December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Thank You
by Joe Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for your recent inquire. President, Joe Anonymous Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com

1 0

Thank You
by Joe Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for your recent inquire. President, Joe Anonymous Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com

1 0

Thank You
by Joe Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for your recent inquire. President, Joe Anonymous Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com

1 0

Thank You
by Joe Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for your recent inquire. President, Joe Anonymous Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com

1 0

Thank You
by Joe Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for your recent inquire. President, Joe Anonymous Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com

1 0

Prof. Bernstein's appeal brief and two major Amicus briefs online
by John Gilmore 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The EFF Bernstein Legal web page has been updated to contain: * the appeal brief by Prof. Bernstein * the Amicus ("friend of the court") brief by EPIC, ACLU, CDT, CPSR, Economic Strategy Institute, Free Congress R&E, Human Rights Watch, Independence Institute, ISC2, IMC, ISOC, NAM, Privacy International, USACM, Whit Diffie, Peter Neumann, and Ron Rivest * the Amicus brief by NCSA, RSA, Maynard Anderson, Jim Bidzos, Mark Rasch, Gene Spafford, and Ross Stapleton-Gray. http://www.eff.org/pub/Privacy/ITAR_export/Bernstein_case/Legal/ There are still three more amicus briefs filed with the court, which are not yet on the Web. The Government's reply is due on November 20; we'll provide page images shortly thereafter. The appeal hearing is on December 8 at 9AM at the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, 95 Seventh Street, San Francisco. John Gilmore Electronic Frontier Foundation

1 0

Thank You
by Joe Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for your recent inquire. President, Joe Anonymous Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com

1 0

Thank You
by Joe Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for your recent inquire. President, Joe Anonymous Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com

1 0

Thank You
by Joe Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank you for your recent inquire. President, Joe Anonymous Free web-based email, Forever, From anywhere! http://www.mailexcite.com

1 0

CDA: The Sequel -- introduced in the U.S. Senate
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just when you thought the Internet was safe from government censorship, Sen. Dan Coats has introduced a sequel to the notorious Communications Decency Act. The bill punishes commercial distributors of material that's "harmful to minors" with six months in jail and a $50,000 fine. Unlike the original CDA, it applies only to web sites -- not to chatrooms, newsgroups, or email. Like the original CDA, it's certain to be controversial. Sen. Coats (R-Indiana), chief GOP sponsor of the original CDA, said his bill takes into account the Supreme Court's unanimous vote in June that struck down his first try. "I have studied the opinion of the Court and come before my colleagues today to introduce legislation that reflects the parameters laid out by the Court's opinion," he said on the Senate floor. (ftp://ftp.loc.gov/pub/thomas/c105/s1482.is.txt) Coats' brainchild is strikingly similar to (and in fact not as broad as) an ill-fated version of the first CDA that Rep. Rick White (R-Wash.) and the Center for Democracy and Technology embraced as a "compromise" in December 1995. Like Coats' bill, the White-CDT measure restricted material that was "harmful to minors." (http://www.epic.org/cda/hyde_letter.html) A Coats staffer said the measure requires adult pornographers to place images behind a firewall. "If you're involved in the commercial distribution of material that's harmful to minors, you have to take the bad stuff and put it on the other side of a credit card or PIN number," David Crane said. But the bill applies to more than just visual pornography. Its definition of material that could hurt minors includes any offensive sexual "communication" or "writing" without redeeming value. It applies to text-only web pages -- or bookstores that place sample chapters on the web. Since it covers anyone who "through the World Wide Web is engaged in the business of the commercial distribution of material that is harmful to minors," it could apply to Internet providers and online services as well. The FCC and the Department of Justice would be required to publish on their web sites "such information as is necessary to inform the public of the meaning of the term `material that is harmful to minors.'" Solveig Singleton, a lawyer at the Cato Institute, says: "The Supreme Court struggled for years to come up with a national defintion of obscenity. They failed. Harmful to minors is obscenity-lite. The FCC and Department of Justice won't have any luck coming up with a definition of obscenity-lite." Not a problem, predicts former porn-prosecutor Bruce Taylor, now the head of the National Law Center for Children and Families. "This bill will ensure that the hardcore pornographers don't get off the hook," he says. Next step for Coats is to attract co-sponsors and to forward his bill to the Senate Commerce committee. Some judges criticized Congress for holding no hearings on the original CDA; Coats isn't going to make that mistake again. "There will be a concerted effort to build a substantial legislative history," says David Crane. This bill won't be the end of Congressional interest in cyberporn. "You'll probably see other legislation come forward. Introducing this is not abandoning our other concerns," Crane says. -Declan

2 1

Re: Some IDIOT called CRYPTO CZAR INTERNATIONAL
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 11 Nov 1997, VME Encryption wrote: > p.s. - I wonder if you know what's the source of all the bad rep we've got > - nobody knows us and we never posted anything on your forum, so what the > heck ? Exactly. You have not posted the source code to your allegedly secure crypto algorithm, so every serious cryptographer will laugh at you. Without independent verification, and lots of it, the only people who will consider your product are lobotomized IT departments. We've never heard of you before; we don't even know who your developers are, so we can only assume they haven't "done their homework." In essence: you have now been branded as complete morons. The only way to avoid having to leave the country is to make the complete source for your crypto available on your website in the next 24 hours. Noncompliance will lead to your mysterious reciept of a suitcase, followed shortly by the mysterious disappearance of a large portion of your city. AlgorithmMonger

1 0

Re: SET
by John Deters 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:18 AM 11/12/97 -0800, Jeremey Barrett you wrote: >Robert Hettinga writes: > > > > Unfortunately, I think that no MIS manager will get fired for using SET, and > > it'll take a serious demonstration of a security breach before people will > > listen to anything else. At least until someone demonstrates a transaction > > protocol which is, say 3 orders of magnitude cheaper... > >Perhaps... OTOH, SET is SO bad that it will be impossible to deploy, >probably forcing everyone away from it anyway. Having spent the last ten years at this retail outfit, I can assure you that "impossible to deploy" != "won't be deployed". If Mastercard tells us that they will jack our rates by 0.5% for every transaction processed without SET, then management will demand SET be rolled out. Function be damned, security be damned, as long as some bookkeeper somewhere is satisfied that SET happens, then we avoid a huge rate increase. If the security of SET is questioned in the trade rags, our management's approach will be to assume that Mastercard will fix it in the future, but roll it out now anyway. OTOH, it's obvious (even to them) that SET couldn't possibly be any *less* secure than current authorizing techniques. *Sigh*. Look for copyrighted swirly red/orange logos to appear on retailer's doors' soon: "SET(tm) Transaction Processing -- It's safe to use your Mastercard here" John, who will get dragged into implementing it. Got any suggestions? -- 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 | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+

2 1

Re: CDA: The Sequel -- introduced in the U.S. Senate
by Lizard 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:05 PM 11/12/97 -0500, Colin Rafferty wrote: > >By the way, my signature contains an ascii art rendition of an adult >about to have sex with a child. I believe that (i) it appeals to a >prurient interest in sex; (ii) it depicts, in a patently offensive way, >a simulated sexual act; and (iii) lacks any value whatsoever. > >Now all I need to do is put it up on a web page on a for-profit company. > More to the point, since Deja News will bring it up if you post to Usenet with it, they become 'porn distributors'.

2 1

Re: Scared of US; Where to relocate?
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anonymous wrote: > > It has become very clear to me over the past few years that amerika > is headed for some pretty rough times, and I've decided to leave before > it becomes illegal for me to do so. The only question is, where to? Comet CypherPunk Bop-Shoo-Bop will be approaching close to earth in late 1999 to drop off Jesus and pick up the CypherPunks. We're meeting at Tim's place. {Anyone who makes it to the pick-up site get's a T-shirt that says, "Darwin was right!"} Do[n't]

1 0

Incoming!!!
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

:: Anon-To: whitehouse.gov Andy Dustman wrote: > On Wed, 12 Nov 1997, Robert A. Costner wrote: > > At 10:05 AM 11/12/97 -0500, Andy Dustman wrote: > > >FYI, here is the list of things blocked at cracker: ... > > >Addresses: whitehouse.gov (ONLY address in .gov domain). > > Anonymous political speech is one the most highly protected forms of > > constitutional speech. I think that whitehouse.gov should be unblocked. > Well, I agree, and since it's your ass, it's done. Dear Bad BillyC, Realizing that a plethora of death-threats were undoubtedly sent your way through the Georgia Cracker remailer even before the ink on Andy's computer screen had dried (only two of them were from me--I'm beginning to like you), I thought I would dash off a quick note to you, hopefully arriving before you send the National Park Janitors SWAT Team out to Bob and Andy's cities of residence in order to raze them to the ground. Outwardly, I am a fool and a cynic, but inwardly, I am a fool and a secret believer in Truth, Democracy and the American Way (TM). (God, the Flag, Mom's Apple Pie, "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington"...) Although I am a member of a CryptoAnarchist non-organization which requires all of its non-members to have "NUKE DC" tattooed on their foreheads in invisible ink (paranoid enough , nonetheless. to make certain it is covered by our cleverly designed aluminum foil hats), I still have a small ember of hope burning deep inside that perhaps there is still someone within the belly of the Great Beast (that consumes the souls of all elected officials) who remains capable of reading the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, and the Constitution, and saying, "My God, what have we done!" The Anonymous Remailers are a public service provided by those who believe that "_mostly_ free speech" =/= "free speech." The anonymous remailer operators are willing to risk abuse, loss of ISP service, prosecution, and a host of other headaches in order to provide a mechanism by which those who fear retribution for speaking freely can raise their voice anonymously, just as our country's founding fathers did. No matter how eloquent the speech of those who claim that words spoken by free men must be stifled if they are 'dangerous' to the goals of democracy, national security, etc., the fact remains that if the citizens are not allowed full freedom of speech, then there is no democracy to defend, and no nation worth securing. Nothing personal, but if you have your hand resting on the Big Red Button and still feel the need to call out the militia every time someone tells you to "Beware the Ides of March.", then maybe you ought to lift weights, or something, and see if you can't raise your level of confidence in your physical security. Has no one in DC ever heard the phrase, "Sticks and stones will break my bones...?" Never seen Kato, in "The Pink Panther?" Personally, I think that you should institute National Death Threat Week, where everyone is encouraged to send death threats in one form or another to their legislative representatives, employers, workers, family, neighbors, et al. Why? Because I don't believe that the first indication of a 'problem' should be seeing the muzzle flash and, if one is lucky, hearing the shot. The Founding Fathers did not write the Constitution 'off the cuff.' They did not fail to consider someone shouting "Fire!" in a crowded theater. They were aware of the existence of words such as "nigger" and "cocksucker." Yet they still wrote that the right to free speech should not be abridged. Figure it out... What has democracy come to when quoting those who wrote our country's defining documents has become a cause for being labeled a fanatic, radical terrorist/pedophile/drug-dealer (and a Horseman To Be Named Later)? Why does it take me half a day to find copies of the Bill of Rights, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence when searching government web sites, but only a few minutes to find by searching the sites of those declared by the government to be guilty of uttering 'dangerous' free speech? I know that it can be just as thankless being President as it can being an anonymous remailer operator, so you, above all, should recognize that they are trying to keep the alligators off their ass while still remembering to drain the swamp. I have no doubt that there are several hundred laws that you or others could use to force the Georgia Cracker remailer operators to block anonymous email to whitehouse.gov, but I hope that you realize the value, in your position, of having at least one forum where people can communicate with you at a level that goes beyond ass kissing, fear of retribution, etc. My final offering of wisdom: Have "NUKE DC!" tattooed on your forehead. I have no doubt that this would create a groundswell of popular support for you that would result in the citizens storming Congress to have you declared "President For Life." Then you could have some *real* fun, without worrying about political fallout. ("Did I say 'inhale'? I meant 'exhale'! Hee...hee...") Your pal, TruthMonger "It's not FUD until *I* say it's FUD!"

1 0

Info
by Wu Tang 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone have comments, used, or know the strength of George Barwoods' Elliptic Curve Cryptosystem "Pegwit" at http://ds.dial.pipex.com/george.barwood/v8/pegwit.htm ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

1 0

Re:
by AJD013187＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Virtual Girlfriend and Virtual Boyfriend are artificial intelligence programs for your IBM PC or compatible and also for MACINTOSH. You can watch them, talk to them, ask them questions, tell them secrets, and relate with them. Watch them as you ask them to take off different clothes and guide them through many different activities. Watch and participate in the hottest sexual activities available on computer, including: several sexual positions, using many unique toys, even bringing in multiple partners. This is no doubt one of the most realistic, sexually stimulating computer games available. They will remember your name, birthday, your likes and your dislikes. Every time you start the program, they say different things, and act differently. Each time, they have a different personality. With the VGA digital graphics, The Virtual Girlfriend and Virtual Boyfriend software have some of the hottest, sexiest graphics out there. And with a Soundblaster or compatible card, you can actually hear their voice as they talk to you. This is the first adult software title that was designed for both heterosexual and homosexual people. I would like you to try the actual full copy out before it is put on the market. It will be sold for 1/5 of the actual price ($10.00) until I can get back some information on what people think of the program. Please give it a try and write back any comments. Thank you. If you are interested and would like to order a copy, then you can read the mailing instructions below. It comes in an unmarked package and is sent out at most 4 days after the order is received. You are not put on any mailing lists whatsoever, guaranteed. It will run on any 386, 486 or higher, and 100% IBM compatibles. Required is VGA graphics, and a hard drive. The sound card is optional. Macintosh requires at least 4 meg of ram. Virtual Girlfriend and Virtual Boyfriend are artificial intelligence programs, meaning they are completely interactive. It would be just like if you were talking to someone. You can actually have simple conversations. Their attitudes change with the different things you say, so you can say things that will upset them, and then say things that will please them. The more you play/talk with them, the more you learn what they can do, and what they like to do. It really is a blast. With all these movies coming out about virtual reality, it's amazing to actually have a virtual reality program like this for your own computer. It's easy to install, and instructions are easy to follow. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Special Software Offer~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This is to inform you about the new adult game that VCS Magazine rated "The best game of "97". "The Search for Paradise is no doubt one of the greatest XXX adult games available". The first games where it is as much fun as it is a turn on! Travel the world to every continent, every country you can think of, and meet some of the most beautiful women in existence. These women will treat you like a king and obey your every command. Any sexual wish you can think of, these women know it all. There is a different paradise for every guy out there, and this game will have them all. This game uses real models, digital video, and digital sound to make it as realistic as possible. You will feel like you're in the same room as the girl you're talking to!!! As an added bonus you'll receive "Club Celebrity X" Meet, talk to and even have your way with the celebrities of your choice. Imagine being in a club with some very beautiful, well known, actual celebrities! You have seen these girls on T.V., Magazines and billboard ads. Now they are on your computer begging for action. This game is hot and once you start playing, you won't be able to stop!!! ~Required: 386 or better, 4 meg ram or better, Windows 3.1 or higher (Win95 is fine), sound card is optional, Rom is optional. (Game is given either CD-rom or compressed 3.5" diskettes).~~$19.95! Order now and get everything for just $24.95!!!! At your request, the programs can come with a password protection utility that only allows the program to run when the correct password is entered. (You must be 18 or over to purchase) Please fill out the following form and mail it to the address above. (Feel free to write out the order form by hand) Questions? Email us at: Virtualfriends4(a)hotmail.com - Send to: Mark Wrhel P.O. Box 0118 Tujunga, Ca. 91043 Your Name ___________________________________________ Date ____________ Address ______________________________________________________________ City ____________________________ State __________ Zip Code ______________ Phone# _____________________ E-mail Address ___________________________ Do you have an IBM ( ) or MAC ( )? CD rom ( ) or Disks ( )? ( ) Virtual Girdfriend or ( ) Boyfriend for $10.00 ( ) *both just $15.95 ( ) The Search for Paradise and Club Celebrity X for $19.95 ( ) Everything!!! The Search for Paradise, Club Celebrity X, Virtual Girlfriend and Virtual Boyfriend. >>>>All for just $24.95<<<<

1 0

Scared of US; Where to relocate?
by lcs Mixmaster Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>It has become very clear to me over the past few years that amerika >is headed for some pretty rough times, and I've decided to leave before >it becomes illegal for me to do so. The only question is, where to? Lagrange 5 and Mars are good choices. The near side of the Earth moon doesn't qualify and neither does Earth orbit since it's so easy to shoot you down.

1 0

In Burma, the Internet is access to democracy, from Newsday
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A very nice piece in Newsday. My writeup of my visit to Burma a year ago is at: http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/editorial/0,1012,475,00.html Because of roadblocks, I had to hike across fields and through villages to get to the site of the sole Burmese Net-connection at a local university. It was set to become operational in spring 1997. I also heard of unconfirmed reports that the military had a Net-connection through a friendly nearby country, probably Singapore. (Perhaps to monitor soc.culture.burma or somesuch.) BTW, the best mailing list on Burma news I've found is burmanews-l(a)igc.apc.org. I also hid my interview notes in the bottom of my bag. I made an extra copy of the crucial ones and put the paper in my wallet, just in case. -Declan ************* Newsday (New York, NY) November 12, 1997 LIFE IN CYBERSPACE / FOR MANY, THE INTERNET IS ACCESS TO DEMOCRACY By Matthew McAllester RANGOON, Burma THE MAN LEANED across the table and spoke so quietly that no one but the two of us could hear. His eyes moved from side to side, scanning the restaurant and the street outside for possible informers or military intelligence agents. That's the way people communicate in Burma when they're talking with a foreigner about something that could land them in prison for several years. "You know what?" the man said. "I got e-mail." "You can't have," I said. For several reasons I knew he had to be telling me a tall story. For a start, it's illegal to access the Internet in Burma. It's illegal to own an unlicensed fax machine or modem. A few years ago a supporter of the largest pro-democracy party in Burma died in prison, where he'd been sent because he did not have a license for his fax machine. Besides, no one has e-mail or Internet access in Burma except for a select few business owners who are friendly with the military regime that rules the country. Diplomats at a few foreign embassies also acknowledge that they have Net access and e-mail despite the Burmese government's restrictions. Even then, they say their e-mail is intercepted and read by the Burmese authorities. This is a country where reporters have to visit in the guise of tourists, which is how I traveled in September and October. In Burma, all international calls are listened to by the operator and, the Burmese people assume, by military intelligence. When I wanted to make a call to the United States, the receptionist at my hotel told me it would cost $35 for five minutes if I wanted to dial direct. I opted for the storefront down the road, where I sat for 30 minutes waiting for a connection. When I got through to my friend, I was less than chatty about what I'd been up to. So how could the man I was talking to across the table possibly have navigated these political and technological barriers to get e-mail? "No, I do. I got it," he said. The man smiled. He's a fixer. A small business owner. People come to him for help. He's thinking of offering people access to his Net account - for a price. Most of all, he looks out for himself, keeping on the right side of the military authorities but not showing them the fear they are so used to seeing in the faces of Burmese people. "I dial out anywhere I can," he said. "My account is in Australia, but I'll use a server from anywhere. Anywhere." For the sake of communicating with the outside world, the man was prepared to risk prison. I've written before about how a good number of governments around the world restrict or ban Internet access to their citizens. Free-speech advocates told me how some governments fear the spread of anti-government information and opinions that dissent from the official line. The advocates told me how democratizing the Internet is by its nature. But being told and seeing with one's own eyes is a very different experience. After a couple of weeks viewing how the military government's system of informers and control of information contributed to its firm grip on power, I could understand why it has banned the Net. The Net's speed and resistance to control would be an unstoppable force in organizing opposition to the military regime. "What would happen if you had Net access?" I asked another Burmese man, who spoke in a whisper even when he was alone at home. "The government, it would be over," he said. "We could share information." Information and open communication in an oppressive state like Burma are invaluable tools in fighting the status quo. I spent some time one evening in Rangoon with U Tin Oo, a former general in the Burmese army and now a senior leader of the National League for Democracy, the largest pro-democracy party. All told, he's spent nine years in prison for his political activities. As we spoke, the phone often rang. Delegates to the party conference that weekend were en route to Rangoon, and they called Tin Oo to discuss the event. The conversations were superficial. "They tap my phone always," Tin Oo explained. When I left I had to take two taxis and walk among crowds in downtown Rangoon to shake the military intelligence officials that a pro-democracy contact had said would follow me. I worried about my own information, my notes. I longed to be able to turn them into ones and zeroes and e-mail them home. Instead, I hid them at the bottom of my backpack. A couple of weeks later I was in Thailand, interviewing Burmese dissidents and refugees who have fled the Burmese government. Working with them in the north of Thailand are several westerners who work as human-rights campaigners, doctors and advocates for the refugees. E-mail is an important tool in their work, as it helps them coordinate with people outside Thailand. One woman collects every story she can find about Burma into the BurmaNet News e-mail newsletter. BurmaNet News is delivered to the e-mail boxes of hundreds of journalists, activists and government officials around the world. It's precisely the kind of democratizing spread of information that the Burmese people are denied. But even in Thailand there are problems. The human-rights advocates and health workers use encryption when communicating online. "They read all our e-mail," said an Australian doctor, referring to the Thai authorities. The Thai government maintains diplomatic relations with the Burmese government, a pariah regime to many other democracies. "The other day I tried to get my e-mail and my password had been changed."

1 0

Re: Selling a Persistent Identity
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Amad3us wrote: >Try this Monty: > >The new owner of the Monty persona is defined to be the first public >key which is signed by Monty's private key and posted to this forum. > >So the buyer sends Monty a public key, and Monty signs it and posts >it to the list. (Optionally via a trusted third party to ensure fair >play. There is a race condition in the making there but it's not too >bad, we could fix it if we were bothered.) > >So Monty can cheat and post one he signed earlier selling to a >different key, but we will ignore those because we base it on first >posted. > >Buyers will no longer be interested in buying Monty's persona after >they have seen it sold, because they know it is no longer his. > >The person who buys Monty's persona could resell it. Using the same >protocol. This arrangement has analogs in the real world. When a doctor sells his practice, the patients are all notified. But, I think there are some True Name issues. The doctor tends to assure the patients that he has carefully selected the new doctor. People know the doctor and as a consequence tend to believe him. This isn't really true of an anonymous persistent identity. Let's say it was doing a significant amount of business. If you knew that its ownership had changed, you might hesitate before doing a deal which had a lot of fraud exposure. On the other hand, the purchaser of the identity has an investment which he may not want to endanger. If the identity cost $1 million and the outstanding deals only amounted to $100,000, fraud would be a bad deal for the owner. One reason why trading anonymous identities is a good idea is that it baffles pursuit. Every time you use one, information is revealed. Even if you are doing things like transmitting 100K to the remailers every hour, from time to time your net connection will go down, or whatever, and increase the odds that The Enemy will have a more accurate picture of your True Name. (This works best if the transaction is handled privately.) But, if the persistent identity starts operating from someplace else, it makes those attacks quite a bit more difficult, especially if there is no public announcement regarding the change of ownership. The transaction makes sense even if two identities of equal value are traded. (BTW, "Monty Cantsin" a.k.a. 0x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is not for sale. After using one persistent identity for awhile, you become emotionally attached to it!) Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNGn0xJaWtjSmRH/5AQH3tAf/TYxrCZxJj4aUMsiKISjMzNByhwDRjfxN xkbuU4JHTklEbOmwwoz1x8goK8vmibVV35Z7Q8p4mP6fPMACJE8k/sLkMJ+EAW0r pnT8khQM4Vh2wNwpk/6FGxABjt+pIJEDdWmVaz7N5exUS3wfT/kvPelnbvHQrRUW PSjJNWQTCW+GbmVF8/e1In4oPKF+gQtAvdlH6OIjkZCJHyEpT7Bk/xKlRJlYsMC+ /UixmqhE1VsuZp3u5UjGI1zJMh96u8gzzJmYWpeYEV7mx+S5tcYlwzWjdn6EXif2 K9/90eqs+12jGNP0gtpKlL34OYQIINIzezptqodlG+5PcY6PN3NrmQ== =L4es -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Secure Hashing for Entropy
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Jon Leonard wrote: >Monty Cantsin wrote: >> Often we have a source of entropy whose output we use as the input to >> a secure hash function. >> >> Does it matter if the hashing function is secure? I don't think so. >> All that really matters is that the function hashes evenly so that any >> input string is about as likely as any other input string to result in >> a particular hash. Even if the hash function is weak and collisions >> can be found, if it is even the same level of entropy is still >> available. >> >> Have I got this right? > >In the case where: >1) Your entropy source is as good as you think it is >2) Your opponent knows nothing about the data from your entropy source >and >3) Your entropy mixes the way you expect it to. > >this is indeed the case. > >If you're not completely sure about the above, using a cryptographic >hash requires your hypothetical opponent to be able to reverse the hash >to exploit what they know, rather than simpler computations. > >Since it seems that paranoia pays off in the design of cryptographic >software, I'd recommend always using a strong hash. Let's say you are using the entropy to create a session key for a symmetric cipher. If The Enemy can guess the session key, you have already lost the game. It doesn't matter if the original entropy-containing string can be guessed because the hash was weak. If your entropy source is weak and the original string can be guessed, then you've lost the game even if the hash function is strong. The Enemy knows how to compute hashes as well as you do. But, I think I now see a way a secure hash can sort of help you. Let's say you have an entropy source which gives you a base 3 number of arbitrary length. There is no even way to map base 3 numbers into base 2 numbers. Use of a hash function obscures the mapping. For example, we want a random 8 bit number. We can get this by generating a 6 digit base 3 number, P, and computing P mod 2^8. This has the unappealing property that it overlaps unevenly. 3^6 = 729 = 2 * 256 + 217. There is an 89.3% chance that the resulting number will be between 0 and 216, inclusive. The probability should be 84.7%. This gives The Enemy an edge if there are a number of messages to be broken. The cost to guarantee a break on a particular message is still the same. The use of a secure hash means that we can hope that the nature of the overlap cannot be determined. The downside is that there are no secure hash functions whose properties are completely understood. All we know for sure is that not much is really known to the public. So, the secure hash function in your crypto system could be reducing your effective entropy substantially if your entropic strings just happen to hash down to a smaller subset of possible hashes than expected. The use of the secure hash function may obscure what is happening from The Enemy. All we know for sure is that it obscures it from ourselves. Ideally, we want to match our sources of entropy with the base of the random number desired and eliminate the question. In the field, the most widely available and reliable entropy generator is a six sided die. If we are using a cipher which takes a base 2 key, this is inconvenient. You can only get one really good bit out of each throw. How hard would to be to construct a secure symmetric cipher which accepted a base 6 key? Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNGoiSJaWtjSmRH/5AQFzaAf+Jm1wlPlC9obQQLoRoss2qpLv5z900X9Z 2u3NO5eG/W9QQRUWTeqzeXOK3Ps8DYKhYXhgYy35AJy6uRrd5820MUUGULAhr0zH JqfVFU6FUGEgEpZsxxLTAVvU/OPx5g3LqeQJfsp92pOsIoeObhiBh6+1zxNLWHU5 fxSrDJAe9eANeUJ5nXlLBGtGwg9ZfvVw4+OWsLpO3ZsQXp+mke+dvz423WukqaQi VJ1VM+XTRBetRCZIuIcqKoCdkYrB2h/S0KIprp/7lHFOpIZWfo++p87BZm0LQuF5 Suo+NGSMtooCZwLYpPQrlQLtB51An8TjdVfr7k2YkUXpxPLcEp6CEg== =om47 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: FREE PSYCHOANLYSIS NIGHT ON THE CYPHERPUNKS LIST!!!
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Tim May wrote: >There seems to be an unhealthy desire by some to "armchair >psychoanalyze" the motivations and inner motivations of others. In >recent days, me. (And in the past, too. This recent episode of >moaning about "What makes Tim say the things he does? is not >new...we've seen this script before.) It's not too hard to figure out what is going on here. I don't think there is much question that Tim is the backbone of the list. The collective output of his critics has yet to reach even 10% of his contribution. Of course, writing interesting articles is hard work. It's easier to rain on the parade. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNGotXZaWtjSmRH/5AQEQnwf8Dd7JKKKw5ub0ou2nRLgsZs4JKP0J7uHZ 0gZNYq8NBcvflcjak8tCIICFnasksXL8lXkHUN6DYb54LsqxJ8W++hm2r0kLzybt i3JhwfZe8/TURRi+G886OwqvFl0+/ideVXivr72a6Vbt/Uufhf1xEENZncoaFgd+ Plc3u4Huk9nsSQJ9WtjAWclYDuLdLGbJQ9gVYTLo8lszhUYhiSCvBi4EQgQWAipO RDDs8X29Q9R7lw9Q/4ABCKM+uKD8lVpTXFVkV7eTgltFt77fJkzHAecT1BQYWQi/ yYxsnDVKItrfnCgNOn+IssisgQN04k16cRiKdCcdkkkP+6MzDBGA8Q== =Apu7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Br'er Tim and the Bug Hole
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Robert Hettinga wrote: >I mean, Tim, I have to admit I'm just as nervous as the next guy >about being next to soft targets these days, but I almost find myself >agreeing with other people, people you would respect otherwise, who >are saying that you're making yourself the greatest friend that Reno >and Freeh ever had. A vertiable poster boy for statism if there ever >was one. And so on. As Michel Foucault used to say, "The only guarantee of freedom is freedom itself." Put another way, "rights which are not exercised are lost." We don't see Freeh and Reno backing off so they don't become poster children for cryptoanarchy, do we? Just because free speech is a right guaranteed under the Constitution does not mean that is necessarily a safe right to exercise. Let us hope that Tim does not come to harm. But, let us also give him the credit he deserves for having the courage to speak his mind. I've been reading about a newspaper called the "Aurora" which operated in the 1790s from Philadelphia. It made itself very unpopular with Washington by claiming he was not the "Father of the Country". It made itself doubly unpopular with Adams for other less than respectful, but astute, observations. People said exactly the same things that Hettinga is saying here. If they would only behave (i.e., go along with anything), then they wouldn't have to be censored. Even though the editors were attacked and beaten, imprisoned, and charged with Federal crimes, they persevered. It would not be unreasonable to say that Jefferson owed his Presidency to their efforts. Indeed, it would not be too much to say that the Constitution (which failed to protect them) might not have survived without their efforts. A few courageous people doing the right thing at the right time make a big difference. This does not happen by kowtowing to whichever malfeasant tyrant happens to be in power. When you are asked to wear a yellow star, you can be pretty sure that doing so will not save you. Also, let us not pretend that Tim's gun collection is much protection. It may delay capture or raise the price of execution of a no-knock warrant, but if the Powers That Be don't want Tim around, then he's gone. It could be a "lone nut" with a sniper rifle, it could be a "heart attack", it could be a rock star's plane "accidently" hitting the house: there are many ways to take care of troublemakers. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNGkzI5aWtjSmRH/5AQHGfwf+P5L2fuDEA5FypnvZn7sfvvFgOwXaAfDn jhfpryY4agB/a8GhAOy0fle4sr7tz913C9tMI9bUVSX0QPygCPayiKg8aa7CDOZn nN9NXcCok6x7+03W8MFeFKSOyTeSboNY2/DRBatoJyQFmCbOSLfnPQBnZUBbxtML JKckdceiTY1S1gAJIkL1CM7eY+Zf/BxG9abyr9gYsj0Fejnv3ajau6544dlJFOH5 Anclg+UgXPR8cyO0G21DMzLoPRywOaDogxAZYXDkc8ehfF7Osa7AvEQqeBbOKOT+ PGv41+bDAgONXa8WCHi3/Ri2dRVTn8mvlSw1ezWwj/7MohTM6V7fUQ== =hCO1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 4

John Brown
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Robert Hettinga wrote: >> And so on. Throughout history there have been those who spoke their >> mind. And others who told them to cool it, to not anger the local >> prince, to not rock the boat. > >No, Tim. Your analysis is too simple, here. My point is, all John >Brown & Co. did was get shot up one afternoon in Harper's Ferry. They >didn't help the cause of abolition one whit. "Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong" by James W. Loewen, pages 167 through 169: "After 1890 textbook authors inferred Brown's madness from his plan, which admittedly was farfetched. Never mind that John Brown himself presciently told Frederick Douglass that the venture would make a stunning impact even if it failed. Nor that his twenty-odd followers can hardly be considered crazed too. Rather, we must recognize that the insanity with which historians have charged John Brown was never psychological. It was ideological. Brown's actions made no sense to textbook writers between 1890 and about 1970. To make no sense is to be crazy. "Clearly, Brown's contemporaries did not consider him insane. Brown's ideological influence in the month before his hanging, and continuing after his death, was immense. He moved the boundary of acceptable thoughts and deeds regarding slavery. Before Harpers Ferry, to be an abolitionist was not quite acceptable, even in the North. Just talking about freeing slaves - advocating immediate emancipation - was behavior at the outer limit of the ideological continuum. By engaging in armed action, including murder, John Brown made mere verbal abolitionism seem much less radical. "After an initial shock wave of revulsion against Brown, in the North as well as in the South, Americans were fascinated to hear what he had to say. In his 1859 trial John Brown captured the attention of the nation like no other abolitionist or slaveowner before or since. He knew it: `My whole life before had not afforded me one half the opportunity to plead for the right.' In his speech to the court on November 2, just before the judge sentenced him to die, Brown argued, `Had I so interfered in behalf of the rich, the powerful, it would have been all right.' He referred to the Bible, which he saw in the courtroom, `which teaches me that all things whatsoever I would that men should do to me, I should do even so to them. It teaches me further, to remember them that are in bonds as bound with them. I endeavored to act up to that instruction.' Brown went on to claim the high moral ground: `I believe that to have interfered as I have done, as I have always freely admitted I have done, in behalf of His despised poor, I did no wrong but right.' Although he objected that his impending death penalty was unjust, he accepted it and pointed to graver injustices. `Now, if it is deemed necessary that I should forfeit my life for the furtherance of the ends of justice, and mingle my blood further with the blood of my children and with the blood of millions in this slave country whose rights are disregarded by wicked, cruel, and unjust enactments, I say, let it be done.' "Brown's willingness to go to the gallows for what he thought was right had a moral force of its own. `It seems as if no man had ever died in America before, for in order to die you must first have lived,' Henry David Thoreau observed in a eulogy in Boston. `These men, in teaching us how to die, have at the same time taught us how to live.' Thoreau went on to compare Brown with Jesus of Nazareth, who had faced a similar death at the hands of the state. "During the rest of November, Brown provided the nation graceful instruction in how to face death. In Larchmont, New York, George Templeton Strong wrote in his diary, `One's faith in anything is terribly shaken by anybody who is ready to go to the gallows condemning and denouncing it.' Brown's letters to his family and friends softened his image, showed his human side, and prompted an outpouring of sympathy for his children and soon-to-be widow, if not for Brown himself. His letters to supporters and remarks to journalists, widely circulated, formed a continuing indictment of slavery. We see his charisma in this letter from `a conservative Christian' - so the author signed it - written to Brown in jail: `While I cannot approve of all your acts, I stand in awe of your position since your capture, and dare not oppose you lest I be found fighting against God; for you speak as one having authority, and seem to be strengthened from on high.' When Virginia executed John Brown on December 2, making him the first American since the founding of the nation to be hanged as a traitor, church bells mourned in cities throughout the North. Louisa May Alcott, William Dean Howells, Herman Melville, John Greenleaf Whittier, and Walt Whitman were among the poets who responded to the event. `The gaze of Europe is fixed at this moment on America,' wrote Victor Hugo from France. Hanging Brown, Hugo predicted, `will open a latent fissure that will finally split the Union asunder. The punishment of John Brown may consolidate slavery in Virginia, but it will certainly shatter the American Democracy. You preserve your shame but kill your glory.' "Brown remained controversial after his death. Republican congressmen kept their distance from his felonious acts. Nevertheless, Southern slaveowners were appalled at the show of Northern sympathy for Brown and resolved to maintain slavery by any means necessary, including quitting the Union if they lost the next election. Brown's charisma in the North, meanwhile, was not spent but only increased due to what many came to view as his martyrdom. As the war came, as thousands of Americans found themselves making the same commitment to face death that John Brown had made, the force of his example took on new relevance. That's why soldiers marched into battle singing `John Brown's Body'. Two years later, church congregations sang Julia Ward Howe's new words to the song: `As He died to make men holy, let us die to make men free' - and the identification of John Brown and Jesus Christ took another turn. The next year saw the 54th Massachusetts Colored Regiment parading through Boston to the tune, en route to its heroic destiny with death in South Carolina, while William Lloyd Garrison surveyed the cheering bystanders from a balcony, his hand resting on a bust of John Brown. In February 1865 another Massachusetts colored regiment marched to the tune through the streets of Charleston, South Carolina." -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNGpBnj7jyGKQlFZpAQEF5wf+Ld2UdeRWbtoYKqptJPbRArQX3xyP7r5t TQuLWdYqHfEmvO4RVbCnsk0qKqFYfRHN1hPRUeaj7Zf8Y3QRghUBn7QkrIPiP6bz TU8N/Jf0RLwMOJq+bl1/BgdT8Ax9FKTMYU/i5Ye6aC9cnMAGmXmx6XTGvrhFhhFM eoyj6dHm91vr5qSJBUMZto1hlXDeSee3RsrnfN8f24hagEEIppHsYFz8kKZQ/5I5 aHWewMZTYI4H6mSbmj51mXzTrhmGfxEK+qx8GIevh4zuF6uZ7/CvO2czERuIIMIO oJOICZQlDYsx8dgGHxGpmpGM/jkLeQjCngv7moQ0Kjd0KoVe84DDhw== =ESwB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

4 3

RE: Bell vs. Woodward--ju
by harka＠nycmetro.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- -=> Quoting In:tcmay@got.net to Harka <=- In> As for Australia, your countrymen acted like sheep in giving In> up their guns. If they try that kind of shit here in this In> country, a *lot* of cops are going to get killed. Hmm, I somewhat doubt that. After all, restricting guns more and more has also been happening in the US for quite a while now and overall resistance has been rather minimal. While there may be a few, who'd actually take up guns "in the defense of liberty" the gross majority of Americans seems just as "sheepish" as people anywhere else. Too many hours of watching (the good) "Cops" has left an imprint in many minds... Granted, America does have a constitution establishing civil rights for it's citizens, but America is also the country (among others) of "But I have nothing to hide" and "If it just saves one child"... In> (Not necessarily by me, though I'll defend my property and my In> constitutional rights as best I can. But the militia and In> patriot and anti-New World Order movements are preparing for In> war.) "Defending my property" is probably one of the more clear situations, where it is fairly easy to make a judgement call, and I support having the choice over necessary actions to take, if your property gets forcefully invaded by whomever and your personal freedom is being threatened. But on a more general basis things tend to become more complicated, IMHO. What if it's somebody else's liberty being taken? How many people would then take up arms (see Waco, Ruby Ridge, Roby/Ill. etc.)? It is much harder then to decide, if it's time for action or not. Especially because of pre-filtered information, that make it hard to base such a decision on "available" facts. When Reuters reported about the Shirley Allen Siege, in the first line they mentioned her to be "mentally disturbed" (implying for many, that the police-action was justified and correct in order "to save her"). People not immediately within the vicinity will have a hard time to decide, if the media-information is correct and subsequently, if "the war has now begun". (In Shirley Allens case, her fellow neighbors _did_ protest the police-action because they _knew better_, but people further away had other information and thus no incentive to defend her in any way.) The same happened in Waco, Ruby Ridge etc.etc., even with Jim Bell to a degree. Thus the .gov is able to pick us off one by one and I doubt, that a lot of "cops are going to get killed" because of it. It'd be rather interesting to devise a "Cypherpunks-911" system, that immediately provides others all over the country/world with necessary information, if something happens, and more importantly, _what_ happens (before the media faithfully recites the police-stories of "what happened") Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* E-mail: harka(at)nycmetro.com (PGP-encrypted mail pref'd) */ /* PGP public key available upon request. [KeyID: 04174301] */ /* F-print: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ ... "Use a Cipher - Be Free!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBNGiG/zltEBIEF0MBAQGlIQf9HfcmkDmcx2uSq1s97lGpWsqGycUYgZN6 qbUTG1NhxRiKTvnGgB+5L7ki2kVF3BR89V7I02pDKZYo3cAHakO5hKmp1bVsWcIU FQhnRINsdLERVTQOdOVvcxUg5iHnPuEl1FQtRPP93051AWZeals+CDW4UrIAOycD /RS7TRc/tn4TaFR2ZSIj9sDd2Q/51hUYuoFKMPhX121lCCYr8SjDYVb9fGRY92pb 9wUqO+gWtxqMl/lPPf2SFrfR3QOXFRe9dQ5IPsyC9SOQQMLxdUuBWwx9fKyK7JlQ BdIoFqHhxMDH3l9sDRqQVlyrAZ38dYe31i3+RwTJcyissbT+tGrdBQ== =3NTr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption...

1 0