December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re:Profiling
by frissell＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> In other words, your AZ tax can be based on your profile, irrespective > of your income or expenses. But the AZ D of R can't use a profile to actually *find* your money or, indeed, to determine that you are a resident of Arizona. > It's also a bit of an eye-opener to note that it is expected to > replace ID used for -other- than official business as well, like club > cards and health care access cards. If it's not in your profile or if > the money is not in your account, you can't do_it/have_it. Moreover, > you'll probably get automatically reported for followup investigation > to determine willfulness and intent. I *love* it when the government decides to use automation to cut people off from permissions/benefits if they don't "toe the line." Since I would like them to cut *everyone* off from permissions/benefits, every step closer to that situation is an improvement. Apparently, "Seaquest, DSV" had a little automated punishment example on yesterday's show. A guy on a motorbike was speeding and his plates were scanned on the fly and he was notified, while still driving, that his "Social Security Account" had been docked for some $700 in fines. Note that all they accomplish by such things is to convert people into "outlaws." If government benefits and permissions are withdrawn from you then the incentive for you to play their game is reduced. Automated punishment also weakens the hold of the government even on those who obey the law because they knwo that they can lose their government "benefits" at any time and so they value them less. In a strictly practical sense, such punishments encourage those punished to learn how to live outside the government's reward/punishment system. Note the non-compliance rates in New York City for driver's license, insurance, and registration rules. The DMV computers automatically suspend someone's license (even if he's never had one) and he keeps driving anyway. People accumulate hundreds of suspensions. DCF ************************************************************************* ATMs, Contracting Out, Digital Switching, Downsizing, EDI, Fax, Fedex, Home Workers, Internet, Just In Time, Leasing, Mail Receiving, Phone Cards, Quants, Securitization, Temping, Voice Mail.

1 0

EMBARRASSED, I?
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks (did I ever tell you, it's pronounced "spunks"?), Blanc Webber made me feel like JFK being sung to by Norma Jean. The part I didn't understand, though, was when she wrote: May this email totally embarrass you. Hell, Blanc, why should it embarrass me? You're the one with the dirty picture. It's a candle? Sorry, my mistake. (But it looks just like my... oh, never mind.) Thanks Blanc, S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ rom owner-cypherpunks Mon Sep 19 13:30:56 1994 Return-Path: <owner-cypherpunks> Received: by toad.com id AA02563; Mon, 19 Sep 94 13:30:56 PDT Received: from mail.crl.com by toad.com id AA02557; Mon, 19 Sep 94 13:30:50 PDT Received: from crl2.crl.com by mail.crl.com with SMTP id AA23474 (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>); Mon, 19 Sep 1994 13:29:20 -0700 Received: by crl2.crl.com id AA12797 (5.65c/IDA-1.5 for Cypherpunks <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>); Mon, 19 Sep 1994 13:29:19 -0700 Date: Mon, 19 Sep 1994 13:29:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Sandy Sandfort <sandfort(a)crl.com> Subject: THE BEST MINDS IN CYBERSPACE To: Cypherpunks <cypherpunks(a)toad.com> Message-Id: <Pine.3.87.9409191301.A12756-0100000(a)crl2.crl.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, I'm always telling people how smart the Cypherpunks are. Now I have proof. Paul Robichaux wrote: I suggest we all kick in $10 or so and hire Alison Armitage to jump out of a cake or something. Seems like the least we could do. It's like he read my mind--especially the "or something" part. Thanks Paul. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

RE: That Steamy Aura
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

That's not funny, Sandy. (but I'll keep it in mind, whenever I think about you) ~ Blanc

1 0

Re: On the crime bill and remailers
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:38 PM 9/19/94 -0400, Black Unicorn wrote: >Some lawyer, can't do stat. intrepretation to save his/her life. > >As I pointed out before, the requirement for INVESTIGATION is reasonably >appearing to have intent. The statuatory offense itself includes NO >REFERENCE to intent. > >The scienter requirement here is "gloss on the surface" of the kind >intended to win votes from on the fencers. Ah. I see. Then this stuff on my face is egg, no? Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) "There is no difference between someone Shipwright Development Corporation who eats too little and sees Heaven and 44 Farquhar Street someone who drinks too much and sees Boston, MA 02331 USA snakes." -- Bertrand Russell (617) 323-7923

1 0

Copyright enforcement through crypto
by sdw＠lig.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'd like to explore the technical problems of enforcing copyright restrictions through encryption and custom viewing software. What I have in mind is a viewer, say a spin off of Mosaic, that has a general purpose decryption engine that could be programmed with an algorythm as part of the document download process. The goal I have in mind is to make possible one time, or limited time viewing of a downloaded document The document would be encrypted with the selected method and keyed with a timestamp. The client would need access to a timeserver and a session key, etc. to decrypt as close as possible to the display hardware. This could be prototyped as a user process, but securely implemented as an extension to X, MS-Windows, etc. I haven't worked out all the problems, but see quite a few already. Obviously, the goal would be to get really good copyright material on the net, like first run movies, when we have the bandwidth. Just wondering what minimum collection of hardware, software, and infrastructure would be needed. Of course, this is related to the pay-per-use software paradigm (vs. current unlimited license). sdw -- Stephen D. Williams Local Internet Gateway Co.; SDW Systems 510 503-9227APager LIG dev./sales Internet: sdw(a)lig.net In Bay Area Aug94-Feb95!!! OO R&D Source Dist. By Horse: 2464 Rosina Dr., Miamisburg, OH 45342-6430 Internet Consulting ICBM: 39 38 34N 84 17 12W home, 37 58 41N 122 01 48W work Newbie Notice: I speak for LIGCo., CCI, myself, and no one else, regardless of where it is convenient to post from or thru.

4 4

Public key/3DES datastream software over WAN Bastions
by sdw＠lig.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Has anyone produced software (preferably Unix based) that provides a public key authenticated, DES/3DES encrypted datastream over WAN firewalls/bastions? A typical use would be to connect transaction feeds between two data centers in a secure, automated way over Internet. I can't see anything conceptually difficult with it, and it seems the PGP library could be used to create simple Unix daemons. sdw -- Stephen D. Williams Local Internet Gateway Co.; SDW Systems 510 503-9227APager LIG dev./sales Internet: sdw(a)lig.net In Bay Area Aug94-Feb95!!! OO R&D Source Dist. By Horse: 2464 Rosina Dr., Miamisburg, OH 45342-6430 Internet Consulting ICBM: 39 38 34N 84 17 12W home, 37 58 41N 122 01 48W work Newbie Notice: I speak for LIGCo., CCI, myself, and no one else, regardless of where it is convenient to post from or thru.

2 1

_American_Survival_ mag article
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Oct. issue of _American_Survival_ has an article called "Clipper Inside". Dunno anything else about it, might be good, might suck rocks. -- <A HREF="http://www.eff.org/~mech/mech.html"> Stanton McCandlish </A><HR><A HREF="mailto:mech@eff.org"> mech(a)eff.org </A><P><A HREF="http://www.eff.org/"> Electronic Frontier Fndtn. </A><P> Online Activist

1 0

Re: Such a Sweetie Pie
by merriman＠metronet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Sandy: > > It was nothing. > [What a Nice Guy (tm)] > > @ @ @ @ > @ @ > @ ~ ~ @ > . * * . > . \/ . > . . . . > . . . . . . > . . > . . . >Blanc >(please, no more!) > > Will you two cool it? You're getting my monitor fogged up :-) (or at least take it off the C'punks list - you're scaring my cats :-) Dave Merriman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Finger merriman(a)metronet.com for PGP/RIPEM public keys and fingerprints. Unencrypted Email may be ignored without notice to sender. PGP preferred. Remember: It is not enough to _obey_ Big Brother; you must also learn to *love* Big Brother.

1 0

I ONLY SHOOT BLANCS
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, In response to my candle comment, Blanc wrote: That's not funny, Sandy. (but I'll keep it in mind, whenever I think about you) Well, I still think it was funny, but now I *AM* embarrassed. (Blanc, wipe that smug expression off your face, this instant!) S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Such a Sweetie Pie
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sandy: It was nothing. [What a Nice Guy (tm)] @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ~ ~ @ . * * . . \/ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Blanc (please, no more!)

1 0

Re: art encryption...
by Pierre Uszynski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: Lile Elam <lile(a)art.net> > > [...] a way an artist can insure a viewer that the art > they are viewing is really that of the artist, the artist can *sign* their > art with their private key and others can check it with their public key. The problem is that's pretty much all that can be done so far: The viewer can *verfify* that the copy is a full un-molested copy of what the artist released, or for physical works, maybe that the object being scanned *is* the original object (maybe). But for pictures released in bitmap form, and then lossily compressed, cropped, scaled, dithered, and whatnot, the (ahem) authenticity of the copy can't be checked anymore. At least not if the signature was, for example, a signed message digest as has been mentioned. Message digests, in the form we now know them, do not resist lossy compression and such injury. That's what they are designed for. So, in particular, a magazine can still take a signed copy of a picture, creatively modify it slightly, and print it claiming this is original work by somebody else. In this case, the printing process itself is most likely enough to dispell any hope of recomputing the same message digest. Handling this case relies back on conventional evidence and juries. Other formats such as CAD drawings, text, and pictures in primitive forms (such as Postscript), and source and binary code, are susceptible to more: It is possible to hide some identifying info in them. But they also are susceptible to mechanical modification (lossless in terms of the "artwork", but lossy in terms of the steganography.) For example, by rewriting "for the same functionality" mechanically or manually. For a mechanical translation, the plaintiff may now have to identify which mechanical process was used before, maybe, having a case again (in addition of conventional legal wranglings). What would be ideal in all these cases is a steganographic process that would map to the whole as much as to the parts. Fractal steganography. In the case of architectural drawings, a signature of the original architects would be embedded in small sets of dimensions, in small sets of proportions, in ways the CAD language is used, in the background details of artwork, in the text included in drawings as well as in CAD files comments and variable names... etc... In summary in sufficiently numerous and different places that mechanical modification, or even extensive manual rework could still forget some instances of the signature. The signature still has to be specific enough to identify certainly the author, as opposed to being attributable to random luck (as in DNA matching). This means this signature requires a rather large number of bits (fewer if the signatures are registered precisely and provably before the works are released), but still enough bits that it is not so easy to hide many of them (depending on the medium: rather hard in text, rather easy in complex pictures.) The signature becomes part of the picture, it is not an afterthought anymore. Fractal message digests, whose verifiability would degrade gracefully as the original is more and more mutilated, would serve the same purpose for verification (you could check that a decompressed, cropped part of a picture is really from the artist who fractally signed the whole.) Conceivably it would be the same if the part was printed in weird colors or something: "some" of it still "is" from the same artist. But, for legal issues, how would that be different from copyright registration? Doesn't copyright registration rely on the same principle: a set of jurors will determine what the chance is that this is the same work or not. This just provides tools to fortify a court case. Enough ramblings :-) I'll stop now, Pierre pierre(a)shell.portal.com

1 0

Nice little privacy threat...
by L. Todd Masco 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just a little tidbit for the privacy-paranoid among us. I live in NYC, while my father, H. L. Masco, MD, lives in Florida. My dad's never lived in NYC, and I've never forwarded mail from his address to mine... in fact, I haven't forwarded anything from his address since before I left Pittsburgh. I just got a mailing from Harry & David that included a pre-printed list of folks from "my" last year's orders so I could repeat order this year. They were my father's orders from last year. Masco isn't that common a surname, so I have to wonder how often this is going to happen to people with more common surnames. -- L. Todd Masco | "A man would simply have to be as mad as a hatter, to try and cactus(a)bb.com | change the world with a plastic platter." - Todd Rundgren

1 0

art encryption...
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by pierre(a)shell.portal.com (Pierre Uszynski) on Mon, 19 Sep 6:32 PM > >What would be ideal in all these cases is a >steganographic process that would map to the whole as >much as to the parts. Fractal steganography. In the >case of architectural drawings, a signature of the >original architects would be embedded in small sets of >dimensions, in small sets of proportions, in ways the >CAD language is used, in the background details of >artwork, in the text included in drawings as well as in >CAD files comments and variable names... etc... In >summary in sufficiently numerous and different places >that mechanical modification, or even extensive manual >rework could still forget some instances of the >signature. [Snip] >But, for legal issues, how would that be different from >copyright registration? Doesn't copyright registration >rely on the same principle: a set of jurors will >determine what the chance is that >this is the same work or not. This just provides tools >to fortify a court case. Pierre, The fractal steganography sounds promising. Is this yours or has it been done? The need for authentic sigs on architectural and engineering drawings is not merely aesthetic. Right now municipal agencies will not accept digital documents because of the lack of verifiable authorship to establish responsibility, and liability, for the health and safety of the design and construction. Hard copy with original seal is required to prevent unauthorized manipulation. Beyond copyright protection, architectural and engineering documents are means to guide actual construction, rather than end products like paintings and drawings in the art world. If there could be a way for buildings themselves to convey authenticity, say, that they are healthy and safe, by a kind decryption by the public that could help prevent concealment of shoddy construction. It's not the drawings that assure safety but field verification of the end result that construction work was done right. What a great help if a building could convey its own message of authenticity about its fitness and safety for habitation and use. That might keep us architects more honest. Probably a long shot that your fractal idea could be stretched this far, but it is certainly needed in the flim flam world of New York City real estate where deception about building safety and health is all too common. Any other thoughts? John

1 0

Re: Clarification of my remarks about Netscape
by cactus＠seabsd.hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <199412131937.LAA00857(a)netcom10.netcom.com>, James A. Donald <jamesd(a)netcom.com> wrote: >I am sick of you misrepresenting what I say, and I am sick of Eric >misrepresenting what I say. > >Cut it out. Excuse me, but my Ironometer just pinged itself off my desk. - -- Todd Masco | It's difficult to be loud about keeping your enumerated cactus(a)hks.net | rights when you're busy exercising your unenumerated ones. cactus(a)bb.com | http://www.hks.net/~cactus/cactus.html - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLu4qYSoZzwIn1bdtAQHSfgGAqS3pIouxLUp0+da7igUyDpJUTuJ0Ouz9 aNIfa3Z59mJW9ZqIWnaOHuUq8s+lFMo3 =+g6l -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: calling all cpunks on netcom
by cactus＠seabsd.hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <199412131946.LAA26053(a)netcom20.netcom.com>, Shrieks <srikar(a)netcom.com> wrote: >Just floating a trial balloon. Are you tired of the high traffic on >the cypherpunks list and having to wade through a ton of mail every >day? ... >Just a thought. Pheedback? % setenv NNTPSERVER nntp.hks.net % trn hks.lists.cypherpunks It's a bit slow because it has all the traffic since June. I'll implement "expire and archive" soon so it'll be faster. But its usable (I'm using it over a 19.2 SLIP connection to our local network). I understand that pine can do something much tidier, pulling newsgroups from multiple news servers. Read yer docs fer details. - -- Todd Masco | It's difficult to be loud about keeping your enumerated cactus(a)hks.net | rights when you're busy exercising your unenumerated ones. cactus(a)bb.com | http://www.hks.net/~cactus/cactus.html - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLu4rnyoZzwIn1bdtAQEFsAGAtecr1Ddz6GU25uZcvVPw8ohJbzxyYEnh sxqS8QBx6GU6MzcMNWydiPE3aZhoLcyk =Fsjn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: calling all cpunks on netcom
by cactus＠seabsd.hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <199412132147.NAA13766(a)netcom12.netcom.com>, Timothy C. May <tcmay(a)netcom.com> wrote: >Netcom expires _all_ newsgroups, even its own ("netcom.*" local >discussion groups), in the "normal" period of 2-3 weeks. There is no >reason to expect them to make an exception for our group. If this is >not made an exception, then a 3-week hang around period will hardly >constitute an "archive." (Yes, it will reduce _some_ storage, by a >shared pool, but only temporarily.) nntp.hks.net's hks.lists.cypherpunks has back to June. We'll continue to keep at the very least one month back, even once we start archiving and expiring -- and the archives will be available by ftp. So people need only keep pointers to Message-IDs within the archives. I'll almost certainly hack something together that will retrieve articles on the Web in my copious spare time. For now all the articles are available both via nntp for newsreaders and ftp via ftp://ftp.hks.net/cypherpunks/nntp/cypherpunks/ (it's big). - -- Todd Masco | It's difficult to be loud about keeping your enumerated cactus(a)hks.net | rights when you're busy exercising your unenumerated ones. cactus(a)bb.com | http://www.hks.net/~cactus/cactus.html - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLu4tbyoZzwIn1bdtAQHLIAGAiAT5Vh2YJnduSJ0aJvSGDSbcBEhoIVz2 Fcjw0PfU1wlGLZsiDIiky6fEsms0EdnY =JKuL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: IPSP and Netscape
by jamesd＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I wrote: > > Eric and Perry have repeatedly used this method - > > not only attacking a straw man, but lying outright > > that their opponent has *explicitly* proclaimed > > the straw man. > > > > I am thoroughly sick of this dishonest debating > > tactic. > > > > If someone genuinely believe his opponent assumes > > or implies something that is obviously false he > > should say "implies" or "assumes" > > > > To say "claims" or "states" is to say something completely > > different. Perry E. Metzger writes > We're sick of you inventing facts, but of course, you'll just claim > we've been doing that. I will provide an example: Will you? You wrote: > You claim we haven't done anything and Netscape has. Where did I claim that? That is an example of a fact that you invented. Now provide an example of a fact that I invented. -- --------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we James A. Donald are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the omnipotent state. jamesd(a)netcom.com

1 0

Re: News->Mail & CMU's Andrew Message System
by cactus＠seabsd.hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <9412131824.AA13662(a)sulphur.osf.org>, Rich Salz <rsalz(a)osf.org> wrote: >> AMS is pretty strongly tied to AFS (now known as part of DCE) > >At some levels DCE's distributed file system (DFS) is "AFS version 5" (sic), >but not really. The original intent was that DFS was AFS with the IPC replaed >with secure DCE RPC, but there's a whole mess of protocol changes since then. > >They're different beasts. I stand corrected. FWIW, I was mentioning DCE mostly for context rather than any claim of interoperability. - -- Todd Masco | It's difficult to be loud about keeping your enumerated cactus(a)hks.net | rights when you're busy exercising your unenumerated ones. cactus(a)bb.com | http://www.hks.net/~cactus/cactus.html - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLu4waCoZzwIn1bdtAQHU5wF8Cn2+2I3AmqnVPcmNTBke6jqaCNmZ0ljU FfYJlbG37TSZcKomZ2a12MG8VjuHKXgO =wkvs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

NEW key distribution venue up and running!
by skaplin＠skypoint.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- After much angst the following is up and running. Special thanks to L. McCarthy and Sameer for the help. BTW-I've been having mail problems so this may show up a few times...apologies in advance. Sam Welcome!! This is the PGP public key distribution mailing list. The purpose of this list is to provide an easy and free method to distribute PGP public keys. The sole purpose of this list is to distribute PGP public keys. Any questions or problems with PGP should be posted in alt.security.pgp. All keys posted to this list are channeled to three different sources: 1) The subscribers of this list. 2) The keyservers 3) alt.security.keydist Please note that you do not have to be a subscriber to the list to post to the list. All messages addressed to pgp-public-keys(a)c2.org will be posted to the list. Because of this please post only PGP PUBLIC KEYS. The keyserver that this list posts to is a non-U.S.A. location. This is to provide support for all versions of PGP. A special note for users of AUTOPGP or similar utilities: AUTOPGP has the ability to directly take keys out of a mail packet. This feature coupled with this list can seamlesly update your key ring. To do this. 1) Subscribe to the list. 2) Configure AUTOPGP to automatically update your key ring. 3) Configure your offline mail reader to discard all message coming from the list. Offline AutoPGP is Copyright (c) 1993, 1994 by Felix Shareware and the author Stle Schumacher. All Rights Reserved. Please direct any questions or problems to: skaplin(a)skypoint.com PGP encrypted mail is accepted and encouraged. - - - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To subscribe to the list, send a message to: majordomo(a)c2.org In the body of the message include: subscribe pgp-public-keys - - - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, send a message to: majordomo(a)c2.org In the body of the message include: unsubscribe pgp-public-keys - - - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- ============================================================================== Life can only be understood backwards; but it must be lived forwards. - Sren Kierkegaard, "Life" ============================================================================== skaplin(a)skypoint.com | "...vidi vici veni" - Overheard | outside a Roman brothel. PGP encrypted mail is accepted and | preferred. | Change is the only constant in the | Universe..."Four quarters, please." E-mail key(a)four11.com for PGP Key or | Finger skaplin(a)mirage.skypoint.com | Smile!! Big brother is watching. ============================================================================== - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: This message digitally signed to verify the identity of the sender iQEVAwUBLu5UdclnXxBRSgfNAQEWcQf9HC5s+rHX+14+ao0IhfIhdqvugDdf5YH8 VAx5oDVIyCm5HqmEp/wYRaYOnoFtIv4j7fa7jYfzvTL9tQGBfJ1ygh5KUo3r9Oqw hGn3iIkcylGquz/cvh2JUBFTowdueSII4180Bbj1xIElQJG2nPSh1KeALIjWqHJS Ch4nSnzwZaVCaY+tITTVTsWezX14UXjmITXU0TG2OpQaMC+Unzlj7EiWWQyqQ/k5 4UIGGLajPaif1AKyZBcv0anxrW88Wcfx16c2giV9sS7+3v6OWI2ItQMo94LfnWnl j78gmXW0dQ3+IIPs+0WmQsghFpPHXwMbtqnLa8O4IRcWMPGmJIxo4A== =bw2k - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLu5XWyoZzwIn1bdtAQG7VgF/a7W7C0N3rwSf+RxurCmreBjsjQmP4DEj Kq+TpEQDjhwOvDgh+OLunv93rNr3IKI2 =+3lV -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

No Subject
by anonymous-remailer＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

perry shut the fuck up you arrogant dweeb

1 0

Emergency! Need single use passwords!
by loki＠nately.UCSD.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi all. We discovered that someone has been running a packet sniffer on our subnet of several dozen computers. He has all the passwords. This is my chance to try to get single use password login programs installed here. Please give me recomendations and ftp locations. Thanks. - ---------------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell who does not speak for CASS/UCSD loki(a)nately.ucsd.edu PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche - ---------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUBLu5mUFVkk3dax7hlAQGP9gP8DB5WGmLQsSR6AGPTKkPMOqyAew+NDsiE ftwsDXJV2ijZfabkY+2V84ea4lDLku7BPmz+5p4gI7E2ezDFHgJ/bQ/cDspsjZoO EzmqiJqJGkCNggFdKzD29jsU1v+icZEdMOuwGZ7rMKEAfCtBCmT9X8Uvk4q7S+YO udLS1eGddAY= =7gbf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3

Encrypted Credit Card Numbers For Transmission....
by werewolf＠io.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I thought about this recently when I bought a subscription to Wired for X-Mas for a friend. Why don't organizations like Wired (who are ostensibly closely connected to the 'net) not have public keys (ie through Viacrypt, as they are a commercial enterprise) that subscription purchasers could encrypt a credit card number to them, and then e-mail that cyphertext file to them for processing. The company could then snail mail to the purchaser confirmation of the cc purchase just like what happens for a credit card phone purchase. It seems straightforward or am I missing something? I mean, PGP is extremely widespread, and other organizations encrypt data for transmission between points with DES, so use of encryption is hardly a novel concept for business to swallow (particularly a magazine like Wired, who likely have a reasonably encryption knowledgeable readership or potential readership). Routine use of encryption at this simple level would likely get the ball rolling in the direction of other endeavors, like e-cash, or at worst become another convenience for the customer and allow encryption and the 'net to gain wider acceptance. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBLu6Cl3BFBj7pSNyhAQGzRQf/WjlkdJaLfTpc8cdDF6EV6IoGN0P0i6l1 dXPMoqRwNn3Aol04pBRQn3+KrK5GaII9ZopRWtEysCzIdv4nbA2t6qLZBZ8oXUgg 3o5Bdp+RIcgXNPtoRmZH5yDGw8kOQqgBH3glWsL25v2BOd87ic10HbhjSZn9FfWD s0qNKFblbqOb6Ur/XZklfjEpPJbE8rvVawt6RQqDO1ky5rKxrgDeGeQVfnu8m7ti fFo9lqTGpBKW9vk8JnTpF5gJvgTcj/iPxNzzeRw6UBD/nIDV2Ttg/lJni5yhGOxe 5LLINeaGVDvtioGbcehz0veXFZ5t7pNJgRxbIIG0AgA+plP0RQdp8A== =iUO3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Re: Using HotWIRED without provoking junk mail
by L. McCarthy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > I get enough junk mail already, and I don't want vendors to be able to > capture market research at the browsing level (I haven't > looked at WIRED's server for precisely this reason). A while back someone established a HotWIRED account in the name "cypherpunks" with password "cypherpunks" to get around this. I make a point of mentioning that whenever I point someone to HotWIRED. I'm assuming here that they're not collecting identification data in some other way (if you're not using Netscape ;). - - -L. Futplex McCarthy; PGP key by finger or server "We've got computers, we're tapping phone lines; I know that that ain't allowed" --Talking Heads - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBLu55rGf7YYibNzjpAQExGwP/S0ahTCimJlYKQCK1DGjHbdSxcaovbHHI Ybtcw8iaGwYZxmEWcK5fM8tRqORV99oGUISdynMrFCw0VV+cvozot4q+GSMCpcND uIsSgkw/D3F3XWfWLtJDocme3Joot1cARfmo6lj7YmqBjHS2e27OOke8BQ2JeOBh 3wceidNaEKk= =fWzB - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLu564ioZzwIn1bdtAQExZwF9EEHP+++Y3ODxhxSZPY3IeVSC0JtOc7vc xu2avrEaeNetk0yPogy1+tmjwb6JC2e8 =qVmS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

No Subject
by ddt＠lsd.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

X-PGP Key ID: 4AAF00E5 X-PGP Fprint: 30D81F3484E6A83F 6EC8D7F0CAB3D265 Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 21:08:38 -0800 To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com From: ddt(a)lsd.com (Dave Del Torto) Subject: KEYSRVR: remove w/o revoke? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- A Keyserver Dilemma: Through the good graces of one Craig Steinberger, I discovered that the keyserver Michael Graff runs at Iowa State has an old, defunct key for me. Naturally, I've tried to update it, but am not sure if I was successful yet, but here's my question: Is there a mechanism for deleting your own key from a keyserver's ring without revoking it? I think not, on the surface of it, it goes against general key hygiene procedures. History: I sent that 512 key to two people almost two years ago as a test and never used it since. Apparently it got put on someone's keyring and transferred to Iowa at some point. (Note: _I_ never added it to any keyserver, so there's a problem with posting other people's keys and not telling them that also needs addressing here.) Now, since I never expected to use that key again, I deleted the secret half of the pair, and hence am unable to revoke it. Asking Michael nicely to remove it from Iowa (which requires a certain measure of trust most keyserver-owners might not extend under normal conditions) is fine. But what about all the other keyservers that propagate the bogus key all over (and back to Iowa)? How can one deal with that problem? Key management is one of my _least_ favorite aspects of PGP. grrrrr... BTW, my (good) key is available at: ftp.netcom.com:/pub/dd/ddt/crypto/ddt-PGP-key.txt My apologies to anyone who hasn't been able to verify my signatures because of the bogus key. dave _____________________________________________________________ "To solve a maze, start at the cheese and mouse backwards." -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLu5noaHBOF9KrwDlAQHHogP/ds8Nr2nlnR6mRZbul24Kk07FvBrNCqrb TY70MN9aEsKLoALXpdvC4ZIc2npwk3HWK/UN7mayqZsVWwOpJf/NZwATcYHrlGxT 5sHsAhGAzb7TlpByEUJ+He65e7a8doyqffHuUeNdokM5YFkxQi/LRfPVkIDi3cGG jq6NJR20SKs= =+Zfi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

No Subject
by ddt＠lsd.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

X-PGP Key ID: 4AAF00E5 X-PGP Fprint: 30D81F3484E6A83F 6EC8D7F0CAB3D265 Date: Tue, 13 Dec 1994 21:08:19 -0800 To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com From: ddt(a)lsd.com (Dave Del Torto) Subject: Re: calling all cpunks on netcom At 11:46 am 12/13/94, Shrieks wrote: >Just floating a trial balloon. Are you tired of the high traffic on >the cypherpunks list Well, yes, it does get a BIT junked-up at times (mea culpa). >and having to wade through a ton of mail every >day? Any of you folks approaching your 5M limit from archiving too >many messages? No, I don't rely on Netcom to store it for me, I POP back it to my home machine and fill the nooks and crannies on my HD before I archive it all to big, monthly searchable text files (which lay compressed at the botton of another drive hanging off my home ether). But that's just me: when I first subscribed in 92 from Budapest (gaak! telecom hell!), I had a very funky and expensive connection and it was a "nagy" pain in the ass. Of course, the volume back then wasn't quite as... "intense." >Well, I am and I don't really want to start paying for the extra memory. I'm sympathetic to that: if there's a better way to do it, I'm all eyes. >I was wondering if it might be worth petitioning the netcom sysadmins >to start up a local newsgroup (eg. netcom.cpunks) [elided] As far as trial balloons float, it's not a horrible one, BUT: while I applaud the intent, the method sorta suc-er-(let's see... #10 on Engineer's New Terminology list...from October's FUN10 list ... ah here we go: "WE WILL LOOK INTO IT"(1). Besides the feasibility problems that Timothy mentioned (Netcom bonking files after a while), I'm just convinced that getting Netcom to do somthing this _complex_ would be *UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE*. I mean, they don't return phone calls, they don't answer support mail (well, almost never), and it took them three-and-a-half-months (yes, you read that correctly) to find the 2 minutes to set up an anon ftp directory for one of my clients (still no explanation for that, btw). Not to mention that certain dept managers there have a tendency to "work around the truth." Now, you tell ME that they can handle something like a local ng (no smirking, now!). Hell, they can't handle the quotidian business they HAVE much less something "technical." Uh, flame off. Yikes. Sorry 'bout that, lads. It's just that I can think of other things I'd prefer to RAM up my butt than more Netcom hassles. Wait a minnit: isn't this alt.netcom.sucks? Oh dear, I wanted the room down the hall. Excuse me. Also, did someone (Tim?) mention that Netcom filters all our packets to the NSA? I'd like to know how anyone could ping that out, but maybe it might be a good idea all the same if we just try to set up our own box overseas. If it could give us a bit more security/fewer intrusions, I'd send the Hack-Tik boys (fer example) in A'dam some fraction of my pathetic bank account to get it up (in the red light district, perhaps, wouldn't _that_ be appropriate?), and/or maybe someone who shall remain nameless with the initials JG might be overcome by philanthropism (yet again) and help us put an old unused box online "somewhere". I'm just thrashing here, but maybe there's kernel of a worthwhile idea here (all puns intended, always). What about Arthur Abraham? Arthur? >Another alternative might be to set up something along the lines of >discuss at mit [elided] This might be viable, but sick puppy that I am, I LIKE getting all this mail dumped on my machine from Eric's remailer. I kind of understand Tim's point: with the files local, I can browse/search at will at greater speeds, etc. And ruthless deletion is the only way to survive the onslaught. Of course, this all means I can never go on vacation unless I unsub for the duration, or else I DO get those dorky "your mailbox is full" msgs from you-know-who. s i g h >Just a thought. Pheedback? Screeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee-oops, sorry, forgot to turn my radio down. dave [1] Which means: "Forget it! We have enough problems right now." ____________________________________________________________________ "I'm quite confident about the Republicans salvaging the Economy: heck, look what a swell job they're doing down in Orange County!"

1 0