December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Cryptoanarchy in the field
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:35 PM 11/14/1996, Sandy Sandfort wrote: >On Thu, 14 Nov 1996, yet another John Anonymous MacDonald wrote: ^^^^^^^^^^^ Problem?

1 0

Copyright violations
by alzheimer＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Financial Times: Tuesday, November 9, 1996 Visa Set to Test 'Electronic Purse' By George Graham Visa, the international payments card consortium, has picked Leeds for a trial next year of its electronic purse, a plastic card with an embedded computer chip which can be loaded with cash and used for small purchases. The Visa Cash card was launched last year in the US and widely promoted this summer in Atlanta during the Olympic Games. Other pilots have been launched in Argentina, Australia, Canada, Colombia, Hong Kong, New Zealand and Spain. The card will clash directly with the UK-developed Mondex card, another electronic purse about to be taken over by MasterCard. Mondex is currently on trial in Swindon, and at the universities of Exeter and York, and a Hong Kong trial was launched this week. Visa Cash will be launched by Abbey National, Barclays Bank, the Co-operative Bank, Halifax Building Society, Lloyds TSB and the Royal Bank of Scotland. Visa said it did not expect banks to charge customers for the empty card during the pilot. It hopes that 2,000-3,000 merchants will accept the card. Electronic purses are designed to act as a substitute for cash for regular purchases such as newspapers or bus tickets. Because the money is already loaded on the card, a shop can accept it immediately without a signature or a personal identification number, and without a telephone call to the bank's computer for authorisation. That makes them economical for much smaller transactions than a credit or debit card would be used for. But ordinary bank cards will soon also contain a computer chip. The Association for Payment Clearing Services, which runs the UK's payment systems, plans to start chip card trials next October in Bristol, Edinburgh and Northampton. Banks could start replacing the UK's 90m magnetic strip cards with chip cards by next summer. The initial purpose is to produce a card that is harder to counterfeit than today's magnetic strip cards. But extra security features such as electronic signature recognition or even biometric keys -- retina scans or palm prints -- could also be loaded on to the chip. Plastic card fraud losses have halved in the last four years to #83.3m last year, and many banks now doubt whether chip cards will cut fraud by enough to justify their extra cost. But bankers are also intrigued by the potential for using the chip to add extra services to their payment cards. American Banker: Wednesday, November 13, 1996 Mellon Starts Internet-Based Corporate Service By STEVEN MARJANOVIC Mellon Bank Corp. has launched an Internet-based electronic commerce service for its corporate customers. The service, which uses encryption and authentication software from Premenos Technology Corp. of Concord, Calif., lets corporate customers send payments and related information to the bank over the Internet using standard electronic data interchange formats. The deal is a new example of how banks are slowly growing more confident about the security of sending sensitive payment and business information over the public network. Mellon says it is confident it can conduct secure transactions over the open medium after a six-month "testing" phase of Premenos' security features. The goal of the pilot was to "try to kill the software," by cracking its public key-private key data encryption features, said Mauro DeFelice, manager of security and technical services at Pittsburgh-based Mellon. "We wanted to make sure we knew what our risk was," he said. A rising number of banks are looking to use the Internet as a channel for corporate banking transactions. The attraction, according to Lawrence Forman, cash management analyst at Ernst & Young, is that the Internet is much cheaper than alternatives, like the automated clearing house network or value-added private networks. But he said not all banks are comfortable with the Internet yet. Further, he questioned whether Internet security issues have been adequately addressed, and noted that many institutions, like Citicorp, remained "very wary of it." Encryption measures are still relatively new technologies, Mr. Foreman noted, and "as volume picks up, the incentive for criminals to break these algorithms will grow," he said. Several banks send and receive EDI payment transmissions over the Internet, including BankAmerica Corp., and Banc One Corp. Chase Manhattan Corp. recently struck a deal with Premenos to conduct EDI transactions with Diamond Shamrock Inc., an oil refinery based in San Antonio, Texas. Mellon's first customer for its new service is Bell Atlantic Corp. Mellon now issues as many as 10,000 payment and payment-related transmissions daily. The bank receives files via the Internet, processes them with its EDI translation system, and initiates ACH transactions, Fed Wire electronic funds transfers, or issues checks. Mellon has offered customers EDI services using payment formats found on the ACH network for five years. The Internet's advantage, aside from its ubiquity, is cheaper transmission rates. The deal between Mellon and Premenos is mutually beneficial. Mr. DeFelice said the bank, which licensed Premenos' software at a discount, can offer competitive EDI services to a larger market of business customers. Premenos gets access to Mellon's extensive corporate customer base. Bell Atlantic at one point wanted to develop EDI software for the Internet with Mellon. But it scrapped those plans, opting instead to use software Premenos had already developed. Financial Times: Tuesday, November 12, 1996 US Lawyers Turn to Fraud-Busting In murder mysteries, getting rid of the body is the biggest problem. Fraudsters face a different dilemma: they need to lay their hands on the spoils once the hue and cry has calmed. Two American lawyers have set up a company to prevent them doing just that. Mr Irving Cohen and Mr Martin Kennedy believe there are enormous opportunities for recovering money taken illegally. "The US Treasury has estimated that $ 500bn of off-shore funds are assets protected from creditors," says Mr Kennedy, who has worked on bad debt recovery with banks such as CIBC and Bank of Tokyo. The reason the money is not recovered, he says, is because "there is no understanding that deliberately hidden assets can be recovered." Interclaim plans to take advantage of that with a form of global factoring. It is looking for debts worth at least $ 5m, and with an average value of $ 20m. "This is a completely new kind of company," Mr Kennedy says, "but it is going to open up a field where there is going to be competition in five to 10 years." The reasons large sums lie unrecovered are a combination of financial services regulations and psychology. A bank faced with a probable bad debt is legally required to make provisions, but that act moves the debt from a profit centre to the bank's recovery or special loans department. More crucially, once the provision has been made, the bank and its shareholders have already accepted the loss; it is written into the accounts and the impetus to pursue it is lost. "Institutions have lost their faith in traditional methods of recovery," Mr Kennedy say. According to KPMG, the accountants, such methods usually recover 2-4 per cent of the debt; Interclaim believes its recovery rates will be closer to 20 per cent. Part of that success will come from its "find, freeze and settle" philosophy. It aims to find the money and freeze the assets, thus immobilising the fraudster and bringing him to the settle ment table quickly. "These individuals are not interested in complying with the rule of law," Mr Irving says. "And we are not interested in grinding through the legislation for five or 10 years. If we find someone whose 12-year-old daughter has $ 10m in her bank account, we can be sure she didn't get that from a paper round." The philosophy relies on an understanding of the fraudster and his assumptions. He is, says Mr Kennedy, not only cunning but arrogant; he regards his victims with derision. But criminals are also usually pragmatic. So when faced with an adversary who outwits them, they capitulate quickly. Interclaim either buys claims outright for between 0.5 per cent to 6 per cent of their value, or works with the institution in a joint venture. It will spend between $ 250,000 and $ 500,000 to enforce and prosecute a claim, though the cost of recovery bears no relation to the size of the claim.

1 0

Re: ??????????????????????
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:57 PM 11/14/1996, newtonm(a)papa.uncp.edu wrote: >I have a breif question for all you folks out there.... >Does anyone know the email address and procedure for sending your mail via >"cypherpunks" so that it changes your e-mail address so that the person >recieving your e-mail message sees on the mesage that its only from >an anonymous source? A customer! You came to the right place, sir. We are glad you asked us for assistance and we will do our best to get you involved in the use of anonymous remailers. The more people who know how to use this technology, the better. An anonymous remailer takes mail and forwards it after removing identifying information. However, this is not done by "sending your mail via "cypherpunks" ". The cypherpunks is just a mailing list. Instead, you send your message to one of the 20 or so volunteer-run anonymous remailers. Here are some URLs you may find helpful: http://www.replay.com/remailer/anon.html http://www.seattle-webworks.com/pgp/ http://www.stack.urc.tue.nl/~galactus/remailers/ http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html BTW, your subject line "??????????????????????" is likely to generate hostility. It is generally considered to be a breach of etiquette to send a message to a large mailing list without indicating the subject. For instance, a good topic for this message would have been "Help with Anonymous Remailers". Since you are clearly new to the net, I am sure you did not intend rudeness. Santa's Little Helper

2 1

Re: The Key for the IPG 200 Megabytes at NETPRIVACY.COM
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> In response to the numerous requests for us to post the key that we used > to produce the almost 200 megabytes of raw encryptor stream at our web > site, we are pleased to provide the ASCII values of same as follows: Numerous requests? - I was right, he is halucinating... > In order for those few who have not had the opportunity to check it out, > we will leave it up another week and then take it down and put up a > new shorter one, maybe a 2,560,000 byte one permanently and a monthly > 2,560,000 byte one where we publish the key each month. No-one wants to... > Of course, no university, coderpunk( no offense intended please), or > cypherpunk , or any collection of same has broken the system, nor will > they ever. As most of you now know, it is unbreakable. We have had over > 100 universities, IBM, Microsoft, Intel, several dozen different > government agencies, and thousands of others to download the data and > look at the algorithm. Of course, like everyone else, they have been > benighted. Oh do be quiet you self satisfied smug little man. Every single member of this list and indeed of other forums in which you post (I don`t know of any but I assume it is not just us you annoy) knows you are a fool. Some while ago I seem to recall you offering to sell your company for one dollar if anyone could break your last algorithm, it was sumarily broken - why are you still owner of the company? - Oh I get it, they wouldn`t pay a dollar for it, neither would I. But seriously, was this you, and why didn`t you sell the company, and how are people to trust you now knowing this past debacle... Go away, you are like an unpopular bore at a party who doesn`t seem to realise that everyone wants him to leave.... Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

2 1

Water supplies
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It should be easy to poison a water supply and kill many people. Yet, this never happens. Why would this be? Surely, there are malicious folks who want to do it.

1 0

EFF Board, again
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim O'Reilly's been talking publicly about starting a "Sierra Club" which would "protect" the "environment of the Net". What does he want to do? It might be a way to tell companies what kind of software they can publish and at what price. ORA has been having trouble competing with Microsoft. Naturally, they cast themselves as altruistic good guys. Whatever O'Reilly is talking about, it sounds like more trouble from the general vicinity of the EFF Board.

2 1

Sarcasm for Jody. [WAS: Top Ten Corporate Security Needs?]
by attila＠primenet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In <199611151336.IAA00800(a)clipper.hq.tis.com>, on 11/15/96 at 08:35 AM, Jody C Patilla <jcp(a)tis.com> said: :> "The Top Ten Corporate Security Needs of MIS" :> :Since Mark Riggins wants free assistance in doing his marketing research, :I can certainly oblige, but I would have to say that my clients tell me :there are only three things they want: :1. Total security. :2. Totally transparent access from everywhere. :3. And all of it for free. :and there you have it, sports fans! :- jcp ...truer words were never spoken; and, when there is a problem, the man will call up and say "It dont work!..." to which you ask: "OK, _what_ does not work?..." and this sequence is repeated again and again -ad nauseum-- "..._IT_ dont work! I keep telling you!" The call escalates all the way to your head freak, who has never suffered fools well... (and should never be permitteed to talk to a real customer, much less a prospective customer)... The probably simple problem (Maybe ...it was unplugged?) is resolved by the guru asking the client: "...why in the fuck would you do something as 'stupid and ignorant' as _that_?!?). Of course, the resolution is a lost customer.... "Minor problem,.." says the guru: "he's a jerk, we dont need him...." And, redder than a russian beet, cradling the talking instrument with plastic shattering impact, our beloved peter-principle corporate honcho screams at his staff: "...I told you stupid nerds you should have gone with Bill Gates --someone smart!" -attila -- Cyberspace and Information are Freedom! FUCK your WIPO, too. -attila

1 0

Cypherpunk chat server
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cypherpunks, This is to announce the general opening of the cypherpunk Web chat server. It is at: http://kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu:5080/ For added privacy, there is an SSL version at: https://kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu:4433/ I wrote this server to experiment with asynchronous stream transformation programming techniques, and for fun. I hope it is of some benefit to the cypherpunks community. Enjoy! Raph

1 0

HP announcing some International Cryptography stuff on Monday
by John Gilmore 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Are they the next Big Company to knuckle under to the Feds? Their pcmcia-with-local-country-surveillance-chip-socket initiative never seemed to go anywhere. PALO ALTO, Calif.(BUSINESS WIRE)Nov. 15, 1996 Hewlett-Packard Company today announced that Lewis E. Platt, HP chairman, president and chief executive officer, will host a press and analyst event on Monday, Nov. 18, that will showcase the fact that a significant barrier to conducting secured business transactions and communications over the Internet has been cleared. Expected to join Platt at the International Cryptography Framework announcement are Brad Silverberg, senior vice president of Microsoft(R)'s Internet Platform and Tools Division, and Ron Smith, senior vice president and general manager of Intel's Semiconductor Products Group. The event will be held at 9:30 a.m. (registration at 9:00 a.m.) in the White and Murrow Rooms of the National Press Club, 529 14th Street N.W., Washington. Members of the press and analysts should contact HP's Lisa Arruiza-DeLeon at 408/447-5331 to register for an event that will showcase an approach to solving the data security and integrity issues that have impaired and frightened users and companies from exploiting the full power of the Internet.

1 0

RE: [REBUTTAL] Censorship on cypherpunks?, from The Netly News
by James A. Tunnicliffe 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Aga wrote: > > >Why? Are you a criminal? > > >What are you hiding behind your PGP? > > > > Okay, I'll bite. Where is it said that a person who wants h[is,er] > > privacy > > is a criminal? Charlie McCarthy might have said that. [...deletia...] > The more you PGP, the worse you look. Nobody reads your e-mail, > so stop being so paranoid. > > -aga Sigh. I really don't have time for unimaginative trollers, and you've caught your limit, so into the killfile you go. Still, I would appreciate it if you could see your way clear to quit posting these trolls on cypherpunks, since it does make it harder to effectively filter the responses from people who make the mistake of taking you seriously. Thank you for your kind consideration, Tunny ====================================================================== James A. Tunnicliffe | WWWeb: http://www.inference.com/~tunny Inference Corporation | PGP Fingerprint: CA 23 E2 F3 AC 2D 0C 77 tunny(a)Inference.com | 36 07 D9 33 3D 32 53 9C ====================================================================== begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT M>)\^(AH4`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$(@ <` M& ```$E032Y-:6-R;W-O9G0@36%I;"Y.;W1E`#$(`06 `P`.````S <+``\` M# `/`!<`!0`D`0$@@ ,`#@```,P'"P`/``P`#P`8``4`)0$!"8 !`"$````Q M.45"-#DQ148T,T1$,#$Q.3,P0S P04$P,$$U1C8P1 `B!P$-@ 0``@````(` M`@`!!( !`$ ```!213H@6U)%0E545$%,72!#96YS;W)S:&EP(&]N(&-Y<&AE M<G!U;FMS/RP@9G)O;2!4:&4@3F5T;'D@3F5W<R `K!4!`Y &`/0&```:```` M`P`F```````#`#8``````!X`< `!````/ ```%M214)55%1!3%T@0V5N<V]R M<VAI<"!O;B!C>7!H97)P=6YK<S\L(&9R;VT@5&AE($YE=&QY($YE=W,@``(! M<0`!````&P````&[TRS")QY)ZGT]]!'0DPP`J@"E]@T``&Y*9P`#`"X````` M``,`!A"T5Q>Q`P`'$$<#```>``@0`0```&4```!!1T%74D]413I72%D_05)% M64]504-224U)3D%,/U=(051!4D593U5(241)3D="14A)3D193U524$=0/T]+ M05DL24Q,0DE415=(15)%25-)5%-!24142$%405!%4E-/3E=(3U=!``````,` M$! ``````P`1$ `````"`0D0`0```+\#``"[`P``(@8``$Q:1G6BU5!"_P`* M`0\"%0*D`^0%ZP*#`% 3`U0"`&-H"L!S973N,@8`!L,"@S(#Q@<3`H,&,P1& M`@!P<G$Q()<(50>R`H,T$P]F-0/%0Q2S$B)S=&5M`H!]%PJ ",\)V3L9GS(U M-0\"@ J!#;$+8&YG,3 ^,Q0@"PH4(0OQ$W!G8:P@=P-@&' Z"H4^'T(@5VAY M/R 3<64@VGD(8" >8 4!;0N !T Z/Q[L805 "L @)&AI0F0+@&<@8F4BP&[& M9" R!<!01U A*A[I`$]K87DL($DGTFP#(&)I&' N'^ ?H-\$D" @! `G``5 M<PMP(X#2="(#(' $D',"(!YP+&AO'G `<'0$(&A;-00`+ 2071[I%-!I=KT` MT'D>Z2<1((D?X$,1P69L") %T&-#"L GP'FR("#09V@%0!' =B @S2=W+@J% M"H5;+B_@#;"^;!(`!S OX2FV'N=4)L!_+9 %L" D(_$ET"? ("!W3P6P$? @ M,QDP;VLF@4Z:;P;@9"V &:!A9 0(a)V2.C92T`P ,0+![G*&#Q)V!T;W C(2+R M-E$*L2T`<&\BT"[F/A[G+6';'E N_%,ML2: 2322)A!U+8!D`B G+>4P4 > M(-L"$ 7 =0,``,!G(.$P4+\[D@-@)A H0270`'!D"H7%($$G+B%C874MPB.C M^RS0(-!T)= V40N -I RTS)K`Q!L9@,0("1G;WTF@%,P4"80)=$*A3,@=?)L M(X!A<!30!9 ',!AP_R<R!I @,P6@0O(1\" C0K&?); @D# P"L% 87%U)E#Y M"H5P;QA@(O(RX3-1/3-7!" H<2K <";!<#Q0:_,]H0"0;F-#PSL0!Y$`P/YK M0\,1P02!"H5 80W!!9!_/.(ZX4$1&'!%\3'1&:!S_T;P`( 'D0-2*"$VH$$Q M***_2B,RX0J%(- 88$HR;T0@OT_1(O(@0A'P!1 (8',ZX/<N[3' `'!K(#,\ M$B.C4''_(X %H "!!($\T0(@-;92%O4\4&XJUCU6CU>?6*]9OZ(]"H4@2F$' M@D$F@#U5PFE%L :02\ ?X"!\8R:@7/!E8CHBL ) <- Z+R]W7= N"X!+P L9 MH$EA+@6@;2]^=/]5V27@7B85$4C !;!4@URR^2/Q($8B\4BQ!1 ",%U @2QQ M02 R,R!%$B 21F+004-BL$0@,-EC8#<W6N9?`T!?UUZB3URA7,%F#Q_@,S9C MH#=8($0Y9S!BT#-CD#/E$B U8M Y0U8?:;]JSR]KWUI>+OP8P0!O$ ! `#D` M0&7"NS'3NP$#`/$_"00```(!1P`!````,0```&,]55,[83T@.W ]26YF97)E M;F-E.VP]3$%.1%)5+3DV,3$Q-3(P,34R,UHM-30Q.0`````"`?D_`0```$H` M````````W*= R,!"$!JTN0@`*R_A@@$`````````+T\]24Y&15)%3D-%+T]5 M/4Y/5D%43R]#3CU214-)4$E%3E13+T-./5153DY9````'@#X/P$````5```` M2F%M97,@02X@5'5N;FEC;&EF9F4``````@'[/P$```!*`````````-RG0,C M0A :M+D(`"LOX8(!`````````"]//4E.1D5214Y#12]/53U.3U9!5$\O0TX] M4D5#25!)14Y44R]#3CU454Y.60```!X`^C\!````%0```$IA;65S($$N(%1U M;FYI8VQI9F9E`````$ `!S 0RY$3,=.[`4 `"#!P10V\,=.[`0,`#33]/P`` M`@$4- $````0````5)2AP"E_$!NEAP(a)`*RHE%QX`/0`!````!0```%)%.B ` M````"P`I```````+`",```````(!?P`!````4 ```#QC/553)6$]7R5P/4EN M9F5R96YC925L/4Q!3D1252TY-C$Q,34R,#$U,C-:+34T,3E ;&%N9')U+FYO 7=F%T;RYI;F9E<F5N8V4R+F-O;3X``P(R ` end

2 1

Re: [REBUTTAL] Censorship on cypherpunks?, from The Netly News
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mike McNally writes: > Dave Hayes wrote: > > Symbolically, he punched holes in his ideology. That's my > > opinion. > Note that this is only true if John's ideology in the first place > was what you think it was. Excellent point. In point of fact, even if John Gilmore explained his ideology to me, I would *still* only have an ideology that was what I thought it was. There is no chance that I can get John Gilmore's exact ideology in my mind since our minds work differently. > He may have "punched holes" in the conception of John's ideology > that you'd formed in your own mind, of course. Yes, that is the case. Of course, my conception of "free speech" is unique. I see no difference between a government, a group of network administrators, or a panel of judges when it comes to censorship. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet The King decided to force his subjects to tell the truth. Nasrudin was first in line. They asked him, "Where are you going? Tell the truth or be hanged" "I am going," said Nasrudin, "to be hanged on that gallows." "I don't believe you." "Very well, if I have told a lie, then hang me!" "But that would make it the truth!" "Exactly," said Nasrudin, "your truth."

1 0

A New Crypto Announcement--Could be Ominous
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(My traffic from the Cypherpunks list comes in bursts interspersed by long gaps, so I don't know if this has been reported. It seems significant to me.) A few excerpts: H-P ( Hewlett-Packard Co ) says RSA Data ( Security Dynamics Technologies Inc ) in codes deal PALO ALTO, Calif., Nov 15 (Reuter) - Hewlett-Packard Co. said Security Dynamics Technologies Inc's RSA Data Security Inc electronic encryption company is involved in its planned announcement Monday of new advance in encryption technology. Hewlett-Packard said technology the company's Chairman and Chief Executive Lewis Platt is due to detail at the National Press Club on Monday aims to resolve this roadblock in the use of electronic commerce over the Internet. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^[emphasis added by Tim] Hewlett-Packard officials declined to give precise details, but said the technology has already received backing from the U.S. government and other ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ governments which it did not name, as well as major industry players. Senior executives of Microsoft Corp and Intel Corp are among those scheduled to make presentations on Monday, Hewlett-Packard said, but it declined to identify other companies whose technologies will be involved. ----end of item--- It sounds ominous to me. Another backroom deal, probably for some form of key recovery strategy, aka GAK. --Tim May, awaiting Monday's announcement with trepidation "The government announcement is disastrous," said Jim Bidzos,.."We warned IBM that the National Security Agency would try to twist their technology." [NYT, 1996-10-02] We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

5 6

Re: It is getting easier
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:25 PM 11/14/96 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >If I remember correctly, some of the newer transponders used on >commercial aircraft actually transmit GPS data back to the controller in >real time. I wonder how long it will be before the FAA will include such >information in their database. I don't think new transponders make much difference. The old ones heighten the radar image of the airplane which gives an accurate 2D position. This position is automatically entered into the FAA computer which maintains the ATC controller's display. In the old style, altitude is determined by an altimeter on the airplane which encoded into the transponder signal. If newer transponders are returning GPS signals, the position may be more accurate (but probably not unless they can decode the selective availability signal). (OBCrypto for those who care.) >"To obtain the position of any passenger flight in the US within 10 >meters, click here." In either case, the Passenger Name Records for the flight are in the airlines databases (and have been there for many years), and the airplane's physical position is in the FAA's computer (and has been for many years). The ability to find the current position of an airplane, or a passenger remains dependent on the incentives and disincentives for database linking and application development. There are no insurmountable technical problems. The technical problems are those of getting old-technology software to do something new. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The lottery is a tax on | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | those who can't do math. | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | - Who 1st said this? | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

2 1

Re: [REBUTTAL] Censorship on cypherpunks?, from The Netly News
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

aga <aga(a)dhp.com> wrote: >Let's stay on topic here -- John Gilmore is a censorous asshole >for pulling Vulis's plug. The topic has nothing to do with >the Freedom-Knights. At 12:19 AM 11/15/96 -0600, snow wrote: >> [This is a rebuttal to a misguided news article.] >> > Cypher-Censored >> > By Declan McCullagh (declan(a)well.com) >> > The list is on Gilmore's machine and he can do what he wants with >> > it; he can moderate the postings, he can censor material, he can >> > shut the whole thing down. By kicking off an offending user, a >> > list owner merely exercises his property right. There's no >> > government involvement, so the First Amendment doesn't apply. And >> > the deleted, disgruntled user is free to start his own mailing >> > list with different rules. >> >> Notice how, once the opposition is admitted to, the rationalization >> begins. Suddenly this is not a matter of censorship, but of ownership. >> Just as suddenly, the classic anti-free-speech arguments of "if you >> don't like it, start yer own" begin to surface. (Anyone ever notice >> how this resembles the "love it or leave it" mentality of certain >> American patriotic organizations?) > > It still isn't censorship. Censorship, at least in my dictionary, >refers to censor, which uses the word "Official" several times. Mr. >Gilmore is not an "Official" in a government sense, he maybe in the EFF >sense, but this is not an "Official" EFF organ, so that doesn't count. Even more important is the fact that Mr. Gilmore did not prevent Mr. Vulis from speaking. No restraint on speech implies no censorship. Therefor Mr. Vulis was not censored. Q.E.D. You all are perfectly free to like or not like what Mr. Gilmore did. However, don't call it censorship because it wasn't. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The lottery is a tax on | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | those who can't do math. | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | - Who 1st said this? | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

3 2

Re: Why is cryptoanarchy irreversible?
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:44 PM 11/13/96 +0000, Adam Back wrote: >A very good idea. There was some discussion of this kind of thing a >while back about doing this for Singapore. The suggestion at the time >was not to do it perfectly, but rather to arrange something simple to >allow people to circumvent the censorship enforced through their >compulsory use of a government censored web proxy. I hope it is ready. To quote from William Safire's 11/14/96 NYT column: "Let's run a test. "Information Technology and Political Control in Singapore" is a paper just issued by Prof. Gary Rodan of Murdoch University in Perth, Australia, distribued by Chalmers Johnson of the Japan Policy Research Institute in Cardiff, Calif. It's on this web site: http://www.nmjc.ord/jpri/. "If Lee blocks access, Singaporeans, try E-mail: cjohnson(a)ucsd.edu. But be careful, global business executives: the Architect of the New Century [Lee Kuan Yew - wsf] may be monitoring everything you download." ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The lottery is a tax on | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | those who can't do math. | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | - Who 1st said this? | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Re: [REBUTTAL] Censorship on cypherpunks?, from The Netly News
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Umm, even if we accept Dave's claim that Gilmore pinched holes in > his ideology, these holes are no bigger than Dave Hayes's own holes, > since he exercises censorship of Freedom Fighters mailing list. Firstly, there is no "Freedom Fighters" mailing list. I have done nothing Gilmore didn't do. People can still send their missives to freedom-knights without being subscribed. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet A person being delivered from the danger of a fierce lion does not object whether this service is performed by unknown or illustrious individuals. Why, therefore, do people seek knowledge from celebrities?

1 0

Media seekers, reputation and banishment
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> A community offers few punishments for asocial behavior. Killfiles > are partly effective. But the strongest punishment is banishment. The "community" didn't decide anything. John Gilmore did. His machine, his mailing list, his decision, and his responsibility. > The issue is "do we individually banish asocial louts or > collectively?" and of course how do we decide who to banish. Collectively => ban for people who don't want to ban the person. > All of this is certainly easier when done individually yet it is > often prudent and effective to have someone take action when they > are in a position to do be effective. Gilmore acted properly in my > opinion. And DV remains in my killfile. If you still need a killfile, Gilmore wasn't very effective, was he?

1 0

Re: [REBUTTAL] Censorship on cypherpunks?, from The Netly News
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> So you are explaining your problems in advance. Good, it tells > thoughtful readers to take you with a grain of salt. What a wonderfully self-referential statement. That's exactly what this statement does for you... > > In person-to-person interaction, one's only real defense against what > > one decides to call "unwanted" is to remove oneself from the arena of > > interaction. It may not be possible to ignore or run away from certain > > sources of input. > You forget "shutting down" the source of input. Turning off the > radio, TV etc, or turning off the person speaking. If people have difficulty ignoring those on a mailing list or newsgroup that they do not like, how can you expect them to know about this herculean feat of responsibility? > > > The list is on Gilmore's machine and he can do what he wants with > > > it; he can moderate the postings, he can censor material, he can > > > shut the whole thing down. By kicking off an offending user, a > > > list owner merely exercises his property right. There's no > > > government involvement, so the First Amendment doesn't apply. And > > > the deleted, disgruntled user is free to start his own mailing > > > list with different rules. > > Notice how, once the opposition is admitted to, the rationalization > > begins. Suddenly this is not a matter of censorship, but of ownership. > > Just as suddenly, the classic anti-free-speech arguments of "if you > > don't like it, start yer own" begin to surface. (Anyone ever notice > > how this resembles the "love it or leave it" mentality of certain > > American patriotic organizations?) > It still isn't censorship. Call it what you will. In my eyes, here is someone who is attempting (ineffectually, which is perhaps deliberate) to stop messages from being sent to another human which used to be sent to that other human. Censorship? Ownership? Why does ownership justify dishonor? > Censorship, at least in my dictionary, refers to censor, which uses > the word "Official" several times. Mr. Gilmore is not an "Official" > in a government sense, he maybe in the EFF sense, but this is not an > "Official" EFF organ, so that doesn't count. But he is an official of the list. Censorship is not just practiced by governments... > "Editorial Control" means that someone decides who get's published and > who doesn't. From your opposition to it, I guess you think that a magazine > dedicated to poetry should print all poems submitted, or as many, selected > in some sort of non-judgemental order, as they can fit. Or that a magazine > should print any writings submitted to it. Resistance to lack of editorial control prevents one from seeing the true nature of ideologies and opinions. Maybe you don't want this, but why deny it to others? Still... > I run 4 mailing lists, one is personal, one is in the process of coming > online, and 2 are up and running. One of these has a rule: No Politics allowed. > I guess I am a pathetic little censorous worm huh? If that is what you wish to call yourself. I maintain no such position. > That is what freedom is, the ability to _do it yourself_ not the > requirement that others do it for you, or allow you to use what they > have already built. Freedom is anything but categorizable in the terms you are using. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet It has been said that man is a rational animal. All my life I have been searching for evidence which could support this.

1 0

Re: Internet banking: more on Mbanx
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Sender: e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Enzo Michelangeli <enzo(a)ima.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 17:28:50 +0800 (hkt) From: Enzo Michelangeli <enzo(a)ima.com> To: Multiple recipients of <e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com> Subject: Re: Internet banking: more on Mbanx On Fri, 15 Nov 1996, networks(a)vir.com wrote: > Unfortunately, their promotional literature does not go > into their Internet services. The information I was given over > the phone was that by signing up they would supply me with > the 128bit version of Netscape for secure transactions. People outside of the US may be interested to know that there is a small, fully legal, free browser with 128-bit SSL security: it's called WorkHorse, and is available with ftp from ftp.mkt.co.uk (that must have got a 110 bps feed, if the connection speed is of any indication). The link inside Banknet's home page, at http://mkn.co.uk/bank/, seems to be wrong and anyway most browsers time out before getting connected. WorkHorse's interface is pretty ugly and the rendition is buggy, but the SSL connection does work: I got through mbanx's "Sign in" link at http://www.mbanx.com/banxing/5welcome.html , whereas MSIE and NS3 were kicked out due to their 40-bit RC4 limit. Enzo --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

HP announcement re encryption (fwd)
by Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Fri, 15 Nov 1996 16:27:22 -0500 (EST) >From: Ross Stapleton-Gray [email was here] Subject: HP announcement re encryption >From Reuters... for those in the DC area, it'll be at the National Press Club at 8am Monday... PALO ALTO, Calif. (Reuter) - Hewlett-Packard Co. said Friday that it will unveil a breakthrough agreement on Monday in the long-deadlocked debate over software encryption, a development that could eliminate a key impediment to the growth of electronic commerce via the Internet. A spokesman said H-P Chairman and Chief Executive Lewis Platt will provide details of a deal involving computer industry leaders, the Clinton administation and other governments at a press conference in Washington. A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin(a)law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here.

1 0

RE: Remailer Pricing
by Mullen Patrick 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Peter Hendrickson's electrons stated >It looks like I wasn't perfectly clear again. Sorry about that. The user >does not tell anybody whether or not the mail has been read. In fact, >it's nobody's business but their own. This is the advertiser's problem, >and I don't really care whether they solve it. In fact, the user does >not have to put the remailer on the accept list. He or she just has >to tell the remailer operator that they would like to receive a dollar >(or whatever) if the remailer operator sends them any mail. Small point, but noted. I thought the word "read" was mentioned, but obviously it was "received"... Perhaps we've been thinking about anonymous mail the wrong way. Is it like the U.S. Post Office where you have to physically go someplace, buy a stamp, physically write your message, put it in a physical envelope, carry it to a box someplace, and then wait (maybe four days) for it to arrive, all for "only" 32 cents? Or is it more like Federal Express where you pay 20 bucks and it arrives the next day, for sure, every time? Earlier today somebody sent a message about his scary former employers and (apparently) how they just kill people. Would that person pay, say, $5 to have the message delivered reliably and very anonymously? My judgement is that it would be worth every penny, and probably more. >Right now the remailer network is a mess. There just aren't that many >remailers operating in a timely and reliable manner. I am not knocking >the remailer operators for this, it's just clear that "free" doesn't >make it worth their while to keep the remailers operating perfectly >at all times. Very true. This strengthens my point that the remailer operator would want a piece of the pie, as well... >A good pricing strategy for remailers would be to charge, say, $1 for >instant delivery, $.50 for 30 minute delivery, etc. To generate >interest, 4 hour delays could be imposed for free remailing, if the >resources are available. fTotalCostOfDelivery = fCostOfReceipt + nRemailersUsed * fRemailerCost Obviously, nRemailersUsed is only necessary for anonymous chaining... Don't get me wrong, there's nothing meant by this equation, no point trying to be made, nothing. I'm just showing you the pricing strategy. I strongly agree with you that paying for remailer use would greatly improve service, and would probably be a good thing. In the case of chaining, there would have to be a great deal of trust involved so none of the remailers stole all the postage w/out forwarding the message. (Just a thought, anyway) Here's an idea I was tossing around sometime earlier-- One capitalist idea that would invalidate this theory. A remailer would make a lot of money if they made a deal with an advertiser, esp. an advertising agency (containing ads for many companies, if I chose the wrong words) if they eliminated incoming postage, and possibly paid outgoing postage or had the ad agency pay the postage (within limits, of course). The remailer would then tag on advertisements to each mailing. Direct marketing (Note: This is what we're trying to avoid, but I see it happening) The non-charging remailer would become wildly popular, as they don't charge postage, and they would be fast, because they would have corporate sponsorship. This idea is *far* from being farfetched; it exists now. Every mail I receive at my free geocities account has an ad attached. Patrick

2 1

Re: Why is cryptoanarchy irreversible?
by ph＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:02 PM 11/15/1996, Bill Frantz wrote: >At 1:44 PM 11/13/96 +0000, Adam Back wrote: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> A very good idea. There was some discussion of this kind of thing a >> while back about doing this for Singapore. The suggestion at the time >> was not to do it perfectly, but rather to arrange something simple to >> allow people to circumvent the censorship enforced through their >> compulsory use of a government censored web proxy. > I hope it is ready. To quote from William Safire's 11/14/96 NYT column: ^^^^^^^^ > "Let's run a test. "Information Technology and Political Control in > Singapore" is a paper just issued by Prof. Gary Rodan of Murdoch University > in Perth, Australia, distribued by Chalmers Johnson of the Japan Policy > Research Institute in Cardiff, Calif. It's on this web site: > http://www.nmjc.ord/jpri/. > "If Lee blocks access, Singaporeans, try E-mail: cjohnson(a)ucsd.edu. But be > careful, global business executives: the Architect of the New Century [Lee > Kuan Yew - wsf] may be monitoring everything you download." Guess Safire hits the Cypherpunks list when he needs material! Peter

1 0

Clipper 3.11 executive order
by Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://library.whitehouse.gov/PressReleases.cgi?date=0&briefing=4 A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin(a)law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here.

2 1

RE: Leadership and Inscrutable Deficiencies
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Vladimir Z. Nuri, in his Ancient Warrior mode: I think many people need to learn a lesson that cyberspace doesn't change certain basic realities, such as how important a dynamic leader is in forward motion in any area. but they will have plenty of opportunities to learn over the next few years and decades. and I'll be snickering in the sidelines as long as they wonder aloud why their realities are as they are and they find the deficiencies therein inscrutable. ..................................................... Oh, Nuri, you're so Morally Superior and so far above us, being more "up" than anyone on inscrutable deficiencies. I find it incredible to realize that it will take *years* in cyberspace before I learn about the immutability of basic realities (and maybe about the Incommensurability of the Diagonal, too). Definitely it will be a very, very long time before I feel the need of being led (around, by the nose?), in place of exercising self-control and reasoned judgement. .. Blanc

1 0

Mirror of new export control regulations
by Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Because it appears that the whitehouse URL changes daily for press releases, I've put a link to a copy of the text of the rules at the top of my homepage. You can also skip straight to it at: http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/nov96-regs.htm A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin(a)law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here.

4 3