vertical. This *must* occur to preserve symmetry. [more stuff deleted] ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

More down-to-earth apps for quantum teleportation...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, On a slightly different tack, consider the application of quantum teleportation to computer construction issues related to propagation delays and multiplexing of data and control lines in limited volumes. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Can someone look this up? (fwd)
by Ray Arachelian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:48:14 -0500 From: Salvatore Denaro <sal(a)panix.com> To: 'Ray Arachelian' <sunder(a)brainlink.com> Subject: Can someone look this up? Can someone on the list look this up? *************************************************************** If the government has no knowledge of aliens, then why does Title 14, Section 1211 of the Code of Federal Regulations, implemented on July 16, 1969, make it illegal for U.S. citizens to have any contact with extraterrestrials or their vehicles?

3 2

Re: Can someone look this up? (fwd)
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Can someone on the list look this up? > >*************************************************************** >If the government has no knowledge of aliens, then why does >Title 14, Section 1211 of the Code of Federal Regulations, >implemented on July 16, 1969, make it illegal for U.S. >citizens to have any contact with extraterrestrials or their >vehicles? Very SETI/UFO-mysterious. Here's what's listed (three times) at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/index.html [Code of Federal Regulations] [Title 14, Volume 5, Parts 1200 to end] [Revised as of January 1, 1997] >From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access [CITE: 14CFR1211] [Page 75] TITLE 14--AERONAUTICS AND SPACE CHAPTER V--NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION PART 1211--[Reserved] ---------- That's the entire entry.

1 0

Re: Predicting cipher life / NSA rigged DES? / Destroying encrypted data (Tangent to Re: Burning papers)
by jim＠mentat.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Randall Farmer skribis: > Been thinking, most applications for ciphers assume solely based on cipher x's > keysize that data will be secure for a certain length of time. ... > My idea ... is averaging the remaining lifetimes in > analysis-hours of broken ciphers which survived as many person-hours of attack > as the one in question. Doesn't seem terribly likely. Typically ciphers will look strong until someone discovers a chink. The chink will sometimes lead to a serious break, but not always, and not always quickly -- but at that point the cipher looks weak. Your best chance at encrypting stuff that needs a long shelf life is with a cipher that's had a lot of analysis and plenty of intrinsic key, like 3DES. > Am I just going crazy, or is it kind of obvious that NSA knew the s-boxes they > provided for DES weren't secure? The former. The S-boxes they replaced were bogus, and the ones they came up with were good against differential cryptanalysis -- better than random ones. There's no a priori reason to believe they knew about linear cryptanalysis, and in any case Matsui's l.c. attack on DES is better than brute force only in situations where you have a great deal of known or chosen plaintext. So how come you claim they aren't secure? DES isn't suitable for long-archived info, but is still OK for short-lifetime data against a not-too-motivated attacker: its only known weakness for this application is its key-length, not its S-boxes. > Anyhow, these two (or three) values are XORed together to form the key used to > encrypt the volume. When your adversaries, armed with their trusty rubber > hoses, come knocking at and/or down your door, you hit a hotkey to start > destroying those 24 bytes on disk, which can be done faster and more > effectively than a wipe of every sector in the volume. The folks with the I like it! Jim Gillogly Trewesday, 8 Solmath S.R. 1998, 00:27 12.19.4.15.17, 8 Caban 15 Muan, Second Lord of Night

3 4

waisgate.cgi?WAISdocID=3424713596+1+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[Code of Federal Regulations] [Title 14, Volume 5, Parts 1200 to end] [Revised as of January 1, 1997] >From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access [CITE: 14CFR1211] [Page 75] TITLE 14--AERONAUTICS AND SPACE CHAPTER V--NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION PART 1211--[Reserved]

1 0

Re: EPR, Bell, and FTL Bandwidth (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: Eric Cordian <emc(a)wire.insync.net> > Subject: Re: EPR, Bell, and FTL Bandwidth (fwd) > Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 18:30:56 -0600 (CST) > No. Doing something to the first photon does not do anything to the > second, much less change its polarization. The operators for > polarization for the two photons commute, so they are simultaneously > measureable. This is the last I'm going to respond to this. The photons are 'entangled' which means their states are linked and co-dependant. [rest deleted] ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

Can someone look this up? (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 28 Jan 1998 19:16:36 -0500 (EST) > From: Ray Arachelian <sunder(a)sundernet.com> > Subject: Can someone look this up? (fwd) > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > Date: Tue, 27 Jan 1998 21:48:14 -0500 > From: Salvatore Denaro <sal(a)panix.com> > To: 'Ray Arachelian' <sunder(a)brainlink.com> > Subject: Can someone look this up? > > Can someone on the list look this up? > > *************************************************************** > If the government has no knowledge of aliens, then why does > Title 14, Section 1211 of the Code of Federal Regulations, > implemented on July 16, 1969, make it illegal for U.S. > citizens to have any contact with extraterrestrials or their > vehicles? It is of some interest to note that in the movie 'Andromeda Strain' the code that trips Wildfire is a '1211'... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: EPR, Bell, and FTL Bandwidth (fwd)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Eric Cordian writes: > Anonymous writes: > > > Tim May knows no more about quantum mechanics than he does about > > cryptography. He is wrong about the nature of the correlation between > > the two photons. > > Tim is right. Please put this lovely cone-shaped hat on and sit on > the stool in the corner. So, you agree with Tim May's statement that: > All that is revealed is a _correlation_, a kind of structure built into the > Universe. Interesting, but not so weird as it seems. (And this is not any > kind of "action at one site instantaneously changing the state far away." > No more so than sending two envelopes out, one with a "1" inside and the > other with a "0" inside changes things instantaneously.....) You agree with the foolish statement that the behavior of correlated photons is no more weird than sending out two envelopes? I thought you had more sense than that. Are you under the impression that opening envelopes can in any way violate Bell's inequality, as measuring correlated photons can? Please! How do you explain the violation of Bell's theorem in QM? What is your nice, cozy, friendly, un-weird explanation? I'm curious whether you are going to sacrifice locality or reality. Somehow I think you'll have to go beyond what is necessary to explain the behavior of envelopes.

2 1

Re: Can someone look this up? (fwd)
by jim＠mentat.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ray Arachelian skribis: > Can someone on the list look this up? > > *************************************************************** > If the government has no knowledge of aliens, then why does > Title 14, Section 1211 of the Code of Federal Regulations, > implemented on July 16, 1969, make it illegal for U.S. > citizens to have any contact with extraterrestrials or their > vehicles? An authoritative-looking message from Ken Jenks of NASA appears at http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Corridor/8148/quaranti.html . It says this section was repealed 26 Apr 1991, and that the intent was to allow for a quarantine after the Apollo missions. The full text appears on that page. It talks about exposure to lunar material from NASA space shots, rather than UFO contacts. Jim Gillogly Trewesday, 8 Solmath S.R. 1998, 01:13 12.19.4.15.18, 9 Edznab 16 Muan, Third Lord of Night

1 0

Earn $20 Per Signup
by Webmaster 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Webmasters: Are you tired of wondering if the hits you are sending to your sponsors are being counted ??? Are you really sure whether the hit you sent was a RAW, a UNIQUE, or something else ??? Well MoJo Money eliminates those problems all together. We will pay you a flat rate of $15 for every FREE weekly membership you send and $20 for every other membership type !!! That's right... $15-$20 for EVERY signup !!! Check out our benefits to you: - No Raw/Unique hassles...You are paid for every signup you generate. - Your commission checks are prepared BI-WEEKLY by payroll processing firm ADP... No bullshit waiting for checks to be written by hand. And no minimum balance required. You will receive your check regardless of your commission. - You are offering a FREE membership to a GREAT site... Your signups will go through the roof with this program !!! - Real-Time on line stats! When a sale is approved you get INSTANT credit for it on your stats page. This is an actual stats page for one of our participating webmasters. Goto http://www.freshteens.com/mojomoney and see why over 600 webmasters have already joined the program !!!

1 0

Why This List Is A Security Risk
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Setting policy on national security risk for the entire USG, the DoD proclaims a trustworthy person does not engage in the following: Sec. 147.14 Guideline L--Outside activities. (a) The concern. Involvement in certain types of outside employment or activities is of security concern if it poses a conflict with an individual's security responsibilities and could create an increased risk of unauthorized disclosure of classified information. (b) Conditions that could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying include any service, whether compensated, volunteer, or employment with: (1) A foreign country; (2) Any foreign national; (3) A representative of any foreign interest; (4) Any foreign, domestic, or international organization or person engaged in analysis, discussion, or publication of material on intelligence, defense, foreign affairs, or protected technology. ----- >From 32 CFR Part 147 published today.

3 2

FUA - Great Underground
by Freakazoid 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Undergrounders! This is a Transmition from Freakazoid. I just want to tell you that FUA - Freakazoid`s Underground Archive is now comming up. Whith much, much moore undergound and eligal things than you can ever imagen. http://freakazoid.simplenet.com /Freakazoid

1 0

FUA - Has Open
by Freakazoid 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi! Freakazoid`s Undergorund Archive Is About to Open. Please Stop by. It`s cool. Hacking Phreaking Carding Undergorund And much, much moore http://freakazoid.simplenet.com /Freakazoid

1 0

BUISNESS IS BOOMING
by seo85＠prodigy.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

WE ARE VERY EXCITED TO ANNOUNCE, National Software Company is currently seeking independent agents for marketing their services. If you're reading this, you have what it takes, (a computer and modem,) to start your own business, work part-time or full-time. The commissions are great, the products are great, and it sells itself. You will be sent all the materials it takes to take orders in the convenience of your own home,-manual, order forms, software, etc. No cold calling No face to face. This is a real company, desiring real people who want in on the ground floor. With all the people getting online via AOL, Compuserve, Netscape, the marketing and need is great.You must be a self-starter , and make between $700-to-$1000 per week to start. Our average agents yearly salary is six figures. Be your own boss! Join us and become an independent sales agent . Call for exciting message! 312-409-7743 =cyperse

1 0

Re: State of the Union Address
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Get a Chemisty 101/2 book. You must have been in the bone head chemistry >class. I think you mean `a bone head chemistry class.' My old college book doesn't have it either, and I took two semesters of the stuff...

1 0

RE: Announcement: RPK InvisiMail released on 12 Jan, 1998
by Bruce Schneier 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A bunch of us cryptographers would really like to attack RPK, but the documents on the website are slippery enough to make it difficult. There is enough unspecified for them to sneak away from any analysis. If someone were to reverse engineer the RPK cryptosystem from this product, I would really appreciate it. Bruce ********************************************************************** Bruce Schneier, President, Counterpane Systems Phone: 612-823-1098 101 E Minnehaha Parkway, Minneapolis,MN 55419 Fax: 612-823-1590 http://www.counterpane.com

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What was the URL again? I got that at work and want to re-visit site tonite at home.

1 0

patent office and key recovery
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Steve Bellovin <smb(a)research.att.com> posted this to cryptography: --------------------------------------------------------------------- Today's NY Times had an article on how the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is gearing up for electronic filing of patent and trademark applications (http://www.nytimes.com/library/cyber/week/012698patents.html) Since patent applications here are confidential, filings must be encrypted. And of course, one of the things holding up deployment -- of a system where a government agency is the legitimate recipient of the message -- is the "need" for key recovery. "The agency wants to include a "key recovery" system in the software in case the encryption has to be broken." The mind boggles. ----------------------------------------------

2 1

Re: EPR, Bell, and FTL Bandwidth (fwd)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Eric Cordian writes: > An Entity at Replay writes: > > > You agree with the foolish statement that the behavior of correlated > > photons is no more weird than sending out two envelopes? I thought > > you had more sense than that. > > With correlated branch systems, examination of one branch can disclose > information about another branch which is currently distant from us. > This is no more weird in the quantum mechanical case, than it is in > the classical case. The envelope analogy is perfectly appropriate. > > That's not to say that quantum mechanical systems aren't "weird" in > ways that classical systems are not. It's just that this is not one > of those areas of weirdness. It's much worse than this. The violation of Bell's inequality implies that changes to the basis used to measure one particle cause changes in the observed state of the remote particle. Of course this can't be used to transmit information; we all agree on that. The remote particle has a random orientation. But the point is, Bell's theorem shows that the remote orientation depends on how the local measurement is done. This is not a matter of simply perceiving or deducing what the conditions are at the remote branch, as in the envelope case. A better analogy would be an envelope which could be opened in two ways, from the top or from the bottom. If you open from the top then the remote envelope will have the same contents as the local one, while if you open from the bottom then the remote envelope will have the opposite contents. In each case the contents are random; the remote observer has no idea whether you opened from the top or the bottom. But somehow your decision on how to open the envelope (what basis to measure the photon) is changing how these globally separated subsystems relate to each other. (This analogy isn't perfect, either, because it might seem that magic changes to the local contents could make the envelope work. Bell's reasoning shows that it is the remote photon's state which must be altered by the choice of how to measure the local one.) This is the fundamental flaw in the envelope analogy, which makes it seriously flawed and misleading. It gives the impression that some kind of hidden variables (the contents within the envelope) can easily solve the problem, when nothing could be further from the truth. It papers over one of the most mysterious facets of quantum mechanics, by making it appear to be mundane. It represents a fundamentally mistaken way to view remote correlated particles. > > How do you explain the violation of Bell's theorem in QM? What is > > your nice, cozy, friendly, un-weird explanation? I'm curious whether > > you are going to sacrifice locality or reality. Somehow I think > > you'll have to go beyond what is necessary to explain the behavior of > > envelopes. > > The wavefunction of the universe is not a physical observable. I do > not have to sacrifice causality for physical phemonema to have > non-local collapse of the wavefunction when measurements are > performed. A satisfactory theory of quantum mechanical measurement > does not currently exist, and it has even been conjectured that > gravitation may be the sole force immune from quantum mechanical > superposition, and that this may be the mechanism behind wavefunction > collapse. There are other hypotheses as well, and the experiments to > distinguish amongst them have yet to be performed. > > A correct theory of quantum mechanical measurement will disclose the > mechanisms by which things like non-local wavefunction collapse, > quantum teleporation, the quantum eraser effect, and other current > oddities are mediated. This will undoubtedly involve a deeper > understanding of how quantum gravity works, and perhaps even the > physics underlying the existence of consciousness itself. OK, so you can't explain it. Fine, it is indeed a mysterious phenomenon, and no doubt you are correct that more insights will come in the future. Now, compare this with the envelope analogy Tim May offered: >> All that is revealed is a _correlation_, a kind of structure built >> into the Universe. Interesting, but not so weird as it seems. (And >> this is not any kind of "action at one site instantaneously changing >> the state far away." No more so than sending two envelopes out, one >> with a "1" inside and the other with a "0" inside changes things >> instantaneously.....) Are you at all tempted to resort to such language in trying to understand how the envelopes could work? Is it puzzling how we could open one here and find a 1 and suddenly know that there is a 0 in the remote envelope? Do we need to learn more about how measurements of envelope contents work before we can begin to tackle this thorny philosophical conundrum? Of course not! The envelope case is transparently obvious. There are no puzzles here, no complexities, no confusion. The only confusion is in the minds of those who think that correlated envelopes have anything to do with correlated photons, or that the hidden variables which perfectly well explain what is happening with the envelopes shed any light whatsoever on the workings of nonlocal QM systems. > However, none of this implies in the least that a physical effect is > propagated non-causally across vast distances when a conscious choice > is made to measure one of two non-commuting observables for one of a > pair of "entangled" particles, which, I believe, is what the current > argument is over. No, the current argument is over how much of a jackass Tim May is.

1 0

RE: Microsoft Internet Explorer: Request for Comments
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Fisher Mark <FisherM(a)exch1.indy.tce.com> writes: > >One small beef: why doesn't it accept .p12 certificates signed by > >"Vesign web site CA"? > > Are these PEM or DER-encoded? There is a known problem with PEM-encoded > Certificate Authority certificates not being accepted at all. > (DER-encoded Certificate Authority certificates are accepted, but MSIE > 4.x won't display their contents while you are accepting them -- you > have to accept them, then view their contents.) Let me illustrate... This is the cypherpunks.p12 certificate signed by "VeriSign Web Site Access CA" for cypherpunks(a)bwalk.dm.com (Random Q. Hacker). I believe it's x509/DER. You need to save it as a local file (say \temp\cypherpunks.p12). The password ("pin") is "cypherpunks". To import the certificate in your Netscape[tm] Navigator 4 browser I do this: Click on Communicator -> Security Info Under Certificates, click on Yours, then on "Import a Certificate" Select the local file. Type in the pin (cypherpunks) when prompted. (see http://www.verisign.com/netscape/transport/import.html) begin 644 cypherpunks.p12 M,(`"`0,P@`8)*H9(AO<-`0<!H(`D@`0!,`0!@`0!,`0!@`0!!@0!"00)*H9( MAO<-`0<!!`&@!`&`!`$D!`&`!`$$!`$!!`$P!`$$!`$#!`."`S@$`00$`0$$ M`3`$`00$`0,$`X(#-`0!!`0!`00!!@0!!`0!`00!"P0!!`0!"P0+*H9(AO<- M`0P*`0($`00$`0$$`:`$`00$`0,$`X("I00!!`0!`00!,`0!!`0!`P0#@@*A M!`$$!`$!!`$P!`$$!`$!!`$;!`$$!`$!!`$&!`$$!`$!!`$*!`$$!`$*!`HJ MADB&]PT!#`$#!`$$!`$/!`\P#00()2H8=5@"??T"`0$$`00$`0$$`00$`00$ M`0,$`X("@`0!!`0#@@*`!(("@*W;`9^X![Y!P2Q#U3[)KDLNI0)W33+;+`,4 MBW;^/GY_HDTZ5L3<LCAEY/-P%UPW6+%M_QNGF4--5.#6,2BOF43HW'D1+J5F M4U\4AG%]GQA*`$A,<#LSO;1U?\;XF?Z'09BZ:.<;A1ZOWP]\8.X[,DA?S7^. M]N(V9$G,JB`8X"`/8=:MD2#YU&%?<@KR,,XBWO9E/XG3.6A`BML,&EHBCMBZ MEI(,Z1TI%?/D6[.,&?QJKI`N*&*6?)XMD:;!B*R>.2Z:PG+<[[4/IY?*.4!T MK';3SKEA(^\%Z*OM-9I]CF&<H0+'$>7\JL)B^66QJJ4*JN`E;3`$M(a)NO.]C^ MV\L3ZYM*ACS(T!^G"+65090XNX'R`XNW?%5#CUO]<AYN^.D?V@)4:M(K+(05 MS07V;:^=([BIL6$%*+0K^,`:YQXT>P>2(\/!BP@%G,D>6?`418[(:!H9#KVS MVS>3$9XYJ)I\1/*JA=Y-G('Z@C]S(E8M8E%:*TOZ-J95+8S3'`ED)=\T)'ZV MN?0AD"(10+9,?]JWCS+&+ABVD]7%SJ/LF;`A2PCSPO)1T.))_,WN^!,]?_OP MOM)#IPWOF"T@=ZJ5'PIZP9/I90,%.@W(B?8>!$)^/^*XTB<OKK-93'&3K"F% M'V4YLPB9^Y*F(47N^,.6!#]E_Q=2&IZ8OQE]L\[0<B3:[1M:]<2I?#2=J:R# M+_T-2&.+.,5<A`6U^(G!7VU";9+[OD"G:9RJTA.\5K(].B]P;7>8E=NW\$H- M&[Q>:*6)'SX1X=:@ND]S,I;E"$I(*M='"I^##U^)R<_K3Q^IJ`XPO[M4GJ:] MC*(8%:R;X%HCD#!XK#L;@3SQ#O5YP7(S)'T%V$T$`00$`0$$`3$$`00$`0$$ M`7P$`00$`0$$`3`$`00$`0$$`54$`00$`0$$`08$`00$`0$$`0D$`00$`0D$ M"2J&2(;W#0$)%`0!!`0!`00!,00!!`0!`00!2`0!!`0!`00!'@0!!`0!`00! M1@0!!`0!1@1&`%(`80!N`&0`;P!M`"``40`N`"``2`!A`&,`:P!E`'(`)P!S M`"``5@!E`'(`:0!3`&D`9P!N`"``20!N`&,`+@`@`$D`1`0!!`0!`00!,`0! M!`0!`00!(P0!!`0!`00!!@0!!`0!`00!"00!!`0!"00)*H9(AO<-`0D5!`$$ M!`$!!`$Q!`$$!`$!!`$6!`$$!`$!!`$$!`$$!`$!!`$4!`$$!`$4!!12<=Q. MQ1W$:+9C'\A+,C^^VFP;!00"```$`@``!`(```0!,`0!@`0!!@0!"00)*H9( MAO<-`0<&!`&@!`&`!`$P!`&`!`$"!`$!!`$`!`$P!`&`!`$&!`$)!`DJADB& M]PT!!P$$`3`$`1L$`08$`0H$"BJ&2(;W#0$,`08$#S`-!`@(R^-$4*[0F`(! M`00!H`0!@`0!!`0!"`0(UZ2XO5.=]_<$`00$`0@$""0$WO^IPE<(!`$$!`$( M!`C!3(TD&TEW2P0!!`0!$`00_,*4]\&/SB.^('X-$+'%H`0!!`0!"`0(\]2P MA*'G;V$$`00$`X("H`2"`J"NHU[<,"*H3\P%U3&^Q.$DS*'^`L<T'7%XJ>Z> M<_[<$`,8CTNUX$LN#P5"G<</0M)F5[@ZB):E<6AC((ZY_,3A^%>(ZXH"UE?? M*5#8\&O!B`Z-,^"+1GJO18\!M]0$3VMDY(GBGRXZPQE#(4B3M17+$@_V5,(K MKUC:7$#Y89(I4B8"(/WG`9+'V\OS"O+Z;C6/DRZ04BQBR*+!;54W_K-2P,V. M,Y#15L,/3+57XGJB-'BG=22?`F_G2PS\2AX;J9<`7ZHI_!WYE9;7)Y[J*-%= M#),0K`E&:`3[$>DU9@[KS\A:6M<6G>P,,&^2`LL`W:54W_<"$+-0:H69?`3: M!,'+O7#4$N1$%X#$%<:MGQB:BQ&TJGQ[KE`"ID6<=CK/1TM+NX!^WH)RM46U M04J`M9ZBKP[1VFK/]5BD@:'VCM(MJW_ZFK!?ZG=_+K&?_>/6[8URW#!_"#6( M\0'MH7#,&GLV:+#-BI#1>MN/%SBYBV<^6OG/&N+Q;M/`_DK'H.7;Z@'"6UK+ M@DXF%#Q``YPP;Q`<W'O7SZ"6%%S+.>;*'ZI&%,GM1W]+X)"\5I)`0[4;-38S M(a)1I#M.EL1F/?O00]>0Z:$02$?X.F.M);Y+R5X109<O_,S7/6VEW#'0#K-=2I MNW<K$%>HAZ)G^#+1#:SOCJ*GDM'`_JDGG&K;=6,S?BB+?Q7Y2<,4=-^E:6UF M[[]8'3(a)UIM03!`.JN^0O9&AK.]4SE1[HI4>]Q-Z#B"_0S.*#R72:!$=XAV:# MG+#C]<`\QQFHDZP>?ZYFV?I[9>W0`$FB(](Q1X\)4--[Y2U_!I1K!_`T]BB, MWE,)$F/Z\%^@)I\*@I%CW9\AV8%A-)4&6$&F!*F(_,3N:@3+-1(X9^@P[V=Z M6WO5%B%CAE9.`D01^Y<$`00$`0@$"-]$QUM*$4G=!`$$!`$(!`CH"]UF:H1M M?@0!!`0!"`0(?(&!R$S+`H($`00$`5@$6+`]MG$7,M!E7HT"DKRE/(5H_G^8 M(*`]3?33&6SSVM:!%N?A`OXT48W%02IFO1B7MO`$-$H]'Q1QRTJCXKY!O^O] M)<W)$Z(%0;(3$,PSM7'_L06)$8SEJ44$`00$`1`$$/EQ@8>5BNA/4F.AX%$@ M<BD$`00$`0@$",<Q4:D$A%4[!`$$!`$(!`@+]P\!]T*M/@0!!`0!"`0(<`@1 MSU^FYTT$`00$`X(".`2"`CB`[3D:/\^Y_N'C?><RX@V-\J=3^T_2[G8PU-<K MP<755[0-E)IX/(R0"?[%;I*G*'*BN52<!O!\7]*RD([_FNQ^5:KVAG`YXIA> M"8<9XA@%"RNU3.*D"YFE6TO3\:GGA7(,9WMD_E4ABMY4;*>OU*PE$;Y$^^/. M26,X[=:P9J^?$R&"075RLR/2&S,8:["[A&&BSR=PYS.=C]=UXLAAQ<46OMBN MQQ1R;?UBB-?4B-$^5V@\5+O8*V1V8A5-KV)C(T44+&8/H3#Y8=TC;6[T];;2 MO0!!R8]A]:S^WS^CS<\D)N52%Q3E1F!^C5:D9Y[&[3_$_!D0;"<*81\G29KU MH2`VK>GK"-ON7Q9X]94DIC?=]VDF3@U>Y;H5HO.4PUV=J)*!+I0SGJ0P#B1' M!LB8?YSL5*"YOF+[X(V1`)R^T=H.JQFEEB+!@YL::3#&";_Z:1B@*>-20K\. MW6EZ$#+C`?"V(H'X6D7Y&3G3O^-!T/LW3WO<GH#XO$.O@)>S5=2VA_4`HZLR M[--9%[&3=W1@W_4M:JIQ//@<`;P`(ZF:@'MW0+6@_:3D!0(P%8J@2\[<&7W= M@88"15]'4&TF&Q^)[B_&RP1':^1VBY`[:2'UJ(PY^ZJ\DDJIX1@S8]UB'8E# M3NQ\!42KFPLTXZ3!DU%`2AN#CW@L+-1_R\,;A"['SWVF!QQJTW%F306JK*[\ M\+@RV)>Q9%`@'\#NQ$=6V(a)XN%M\\RRFXXHN!TU(4Z7``85-Y?.V35O'@\;@K M!`$$!`$(!`C@"^/@&!YC'@0!!`0!"`0(CF9`SX-,;"P$`00$`3@$.',8<9=M MP;\$#1"H$4YPT$3--%B[".JZ'QY8M*#SW.BL:3-S9X]U#!R*?.7M3#G*J!F> M^Y#"`*R[!`$$!`$(!`B\T"$OSV7@P`0!!`0!"`0(O8_X%_V`9VT$`00$`0@$ M"*?5L&6+V16R!`$$!`$0!!#.QQUB4.SU"Q",[GQ8LA7^!`$$!`$(!`AE<U:4 M/`$@:`0!!`0#@@38!(($V%FHCQ"R[=GI.C!JV7M&-U1M=O::]??)0JC>6(J8 MC?5B;F%!LA8DXSE#4;J!-%JO[0(R6EN>.`HLD_E+6Z1RY)O12DBV3'J<@*ZE MC7JW+0TDIBE>2.FA"-.J1]FT1?1`;`[_`/)AS:1:7(L)[!+YL_.=@GH=@"L. M8)UB;*$*G;I[[%)^MJ&%:?E\`JI6RM-/COA+LC^:4"F@0=R+'XV'N:OR?[0A M,`N'&NB[[85U#2N2;*N!'A4_9]1Y+]>VH_!`/DN8G,I-C_DI8>)9($,D-RVY M*-^<S8&PRAE.S<^FME&=KM$U0\,$830<$"65L=[S/0C[E23E;6T>$XVC,I=M M$<(2[%LY8?6XI.7E-7W959WLO!\Y8&-:1E^%[@MD..5,SM7N^89^*;%)\*@) M8:*N9-T`CAL<FGXL+M#S6]T/"G^[50,+3!C9B^?;\+/QWER2NT@40W,P[_E( MF)R.5J;.\FIXGF%Y\P2&P/BM2:A[)@*[[QG;_Q5C':MS%628W$Z-9,-YUV'- M$)`E'A!1L$91ZKGI/]`R_-Q1(,Z9Q^ZC2O/_\2!'Z6W=XD;LZ6;9<X=SMY>! MX^5!X57W2\X3EFVX1?'DPKEG2MVTQ/L+(RZN%'(6ZGI4'9*YC#MP$@DE\4F4 MIS\]@<RX=5@$$59IBYF]#_#DD(<T2B7P9;,D_NDX9X:K?OV"VYJ(E!#_6AS3 MFK:A92/3Y0BY//_M\\W#F=C]@35#S+E6<&%6=$;GPF>@QP6SA2/O7,V1@?PV M,@`;5=#6R94NEWSW5=ND`Y=XK"(WB+O0"@CH@G^`>X_LZ[Q1`:Q:,ICV**C] M/)L9`[77V2X<_8RA!!G:]D\[N\##7TWJC7"%%(&'F@]SD(*4?>B49?,Y6(1W M6@I]0)_5**Y<K')S_)#?R]K3B)*:32^'\\-JJ4F3WA!`$6ORQ3#R9<[K45F. M\V/*%[8L#\;E3H,\0:W$8L>N%-W@2?ZZ98MGW=X+:304&Q8JY[R-U"`%ZWJ> M(E!)JP3"?1>OH>?\I&D'D5+J+M%4Z%$:0TML_3591QLN&9H&E@J<G.%<J9.U MKVS30]/WZ#[J>J/M93F"Z%W'FG2_.1ME6QIO,Y1`!+?M0N,FM!27.%%/G_:3 M<U2G!8=T6GL0^3LOMUT=6;EDCU*4M_B#4/UUA7UQ\_*<6.^Q,Q\\U(NB//#B MVDZX+>-LZ^)G@G69#(AGUR''7E$W/Y6A;(`N==^CKFP`K#M03T!NY@<H:#>< M$9>'M5YJ"A'*,#G:KF;/%("QPK7R)*Y0EO9,%*F'*\8H`BL&P\'B-'EW@RR& MM:S07"6\/&%>AT[FX<!-)F*U^U`_1F!C`CU?%B25),7YW7!J9\(UL1).#KQ5 MYD>_#<#*^DEE?[?:;&'W;[X9]?)4U]_;&:<%%0Y''2BOU/:E4Y$J"8Z6ZU&! MU\<EEU;3C:JQG'0$A%DK#_$>B\$$R90-@<7WZ+2ILRSYFYSM\&"8E(&P%F"J MB9]]6/"['02-$;)'J2TWE!&P;:+8S';SFFCU`K!QFH`;<)-^Z9)L*!H[(\++ MIN?K$W*\./L#K?*A&B2IJ,8]_C>`K,4R)DQ1N>WCL"E^J.40C]HW%N")D(<V MXX/<!UK2>6XOX#<G&;<>CQX,[C&V(a)0.1`<TYM%5`R(E@F,HINPOG@HD$`00$ M`0@$"`,O]&!S\*,`!`$$!`$(!`@C?KA8R:[.300!!`0!2`1(PCRQCG!5A*LH MWZKJF_"\?3?'NQI^`';&7!/GR;_SBAGZ,/3HJ'5XEY:.Z#FB%PN,7::GW`X; MK5=QI<0F=+&N39[&;PXK9RQ.!`$$!`$0!!")WRW,UF6I5@2//%/;-1Y1!`$$ M!`$8!!AAK%?A4_O$R$](>E[87<K=XJO1(:L;.&@$`00$`0@$"`C05EF1F=@0 M!`(```0"```$`@``!`(```0"```$`@``````````,#4P(3`)!@4K#@,"&@4` J!!3AW(SLH6UW.V4^I.],(DR_+[D-N000G)PQBC:?#9;D_!U4*SHN@@`` ` end To import the certificate in your Microsoft[tm] Internet Explorer 4 browser, I try: Click on View -> Internet options -> Content tab Click the "personal" button under Certificates A new window opens. Click on Import Type in the name of your local file and the password (cypherpunks). IE simply says it can't import it, with no details! I *assume* it's because "Vesign web site CA" isn't even listed among the authorities IE accepts (and I'm too lasy to search the web for whatever I need to add to IE) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

The # 1 Stock Recommendation Service Is Free
by invest＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We are very excited to inform you about the most accurate and reliable e-mail stock recommendation service on the net today. What's even better is that it is free. Damex research specializes in the following areas: 1.) Finding undiscovered and undervalued stocks that have tremendous potential for dramatic appreciation. 2.) Uncover low priced stocks on the verge of breakouts from stagnant positions. Usually the company chosen will have recently undertaken a change in management, obtained a research breakthrough, made an important acquisition, developed a remarkable new product or obtained important financing. Any of these factors could lead to rapid price appreciation 3.) Identifies over priced companies ripe for selling short. Includes price to go short with stop loss for all short positions. All recommendations are easy to implement and are low stress and high profit stock and option trades We have to earn your trust. Our staff understands that most people don't have the time and resources to do the in depth research and analysis necessary for successful investing.That's why thousands of investors prefer Damex Research to do it for them. To Subcribe Send your e-mail address to damex3(a)juno.com

1 0