December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

[FC97] Anonymous Networking?
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can someone summarize McCoy's `Anonymous Networking and Virtual Intranets' from FC97 plz?

1 0

No Subject
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

White House "kinder, gentler"-CDA/censor empowerment meeting
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 00:23:08 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: Seth Finkelstein <sethf(a)MIT.EDU> Cc: jseiger(a)cdt.org, jberman(a)cdt.org, fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Re: White House "kinder, gentler"-CDA/censor empowerment meeting Below we see an excellent example of the naivete inherent in Net-libertarian and cypherpunk writing. Obviously the writer does not understand the complexities and challenges of Washington politics. In many ways, it is like sausage being made: disgusting to watch, but a process that results in the compromises so vital in a healthy democracy. Which is why it is inappropriate to criticize the White House's position on the CDA. If you speak your mind aloud, you run the risk of being marginalized like the ACLU. How can you serve your constituents then? Obviously, you can't. So I respectfully suggest that Mr. Finkelstein disabuse himself of radical notions like opposing regulation of the Internet. I can only conclude that because Mr. Finkelstein does not live inside the Beltway, we cannot expect him to realize that it is always necessary to remain players in the game -- even if it means giving up fundamental liberties in the process. -Declan On Wed, 16 Jul 1997, Seth Finkelstein wrote: > >> At 11:35 PM -0400 7/15/97, Michael Sims wrote: > >>...But by lining up with those who intend to FORCE, by > >>hook or crook, ratings on everyone, well, you're not sending the > >>message I would think you would want to. > > > From: Jonah Seiger <jseiger(a)cdt.org> > > As far as I know, this is not what's happening and you are reacting to ghosts > > "I am the ghost of RSACi past". Such as when it nearly became a > contractual requirement for all ISP's in the United Kingdom last year. > Of course they didn't *have* to join up, and they didn't have to not > be raided as child pornographers either. Not a ghost, but a spectre. > > > Like you, CDT will be watching what the President says tomorrow > > very carefully and will have something to say once he has spoken. > > I'm sure you will. And I'm also sure it's going to be along > the lines of "Sign up to this program because it's not censorship and > if you don't, the government will get you". > > ================ > Seth Finkelstein > sethf(a)mit.edu > > >

4 3

Prepaid/anon net access
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 www.wired.com has a little blurb about the people at <http://www.auricweb.com/Accesscard.html>, apparently they're offering/planning to offer prepaid net access cards (similar to prepaid phone cards) whereby one can dial an 800 number, then enter a username/PW for 20 mins of dialup PPP. (they don't provide E-mail accounts, you have to have your own provider for that.) More tools for tentacles. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBM8wXsWcCR88m5EiMEQLxzACfRpDqQ+YUEUDpq7MxgmD+kjDZQ+wAnR52 649yXdt84bHMA3TC63blT9Yn =80qU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.

1 0

Global Banking Docs
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

For those who may have missed it, the European Committee for Banking Standards offers its "Secure Banking Over The Internet," March, 1997. An abstract of the 62-page report which also evaluates global electronic security and cryptographic tools: This ECBS Technical Report shall provide a survey of current and planned banking use of the Internet, investigate the security requirements for secure banking on the Internet, provide a survey of the security-related protocols, services and applications on the Internet, discuss other requirements for global banking (e.g. banking secrecy, data privacy, export issues), and provide an outlook on new banking applications and services such as electronic cash. It's available in PDF format (241K) at: http://www.r3.ch/standards/ecbs/papers/tr401sbi.pdf A mirror of the report is at: http://jya.com/tr401sbi.pdf Note: Acrobat reader version 3.0 is required; version 2.1 cannot read the report. ---------- The FDIC has published today a request for comment on its proposed international banking regulations which combines and consolidates its current three regs: http://jya.com/fdic071597.txt (231K)

1 0

SPA statement and RSAC release
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 08:17:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: SPA statement and RSAC release Statement by Ken Wasch, President, Software Publishers Association PR News Wire via Dow Jones White House Forum: Children on the Internet WASHINGTON, July 16 /PRNewswire/ -- The following is a statement by Ken Wasch, President of the Software Publishers Association: "The software industry recognizes -- and understands -- the legitimate concerns of parents, educators, the President and Vice President, legislators and other citizens about the content and suitability of many Internet sites for our children. We believe parents should have the opportunity, and readily available tools, to monitor -- and block -- objectionable online content. "Today's White House Forum is an important step in highlighting this issue by bringing together a diverse group of concerned organizations and individuals to focus on what must be done. SPA appreciates the invitation of the President and the Vice President to represent the software industry at this forum. However, after we leave the White House, the responsibility of marrying freedom of speech with these legitimate concerns falls on the shoulders of the software industry. The software industry develops the tools and products that, in turn, can put a brown wrapper around objectionable material on the Internet. Others may talk; the software industry must act. "Understanding its responsibility, the software industry several years ago helped establish a process of self-regulation and content ratings through the Recreational Software Advisory Council (RSAC). Today, RSAC, through its Internet ratings system -- RSACi -- has assigned objective content labels to more than 35,000 online sites in just 12 months. RSACi is now the world's leading Internet content ratings system, empowering parents everywhere to block online content they believe offensive. It is important to keep in mind that 'Truth in Packaging' has nothing to do with suppression of content. RSACi is a labeling system, not a system of censorship. "At today's White House Forum, the success of RSACi as an effective, no-cost tool for concerned parents was highlighted. It is no coincidence that two of this nation's largest corporations have committed to using the RSACi ratings system in their online efforts. SPA and the software industry congratulate Disney -- with its strong family emphasis -- and IBM on their decisions to work with RSAC. We know others will join them. Then RSACi will become the universal ratings standard, allowing everyone everywhere to benefit from the exciting world of the Internet, without the inhibition of state-imposed regulation or censorship." SPA is the leading trade association of the software industry, representing 1,200 leading publishers as well as start-up firms developing software applications and tools for use on the desktop, the Internet, and client-server networks. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE RECREATIONAL SOFTWARE ADVISORY COUNCIL WELCOMES IBM AS CORPORATE SPONSOR IBM Supports RSAC Initiative to Provide Self-Regulation of Internet Content Washington, D.C. -- July 16, 1997 The Recreational Software Advisory Council (RSAC) today announced that IBM has become a corporate sponsor of RSAC the non-profit organization committed to providing Internet users with detail regarding web site content. IBM is contributing $100,000 to RSAC, the non-profit developer of RSACi, the voluntary, non-judgmental content labeling software system that allows consumers and Webmasters to create customized filters of online content. "The astounding popularity and growth of the Internet has brought about its greatest challenge -- controlling the flow of content that some feel is inappropriate for children, students, or corporate staff. RSAC's goal has never been to restrict the act of free speech, but rather to allow free speech while simultaneously empowering consumers to control the content to which they're exposed," commented Stephen Balkam, executive director of RSAC. "We're very pleased to be working with IBM to continue our effort to make the Internet fun and safe for everyone." "Effective technology complements the efforts of parents and teachers in monitoring children's' use of the Internet," said John Patrick, IBM's Vice President, Internet technology. "IBM is committed to providing parents and educators with the tools to help children leverage the Internet appropriately. We are proud to be working with RSAC in creating an Internet environment that is consistent with the interests of parents, teachers and children." RSACi, or RSAC on the Internet, is the objective content-labeling advisory system that is fully compliant with the World Wide Web consortium's industry standard for web content rating, the Platform for Internet Content Selection (PICS). RSACi is a fully-automated system that relies on Webmasters to complete a detailed questionnaire regarding the level, nature and intensity of the sex, nudity, violence or offensive language (vulgar or hate-motivated) found within their web site. The responses given then generate rating tags that -- when posted on the web site -- are read by not only popular browsers (such as Microsoft's Internet Explorer), but by blocking system software (such as MicroSystem's Cyber Patrol), allowing consumers to anticipate Internet content and block any materials they deem inappropriate, or offensive. To date, the RSACi content advisory system has been used to rate more than 35,000 web sites -- and it is anticipated that this number will grow to more than 120,000 in the coming year. "It's our opinion that the IBM sponsorship -- together with the recent formation of the International Ratings Working Group at the Bonn Ministerial Conference -- will lead to a four-fold increase in rated sites over the next calendar year," commented Stephen Balkam. IBM has been a leader in developing and supporting standard content filtering programs and technologies for years. In addition to sponsoring RSAC, IBM contributed to the development of PICS within the W3C earlier this year. IBM also ships NetVista, an Internet server designed for educational institutions that helps teachers integrate the Web directly into the classroom while filtering inappropriate content. IBM, the world's largest software provider, creates, develops and manufactures the industry's most advanced information technologies, including computer systems, software, networking systems, storage devices and microelectronics. IBM offers complete information about the company, its products, services and technology on the World Wide Web at http://www.ibm.com. For more information about IBM Software to go to the IBM Software home page at http://www.software.ibm.com. The Recreational Software Advisory Council is an independent, non-profit organization based in Washington, D.C, that empowers the public, especially parents, to make informed decisions about electronic media by means of an open, objective, content advisory system. The RSACi system provides consumers with information about the level of sex, nudity, violence, offensive language (vulgar or hate-motivated) in software games and Web sites. To date, RSACi has been integrated into Microsoft's browser, Internet Explorer, and MicroSystem's Cyber Patrol Software. CompuServe (US and Europe) has also committed to rate all its content with the RSACi system. More information on RSAC and the RSACi rating system is available at http://www.rsac.org. # # #

4 3

sorry
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

My foot in my mouth. =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: (408) 259-2795

1 0

Re: White House swaps stand and decides to invite ACLU after all
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 23:05:15 -0400 From: "Shabbir J. Safdar" <shabbir(a)vtw.org> To: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com>, fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Cc: barrys(a)aclu.org, beeson(a)aclu.org, privaclu(a)aol.com Subject: Re: White House swaps stand and decides to invite ACLU after all Some obvious problems with this bit: At 3:28 PM -0700 7/15/97, Declan McCullagh wrote: >[Two hours after the ACLU issued this press release and journalists >started to call, the White House reversed its stand. Now it says the ACLU >is permitted to come to the meeting tomorrow after all. --Declan] I know people who received their invites late this afternoon, so it's not obvious that the ACLU wasn't invited, just that they got their invitation later than everyone else. >From aclu press release: >"The Court's decision was clearly written to protect individual online >users," said the ACLU's Haines. "They, not industry giants, are the people >the ACLU represents, and they are the people who are being denied a voice in >this meeting." As a hard working member of the net civil liberties community I find it inappropriate that the ACLU assumes that even though other civil liberties folks will be there, including myself, that we don't represent Internet users. I don't think any of us has the right to say who solely represents the Internet community. To say that even though VTW and CDT and ALA and others will be there, that the net community is still not represented is pretty out of line. And though I'm not defending the fact the White House's actions, I wonder if it occurs to anyone that the reason they were left until last is because when the White House started moving away (in the Magaziner paper) from the CDA the week before the SC decision, the ACLU dissed them in the press. Perhaps the reaction to that shouldn't have been to trash them in the press, but to say encouraging things while saying "Actions will speak louder than anything". It's not as if the White House can't modify their position on this issue, they've moved around on others before. Shouldn't we make that work for us for once? To diss them, regardless of what they do, violates the "carrot and stick" principle of politics. If they say stuff we agree with, like "no legislation please" and then we diss them, why will they bother to stick up for the net anymore? -S

1 0

The Big Sellout
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 22:25:50 -0400 From: Michael Sims <jellicle(a)inch.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Cc: jberman(a)cdt.org, jseiger(a)cdt.org Subject: The Big Sellout It's here. http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9707/15/cybersmut.ap/index.html Computer industry to announce anti-smut initiatives July 15, 1997 Web posted at: 9:59 p.m. EDT (0159 GMT) [20 minutes ago. I'm quick, aren't I?] WASHINGTON (AP) -- Hoping to avoid a V-chip for the Internet, the computer industry will announce at the White House on Wednesday it will provide greater access to anti-smut software and work to flag Internet sites that are clean enough for kids. Weeks after the Supreme Court declared unconstitutional a law designed to keep cyberspace's seedy side away from children, the White House is urging the computer industry and parent's groups to take such voluntary steps to make the Internet safe for youngsters. "We don't need to reinvent the wheel here and we don't need a V-chip for the Internet. We have tools out there which are 100 percent available," said Jerry Berman of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a group that works to protect computer users' civil liberties. They just need to be more widely used and understood, he said. President Clinton and Vice President Al Gore, a computer enthusiast, will host the private meeting Wednesday. About 30 to 40 people are expected, including representatives from America Online, Netscape Communications Corp., Microsoft Corp., Yahoo! Inc., the National Parent Teacher Association, the American Library Association, makers of screening technology and electronic civil liberties groups. The White House has said it wants a solution "as powerful for the computer as the V-chip will be for the television that protects children in ways that are consistent with America's free-speech values." Instead of seeking new legislation to force the computer industry to shield children from Internet smut, the Clinton administration is pushing voluntary ideas. That's welcome news for the industry and electronic civil liberties groups, which fought to overturn anti-smut provisions in the 1996 telecommunications law. "It's a very positive thing to try to come up with a constructive alternative to legislation," said Andrew Schwartzman, president of the Media Access Project, a nonprofit media watchdog group. No final industry-wide voluntary plan is expected to be announced Wednesday, but some companies are expected to unveil plans. For instance, Netscape Communications is expected to announce it will back a software standard that allows people, using a Web browser, either to block or select certain Web sites based on their electronic labels, said industry and government sources, speaking on condition of anonymity. Netscape did not return a phone call for comment. Microsoft Corp.'s Explorer browser already uses the standard, dubbed PICS, which can work with more than one labeling or ratings system. Parents using a browser with the PICS technology could, for example, call up Web sites designated to be "family friendly" or they could block sites labeled as violent or sex-filled. The Center for Democracy and Technology, meanwhile, is supposed to debut a Web page that would give parents information on how and where to get free smut-screening software, Berman said. The center estimates all of the major providers of Internet access to consumers offer screening technology for free or at a nominal cost. Those providers cover 14 million households, and include AOL, AT&T WorldNet, CompuServe, Prodigy and Erol's. The American Library Association is working on a broader effort. It has compiled a listing of family friendly Web sites parents can access separately or through its Web page, said spokeswoman Joyce Kelly. The listing will be updated and expanded, she said. And Microsystems Software Inc., maker of Cyber Patrol, a widely used screening software, is expected to unveil new technology to make it easier for owners to label their Web sites, a company representative said. "We're heartened that the industry is taking steps on its own," said Patty Yoxall, spokeswoman for the National PTA. "We prefer voluntary efforts over government intervention." White House officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, stressed that in addition to the voluntary efforts for indecent or smutty content, the government still will enforce vigorously provisions making illegal any obscene materials carried on the Internet. The Supreme Court upheld that provision of the 1996 law on June 26, even as it overturned provisions aimed at restricting children's access to indecent online materials. Copyright 1997 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

10 9

[ANNOUNCE] IETF "OpenPGP" Standard thread beginning
by Dave Del Torto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Greetings, The OpenPGP standard discussion is now on the IETF Standards track through the courtesy of the Internet Mail Consortium. The first event will be an OpenPGP BOF (Birds of a Feather) discussion at the Munich IETF meeting in August 97 (see www.ietf.org) to determine what interested parties want to have included/supported in the OpenPGP standard. Meanwhile, the IETF OPEN-PGP mailing list is being hosted by the IMC for the IETF. The list mechanism is currently accepting subscriptions, but the list itself will not be active for posting for a few more days (notifications will be made to subscribers when it is active). If you'd like to sign up for the IETF's OpenPGP mailing list now, please send email as follows: To: ietf-open-pgp-request(a)imc.org Body: subscribe (If your mailer/etc supports "hot" links, just double-click this URL: <mailto:ietf-open-pgp-request@imc.org?body=subscribe>) For related materials, including the archive of the OpenPGP mailing list, please see the IMC website at: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-open-pgp/>. For information on PGP Inc's involvement with this standards activity, please contact Charles Breed <cbreed(a)pgp.com> or myself. dave __________________________________________________________________________ Dave Del Torto tel: +1.415.596.1781 Pretty Good Privacy, Inc 555 Twin Dolphin Dr. #570 ddt(a)pgp.com fax: +1.415.631.1033 Redwood Shores CA 94065 engineering key: see X-PGP header web: http://www.pgp.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM8xZ2KHBOF9KrwDlAQENvQQAjVlB6gIJ89XRlgdElr0n25/xJr/B1Ueo hAj9CjRUeJJ3T5WuoT/9kHScYl1FfwYXF82tLcztNsDmYdjRYylFQ1uiaIeDRMUU tBZyi7+NkyHIpd6trFqGDd4F61mb/nxOZQvx7t7XJLHo0pATdflL1OwGEUOAD1jw Xz+pwUc+QhE= =9Igf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

The Big Sellout
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 15 Jul 1997 22:35:21 -0400 From: Michael Sims <jellicle(a)inch.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Cc: jberman(a)cdt.org, jseiger(a)cdt.org Subject: The Big Sellout So CDT, a few questions: 1) "The Center for Democracy and Technology, meanwhile, is supposed to debut a Web page that would give parents information on how and where to get free smut-screening software, Berman said." Did ya really? Smut-screening software? 2) Do you feel that mandatory voluntary net ratings are an improvement over the CDA? If so, why? 3) Does the statement by the National PTA, a censorious group if ever there was one, that they favor "voluntary" action give you any pause? That is, if your two organizations are on the same side here, do you ever wonder if these actions are achieving your goals or theirs? -- Michael Sims

1 0

Re: CCTV Cameras in Britain
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Damaged Justice wrote: > Privacy International says that in Britain, there are an estimated > 300,000 CCTV surveillance cameras in public areas, housing estates, > car parks, public facilities, phone booths, vending machines, > buses, trains, taxis, alongside motorways and inside Automatic > Teller (ATM) Machines. > Yes, there are many cameras, and more going up all the time. The vast > majority of the population is glad that these cameras are being > introduced. Ordinary crime has been reduced greatly in those areas > (proven fact) where the cameras are in use. Does this 'move' the crime to a different area? If so, then the next step will be to add cameras to the other areas. Eventually, I suppose, it will only be safe to commit crimes in the homes of the (unarmed) citizens. By then, I am sure the citizens will protest very little when the government decides that cameras are needed in every home to fight "drug dealers and child pornographers." > A very popular and effective program on UK TV is called 'Crimewatch' > where video footage, from these cameras, of crimes and suspects is > shown not for sensationalism and ratings but in order to ask for help > identifying the perpetrators. It is very effective and crimes featured > have a very high clear-up rate. The U.S. is now inundated with a plethora of "Good Cop" shows and an increasing variety of "Dumb Criminal" video shows, including a few specials that are blatantly geared to spread the message, "The Surveillance Camera Is Your Friend!" This is not the result of happenstance. The whitewashing of LEA's and other government agencies, as well as the promotion of the belief that Constitutional rights are our enemy (and the friend of crime), are the result of conscious, active direction on the part of those in power. > Unfortunately there are immoral, > irresponsible and downright antisocial > people who will not abide by the law > and persist in infringing our rights. > As long as those people exist... > then we need such laws and technology. This type of thinking is exactly the reason that government interests lie in creating more crimes and more criminals. Since an ounce of good marijuana costs $300.00 instead of merely $3.00, it is profitable to not abide by the law. Since it is also cause for imprisonment, it makes it worthwhile to use violence in order not to get caught with it. Under the "life imprisonment for a third felony" laws, you might as well rob and kill someone as write them a $1.00 bad check (or be better off, in some states). > I would feel very ashamed if my attempts to protect my rights caused > the death of innocent people because security against those who are > irresponsible had to be drastically cut back. If so, then consider feeling ashamed *now* for that fact that your lack of attempt to protect your rights, and other's rights, is causing the death of innocent people because security against those who want their freedom has been increased. Both the U.S. and Britain send armed thugs to foreign soil to force their citizens to live according to our belief in what is right, and then we call them *terrorists* when they respond to armed force with armed force. With the use of radar to create "speed traps," government realized the profits to be had from *creating* crime and they have never looked back. I have no doubt that the surveillance industry will prove every bit as profitable as the prison industry, and just as easy to sell to a citizenry that is being frightened and held hostage by a government which should be protecting them and helping them to protect themselves. Save your "In order to save the patient, we had to kill him." laws-and-technology speech for forums where freedom and privacy are considered less precious than comfort and security. TruthMonger

1 0

Re: The Big Sellout
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan McCullagh wrote: > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > http://www.cnn.com/TECH/9707/15/cybersmut.ap/index.html > Computer industry to announce anti-smut initiatives > > WASHINGTON (AP) -- Hoping to avoid a V-chip for the Internet, the > computer industry will announce at the White House on Wednesday it > will provide greater access to anti-smut software and work to flag > Internet sites that are clean enough for kids. > White House officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, stressed > that in addition to the voluntary efforts for indecent or smutty > content, the government still will enforce vigorously provisions > making illegal any obscene materials carried on the Internet. Translation~~They will attempt to imprison people who are victims of those who voluntarily access their web sites and then complain to the authorities, despite the sight being clearly marked as a adult-oriented site. TruthMonger

1 0

Re: CCTV Cameras in Britain (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 10:17:49 +0200 (MET DST) > Subject: Re: CCTV Cameras in Britain > From: nobody(a)REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) > Since an ounce of good marijuana costs $300.00 instead of merely > $3.00, it is profitable to not abide by the law. Don't know where you live but your street prices are about 300% too high... > TruthMonger ____________________________________________________________________ | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

2 1

adults only
by candy＠mail2.24hrplaymates.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

TRY US OUT FOR FREE!!! See and talk to a live person on your computer screen. Not a video! Not prerecorded! This is live!!! Our models will obay your every cummand, we're willing to prove it by giving you a free 5 minute preview. Give it a try, it's free! - CLICK HERE xxxx

1 0

White House "kinder, gentler"-CDA/censor empowerment meeting (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 08:03:06 -0700 (PDT) > From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> > Subject: White House "kinder, gentler"-CDA/censor empowerment meeting > Below we see an excellent example of the naivete inherent in > Net-libertarian and cypherpunk writing. > Obviously the writer does not understand the complexities and challenges > of Washington politics ... a process that results in the compromises > so vital in a healthy democracy. I would like to see your proof that a healthy democracy requires compromise. This is truly the pot calling the kettle black in regards to mis-understanding the fundamental dynamics of 'healthy' democracies. > I can only conclude that because Mr. Finkelstein does not live inside the > Beltway, we cannot expect him to realize that it is always necessary to > remain players in the game -- even if it means giving up fundamental > liberties in the process. Declan, you are truly an idiot if you believe that you can obtain any sort of democracy, let along a healthy one, by giving up fundamental liberties. With friends like you we don't need enemies, we don't have to worry about them taking anything you are more than willing to give it away. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Microsoft will NOT ship browser with RSACi on by default
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 19:30:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Microsoft will NOT ship browser with RSACi on by default Microsoft called me a few hours ago and told me that -- despite reports to the contrary -- the company definitely will *not* ship the next version of Internet Explorer configured to block unlabeled sites out of the box. "The product is going to ship with Content Advisor off by default," said Mark Murray (mmurray(a)microsoft.com) My article at http://netlynews.com today had said: The next version of IE will default to displaying only properly labeled web pages, according to Ken Wasch, the president of the Software Publishers Association. This comes after previous reports that RSACi might be default-on: http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,476,00.html http://pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,740,00.html Kudos to Microsoft for doing the right thing. -Declan

9 14

Cookie that help you lose wieght!!!
by 01093775＠03416.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

<HTML><PRE><BODY BGCOLOR="#000000"><FONT COLOR="#00FFFF" SIZE=3> COOKIES THAT HELP YOU LOSE WEIGHT!!! Dear Friend, No, there isn't a misprint on the subject line. There is a cookie out there which actually helps you lose weight. I have found this amazing product and I'm willing to share this miracle with everyone. Do you like cookies? I'm sure there are many of you out there who love cookies. But aren't you concerned about the Fat, Cholesterol and Calories that get digested by you body as you enjoy a delicious cookie? How about those Fat free, Cholesterol free cookies? Sure, they don't have the fat and cholesterol which you don't want, but it still has the calories which can add up. So let me introduce to you a cookie which can actually help you LOSE WEIGHT! You can use this cookie as a healthy snack or as a weight lost program. The cookie company creates the only FAT BURNING COOKIE in the world by mixing a 5000 year old Chinese herb with a delicious tasting cookie. This thermogenic herb helps rev up your metabolism to help you BURN FAT and CONTROL YOUR APPETITE. The Chinese have been using this herb on it's own for thousands of years as a diet aid, and now you too can take advantage of this amazing herb in a HIGH FIBER, 100% ALL NATURAL COOKIE. This cookie also TASTE GREAT! It's actually moist and flavorful. You can have this cookie as a great tasting healthy snack, with the added all natural benefits of weight lose, or you can use it by itself as a diet program. The cookie company guarantees, no matter how many diets have failed you before, you are guaranteed not to fail this time. The cookies are 100% guaranteed to succeed in your WEIGHT LOST program, or your money would be gladly refund. Why don't you find out yourself about this AMAZING product? You really have NOTHING TO LOSE BUT FAT. ACT NOW and find out how ONE COOKIE A DAY CAN GIVE YOU THE BODY YOU'VE ALWAYS DREAMED OF! To receive more information about this amazing cookie, and the cookie diet, please send three ($3) dollars cash along with your name and address to:- Cookie Dept. # 23918 PO BOX 180 Cypress, CA 90630 Sincerely yours, your friend The Cookieman </FONT><FONT COLOR="#000000" SIZE=3>

1 0

If You Build It, They Will Con (fwd)
by Ray Arachelian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 16 Jul 1997 11:09:05 -0400 From: "Anthony F. Navarro" <anavarro(a)inch.com> Subject: If You Build It, They Will Con >From the Netly News -Anthony July 15, 1997 If You Build It, They Will Con by Declan McCullagh Perhaps the thinking behind DefCon went something like this: Lure hundreds of hackers to Las Vegas in the middle of the summer, ply them with cheap beer, talk about packet sniffing, and observe. Last year the result was self-organizing chaos, capped by an event where the hired strippers were upstaged by a band of exhibitionist conferencegoers. "The pimp was like, 'Oh my God,'" says Dark Tangent, DefCon's organizer. Last weekend's fifth annual DefCon may have been a little less raucous, but it was no less important as a place where hackers from around the world gather to socialize, gamble -- and glance around furtively trying to spot the government agents who infiltrate the convention. (Bonus: If you guess correctly, you can take a prized "I Spotted the Fed" T-shirt home with you.) Naturally, DefCon has always been populated with a slew of specialized talks on "Hacking Novell Netware" and uses of "embedded microcontroller applications." But this year, speakers such as Richard Thieme spoke of finer points: For instance, how hackers should avoid merely imitating their predecessors' exploits. Instead, they should learn the intricacies of computer systems themselves. "This is really functioning as a call to excellence," Thieme says. Then there was Carolyn Meinel, who maintains the "Happy Hacker" mailing list. "You don't need to break the law to be a hacker," she told me. Maybe not, but the DefCon crowd -- mostly teenagers and twentysomethings -- wasn't listening. Some tried to pass counterfeit $20 bills when registering. ("We'll beat your ass," Dark Tangent warned afterward.) Others tried to snatch the DefCon banner from the convention hall. By the time the conference began, the hotel's antiquated phone system had been penetrated and instructions distributed on how to call long distance for free. The hotel's radio frequencies quickly appeared on the DefCon mailing list. On Friday evening, security guards booted two revelers after a hallway skirmish led to blows. And someone was carrying around a door to a GTE truck -- I never found out why. All of which might explain Las Vegas's growing reluctance to host the event. Dark Tangent says the convention has become virtually blackballed. "You're dicked. There's no place to go," he says. This year, Dark Tangent had to rename the convention "DC Communications" and take out $1 million in liability insurance. He also moved the conference to the Aladdin, a ramshackle hotel -- complete with faded purple carpets and cheesy lounge singers -- that seems the only venue now willing to risk hosting DefCon. Still, the Aladdin seemed a choice venue for Winn Schwartau, the "InfoWar" crooner whom many hackers love to hate. He showed up to host two rounds of Hacker Jeopardy. Teams of digerati took turns heckling Schwartau and competing in categories such as National Security for $300: "A: The two possible meanings of DOS. Q: What are Denial of Service or Disk Operating System?" Or, "A: The assistant director of the FBI who handled the TWA investigation and was behind the Clipper Chip. Q: Who is James Kallstrom?" Bruce Schneier, author of "Applied Cryptography" (and the star of his Hacker Jeopardy team), spoke on Saturday about "Why Cryptography Is Harder Than It Looks." He warned of overconfidence when designing a cryptosystem: "The math is perfect. The computers are bad. The networks hideous. The people worse." Says Schneier, "We need to recognize the limits of the possible." Sameer Parekh, president of C2Net, spoke the next day about offshore crypto-development: "We export jobs, not crypto." Jobs seemed to be what many in the crowd were looking for. As one generation of hackers gives way to another, a new batch of self-anointed "security consultants" appears on the scene. Of course, there are never enough scouts in attendance to hire them all. Dejected, and unable to hack more than the hotel PBX, some found solace in the seamier side of Las Vegas. I saw a note inviting everyone to a "StripperCon" that was being held down the street at the Tropicana Hotel on Saturday night. I went gambling instead. Short $75, I wondered whether next year's DefCon would be worth attending -- that is, if it happens at all. But surely there will be a DefCon 6, and since Internet Underground has gone to pasture, who else will there be to cover it? So I poured another shot, dialed 9# on the wall phone and placed a long distance call to the editor. On the house. | The Netly News | Afternoon Line | Bootcamp | This Old PC | Walter Miller | Alt.Culture | Digital Sandbox | Archive |

1 0

Re: The Censorware Summit: A Preview, from The Netly News
by Antonomasia 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1173,00.html > >The Netly News Network (http://netlynews.com) >July 16, 1997 > >The Censorware Summit >by Declan McCullagh (declan(a)well.com) > Today, Friedland and more than a score of industry and nonprofit > groups are visiting the White House to promote technical means of > stopping Junior from visiting playboy.com. President Clinton is > expected to endorse such measures over attempts to revive broad > criminal laws like the ill-fated Communications Decency Act, which he > supported. But this new approach suffers from all sorts of problems. A UK computer vendor (I forget which) deals in its catalogue with the possible concerns of parents at internet content in this way. It suggests that the computer is in a family room where parents can readily see what Junior is up to. Common sense or what ? Bubba can keep his nose out. > Rep. Bob Goodlatte > (R-Va.), a staunch CDA supporter who will be at today's summit. "They > said we can't go that route. I'm certainly interested in developing > other options. I want to put the burden on pornographers. One of the > ways to do that is to have Congress pass legislation that would make > it difficult for people to misrate their web site." And I (poor ignorant thing) thought that pornmasters wanted their sites recognised for what they are to attract visitors. -- ############################################################### # Antonomasia ant(a)notatla.demon.co.uk # # See http://www.notatla.demon.co.uk/ # ###############################################################

1 0

"The Failure to Do Your Job" amendment (was Re: White House ...)
by John Deters 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please forgive me for following up to my own posting, but I just realized how close I was to a solution: A Constitutional amendment that would call for the impeachment of the President for failing to veto any three bills that are overturned by the Supreme Court on Constitutional grounds. Call it "The Failure to Do Your Job" amendment, or the "For Violating Your Oath" amendment. Maybe include a clause that stipulates the ex-President must also return any salary earned during his or her tenure. John -- J. Deters "Don't think of Windows programs as spaghetti code. Think of them as 'Long sticky pasta objects in OLE sauce'." +--------------------------------------------------------------------+ | NET: mailto:jad@dsddhc.com (work) mailto:jad@pclink.com (home) | | PSTN: 1 612 375 3116 (work) 1 612 894 8507 (home) | | ICBM: 44^58'36"N by 93^16'27"W Elev. ~=290m (work) | | For my public key, send mail with the exact subject line of: | | Subject: get pgp key | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+

6 6

Time Online chat at 8 pm: Does the Net need a Nanny?
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'll be participating in a Time Online chat this evening at 8 pm EST. Our guests will be Chris Hansen from the ACLU and Bruce Taylor, a longtime CDA supporter and head of the National Law Center for Children and Families. We'll be talking about the White House censorware summit, self-rating of news sites, and free speech online in general. Join us at: http://pathfinder.com/time/community/newsforum.html You can participate in the chat as long as your browser supports frames, but the Ichat client software is more stable: http://www.ichat.com/download/ -Declan

1 0

Attorneys: RSA patent invalid
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a just published article in CyberLaw, patent attorneys Patrick Flinn and James Jordan rise serious questions about the validity of the RSA patent in the US. The authors conclude: > Due largely to luck, bluster, and the naiveti of potential competitors, the owner of United States Patent No. 4,405,829 has enjoyed a virtual monopoly on all uses of the RSA Algorithm. However, a careful scrutiny of the RSA Patent claims, and other details of its disclosure and prosecution, reveal both significant limits to the scope of the patent and material questions regarding its validity. The full article can be found at http://www.cyberlaw.com/rsa.html -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred

1 0

Time Online chat at 8 pm: Does the Net need a Nanny?
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We're having a Time Online chat this evening at 8 pm EST to discuss Net-censorship. I'll be joining Chris Hansen from the ACLU and Bruce Taylor, a longtime CDA supporter and head of the National Law Center for Children and Families. We'll be talking about the White House censorware summit, self-rating of web sites, and free speech online in general. Join us at: http://pathfinder.com/time/community/newsforum.html You can participate in the chat as long as your browser supports frames, but the Ichat client software is more stable: http://www.ichat.com/download/ -Declan

1 0

Re: The Real Plan: Making the Net Safe for Censorship
by Lizard 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:42 PM 7/16/97 -0700, Ross Wright wrote: >On or About 16 Jul 97 at 18:12, Lizard wrote: > >> At 04:47 PM 7/16/97 -0700, Ross Wright wrote: >> >Marc: >> > >> >What a bunch of crap! Keep out of the internet, you government >> >flunky. Let business, commerce and freedom of speech remain in >> >it's new home, Cyberspace. And save your regulations for someone >> >who needs them. >> >> You will get a lot more respect on the net once you learn how to >> read messages. I'll leave it you to figure out what you got wrong. > >Umm, I think I understood the message, and Mr. Rotenberg's >involvement in the politics of censorship, as it relates to the >Internet. > No, you do not. >> Sheesh. And I retreated to mailing lists to get away from this kind >> of stuff on USENET. > >What? I just feel that there should be no laws or resolutions or >promises made or kept by the United States Government about the >internet. > That's not the kind of stuff I'm referring to. >On or About 16 Jul 97 at 14:42, Declan McCullagh wrote, about >something that Marc Rotenberg <rotenberg(a)epic.org> wrote: > >>On the other hand, without a proper law, > >See, when they say "without" that means they think we need one. > >>parents can purchase and >>activate measures to protect their children from adult material and >>still not feel secure in their homes from unwanted material. > >Ohhhh, so scary. Not safe in the home! Imagine that. Sigh. While occasionally I am prone to fits of charity and altruism, today is not one of those days. I shall leave it to someone more merciful than I (such as, perhaps, the Marquis de Sade, or Attila the Hun) to explain your error to you. Perhaps Marc himself will enlighten you, though, frankly, I hope he doesn't, as this could provide much amusement over time.

1 0