December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

ZDNet Announces Computer Magazine Archive!
by announce＠lists.zdnet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------------------------------------------------------------- ZDNET ANNOUNCEMENT 6/10/97 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Introducing Computer Magazine Archive: Subscribe today--FREE until June 30th! Need an easy way to track the latest computer industry trends, research your competitors, follow the latest IPO's or research just about anything related to high-tech? Computer Magazine Archive, a new service from ZDNet, puts over 55,000 articles from 70 of the most popular computer publications at your fingertips. You won't need to search through piles of old publications or your overstuffed clipping file for information anymore. Simply log on to http://cma.zdnet.com for a faster, more effective way to access the information you need. ----SPECIAL LIMITED-TIME OFFER---- Similar information databases typically sell for thousands of dollars a year. With Computer Magazine Archive, you can access the same information for only $4.95 a month! And as a special introductory offer, it's FREE until June 30th when you sign up today. Try it risk-free and if you're not completely satisfied, simply cancel before June 30th and pay absolutely nothing. Log on to http://cma.zdnet.com to test-drive Computer Magazine Archive today. It's the most comprehensive database of computing articles you'll find online! Computer Magazine Archive: http://cma.zdnet.com ________________________________________________________________ ZDNet Announcements are periodic notices of new features, special events and free offers available to members of ZDNet. --To subscribe to ZDNet Announcements, please send mail to: announce-on(a)lists.zdnet.com You can leave the subject and body blank. --To unsubscribe to ZDNet Announcements, please send mail to: announce-off(a)lists.zdnet.com You can leave the subject and body blank. ________________________________________________________________ Powered by Mercury Mail: http://www.merc.com

1 0

List of reliable remailers
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = "<remail(a)miron.vip.best.com> cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"mix"} = "<mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = "<remailer(a)replay.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = "<remailer(a)remailer.nl.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"haystack"} = "<haystack(a)holy.cow.net> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = "<lucifer(a)dhp.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = "<remailer(a)cypherpunks.ca> cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = "<winsock(a)rigel.cyberpass.net> cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord"; $remailer{'nym'} = '<config(a)nym.alias.net> newnym pgp'; $remailer{"balls"} = "<remailer(a)huge.cajones.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"squirrel"} = "<mix(a)squirrel.owl.de> cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"middle"} = "<middleman(a)jpunix.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek reord"; $remailer{'cyber'} = '<alias(a)alias.cyberpass.net> alpha pgp'; $remailer{"dustbin"} = "<dustman(a)athensnet.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle"; $remailer{'weasel'} = '<config(a)weasel.owl.de> newnym pgp'; $remailer{"reno"} = "<middleman(a)cyberpass.net> cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{"wazoo"} = "<remailer(a)wazoo.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"shaman"} = "<remailer(a)lycaeum.org> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"hidden"} = "<remailer(a)hidden.net> cpunk pgp hash latent cut"; catalyst(a)netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura(a)replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer(a)crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix) (weasel squirrel) The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers. The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems for incoming mail. The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only. 403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now. The penet remailer is closed. Last update: Mon 9 Jun 97 6:45:22 PDT remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- hidden remailer(a)hidden.net #-##*---#### 38:53 99.99% weasel config(a)weasel.owl.de ++++--++--+ 2:09:06 99.95% squirrel mix(a)squirrel.owl.de +-++--++-++ 2:05:06 99.95% jam remailer(a)cypherpunks.ca ****** ***** 10:29 99.83% balls remailer(a)huge.cajones.com ###.-## #### 38:28 99.71% replay remailer(a)replay.com ***** ** ** 5:44 99.35% mix mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com *.-.-----. 7:30:50 97.83% reno middleman(a)cyberpass.net -+--------+- 1:19:13 97.76% winsock winsock(a)rigel.cyberpass.net -+-------- 3:48:43 95.95% lucifer lucifer(a)dhp.com +++ +++ + 51:30 91.29% cyber alias(a)alias.cyberpass.net ***** ** * 15:59 88.67% nym config(a)nym.alias.net 3:02 0.05% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien

1 0

Re: Steak Knife Decryption
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Subject: Re: Steak Knife Decryption > To: mpd(a)netcom.com (Mike Duvos) > Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:44:15 -0500 (CDT) > Cc: cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net > From: ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) > Organization: Bool Sheet Software > Reply-to: ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) > Mike Duvos wrote: > > > I am not quite clear if rational people can get something out of > torturing other rational people. Maybe, I am confused and wrong > somewhere. > - Igor. Torture is a means of producing an irrational state in people's minds (at least temporarily), thus causing them to do things they would not rationally do (sign a prepared confession, reveal a secret, etc) If torture could not do this, it would not be used; verbal persuasion over tea and crumpets is *so* much more pleasant. Even people who might be able to face a more or less painless death with equanimity (in the pursuit of some greater cause) may break down as the bamboo splints are pushed under their fingernails. 'Rational torture victim' is an oxymoron. Peter Trei trei(a)process.com

1 0

Re: Thoughtcrime (Re: My War) (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 20:22:44 -0700 > From: Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net> > Subject: Re: Thoughtcrime (Re: My War) > Your economics education must have some gaps. Look into "price elasticity." > Look also at the markets for illegal drugs: despite severe "taxation" (in > the form of price increases of some drugs, increased prison terms, etc.), > some markets have increased even as prices have increased. Clearly this whole discussion can be broken down into a cusp shaped gap. Too much regulation will cause the market worth to soar hence driving a large increase in at least attempted revenue spent on the commodity. Whereas a complete lack of regulation will saturate the market hence driving suppliers and distributors out of the market, leaving a few megaliths. Somewhere in the middle is a point where there is actualy a minimum of the events you are trying to eliminate. > With drugs, knocking out distributors has in many cases increased the > selling price of the drug, making it actually more lucrative for street > dealers to enter the market. Actualy what it does is increase the perception of danger and difficulty in the mind of the user and low-level dealer. The actual cycle is much more complicated than Tim is alluding to here. First there is the total supply of raw material, processing, and distribution. This sets a hard baseline limit on the total available drug. Then we have a certain fluctuating percentage of the population who use it. If we study the typical 'addict cycle' for different drugs and users we see a multiplicity of cycles and patterns of behaviour (eg most users who don't od kick the habit after a period of time). Then we have the perception of those users on the availability of the drug. There is also the percentage of tax that a society can support at a given standard of living to support police activity specificaly for drug control. The image that John and Jane Doe have on the impact of drugs on their lives. And on and on... > This is not at all clear. If the crackdown on child porn, or porn in > general, causes the street price to rise to $10 a picture, say, then many > folks not producing child porn now might be tempted to get into the market. Any many who had thought about it would decline because of the increased chance of getting caught. Specificaly how are you justifying the assumption that the net effect would be to increase the total available distributors? It seems to me that such an arguments natural extension would be that it would increase the net number of movie makers not distributors. Consider, the number of distributors is reduced by a very public campaign. Obviously two things come from this. First is the actual reduction of available material and the perception that distribution is a very dangerous game. So what does our enterprising pedophile do? He buys himself a camera and proceeds to make his own for him and his buddies. Hell, if he gets too worried he can start killing the kids so they can't squeel. _______________________________________________________________________ | | | Speak the truth, but leave immediately after. | | | | Slovenian Proverb | | | | Jim Choate ravage(a)ssz.com | | The Armadillo Group www.ssz.com | | Austin, Texas, USA 512-451-7087 | |_______________________________________________________________________|

5 5

No Subject
by Paul Bradley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>In the same way I do not believe that the sheeple who every 5 years go >>out and vote in some corrupt and evil party to power commit a crime >>against me, even though they are definitely naive, stupid and brainwashed >> to believe in the process of demoncracy, and particularly in its current >> flavour. Remember the NAP, direct acts of agression are the only crimes. > >Well I for one do not beleive that only direct acts of agression are the >only crimes. If I hire a hitman to bump off my wife I am as guilty of the >murder as the one who pulls the trigger. If he kills off 2 or 3 others in the process of killing her even I only hired him to kill her I am still >guilty for the other deaths. If you are in a group of people, and vote for your wife not to be killed, but you are outnumbered and the group have her killed, I would not say you were guilty. Similarly if everyone else chose to vote in a poll to say "do you want to kill William Geigers wife?" and you abstained, I would not say you were guilty. The paralells between this and a political election are easy to draw. >The same goes true for governments and their citizens. Citizens "hire" >governments to do their bidding. If the people want their government to do >"x" and they do "y" and the people let them continue doing "y" then they >are just as guilt as the officials in the government. Ofcource you have >the segmant of the population that support "y" but they are obviously >guilty. In that case I would say you were guilty of murder. I do take direct action against the government, and so do you, because we have not yet removed the state does not mean we are murderers. >> A government can only conduct its activities with the support of its >> population. This may be active support or support through inactivity (ie >> shrugging shoulders and doing nothing). >Shrugging of shoulders is ignorant and reprehensible but not criminally >so. To make an analogy, if I see someone in the street who has been run >over by a car and is going to die if I do not fetch assistance, to walk >on by would certainly be a callous act, but not criminal. >Also, often there is very little one can do alone, you are starting to >apply democratic arguments here, in that you are saying "if the majority >of English people support the occupation of NI kill all English people". >Yes that is *EXACTLY* what I am saying. :) > >It is up to the people to control their governmnet. If their government >acts illegaly or immorally and the citizens do nothing to stop them (up to >and including arm revolt against their government) then they are just as >guilty as the ones pulling the triggers!! Yes, but there are several reasons why this cannot currently occur: 1. The UK government has systematically taken action to disarm the population, of course, this law can be easily circumvented. 2. The majority of people are too cowardly to take any action, and too brainwashed to see the governments evils. 3. The English do not understand the history of NI, although NI is not the only issue which should cause public outcry it is the most obvious, and most people simply do not even realise the crimes carried out by the British in NI. >Every English man, woman & child is guilty of the crimes against the Irish >people and as such are fair game for retalition. Perhaps this was only a figure of speech and I am replying to a void point but I do not believe, even if we accept citizens are responsible for the crimes of the government, that children could be guilty, not that is if under voting age, and definitely not if under the age of criminal responsibility. >Perhaps if enough good >Englishmen get blownup the will finally force their government to stop >their agression against the Irish. It is better that a lot of bad Englishmen (such as poloticians, police etc.) get killed, they provoke more public sympathy that Joe Sixpack. >Yes, but the only Germans I believe guilty of crimes were those who >directly took action in support of the government, "we were just obeying >orders" is no excuse, but not taking action to end the holocaust was no >crime. Turning a blind eye, and taking no action, are different things, I > do not turn a blind eye to the problems in northern Ireland, I recognise > however that there is nothing I can do to solve this problem, so I >concentrate on more productive things. >Well with that attitude, "there is nothing I can do" is why governments >get away with what they do. Of course, but it is very often true. Of course the German people should have revolted and deposed Hitler before WWII even began, the reason they did not do so was cowardice, the reason the English do not revolt is because they *do not see that the government commits crimes*. To English people, the governments acts of brutality in NI are just "protecting the people" or "keeping the peace" etc. There is a vast difference between persuading people who realise they should do something to do it, and persuading people to see things a different way. >You as a citizen of the UK are responcible for >the actions of your government. This is a responcibility you can not >ingnore because it is "too hard" or "too incovienant". It is not only your >right but your duty to do everything possable upto and including the arm >overthrowing of your government. I realise that I, as an citizen of the UK should do something from a moral point of view, but, this simply does not suggest to me that if I do not do anything I am commiting a crime, this is not a logical step of reasoning to me. Whatever the case, I do do something, it isn`t yet armed revolt, but I wouldn`t rule that out for the future. >The majority of citizen-units are too cowardly to take any action even >when they see the evils of government, this makes it very difficult for >the minority to end this evil, there is definitely strenth in numbers. >Difficult but not impossiable. I am sure that the IRA would like to launch >an all out invasion of England and put an end to the whole thing. They are >too small to do so. So they engage in a policy of "terrorism" against the >citizens of England who are the true powerbase of the English government. Yes, but to do so would require the belief and support of most of the population, a virtually impossible task in a reasonable space of time. I am not saying this is an excuse for inaction, merely stating fact. I personally see geurilla warfare methods, selective "terrorism" and cryptography, as well as info-warfare as the means by which the state will be overthrown, there is no longer a need for large armed revolt. >I would imagine that a "man on the street" survey would find that most UK >citizens support the actions of their government which makes them targets >even more so. Yes indeed, the average brainwashed citizen-unit thinks any "violent" act of self defence is criminal, recall the British public recently signed a petition in massive numbers (something like 10% of the population) for the banning of *all* handguns, even for sporting purposes. There are also laws in the UK which do not allow citizens to carry any defensive weapon whatsoever, these laws kill innocent people. >This is a blatant and misguided overgeneralisation, I realise that >sometimes innocents get killed, I do find this understandable and >sympathise with those who feel they can excuse their actions in the name >of "war", but the actions of those who kill innocent people to get to the > guilty are still crimes, and should be treated as such. >No it puts the responcibility of government actions squarely on the >shoulders of those who are responcible, the citizens. No government wether >democracy or dictatorship can survive without a minimum of passive support >of its citizens. Germany never could have commited its crimes without this >support, the communist in Russia, not the Japanise. As such they are all >guilty, not just the ones pulling the trigers. If you come up to me in the street, hold a gun to my head and tell me to move so you can shoot someone behind me, I am going to move. The government uses force and coercion to compel its citizens to get out of its way and allow it to carry on its evil work. Sure, if I move to allow you to shoot the guy I may be cowardly, not guilty though, I see these two situations as very similar. I don`t think however that I personally can be thought of as guilty, even if we do accept for a moment that non-action is a form of consent, civil disobediance is an excellent tactic to show the violence of the government against peaceful protest, "terrorist" acts simply incur the displeasure of the sheeple and make them more determined to support the government. >You can see prime examples of this all throughout Eastern Europe & the >USSR. The old communist regimes lost popular support and their governments >proptly collapsed. This is something I was thinking about a while ago, is there any way we can vastly accelarate the governments programme of infringment of rights? The boiling a frog slowly argument currently applies in that people do not see the governments evil, if they moved much further more people would open their eyes and see what is happening. Exposing the brutality of the state, as gandhi did to great effect, is always useful. Recall the fracas in NI over a peaceful Orange order march being banned recently (in the end the march went ahead but there was a lot of media coverage). Datacomms Technologies data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

1 0

Automotive Products - Shocks, Struts, Suspensions
by ijmkkj＠micro-net.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ Your email address was acquired during a targeted search of the Web for those we believed would be interested in the following. If this message reaches you in error, simply hit reply and put the word "remove" by itself in the subject line for immediate removal. ////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// Come visit http://www.shox.com, the home page of RD Enterprises, the nation's largest wholesale and retail distributor of shock absorbers, springs, struts, sway bars, strut tower braces and suspension packages for street high performance, autocross, race, and quality luxury motorcars...including suspension set-ups for pick-up trucks, sport utility vehicles (SUV's), motorhomes, kit cars, weekend slalom, and full coil over race cars. If you are interested in a mutual link, contact linx(a)shox.com for a banner swap and/or mutual link. Thank you for your time! sales(a)shox.com http://www.shox.com

1 0

Question about anonymizing proxies
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sorry if this has been beaten to death before (if it has, a pointer to where it is in the archives would be appreciated), but is it possible to chain anonymizing proxy servers in a way similar to remailers?

4 3

Your REFUND from IQ INTERNET IS HERE!
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Your REFUND from IQ INTERNET IS HERE! This message is for anyone who was ripd off by IQ INTERNET You can now obtain a FULL Refund paid to these Bastards by following these simple instructions. I could also use some help in distributing this REFUND offer! Please help me by mass emailing this out to the Internet. I am sure we could find others who would like a REFUND too! (g) LOL! I just discovered a "way cool" crack for IQ DIRECT / WMRG COM., a pre-paid calling card company. If you want FREE long distance to any where in the world here it is.!!! Call 1-800-510-7941 the automated prompt will ask you for a pin number. Now here is the "Way Cool" Crack ...The pin number is a 10 digit code, for example: 748-700-4162 The first 3 numbers is the 'batch" code and will always stay the same. The "batch" codes seem to run sequentially. In other words 100, 101,112 ...748,749,....999 end. The "batch" codes also represents dollars denominations of $5, $10, $20, $50, $100, $500!!! (lol G) The second and third set of numbers are somewhat random. However as in the example 748-700-4163, I know of people who have been able to pick up a lot of FREE time just by changing one number in the second or third set of numbers. When you dial the 1-800-510-7941 number the automated voice will allow you 5 attempts to enter the correct pin number. You will be disconnected after the 5th attempt. But hey, no problem! Just call back and retry. I have found on average that within the 10th attempt at entering a pin number, you will find an authorized pin number! It is really a lot of fun! Sort of like spinning the Wheel of Fortune and coming up with a jackpot of up to $500 in pre-paid long distance! This crack is likely to end within 1 week of this posting 6/07/97. Do yourself a favor and Hurry! Let everyone know about this "limited" opportunity. (G) Due to high call traffic you may run into busy signals (lol & G)!!! $incerely, Dialing For Dollars$$$

1 0

Encryption Workshop
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On June 10, BXA will present an Encryption Workshop at the Westin Santa Clara, in Santa Clara, California. The half-day program will highlight the current U.S. policy on encryption and will include discussion of the main elements of the interim rule published December 30, 1996, including license exception KMI and the licensing process. The program will also address upcoming revisions based on the Administration's initiative to promote the use of strong encryption by U.S. banks and financial institutions and their subsidiaries overseas. For registration information, please contact: Carol Truhe with the Professional Association for Exporters and Importers at (408) 524-2135 or by fax at (408) 524-2023.

1 0

With friends like these...
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just read www.crypto.com/key_study. I was not impressed. In fact, one thing worries me a lot. I think the report basicly sells us out. The authors, Hal Abelson [1], Ross Anderson [2], Steven M. Bellovin [3], Josh Benaloh [4], Matt Blaze [5], Whitfield Diffie [6], John Censor Gilmore [7], Peter G. Neumann [8], Ronald L. Rivest [9], Jeffrey I. Schiller [10], Bruce Schneier [11], include many "respected" "experts". Some of them, like Blaze and Diffie and Schneier, are people who act like they're on our side. But... Benaloh works for microsoft and Rivest for Bidzos. Two from AT&T. One from HP. One from Sun. The influence of big money was clear. They want what's good for the big companies. The report endorses pro-code/safe, which effectively criminalizes the use of crypto and would outlaw remailers. It's true that they say key recovery is a bad idea (not that it's unacceptable, however, just a bad idea, not nearly as strong as it could be). The reason they give is that they think it may be too expensive for corporate America. What they don't say is Far more interesting: They don't say that key escrow is unacceptable, period. They don't mention the big brother problem. They don't talk about the long history of government abuse (FBI, CIA, NSA, etc). The conveniently leave out ALL the libertarian issues about how key escrow making the government bigger and more powerful. They just seem to care about what it costs. And these are our friends? Now lets look at who benefits from this point of view. Criminalize crypto, outlaw remailers, no expensive key escrow. It SOUNDS good, at least a small gain, but this gives them a real tool AGAINST us. They can come after crypto users for the first time. Who benefits? BIG companies. NOT CYPHERPUNK GOALS. By not mentioning it, I think these guys have sold out. They may not realize it themselves, but the effect is just as bad (maybe worse). CDT which brought us the CALEA and the CDA, funded the study. They no doubt were able to influence the content to get rid of the "unacceptable" stuff. We should be asking who our friends are here. I think if these guys really wanted to be effective, they could take more of a real stand, with some real risks. Have ANY of these guys ever written code to promote strong crypto? Schneier wrote a book, but, charges for his services. I don't think they have been "bought" or are working for the other side, I just think we should be realistic about who the "experts" are really working for - their own pockets and their big employers. KEY ESCROW IS UNACCEPTABLE, PERIOD. No matter what the cost. No matter how safe. No matter what. I think we should respectfully ask them to clarify where they stand. Mr experts, <hal(a)mit.edu> <ross.anderson(a)cl.cam.ac.uk> <smb(a)research.att.com> <benaloh(a)microsoft.com> <mab(a)research.att.com> <diffie(a)eng.sun.com> <gnu(a)toad.com> <neumann(a)sri.com> <rivest(a)lcs.mit.edu> <jis(a)mit.edu> <schneier(a)counterpane.com> Do you stand for the criminalization of crypto? Is there anything wrong with key escrow other than the cost? Why is your report so weak?

4 3

Re: [ADMINISTRATIVIUM] Quadratic residues
by The Spectre 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Mon Jun 09 15:38:35 1997 > On Mon, 9 Jun 1997, Anonymous wrote: > > I think Vulis needs each of us to send ten copies of this back to him. > [...] I think I'm sending *you* ten copies of this. -=Start Signature=- Goth.Code 3.1 GoCS5$ TAnFe P! B7/17Bk#1 cBk(Lb)-s6 V6s M3p1wgD ZGoPuoMehFon!! C9oc A20+(24) n5 b54 H185 g6!??94A m@Z4? w6T v1h r7EISP p1Z565Hm D26 h5(R) sM10M SsYw k6B N1286JONEH RzM LusNY3 -=http://www.nac.net/~users/spectre=- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBM5xbwqAC4xvMjGa1AQGGrwf/RFxPyCB1MGB+QLUi2cRxZW52X9MBcVr2 dlZd6BZxvbDy5uo8FCbQly4vLG35N/P08SeeCrtnuXjPc9rb/RF38O/rtwSRqFDy sbgtrrFaTwOyOruOAGbuXllHCStYYC0GHYESAoJOXi8vxdMHk0kxZXuWgnAO2uwh c2ON2Jv1f9YmybGrClZ0CaFybWKOG6r3m31QLOJUZqOWZbErRTYOlDM7//09x/ZZ ZA6XCUgLDPPNfm6PSaJmqBeEkgqQC3I0q6uslYi+43u14mXTCa/ddxUG0crMAUb2 F6MyRlD2FjaalVcH69me9VIfJPybbW/o3MbJ7RkNDVAvCNfCg0wenw== =M57W -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

No Subject
by C.Laffra 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, My records indicate that we exchanged email in the last three years. I sincerely apologize if this email is mis-directed. This is to inform you of my new address: Chris Laffra, Ph.D. Research Staff Member Java Tools Group Computer Science Department Research Division IBM T.J. Watson Research Center P.O. Box 704 Yorktown Heights, NY 10598 Tel: (914) 784 7525 Fax: (914) 784 6576 email: laffra(a)watson.ibm.com web: www.research.ibm.com/people/l/laffra (soon to be actived) email: laffra(a)aol.com web: members.aol.com/laffra Chris.

1 0

Law Enforcement Types Summary
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

JUST A RECAP OF HOW OUR JUSTICE SYSTEM WORKS The LAPD, The FBI, and the CIA are all trying to prove that they are the best at apprehending criminals. The President decides to give them a test. He releases a rabbit into a forest and each of them has to catch it. The CIA goes in. They place animal informants throughout the forest. They question all plant and mineral witnesses. After three months of extensive investigations they conclude that rabbits do not exist. The FBI goes in. After two weeks with no leads they burn the forest, killing everything in it, including the rabbit, and make no apologies. The rabbit had it coming. The LAPD goes in. They come out two hours later with a badly beaten bear. The bear is yelling: "Okay! Okay! I'm a rabbit! I'm a rabbit! Case closed.

1 0

WSJ on Money Laundering
by Alan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Check out the latest (June 9th, 1997) Wall Street Journal. On page B1 there is an article on the wave of money laundering convictions for non-drug related crimes. In fact, the article points out that just about any monetary transaction can be declared money laundering. (And get upheld in court!) And the reasons behind this? Long terms and lots of ready cash for the feds. "Property Seizure: It's not just for drug crimes anymore!" alano(a)teleport.com | "Those who are without history are doomed to retype it."

3 2

blue, blue, 'lectric blue
by cypherpunks＠Algebra.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Blue Lister's Nuked! Blue Lister's Nuked! First round's on Ian. Second round we puked! http://nethomes.com/lectric

1 0

Re: FCPUNX:My War
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:13 PM 6/8/97 -0700, se7en wrote: > [about child pornography on the internet] > It is disgustingly real. It is so real it will make you > want to throw up, and I actually, physically did throw up last night. > > Second, in reference to previous conversation over the years on this list, > and in the hacking community in general, I know this type of activity is > not tolerated by us. You are no hacker: You appear to be Rich Graves. Furthermore this activity is tolerated by us. And as usual you are discovering and publicising all sorts of good reasons why the government should supervise us, while piously declaring you are opposed to any such supervision. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

2 1

privacy discussion on today's TOTN
by Carl Ellison 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

NPR's Talk of the Nation, today at 14:00 EDT, will discuss privacy issues. +------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Carl M. Ellison cme(a)cybercash.com http://www.clark.net/pub/cme | |CyberCash, Inc. http://www.cybercash.com/ | |207 Grindall Street PGP 2.6.2: 61E2DE7FCB9D7984E9C8048BA63221A2 | |Baltimore MD 21230-4103 T:(410) 727-4288 F:(410)727-4293 | +------------------------------------------------------------------+

1 0

Doc Offerings
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We offer: A Federal Register notice today of an upcoming Technology Administration "Public Forum on Certificate Authorities and Digital Signatures": http://jya.com/ta060997.txt The recent Denver ruling of $350K damages against the IRS for disclosing confidential tax payer information: http://jya.com/wardvusa.htm (48K) NIST's latest package on the Key Recovery Demonstration Plan of a test run among 10 federal agencies, including a May 29 solicitation: http://jya.com/krdp.htm (37K) And, the quite instructive 1994 Department of Justice "Federal Guidelines for Searching and Seizing Computers": http://jya.com/doj-search.htm (376K)

1 0

MS Access 97 deprotection? (fwd)
by Igor Chudov ＠ home 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

----- Forwarded message from Peter Trei ----- >From owner-cypherpunks(a)Algebra.COM Mon Jun 9 18:22:12 1997 Message-Id: <199706091524.LAA01532(a)www.video-collage.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is <trei@popserver> From: "Peter Trei" <trei(a)process.com> Organization: Process Software To: cypherpunks(a)Algebra.COM Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 11:36:50 -6 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: MS Access 97 deprotection? Reply-to: trei(a)process.com CC: trei(a)process.com X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42) Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)algebra.com Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com X-List-Admin: ichudov(a)algebra.com X-Loop: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com An acquaintence of mine who runs a small consulting business here in Massachusetts called last night. He seems to be suffering from one of the classic aftereffects of a having 'disgruntled, about-to-be-ex-employee'; one of the database files on which his business relies has been encrypted within Microsoft Access 97, and he needs to recover the data. A quick look around at the obvious sites shows no generic de-protector, as there are for MS Word and many other systems. Anyone have any clue how he might get his data back? (I've already told him to consider the lawyer-based route). Send me mail - I'll pass it on to him. thanks, Peter Trei trei(a)process.com ----- End of forwarded message from Peter Trei -----

1 0

Re: Steak Knife Decryption (fwd)
by Igor Chudov ＠ home 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

----- Forwarded message from Peter Trei ----- >From trei(a)process.com Mon Jun 9 18:21:21 1997 Message-Id: <199706091411.KAA26392(a)www.video-collage.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is <trei@popserver> From: "Peter Trei" <trei(a)process.com> Organization: Process Software To: ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home), cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net, mpd(a)netcom.com Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 10:20:41 -6 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Steak Knife Decryption Reply-to: trei(a)process.com Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42) > Subject: Re: Steak Knife Decryption > To: mpd(a)netcom.com (Mike Duvos) > Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 00:44:15 -0500 (CDT) > Cc: cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net > From: ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) > Organization: Bool Sheet Software > Reply-to: ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) > Mike Duvos wrote: > > > I am not quite clear if rational people can get something out of > torturing other rational people. Maybe, I am confused and wrong > somewhere. > - Igor. Torture is a means of producing an irrational state in people's minds (at least temporarily), thus causing them to do things they would not rationally do (sign a prepared confession, reveal a secret, etc) If torture could not do this, it would not be used; verbal persuasion over tea and crumpets is *so* much more pleasant. Even people who might be able to face a more or less painless death with equanimity (in the pursuit of some greater cause) may break down as the bamboo splints are pushed under their fingernails. 'Rational torture victim' is an oxymoron. Peter Trei trei(a)process.com ----- End of forwarded message from Peter Trei -----

1 0

Thoughtcrime (Re: My War)
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here are some of my responses on another list... --Declan ********** Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 17:46:47 -0400 To: "Vangelis" <vangelis(a)qnis.net> From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)pathfinder.com> Subject: How "child porn" laws ban pix of girls in leotards At 11:54 -0700 6/9/97, Vangelis wrote: >None of this out-of-control angry mob shit, alright? THINK. If it's too >hard a task to go after ONLY those genuinely responsible and you'd rather >go after their friends, family, co-workers, customers, or anyone else >you've rationalized as somehow indirectly encouraging the activity w/o >actually participating, then you've got no business playing vigilante - >you've become just another wreckless crusader *blinded* by his own >self-righteous outrage. Christianity, the Nazi Party, and Prohibition, and >McCarthyism (just to name a few) have already given us enough of those. This is well said. Read that paragraph again. The true enemy here is *NOT* the pervs trading child porn. It's the censorhappy wackos who want to censor others. The main reason folks seem to be in a lather about the "threat" of child porn is that it might ruin the Net for everyone. That is, it gives Congress an excuse to censor it and bring it under ever-tightening controls. But isn't it clear that the true enemy is the censor? Stamp out child porn and then Congress will use Nazi sites, or regular porn sites, or sites that collect personal information as an excuse and justification for censorship. That's why you should attack the censors (and the real child molestors), not those trading dirty JPEGs. Also, I see a lot of uninformed rants on this list about "we must uphold child porn laws." Few people seem to realize that the long-standing Federal child porn law outlawed *pictures of dancing girls wearing leotards*. I'm not making this up. No nudity. No breasts. Certainly no genitals. But the Supreme Court upheld the conviction in the Knox case. Now the law is even worse, since it criminalizes morphed images that *look* like kids in leotards, even if the models were 25-year old adults. Be cautious when praising such laws. -Declan ********** Date: Mon, 9 Jun 1997 17:10:42 -0400 To: Tepes <tepes(a)reincarnate.com> From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)pathfinder.com> Subject: Re: My War At 06:59 -0400 6/9/97, Tepes wrote: >Yeah, a friend of mine accidentally came across kiddie-porn a few months >ago. She e-mailed all the headers, etc. to Customs' Child Porn dept. and >they e-mailed her back saying that they really can't do anything about it. >What the hell do they have a Child Porn task force if they can't do >anything about it! Perhaps because Customs has nothing to do with enforcement of domestic laws? I hope you're not proposing expanding the police powers of the Feds. I mean, your friend is doing the equivalent of asking the National Park Service why she isn't getting her welfare checks on time. >What is also equally sick is rape porn. Excuse me, but what is "rape porn?" What, a picture of two people having sex that's titled "rape?" Not quite. Just like those pictures of a 40 year old guy and a 20 year old girl having "incest sex," it's a fantasy. Free speech. Don't sweat it. Let others enjoy their fantasies. -Declan

2 1

hidden.net temporarily down
by Patrick May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The magic smoke escaped from the machine running remailer(a)hidden.net. It is being moved to a new machine forthwith. Expect a couple days downtime while the IP address change propogates. remailer-admin(a)hidden.net

1 0

Call 4 Participation
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text X-Authentication-Warning: blacklodge.c2.net: majordom set sender to owner-spki(a)c2.org using -f Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 14:29:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Yahya Al-Salqan <Yahya.Abual-Salqan(a)corp.sun.com> Reply-To: Yahya Al-Salqan <Yahya.Abual-Salqan(a)corp.sun.com> Subject: Call 4 Participation To: ssl-talk(a)netscape.com, spki(a)c2.net Cc: SECURITY-TF(a)ILLILOUETTE.Sun.COM, Yahya.Abual-Salqan(a)corp.sun.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-spki(a)c2.net Precedence: bulk The second IEEE International Workshop on Enterprise Security will take place next week (June 18-21) at the MIT. The workshop will host a Panel discussion on the "Future of the Internet Security at the IETF." The Panelist are: 1) Carl Ellison, CyberCash, SPKI author at the IETF 2) Don Eastlake, CyberCash, Secure DNS author at the IETF 3) Perry Mitzger, Co-chair of SPKI and SecSH at the IETF 4) Tatu Ylonen, author SSH at IETF 5) Steve Lloyd, Entrust 6) Tom Polk, NIST, editor of PKIX at teh IETF You are invited to take advantage of this opportunity to learn about the future of Internet security. Visit http://www.cerc.wvu.edy/SECWK/ for more information on the presentations and discussion groups. I look forward to meeting some of you at the Workshop, Best Regards, --Yahya Al-Salqan, PhD Sun Microsystems Enterprise Security General Chair --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/

1 0

Response to "My War"
by se7en 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have been away for most of the day, and came home to see I hit a sensitive spot in one way or another with many people. I tried to respond to many people who sent me private messages, but for some strange ass reason all of my mail is bouncing as "host unknown." I am quite sure aol.com exists. So I am going to try and respond to much of it here. In my long rant, I realized the message was getting too long, and paraphrased some of my larger thoughts. I figured everyone would know what I was trying to get at, but I was wrong. To clarify a few points, before I get to the debate: I was not advocating the destruction of servers that are used by large numbers of people. I was thinking of the terminology used by the people trading...fserv/ftp servers, many of which are virtual to their desktops which can be shut on and off at will by them as desired. My reference to destruction of servers fit this definition. I don't want to affect large numbers of innocent users to get the few scumbags out there. That is not acceptable. Precision strikes yes, not mass strikes for the "greater good." That is asinine. Nor was I attempting, as some did point out, to be some sort of "ring leader" in this crusade. I do not plan to organize some large anti-kiddie porn team. I plan on spending a few hours a week, on my own, identifying active participants in this activity. I plan on gathering logs of various types of activity to justify my actions. I plan on taking action which will affect only these individuals. I will make public postings on my own accord to various places on the Internet (dc-stuff WILL NOT be one of these places). These are things I am doing on my own. If others would like to join the effort, I would ask they do the same thing. Spend a few hours a week in their world to identify the traders and do what you do best to either wreck them or make things a serious hassle for them to continue. I do not want a personal strike team to organize and manage. As far as freedom of speech goes, sorry guys, it does not cover activities which violate the rights of others. Someone does not have the right to fuck a four-year-old girl in the ass, take pictures of it, and then scan it and upload it to the Internet. No one has the right to force a six year old girl to suck his dick until cum is running down her face, take pictures of the whole thing, and, once again, upload it to the Internet. This is not covered. Go back to school if you think it is. Anyone who thinks this doesn't affect the young children, you are wrong. I doubt these children consented to the sexual activity. I doubt they consented to being photographed. I doubt they consented to the pictures being distributed to others. I am sure this affects the emotional/psychological state of the child victim in many ways beyond what most of us can understand. I think we can all agree that is creates a less-than-optimal psychological state in the children. I know my actions are themselves illegal. I am not going to try to morally justify it with comments such as "It's for the greater good," or "What they are doing is more illegal than hacking." I know my actions against these people are illegal, and many for good reason. It is destruction of property. I am honest enough to admit I will be breaking laws. At least I don't try to rationalize it behind some strange, twisted sense of logic. I am not here to force my morals on anyone. If you agree with me, fine. If you have the ability to do something about it, fine. If you disagree, fine. I have had some disagreements against my email/plan/whatever. I have read evry single one of them. I do not hate those who disagree with me. I see the logic in their arguments. I actually encourage it, as it helps me to define what I plan to do better. Everyone has the right to say what they want, whether they agree or not. That includes me, that includes you. This, of course, as long as it doesn't violate the more fundamental rights of others. Agree with me? Yes. Disagree with me? Yes. Distribute child porn. No! On an interesting note, in instances where I have talked one-on-one with law enforcement agencies in the past, I have thrown several hypothetical cases their way to judge their reaction: (A small glimpse of my Defcon speech) ME: "If I entered a system without authorization and poked around a left, would you arrest me?" THEM: "No. We don't have the time or resources for that. We aren't interested in the people who look around without causing damage despite what everyone thinks." ME: "If I entered a system without authorization and destroyed it, would you arrest me." THEM: "Most definitely." ME: "If I was at Defcon and entered a system without authorization that was dedicated to the distribution of child pornography and destroyed it, and you were looking over my shoulder the whole time and saw what I did, would you arrest me?" THEM" "I would turn around and walk away." se7en

3 2

Re: Thoughtcrime (Re: My War)
by Blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I really don't think that se7en just wants to censor the kiddie porn sites; I think he is on a personal vendetta (like McVeigh). He didn't call for anyone to support legislation and propose new, tough laws, but called for hackers to go after this particular target. On the net anyone is prey, remember; kiddie porn dealers not exempted. It's moot to discuss whether eliminating a few thousand digital images will make any difference on the availability/market desireability of these pictures (I expect these are all backed up somewhere, anyway, so destroying them probably wouldn't actually make much difference, but just anger the owners.) How many photos of real children arranged into sexual poses or imposed upon to perform sexual acts does it take to satisfy an addict? How many photos which are not duplicates do these people actually possess, and how many more do they seek to obtain? Is it the number of them, or the thrill of the "new"? That a certain number of these photos are in circulation may not be so important as the fact that they are "new" (to the person looking to get them). This means that having free circulation of large numbers of images may be beside the point (I am speculating and calculating based on almost total ignorance of the psychology of this type of individual). If these pedophiles just want to fantasize, I would offer they could get a package of Macromedia Freehand or Director and Photoshop and create their own. But that probably wouldn't be satisfactory to them. I expect there is something in the qualities and character of real children which draw them. But I digress. The subject was hacking at your own chosen target. Some people hack children's innocence; some people hack the hackers. Que sera' sera'. .. Blanc

1 0