December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

FW: Anonymous Remailers
by Roger J. Jones 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:17 AM -0800 5/14/97, Roger J. Jones wrote: >Why is it that some who are very concerned about their personal privacy >utilize anonymous remailers that: > >1) Log all of their mail messages? Tim May Responded With chained, multiply-encrypted messages, logs are ineffective unless all of the links in the chain collude to trace messages. While this is certainly possible, it seems unlikely. Roger J Jones Responded Several of you have suggested as Tim has that the chain of remailers is secure. I suggest that the statement is only true to the extent that one wants to trace back a particular message. On the other hand, if one wants to find the source of postings to anonymous remailers and has skilled access to the Internet the task is quite simple and does not even require attacking the remailers. Of course, one could break the chain by having the remailers call each other outside of the Internet, but then of course the phone records would disclose the connection. Then again, one could hard wire a private connection between two remailers outside of both the Internet and the phone system but even this connection would be disclosed through reasonable traffic analysis. Of course, the simple fact that even encrypted streams need to include the ultimate destination of the message makes content analysis easier and weakens the encryption. Then again, all of this is a lot of work. Social Engineering and pure bribery would more likely be the most efficient and effective solution. Roger J Jones wrote: >2) Are in many cases reputed to be run by foreign intelligence services? Tim May Responded This allegation was made by some clueless Washington think tank authors. They provided no evidence, only innuendo, and they were unwilling or unable to provide any further comments when queried by several Cypherpunks. And given that many or even most of the remailer operators are members of the various related Cypherpunks or Remailers Operators lists, and are known to various of us, the notion that most (or even many) remailers are run by intelligence agencies is absurd. At 9:48 AM -0800 5/14/97, Roger J. Jones wrote: I suggest that just because you chose to characterize the sources as "clueless Washington think tank authors" does not (as they say in Star Trek - The Next Generation) "make it so". The "allegation" that foreign governments actively participate in actions to violate personal privacy ("borrowing" laptops from traveling businesspeople, taping phones, etc.) are all documented in various places. Of course, they could all the result of a single psyop with excellent results. But I doubt it. Tim May Responded Your first point, using some kind of Star Trek lingo, is beyond comment. I provided a lot more context than your original point provided, and yet you seem to want even more documentation. Go back and read the archives for a discussion of this paper (hint: search on "remailers" ANDed with "SAIC." Pay particular attention to the critique of this paper by such folks as Raph Levien, and others. Anonymous Responded Yes, you are missing a lot. The bit about foreign inteligence agencies is almost certainly a canard created by one Strassman at a conference in Boston 2 years ago, then retracted. Anyway, if you use chaining, it's irrelevant. See <A HREF="http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/ocean.htm"> http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/ocean.htm </A> and <A HREF="http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/arbitr.htm"> http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/arbitr.htm </A> for the gory details. Roger J Jones Responded Given that several of you have suggested that the "foreign agent" theory is a hoax I suggest that this does not give me much faith either. What we have is the classic case that it difficult if not impossible to prove the non-existence of anything. For example, presume that one could identify every real owner of every remailer in the Internet universe. Have we proved anything? Not really. Because in the time it has taken to prove the case, a new remailer could have been created. Or the remailer that one thinks is secure could be down with a different remailer operating as an IT spoof. Or, after checking with the owner of the "safe" remailer the owner becomes subject to the normal desires of life (fear, greed, power, etc.) and "turns." The existence of both type one and type two errors prevents even an exhaustive search from being fully satisfied. Roger J Jones wrote >Do they really trust the owner of the remailer? (Unless of course, it is >their remailer?) I seem to be missing something. Roger J Jones wrote further...... So, chaining does not seem to be a secure solution. It just makes the process more difficult, but not impossible. The non-existance of "agents" who would operate a remailer for purposes other than protecting security can not be proven. I still seem to be missing something.........

3 2

Re: Difference in terms
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz(a)as-node.jena.thur.de>writes: >> key recovery is if I can get my key >> key escrow is if you can get my key "Key Escrow" was "We want your keys". "Software Key Escrow" was "OK, Clipper was a loser, but we want your keys" "Public Key Infrastructure" was "Here, have some keys" "Trusted Third Party" was "Hey, trust us, we want your keys" "Key Recovery" is "OK, that didn't work, but we still want your keys" # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

1 0

TEXTO - Text steganography
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------------------------------------ TEXTO - Text steganography ------------------------------------ Texto is a rudimentary text steganography program which transforms uuencoded or pgp ascii-armoured ascii data into English sentences. Texto text files look like something between mad libs and bad poetry, (although they do sometimes contain deep cosmic truths) and should be close enough to normal english to get past simple-minded mail scanners and to entertain readers of talk.bizarre. ------------- Perhaphs this explains why, when I tried it, it signed Paul Bradley's name to the output. _Mr._ Nobody to _you_, pal.

3 2

Re: Difference in terms
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:43 PM -0800 5/14/97, Bill Stewart wrote: >>Lutz Donnerhacke <lutz(a)as-node.jena.thur.de>writes: >>> key recovery is if I can get my key >>> key escrow is if you can get my key > >"Key Escrow" was "We want your keys". >"Software Key Escrow" was "OK, Clipper was a loser, but we want your keys" >"Public Key Infrastructure" was "Here, have some keys" >"Trusted Third Party" was "Hey, trust us, we want your keys" >"Key Recovery" is "OK, that didn't work, but we still want your keys" > SAFE is "All Americans deserve strong security and unlimited strength crypto, but we still want your keys." "Pro-CODE is about the right to have and export military-grade crypto, but we still want your keys." Or as Congressman J. Getalong put it, "SAFE is a step toward a future of security and prosperity. The legitimate needs of law enforcement are being met by this bill. We are good listeners of the NSA, and the NSA is a good listener to all of us. And I do mean all of us. All Americans will prosper from this new working relationship with Big Brother. War is Peace and SAFEty is liberty," --Emmanuel Goldstein There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: OTP: Yeah, you know me: Vulis
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Demento Vulis 's reheated, refurbished, and regurgitated auto-spam is completely inappropriate for the mailing lists into which it is auto-spammed by his inbred evil spam-bots. Demento couldn't write a single lick of cryptographic code if his NSA masters and his KGB brothers paid him for it. But truth be known, he sells his spamming software to Cyberpromo and their ilk, and gets paid in anal sex performed on him by large testicled bulls - often without applying vaseline in his cavernous anus. He has killed many bulls in this manner. \|/ /~~~~~~~\ | O O | -ooo-----U-----ooo- Demento Vulis

1 0

Re: The Inducement of Rapid Oxidation of Certain Materials....
by Graham C. Hughes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Content-Type: text/plain > Oh, this is just charming. People are still dying, and now you're > going to sit on the sidelines writing email messages to people about > what they're discussing on some mailing list. Better than being the one to bring it up in the first place. Really, is a crypto list an appropriate place for that sort of tripe, any more than it is for this? > > You can't count up human lives and say ``this entity is more evil than > > this entity.'' It doesn't work that way. People are people, > > regardless, and usually don't deserve that kind of premature > > termination. > > Your use of the word "usually" betrays your hypocrisy. If some people > "don't deserve that kind of premature termination," it follows that > some do: presumably those that are more evil than the rest. I do believe that there are varying degrees of evil, yes. I do not believe they can be differentiated by counting bodies. I remarked `usually', because of a practical bend; the Rhwandans certainly don't deserve their lot, but there are others who well deserve premature termination in one form or another; Dahmer comes to mind. From time to time, I thought that things would be better off if I were to simply die. Put another way, the situation in Rhwanda distorts the usual life-and-death cycle, by killing indiscriminately people who should live much longer. Dahmer, a man who lived in death, could hardly come to a more appropriate end. As I look back on that paragraph, I do acknoledge it was poorly worded, and I apologize for the difficulties. No one, not even Dahmer deserves the hardships Rhwandans (to pick a convenient example) are going through. > So you're saying that fewer people would die in Rwanda if we discussed > something else? What exactly is it that you think the members of the > Cypherpunks list should do about it (assuming for the sake of argument > that "we" wanted to do anything)? I just don't think it's appropriate to center a long flame about. Does it not cause you, too, anguish to see such a situation fought over like a dog bone? - -- Graham Hughes http://A-abe.resnet.ucsb.edu/~graham/ MIME & PGP mail OK. (define pgp-fingerprint "E9 B7 5F A0 F8 88 9E 1E 7C 62 D9 88 E1 03 29 5B") (require 'stddisclaim) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBM3tIqyqNPSINiVE5AQFYPgP+MdJRFnhYL6UktZkVKbZhduRvVD56YfMk RG3KzSr5H5Jr7hE8kcURgXcfpeHTeNjmj5QRSsLBI4L9ldLFeVHWkIzhk4L/ajhV 3hQdJWvJSixZbDLn+k6yFaFOm/VAXlE7pI7VRTY/iggw8RrtlT4yd/dUHwOV+xDj Dn47e3bKc0w= =L0Wl -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

[CRYPTO] Blowfish
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here, Tim C. May descends into total inanity. He should have a cold shower and/or a Turkish coffee. ___\ <o \__o Tim C. May X\ X> _/_\____<_\_

2 1

[Fwd: ITAR / S 1726 / Civil Disobedience]
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-- Toto "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" http://bureau42.base.org/public/xenix/ "WebWorld & the Mythical Circle of Eunuchs" http://bureau42.base.org/public/webworld "The Final Frontier" http://www3.sk.sympatico.ca/carljohn/ To: president(a)whitehouse.gov, toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca Subject: ITAR / S 1726 / Civil Disobedience From: "C.J. Parker" <toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca> Date: Fri May 16 5:42:13 1997 Dear Mr. President, I am writing to express my disapproval of the Clinton Administration's position on the ITAR restrictions for encryption software. This is an important issue to me. 1) Software is writing, so it is protected by the first amendment, so the ITAR is unconstitutional. The idea that only paper books are first amendment protected, and electronic books are not, is just plain wrong. 2) The ITAR does not help National Security, but in fact greatly reduces our nations security because the Internet, and the computers and information connected to it, are kept from using good Encryption. 3) I feel that encryption is very important for doing commerce on the Internet, and that commerce on the Internet is important for our economy (Internet is the fastest growing sizable segment). You say you like the "Information Super Highway" and you are "going to focus on the economy like a laser". You should be removing the ITAR restrictions on American businesses. Otherwise the business for commerce software will go to companies in other countries. 4) The Clinton Clipper III proposal to have government key escrow is not acceptable. Also, it will never work, since people will always be able to buy and use software from the rest of the world. This proposal is just slowing down Internet progress. Please cancel Clipper III. 5) Please support Senator Burns Pro-CODE bill S 1726 that would end this foolishness. Or better yet, just take software off the list of "munitions". The current law, (see http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/22/2778.html) says that "The President shall periodically review the items on the United States Munitions List to determine what items, if any, no longer warrant export controls under this section. The results of such reviews shall be reported to the Speaker of the House [...] at least 30 days before any item is removed from the Munitions List [...]." 5) As an act of civil disobedience I have personally exported an encryption program (it is 3 lines of writing) using the web page at http://online.offshore.com.ai/arms-trafficker/ Yours sincerely, C.J. Parker toto(a)sk.sympatico.ca Sent from host lohner20.sk.sympatico.ca with IP 142.165.98.20

1 0

Re: Wine Politics Again!
by Jim Ray 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 06:53 PM 5/13/97 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: >At 09:26 PM 5/9/97 -0800, Tim May wrote: >>I am shipping a few bottles of California's finest merlot (much nicer than >>the trendy cabernets) to my sister and her husband in Hollywood, FL. > >You're a bit late - merlots have been getting more trendy :-) >But Chiles hasn't signed the Florida law quite yet, so you're also early. And he may not. Taxin' Lawton is, if nothing else, a wind-direction indicator, and this law isn't too popular among the rabble. >Do they even _grow_ wine in Florida? Barely, and it's not as good as Tim's merlot. The orange wine for tourists is truly horrible. >You'd think it would be the >cocaine industry trying to get their product regulated to keep prices high. [Comment about credulous media reprints of San Jose Merc/CIA denials of contra cokesmuggling reluctantly suppressed. Tongue bleeding.] >>There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. > >It's especially ridiculous that shipping wine should be a *felony*. >Mike Froomkin points out that the Constitutional Amendment ending >Prohibition lets states make their own stupid decisions like this, >and it probably overrides Commerce Clause controls. Yeah, and for stupidity, Tallahassee is hard to beat. >You'd expect that a law that's made primarily to protect business >interests would have business-oriented penalties - like fines for >conducting wine-shipping without a wine-shipping license, >or triple fines for not filling out paperwork in triplicate. I've met some of these guys -- hell I've run against one of them. We aren't talking Einstein-level here, or even Forest Gump. >Does anyone know if either state's laws also penalize the >recipient of the Demon Grape, or only the sender? ... I don't know, but I'm willing to risk getting some Merlot and finding out as a public service to the cypherpunks list. Y'all could even try to mail me a bottle anonymously. ;-) JMR -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEPAwUBM3t9LzUhsGSn1j2pAQHavAfONFdPqiU76q17liQMYGA+AwEcwnZaipBu AvRqxq7FpeLLM1lR2POCJRBo2rRIXjajwmKacaBG7x08dqsMHug1hul4v2Kge7QV MtSzwTOokPqwP73O2SU2udB+6d3b5S9rgVjbIDps60iKxVSyEfzVM6B33t6gFBNB CXYNQoIEx4bOI2puNM6aFX+zsUvDjoSZ5EbWbjRE6tabMKIMPZgVH+QQ4i+En+8I ug9OaUeFiptHWUzqciqDm70fhhJxsGqH83aj1EDAFj1WCgdo9mBKJjDo2F8fsLCr Mrs+TWYd+lq+T//lpVvc65ENTwMh1pjDCyRoXJIUsTW+Qw== =lheO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Regards, Jim Ray <jmr(a)shopmiami.com> DNRC Minister of Encryption Advocacy One of the "legitimate concerns of law enforcement" seems to be that I was born innocent until proven guilty and not the other way around. -- me http://shopmiami.com/prs/jimray/ PGP id.A7D63DA9 98 1F 39 BA 93 86 B4 F5 57 52 64 0E DA BA 2C 71

1 0

NEW!! CONFERENCE AGENDA IR AND SECURITY
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text X-Received: from muwayb.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU (muwayb.ucs.unimelb.EDU.AU [128.250.20.7]) by eduserv.its.unimelb.EDU.AU (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA28553 for <s_mark6(a)eduserv.its.unimelb.edu.au>; Wed, 14 May 1997 07:03:14 +1000 (EST) X-Received: from directory-daemon by muwayb.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (PMDF V5.1-8 #17781) id <01IIUND0S1C00002GS(a)muwayb.ucs.unimelb.edu.au> for s_mark6(a)eduserv.its.unimelb.edu.au; Wed, 14 May 1997 07:04:25 +1000 X-Received: from directory-daemon by muwayb.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (PMDF V5.1-8 #17781) id <01IIUND0K3Y80002FQ(a)muwayb.ucs.unimelb.edu.au> for irtheory(a)politics.unimelb.edu.au; Wed, 14 May 1997 07:04:25 +1000 X-Received: from wona1.ethz.ch (wona1-rz-vms.ethz.ch) by muwayb.ucs.unimelb.edu.au (PMDF V5.1-8 #17781) with ESMTP id <01IIUNCVGG8S0002GF(a)muwayb.ucs.unimelb.edu.au> for IRTHEORY(a)UNIMELB.EDU.AU; Wed, 14 May 1997 07:04:25 +1000 X-Received: from 129.132.196.50 (sipo50.ethz.ch) by wawona.ethz.ch (PMDF V5.0-4 #16342) id <01IIU5LJINA8934Q4Y(a)wawona.ethz.ch> for IRTHEORY(a)UNIMELB.EDU.AU; Tue, 13 May 1997 22:37:06 +0100 Resent-date: Thu, 15 May 1997 13:38:40 +1000 (EST) Date: Tue, 13 May 1997 22:37:45 +0000 Resent-from: "M.Beavis" <s_mark6(a)eduserv.its.unimelb.edu.au> From: isn(a)sipo.reok.ethz.ch Subject: NEW!! CONFERENCE AGENDA IR AND SECURITY To: IRTHEORY(a)unimelb.edu.au This message was sent to all institutions included in the ISN. Please spread it within your institution. Apologize cross-posting. ************************************************************* ** CONFERENCE AGENDA ** ** INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS AND SECURITY ** ** ON THE INTERNET ** ** ** ** Run by ** ** ISN - International Relations and Security Network ** ** http://www.isn.ethz.ch ** ************************************************************* TO ANNOUNCE YOUR FORTHCOMING CONFERENCES ON THE INTERNET USE OUR ADD-A-LINK FORM AT http://www.isn.ethz.ch ************************************************************* As part of its electronic services, the ISN has newly established the following directories: 1) An electronic CONFERENCE AGENDA in the field of international relations, regional security, as well as peace and conflict studies (including both physical and virtual conferences). Conference announcements are accepted independently from having an own home page. 2) a special DIRECTORY OF ELECTRONIC DISCUSSION LISTS in the same fields. The aim of the two new services is to facilitate information exchange about international academic events and to promote the use of electronic means for interactive dialogue within the security community. Both directories are accessible from the ISN home page. Members of the community are called upon announcing their forthcoming activities through this new public directories. Thank you for your cooperation. The ISN team ********************************************************* The ISN is maintained by the Center for Security Studies and Conflict Research at ETH Zurich, in conjunction with the Euro-Atlantic Foundation, Brussels, and EINIRAS. ISN is supported by the Swiss Government. Contacts: ISN Secretariat: isn(a)sipo.reok.ethz.ch ISN Webmaster: webmaster(a)sipo.reok.ethz.ch ********************************************************* ---------------------------------------------------------------------- --- 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

Reporting threshold for NY money transfers lowered
by daw＠cs.berkeley.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I thought this might be of interest to cypherpunks: The threshold for reporting New York money transfers was apparently quietly lowered to $750 last month. Looks like all it took was one order signed by one Treasury official -- eek. Can they lower the $10k cash threshold just as easily? * NYT Sunday April 13, 1997 * * U.S. Seizes $5.6 Million Hidden in a Truck on Way to Mexico * By Sam Dillon * * Mexico City, April 12 - United States officials said today that * $5.6 million discovered this week in a truck about to cross into * Mexico from El Paso was the largest cash seizure in memory along * the southwest border. * [snip] * * ...probably the proceeds of street drug sales... * [snip] * * Officials have seen a big increase in cash seizures lately... * [snip] * * In [another] case the authorities believe the traffickers * chose to move the cash south out of New York in bulk by * car because of an order signed by Mr. Kelly [Treasury * Under Secretary Raymond W. Kelly] which required New York * businesses transmitting cash to report all transactions * over $750. * * Although the order was not announced, word spread quickly * among traffickers, and a dramatic drop in money wires to * Colombia followed, along with a sharp increase in seizures * of cash along the eastern seaboard. Thanks to <guy(a)panix.com> for forwarding.

3 2

Re: NSA _likes_ strong crypto?
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 15:07:35 -0400 > To: cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net > From: Thomas Porter <txporter(a)mindspring.com> > Subject: Re: NSA _likes_ strong crypto? > Reply-to: Thomas Porter <txporter(a)mindspring.com> > At 09:32 AM 5/15/97 -0700, Bill Frantz thoughtfully expounded thus: > > > > >During a hall discussion at CFP, I heard that people at NSA are changing > >their opinions about the use of strong crypto in the general community. > >The reason is the threat of InfoWar and the need for strong crypto in > >general use to secure the US information infrastructure. > > > I realize I may catch it for my numerical ignorance here, but a more > paranoid type might think that any acquiescence on the part of NSA might be > due to more relative ease of breaking important traffic than they might > have possessed in the past. > > Does any one on the list have any ideas on what the Intel mega-pentium > parallel processor (touted for nuclear explosion and weather simulations a > few months back, and noticeably missing any mention of NSA application) > does to the time estimates for cracking "strong" crypto keys? I am being > purposefully vague in my definitions of strong crypto, but I would present > as my test cases PGP ascii-armor traffic of 2048 key length or plain files > encrypted with pgp -c option; ie. typical crypto-criminal/narco-terrorist > fodder. > > How does this strength of encryption compare to whatever might be used to > "secure the nation's info infrastructure" [Netscape 40 bit!!??] regarding > cracking time? Clearly less, but how much less on this type of specialized > parallel processor? To put it another way, any swags on how long it would > take this pentium parallel processor to crack the current DES56 challenge? > > Inquiring (and ignorant) minds want to know, > > Tom Porter txporter(a)mindspring.com 1. You must assume that any well-heeled opponent will have built a Wiener engine, so the time to brute a DES key can be measured in hours, rather than days. A ciphertext-only attack is only a little harder than a known-plaintext attack. But that doesn't stop us from doing the calculation anyway. The fastest DES cracker I'm aware of (Bryddes) currently claims 615,000 keys/sec on a Pentium 120. The sandia machine is acheiving 1.06 Tflops with 7264 processors. The processors are 200 MHz Pentium Pros. (The Mflop rate is lower than the MHz rate). They plan to have 9200 of them when it's finished. 615k * 200/120 = 1.025Mkps (it'll actually be a bit higher on a Pro) 1.025M * 9200 = 9.430Gkps (2^56 = 7.2E16)/9.43E9 = 7.6 Msec = 88.44 days Thats a conservative, upper limit, not a SWAG. Speeds would be much higher on a 64 bit machine. I'm very curious to see how bitslice DES would run on an MMX Pentium, which has some 64 bit registers. 40 bit encryption is a bad joke = it would take about 2 min on this machine for 40 bit DES Peter Trei trei(a)Process.com Peter Trei Senior Software Engineer Purveyor Development Team Process Software Corporation http://www.process.com trei(a)process.com

2 1

A wee bit of Civil Disobedience
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Want to add a bit of mass civil disobedience to the Crypto movement? Get alt.binaries.crypto created as a usenet news group. Why has this not happened already? This will make an even bigger mockery of the ITARs, the EARs, and the other silly regs throughout the world. [BTW, for those of you who oppose "Careerpunks", consider this... How can you throw your crypto-sabots if you cannot get close to the machinary of industry?] Jarvis Pym Mad Chemist of Kaos

2 1

None
by ryank 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Express Letter
by internet＠netline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello, How are you? I have found a great way to make an honest and ethical living on the internet. I work from home using only a computer and a modem and I have very limited computer experience. If you would like a free report on this business simply read on. Entrepreneur Magazine voted "INTERNET CONSULTING" as the #1 business opportunity for 1997!! Now any business or entrepreneur can profit from advertising on the internet. So why are so few of them doing it? Because they don't know how, and there is no one to show them! This has created an incredible need for Internet Consultants! Within 4 hours of starting my Internet Consulting business, I had sold my first ad. Now the requests to place orders are flowing in. We've had to hire help to process the orders! What I do is simply show people who are currently advertising by conventional means, how we can put their message in front of over 60 million customers on the Internet. This is a low start up, easy maintenance, turn key , risk free , 100% guaranteed business. This business is WHITE HOT! The time to get in and profit from the INTERNET is NOW! Don't let the opportunity of a lifetime pass you by! For a FREE REPORT on this business (do not hit reply) simply send an e.mail to our auto responder at: hitme(a)answerme.com and you will have the packet in you e.mail box within 30 seconds or so. Best Regards Bob Thank You and Good Luck!

1 0

MSNBC poll on crypto
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Should the United States remove restrictions on the export of powerful encryption technology? * 283 responses Unequivocally yes (84.1%) Yes, but only if law enforcement is given the keys to break the encryption when necessary. (9.9%) No, maintain the status quo. (1.8%) No. In fact, the restrictions should be tightened. (4.2%)

3 2

Clinton virus
by Mix 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Clinton virus! Makes bogus DOC files randomly as it spreads.... section 1 of 1 of file bill.com < uuencode 96 (v56) by R.E.M. > begin 644 bill.com M35JK`0H````"`#H..(a)[5`8`````.`!D!'````$Q:.3'__P)<+E6)Y;B$`IK- M`J@`@?#_[/>,TX[#C-O\C;[^_O\?Q78$K*J1,.WSI([;BH9^^/`PY(OX@+OX M7'4&_C`\COGKZ]M\_197P>'5^IH]"K^_`"'Z``[VO/;K_+C_`'-T4)I7\7[Q MUOV=!A,\[_@)?._*B@"+ACS\]240`#W]L`!U`4"'_XA&_XK]B>Q=P@0`!$+3 MPDE,3%D``5G]][_C,%H!'L$`_\$QP`S,G,\(Z:A3BNB_I7ES[)'82="ZP[SX M&+_IU,7__1&M^`Z\^`P%*BYE>&6[^/_AO(L^P".Q"-/G@<?A?M`BQIJH"=3] MQP:^(P$8?K$M`:>X(`!0O]H<'ZB:B!R#/EB5C@`C1;_X[\/J`-O#^`G7]^G^ M@+WIPV#5!Z'R2*/\O?S&Q/B][T#OZ[2:81C0#=+_-O6:.P,<]Z-V8`%<`AQ- M7F'X";_-?VKX$,_-?VH0:O@1.VKH\/T\`74<[?U>^!MT^!&^=/@0Z-G^C?$N M15A%;:\!((OS!(OV!)_P#;^R(*7X"BPHY/SLL>POL>W8^`WTP/(=D/`+FIT! M<^A$WK^PZ;]AR0;MOZ_\N`DQ]6;L`$OIN,:.`NSX#OSL`^SX"YH$[.JJI;#Q M%@'][*+P"<KS?@MT!Z&R_/'\\A)U#RC\>Q9G^`O0`RHN*@-;$D$Z7(;H#K"` M\=4N_,<>T;`![QGO^`J_8`.(a)*#SM&^+P$MGB]%GRXN+U&.+P#/*'Z!%^`PM1 MZ#__$_179*%7^`GO%B+M8V]MP>@*"P1`Z!4@XNL<PIH,ZBX+UW6H&JZR_NKH M">O9V?,1^`O7X`W&`WU2_X`^\;W7_;]6`!,%J?[F@/&:6!VC7?WB_")6[$*: M)6CB_+[B_\G[&OGP#!7)R-[8%>CMZ]CRX8?"H,(PY*/"(Z']Y^E(2*/$^*/& M^:/(`$,C0^_&A=Y#``KW[?=/0(?WZO=-Z-`(RL0R.?%+_*/QY>.CX:/^D+\& M`NBKC\L34+_,(]7#!^/^-$S!X_\VYK_.I57CRN/_QII9U/@,\?@*T?`A&%ZL M)%;\(E:::<[P$??J#?(!7&'@$+_^!>?H"Y;@#D/@&^B#NUSZH.^X\"`@1;CU M(%C@WKCU[C_@$``&/^!,Z`7Z_,O__RY$3T,85&AE>2!C86QL(&W_H64@4VQI M8VL@5VGR>1X,3.@.+-NXZ`.O+-O*<+PZ_9E24`2_6)-+)(a)G]P`YJY^QJY.U$ M=5EJX]C_<>M8E%'QV5'S6H[QFFE1]^+R=O7%H_)PQ.K=!>3X"T?P#5K@">A' MAU?_Z*'[[@)!.@.1T>?X":/#0/QD@D#]@S[\6J]Q?A:_R0>GVBGRZ&D)P,,V MA.&OO,?Y6^`/%T/X"\RC_\OMR_U^SN@:_.C"7E#]A_Q#.EP\P>B"^`D?VW0? MG##8"4((B?@-?@^_17W][:3H">A"_UV6U?_X"56+[![__\56"H/",+@`0\TA M'W,$,\G_O^L",\"C6)7$?@:1JUW*"/%3W/T(W(M.!K@!V7(AP=W\X@;BU@I# M&":+';]7YG,&-E3`,]*^^`G\O9*[_MG\#("\B[.Y\N'3NO_A@^Q0F78,__"- M?K`6!_RL/$_BL$^8'PZ1\Z0RP*J"!K0:0SC0C5;E'\`*M$[BAWVCZ"``B^7" M\H$*7OW<'[1/^P;XY`0`YOQR'H/'A_\>'@8?N[D``?SRKO;1/YR*P4^+]T[] MJ*K\'^/_@</"B29:E8P67)6!_X_L_@".'C@`H2P`B4;R$/IX;PIO@G+X#G8& MC4.<O@+_ZW[K?JH.P^JP#:IFC;;KB1_^=O2,7O9&S.*)?OB,1A"'^A@I2'[2 M\M!__/+^\OQ6@HU>\K(a)`2_\8__2ZG0&.VOJ+?XX[_'_[\/6T3>++OUZ7OO_# MPP&Y$P"0_"ZLM#7N!G#\4QD5M"4:CP6/1?#_`B4$XN;+``(;(2,D-/^7-38W M.#DZ.SP]/C]U(/`)A_^BC`8N,^WH+@_HH`##_XO$!;"Q!-/HC-(#PJ-_"`H` MHPP``P8$^0XA'/T8_1S])`".#_W1)J$"]2`LN2H`U@"GO8P.+`!T.0)T^`J) M'8Q_P'[\[QX.'[H,`2]H(3VZ$_@C^-L`N"2%]/@$\#]0N%Z5X1\>4/ZX8P(. M4`[H3@Z-^NC(`NR6[/@*.O__[+D"RS/`G%N`YP]3G9Q9@/_[Y?"`_?!T#D"` MS_#P_70!0(?PHDP`P]O*8?N#Q/__!EB#YQ^!QY8`@/PY<P.__X?__U>T5).+ M[(!.%@%86__C65I>7UT?!\^XT`#5ZW_M`[C(`%E;ZP?-X5SIV^;S^___HS(` MB\$+PW0]H1``"\!T+X'_CL`&]ALKPW<7]S_\V#T`$',0NN[WX@/!<G_X!R8[ M!@@`<@;=%`#KT>__B\B,PRO4Z8/K$(D.-`")'G\L-@#$'BX`C,"Q$Z;I#!_U MHS#]/`"X;@$N%"`&4\O]\QPJ"/RV.O<A`JSP#24D\=;QK?+PH0P?L`L&L'0I MNTP"AC#.`*%:Z/V[6P3X]![TZ>A``+`###KH5?7:Z#4A#>E@Z0?=M$P/P\$N MB@<*0P;H:4./#^OSP[%DYK$*Z`+_^%$$,N3V\00P4+Y8BL1A^,-0_.@!]E"Q M!-+#\.CH`_<D#^0\.G(_]`($!XK0M`:XPZKH$E)U^S]N=&DLT65R<F]R(``@ M871\@/LN#0H`4/+H_X=O;G,@0V]P>7)I9VCH_P\H8RD@,3DX,RPY,B!"_Q_A M;&%N9#/`AP8\`,N#/AS^^X"9RZ'YZ7#^B_0V_\..1`(F.U4"?P=\%/@%\0!R M#_,&?`CQA^'X101WV+C)V$C^X?"XU_I"_@5K<@TK_S'$<PGWV#L&.@!RXLK\ M_^@J_KHSTHO<'C;$?P@VAX?%=P3\EJNXL-?\(WR``*OU_XU%=*N,'-+L5`S\ MJ.RY__\.`/.KN4\`"])U":PZR'8$[UN*R.,(K,CQ`ZKB^!_A'W_AP#^OL`HV MBT<$)HE@C'?X!O@,,2#X"/@.O/KU#_8*@MFZL=?K"+JR+SS[`[JSUQC;U(M% M`CT<#NET$CWI=`T]Q_]R=!#'`F8`ZR12!E<.)_#H)0!:O0FY_KL0#P$`Z$P` M=,?'QPS0TD;:L-3V`;']8\*!?0*R&/BO%!X(M&?@&%"[%(X'R14`6$4,NQSU M$.!TP/@)F?XF__;"&37I`WOI7P?#W?0QQ2&\50QA3?B+';0_"0%]V1"!<\<" M(`L`!L?V0#^XH^[0^`HSR2:'36`\6,Y`S@<KP<PJK+AET]OX&";9X/S#7^'K M@_L$=@:T/N;\-,3G^.PU+G\F(?QU+MYWQ3MW"G0KA_@>!E-2L5=<7PH'_Q\# MV@/R_/_0*_*,PEL''P#N5MLP=0C#`/IH#P\`PU!14AM3Z#,![TWD7UI96+S^ M=;S#HOQ`(<2BLJ(YYD]\__]_""O/*]%S!`/*,](&)L1W_P,,`_ZP(/SSJBO^ M!Z8`'./%5W4)4H?FK^(`KUKCZ<B78!MIE['\2+']0;'X"L$##K'(+TN.VB&< MK5^M^Z^D*_M]C%.M_0U04E:KC<?ZJUY:6$#`J?XC\EX&N.'_NP5PZ.[^=0HF M@W\:`/?_=`/H<$7+K#P-=`P\&G01.V,8\W7SV\/X=`D>#NL*=`%.C\.XT/YO M[\#]`@"^4`",VNA8_[WX"2W60KW?_.S\"CO\Y1*&-^5N)O]?%.+MPY??\ACR M_LD,N%(a)&5,+_AWX(BU8*1^A._HO'Q/27XBO'2*H*PF,/8POPF*IJX/+C!=/# M&!YIQ0B*!S+DX3^]Q@8KT'X%4.AN_L+T!WV+=K-&Z*ZD_?Z\2>`58>$68>`A MH$X`M,(+/9>Y`@`\N@&BO)KJB>'AE>$:^+/9Y8WA-/[_4(SC3`!:6":`?3`` M=!(>C=]X53`&'S/)#[H&#NL1DN&;Q^+,)HD%BT86X@1TK5]#[+31=0XCZ2?L M<][R0\LG[^@<Y!<B[0DBZFH_X7ODM>)W_`90Y,.T/[IDA/V4!;FZ9?"UZ-S_ M=2O\&QY21+EMY;Y:'W(&.R%ZP71XPK96\K,_N;J'RK-`N<K]$.BFRM#_/U@* MK?$<'E$F]V4$BW`.R+T,BN._61#VOR72ZG4$QMF,PA`/"X`%*>L<.T^HSW07 MB0X2IN3_H2%XV@68#F[^2J0A5'RD"*K\\_+W`\J+T*MW'K-"'OU=ND3RQ5<$ MZ:FT0=4JM_+G]2KQ,[<&,[0T\!J$K$Y]V;16O`5S\A0>C7;QAQ>Q<X/',/RL MJM*K`'7Z'Q>RV:NLZ;,#A$GH2=>',,OAPCP#:0!R)4N[^RS_?P`S__PF.@5T M![G___*NZ_2X<+T#B_<$L?21]M#=$/>IV>G\JDZQ'[$".@W4TN7!D\O$OX#_ M_\&*#3+M1S/;XPDF@#T@=P.#^4?B]\7S_';SQRN_`\9T!$-*==X9ZH'LSH;C M5X!7BD8,70;A_[09<_[`BM`$0(@$1L>_1P0Z7$9&M$?0\L8$`-@4P(>QX:(O M7$?2D,FB`'B]?L=)_@)/_ZOZ&$`BT:`WRJ`_#IU;Z`@)-\L07#!#KJC#?\Z MPBWL#P8+@'Z"`'0%5_ZT.^A+_:,5X[\@`+0Y#5?H-NOX#@OK.N@AZ_UH]+#O M2)NB?SZI?YB+R"BK'Q#]PS!6,#/VP_R+W/U&C-I@YJRJBL@R55K:O"'NYOSJ M"N(&-O'1K-]".L%V`HK!W/@)"MS]X`Q<_-@(BH"YV`8+R7__$P.Y`0`#\2O! M<A-`QGRX[GT",\D[P0:+P0G+R)JJ<K\(O__^#X%C\ZPF``5S"";&!?\?=)7V MT`/Y1Y%O_?Z;=@J_]*/S+(K0,O;*PLTKRG+__QQ!1ZSRKG45B\>+V8O*2?-_ M.*9T#HOXB\N+T4;KYOR*C^L$2"M&!O#ICO[".%$DXI.*)9\ZS'[$\P*R70& M)J9U`CK2O\1C_@2P`:HVBD<$JD91L^E1_@J_[/'K-OT='MR3#8D"@VP!?07' M:NV3`2J-'>D&(a)X.8X4CMJ<O0Y?[N#E3:`_]7A-\+0_]V!AF2ZJS^_.GDL-WL M"/1X_CW`+O(,H?@*`'Y<^F-^`896@?K-?T_YD,`&^7Z-^8WX$+08"(U8_I;X M"NP#&FO54)+\/I)[DOSO_`FVWY$'Y7_7B8D-N``]9;SOK0VP`O\%$MP"M#R: MTPF;T?_:$<%:B06X"P2ZJ(NCT_POM=KPR43D]L*`N&#EE]FSK]IU%,%?R2L` MN#O/_O\_MM&RUXE%%(E5%HE-&(E=&ARB[QR`!/L>X0/VG[LSTMFQ`F;9+8"W M.@"#V@`^B<"GR4[93]V-E00+Z+G]$;QSGND?_ZH[V'0@@.P:=`-#Z_)7\HO3 M*]#2V;K]L1?2P^@(OUH6N#;W9P2+P0]]^/P#P8/2Z\(3\>@]`)/__Y^IN2`` M]L:`=0K1X]'2_LA__^+S,L"`YG_+>^'-/)\&E@W'P\TW!C[UF`:2]36_#_W- M.=G-/<MKD4_@_Z''/^B+'D`'+O<FS@W1X?T8_@+I`]$#T[7C?ACZ`O.Q!=/C M^@4!(`PLC:/2B1;??M+#!82T+(:1#O'\RXO/O@KX/[W:"]MY$??;]]B#VP3_ M:0>CX>$M0<,STI/Q'_?V_8#",(#Z.G(#PO_X!^:(%8O0"]-UXRMZC\^]D<;Q M]N-=(MDK=`?_^/HM=05.1TET3/4D=$C_PR:*'8#K.H##"G,E'_`/$W4V4]'@ M'E)0^OT'_%L#PUL3TULR__C\_V%'XM"+V`O:=`\+]GGC?P?WVG;:`#/R>`'# M^<-,XZ[ZM/MA?>L.X2"L_'(+^!?X!G,X_<GSMP2O<M3^SW5A^_8*T.+1N_@* M^)?2@^P@__^+1@Z+5A"-?@`6!^@)_QZ+&O[WXLJUN0;G##O"?@*+X\/".\KZ MRCO!??K!_:_\JE^I"%&+R+`@\ZI9%=%J/]KG?GH;TRK4=2K2Z/3^<@*\N_"+ MSRM.^:$STL?:B0W_#QCJOU(`'@>YJI<KS]'IK^OF_/.KP\=P"O_X"O__Z/@5 M__@6$%!70/R@(:%)R0(`P9'_^`P!``#P`````$D(````0!@+&0&<`/L!!@X? MBPX,`(OQ3HGWC-L#'@H`CL/]\Z13N"L`4,LNBRX(`(S:B>@]`!!V`[@`$"G% M*<(IPX[:CL.Q`]/@B<'1X$A(B_"+^/.E">UUV/R.PH[;,?8Q_[H0`*V)Q='M M2G4%K8G%LA!S`Z3K\3')T>U*=06MB<6R$'(BT>U*=06MB<6R$-'1T>U*=06M MB<6R$-'104&LM_^*V.D3`*V+V+$#TN^`S^"`Y`=T#(CA04$FB@&JXOKKIJP( MP'0T/`%T!8C!0>OJB?N#YP^!QP`@L033ZXS``=@M``*.P(GS@^8/T^N,V`'8 MCMCI<O\J1D%"*@X?OE@!6X/#$(G:,?^L",!T%K0``<>+QX/G#[$$T^@!PH[" M)@$=Z^6M"<!U"('"_P^.PNO8/0$`==J+PXL^!`"+-@8``<8!!@(`+1``CMB. MP#';^H[6B^?[+O\O#$$*#Q$1*Q<%#P44$Q,%!103!1DC(`X)%`H%&2\*#@D: M$@X0"@X*!045#P4/!0\%!04'#A\%%141$Q`*#A,;!103%@\/(!D*!0\*!1,3 M!0X%2@X%&`48!0H%"@4/"@42"@43#@4*!0X.0!4/!0\%#P4%!3`)"1H0"@X/ H"@42!04*!0X9!0D9)@\8"A$/#@4+`(\!7@`:`0#U`0!Y"1L6'P`!`` ` end sum -r/size 3228/6963 section (from "begin" to "end") sum -r/size 14922/5035 entire input file

1 0

Re: Just Say "No" to Congress
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan McCullagh wrote: > Tim wrote: > > We're basically under assault from all directions. The bozos in Congress > > and state governments are spinning out new laws and obscure regulations > > faster than we can react...and of course they're using our money to > > generate these laws and lobby for them. Further, a mostly-brainwashed > > Washington media population is surprising uncritical of these blizzard > > drifts of new laws. > Hmmm... Do I get counted in the "mostly-brainwashed" category? > > FYI, here are two bills that Feinstein introduced recently: I think you just showed the answer to the question is "Yes." Politicians build a house of mirrors with bills that they "introduce"--agencies that they "propose" be funded--causes that they "support." I'm not interested in a reporter quoting "the record" to me. I can get that from Feinstein's glossy handouts. I want to know what a politician has *done* for me (or against me), not how much she purports to *love* me. I enjoy many of your articles, Declan, but please--no more "Senator XYZ introduced a bill that supports mom's apple pie and the flag." tripe. TruthMonger

1 0

Kansas City.
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A new scheme to broadcast the names and faces of people arrested for trying to buy and sell sex could mushroom into a full-fledged challenge to U.S. constitutional law. Starting Thursday, a local government access cable television channel will broadcast the names and faces of people arrested for prostitution-related crimes. The first half-hour installment will feature mugshots of alleged purveyors of sex and the customers who offered to pay for it. Supporters of the plan hope that such public humiliation will help efforts to crack down on prostitution. But opponents say it violates the principle of ``innocent until proven guilty,'' a key tenet of U.S. criminal law. ``The city is setting out to punish with ridicule people who have not been convicted of anything,'' said Dick Kurtenbach, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Kansas and western Missouri. ``The presumption of innocence is really turned on its head with this scheme.'' Both supporters and opponents say that although U.S. media groups regularly publish the names of people arrested and charged with crimes, this may be the first time a government entity broadcasts the identities of alleged wrongdoers. ``As far as we can tell, this is the first jurisdiction that's putting on TV names of people arrested. This is a fairly novel approach,'' Kurtenbach said. The plan was the brainchild of City Councilwoman Teresa Loar, who said she hopes it will deter prostitution and the social ills -- drug use, assault and robbery -- that commonly accompany it. ``I'm not here to persecute people. I just want them to know that they run the risk of having their picture on the access channel if they try to hire a prostitute,'' Loar said. Loar said she is aware of ACLU's criticisms, but she counters by saying that arrests are a matter of public record. She noted that a disclaimer will say that those people pictured are innocent until found guilty in a court of law. When asked why the city does not air the names of people actually convicted of prostitution, Loar explained that few arrests in prostitution sting operations actually lead to convictions. ``Showing convictions wouldn't work -- because we don't get any. They (the accused prostitutes and would-be customers) plead their way down and pay a fine,'' Loar said. Loar said she understands the idea of constitutional rights but feels her constituents' rights are more pressing. ``As far as victims' rights go, my concern is my constituents' rights to quality of life. Their rights are being violated every day with this crime,'' Loar said. Constitutional law experts acknowledged that those people whose names and faces wind up on television could sue the city but would probably lose any claims alleging defamation or invasion of privacy. But Doug Linder, law professor at University of Missouri-Kansas City, said it may be possible to claim that the broadcast constitutes a form of punishment, which legally has to be meted out through due process of law. Plaintiffs could sue on the grounds that they were not given due process to defend themselves, Linder said. ``One could argue that it is a form of punishment if the police department or the city is providing their pictures,'' Linder said. ``These people should have the opportunity to prove their innocence. I think there might be a real constitutional claim there.''

1 0

Re: Reporting threshold for NY money transfers lowered
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:30 PM 5/15/97 -0700, Steve Schear wrote: >Smaller operators >could deposit the funds in their demand deposit accounts or sell to >Aggregators who would offer to take any CTR related heat. I believe the term is "smurfing". -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred "I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence." Mahatma Gandhi

2 1

Re: SAFE vote and cutting crypto-deals, report from House Judiciary
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 19:51:28 -0700 From: Lee Tien <tien(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Re: SAFE vote and cutting crypto-deals, report from House Judiciary Thanks to Barry Steinhardt for his comments, especially his saying that: >The language was an improvement , but it doesn't belong in the bill and we >are still lobbying to have the criminalization provision removed. > >All of us in the cyber liberties community need to watch this legislation >very carefully. It could easily get much worse as a "compromise" is reached >with the Administration. In the end,the bill could be laden with amendments >on issues like key recovery that defeat our purpose of making strong and >secure encryption generally available. > >At some point, we may need to say that no bill is better than a bad bill. This is a crucial point. This isn't an exercise in back-patting, in doling out kudos. This struggle engages a stubborn and devious foe. I also thought Michael Sims was on target in pointing out that Safdar's criticism of Declan were basically arguments from authority. Speaking only for myself, it's not enough to look at who's for and who's against. The Administration likes to say, trust us, we know what's best. We should say the emperor has no clothes if it's true. Some supporters of these bills seem to respond to substantive criticisms with comments about loyalty or solidarity. What's wrong with robust, open debate about substance? I don't assume that those on the "inside" have better knowledge or understanding of the law. If they're going to defend the bills on the merits, they should explain the merits. I don't assume that everyone agrees on what the bills should say. Some might think that some "willful use of encryption" provision is consistent with civil liberties. (Personally, I don't and I'm glad to see Barry feels the same way.) But my point is, let's be clear whether we're disagreeing about values or political tactics. Is a compromise acceptable because, all things considered, it's the best we can do, or because we actually agree on the merits? Finally, I do believe that the insiders better understand the political need for compromise. But I'd like to be educated about it. In particular, I'd like to understand why the President wouldn't veto any bill he doesn't completely agree with. Unless there's something veto-proof out there, or some other bargaining chip, why wouldn't he veto it? Lee

1 0

Re: Spam IS Free Speech
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ross Wright wrote: > > Gander. Goose. > > Right. If I send you a gig, you send me a gig. If I send you a meg > you send me a meg. A few bytes for a few bytes. Are you following > what has upset me about this issue, yet? Like for Like, Goose, > Gander. You said it, but you don't mean it. Pardon me. Gander. Humongous fucking goose. > Right? You are saying if I send you one message, you have the right > to mail bomb me? There's no parity there. All's fair in love and Penis War. Your argument seems to center around the theme that those who dick everyone a little have no right to expect to be repaid in lump (pardon the pun) sum. You neglect to point out that those who use technology to send spam to millions of random addresses go to great pains to prevent those who receive their crapola from replying to the source of the spam. The fact is, anyone who chooses to return their crap in kind has my personal proxy to send them my share, as well. I am certain that if you take a poll on this you will find a few million others who will also give them this proxy. Penis Warrior

1 0

Re: Anonymous Remailers
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May wrote: > Further, a clever little fix is to make one's own remailer site a link in > the chain. All a snooping subset of remailers can do is trace the message > back to your own remailers. Obviously, they can't know if the message was > merely _remailed_ through your site, or _originated_ there. Thus, including > oneself as a remailer also provides excellent plausible deniability.) This is a lame idea with no merit whatsoever. TruthMonger

1 0

Re: Response to "SAFE bill and cutting crypto-deals"
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan McCullagh wrote: > > Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 01:56:20 -0400 > From: Jason Gull <jgull(a)UMICH.EDU> > > We already have federal laws > which make the use of a telephone or the mails to commit a felony into an > additional offense, so this provision -- quite similar to obstruction of > evidence, from the look of it -- doesn't seem at odds with precedent. Precedent concerns citing the fact that the citizens are already getting fucked with a 2" Green Dildo, so therefore there is a precedent for them to get fucked with 2" Blue Dildos. > Granted, > there's the danger of the "slippery slope" -- that allowing any > restrictions on crypto will lead to a gradual encroachment of government > into other uses of cryptography. I've never seen a 2" Government Dildo that didn't grow in an expoential manner every time a Congressperson farted. > However, whether or not it is a good > idea or not, politics and previosu law seem to firmly support such a > provision. I'll rush right out and inform Che Guava and the Posse Comatose. When Dr. Roberts is done helping Kent get the stick out of his butt, perhaps he can do something about your cataracts. Del Do

1 0

Re: Just Say "No" to Congress
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > anyone who disbelieves in the authority of the US government > yet sends them their tax money is a hypocrite. Horseshit. That's no different from saying that anyone who disbelieves in the authority of armed robbers yet gives them their wallet is a hypocrite. Do you actually put any thought into your posts? TruthMonger

2 1