December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Excerpt on SPAM from Edupage, 11 February 1997
by Pete Capelli 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

jim bell wrote: > > At 03:25 PM 2/12/97 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: <Some deleted> > even more happy to pay, say, 10 cents to each recipient. At that rate, an average > person would probably receive enough "spam" to pay for his Internet > account, quite analogous to the way advertiser-supported TV is presented to > the public for no explicit charge. Yes, but why does monetary compensation make it then O.K.? I'd rather pay for my Internet access, then be bombarded by spam, no matter what they paid me! I think the best soln. is the one that is currently in place for phone calls - they can call once, but if I tell them not to call me again and they do, I can then begin legal action against them. I pay more per month for my phone service than my Internet service ( although in NY, *everything* is more expensive. ), and junk phone calls are way more intrusive then spam. > > Jim Bell > jimbell(a)pacifier.com -pete -- Pete Capelli, CNE UB Networks, Inc. pcapelli(a)ub.com ***** Finger pete(a)idaho.ubisg.com for my PGP Public key !! ***** They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. - Benjamin Franklin, 1759

2 1

Re: Private property & the cypherpunks list(s)
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is where the distributed nature of the list comes in. if someone disagrees with Jim's AUP, he or she can use soem other mailing list host. igor Greg Broiles wrote: > > (Readers curious about Jim Choate's list ownership/acceptable use > policies might take a look at <http://www.ssz.com/ssz/conditions.html>.) > > Jim Choate wrote: > > > Please explain how making submissions de facto public domain censors > > anyone? > > What the fuck is "de facto public domain"? It's public domain, or it's > not. > > Your scheme imposes a cost (loss of intellectual property rights) > against authors who would like to make themselves heard. It also > prevents a certain class of messages (those messages whose status is > "copyright claimed") from being distributed. Further, your suggestion > that posters be required to include a "fair use header" is compelled > speech. > > That's three flavors of "censorship" right there. I thought that the new > list(s) were supposed to allow anyone to say anything they wanted. > > (Does "no fair use" count as a "fair use header"? It's not legally > enforceable, but it seems like the easiest way to specify "minimum fair > use required by law". If not, are you planning to moderate the list to > make sure that people use only approved fair use headers? Hmm.) > > Even if the "copyright abandonment by implication" trick works (and I > suspect it will not, given that an assignment or transfer of copyright > must be in writing, 17 USC 204; and abandonment is essentially an > assignment or transfer to the public domain), it will not apply to all > text sent to the list. A person cannot abandon or assign something they > do not have; so if someone sends a message to the list which contains > text whose copyright is held by a third party, that copyright will still > be valid. > > So what you've got is a list where you can't be sure that its contents > are public domain, and a draconian rule requiring authors to give up > their rights to what they've written. > > Do you imagine that all of the many-majordomo servers will implement > your "public domain only" rule, or only yours? > > If the rule only applies to the ssz.com version, what's the point? > > If the rule is intended to apply to all servers, and servers aren't > going to be allowed into the network without agreeing to implement it > locally, um, tell me again about that "free speech" thing? Aren't you > just taking advantage of your position as a person working on the > many-majordomos project to impose your ideas about intellectual property > on the rest of the list? Is such a strategy compatible with "free > speech"? > > Also, how could a rule like this possibly be compatible with a Usenet > gateway? There's no chance at all that you can expand a local rule on > your system to all of Usenet through a gateway. > > And Declan McCullagh wrote: > > >I forward articles to cypherpunks that are copyrighted by my employers, or > >magazines like Playboy and Wired for which I write freelance pieces. > > > >I like to think these articles have some value. I will not forward any of > >them, nor would I be able to, if they magically became "public domain." > > Which are good points - also, don't forget that, from time to time, > people have even posted code to the cpunks list, and many software > authors like to retain copyright in their code so that they can insist > on things like noncommercial distribtion or credit where the code is > reused. If a work is truly "public domain", the author has no power to > insist on those things. > > This proposed rule seems to limit postings to those which are perceived > by their authors to be without commercial or reputational value. Is that > a good idea? > > -- > Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy > gbroiles(a)netbox.com | in a nutshell: > http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. > ====================================== > == This list is still experimental. == > == complain to ichudov(a)algebra.com == > ====================================== > - Igor.

1 0

No Subject
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There's a rumor that Tim May sells his dead relatives as fertilizer as they constitute the best shit in California. n ___ n H /. .\ H Tim May nHnn . nnHn <U U/ o \U U> / /\___/\ \

1 0

Dale-Further proof
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yet another Dale day (blah): :Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:37:58 -0800 :From: Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> :To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com :CC: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com :Another blood stain on Gilmore's shroud, as it were. As further evidence that Dale is unworthy to participate in any socially interactive behaviour other than grinding (that is, grinding) his nose in the naysayers, collective ass, I submit that he posts mixed and otherwise unclear metaphores. Ipso facto. As difficult as the good doctor can be, Dale is not intellectually worthy to lick his boots, though he tries. And, cc: Doctor V., no less. What cabal is this with cc's in the clear? Love you, fella. (You can tell, can't you.)

2 1

Openmarket/128 bit export?
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just saw a newswire about Openmarket exporting 128 bit ssl for OM-Transact. Anyone have any details? Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Transmission of Crypto material and ITAR
by Benjamin Grosman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear All, I have a question regarding the impossible enforcement of ITAR/EAR: Naturally I cannot download crypto software from the US, but most of these sites have mirrors in other countries, such as the UK for PGP, and sweden and finland for lots of things. However, with the way that information is routed throughout the internet from these sites, whenever I, in Australia, request packets containing this data from the UK etc, it invariably passes through the US from coast to coast! Therefore, if ITAR/EAR tries to govern that, aren't they really trying to enforce something totally unenforcable? Surely they cannot expect all gateways operated by, say, Sprint and MCI to packet sniff 'n' search? Can anyone tell me what the ruling is with regards to this? Yours Sincerely, Benjamin Grosman ---------------------------------------------------------------- Benjamin Grosman - Programmer, Magna Data Internet Solutions Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. [Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.] ----------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Recommendation: Creation of "alt.cypherpunks"
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ichudov(a)algebra.com writes: > > > 1. A newsgroup like comp.privacy.cypherpunks will be carried on a lot of > > > corprate news servers that don't carry alt.* (or even soc.*). Note that > > > soc.org.cypherpunks is inappropriate since cp is *not* an organization. :-) > > > Another possibility is sci.crypto.cypherpunks. (True, people whose corporat > > > newsservers don't carry soc.* and talk.* can use dejanews - provided their > > > firewall lets them.) > > > > > 2. It takes more work to create a comp.* newsgroup than an alt newsgroup. > > > It takes a vote. I'm willing to be one of the proponents and generally help > > > with the process. (Both I and Igor have been co-proponents of major Usenet > > > newsgroups - don't know about other people onthis list. :-) > > > > Not only it takes a vote. What is more important is what a vote gives: > > a good discussion of the newsgroup and the formal RFD/RFD/CFV process > > ensures that, on average, a good balance is found between various groups > > of readers. > > > > I am not concerned as to what the name of the group will be, it is > > not important. What is important is that it should be in a more or > > less flame-free zone. > > I'm concerned about smart people stuck behind corporate firewalls > and able to see comp.* and sci.*. Nearly every big Wall St firm > is that way. Did I ever relate to you the story how I had to > break through the firwall at GS to accomplish mywork? Would be interesting. > > It is too late to stop alt.cypherpunks, but if I had to make a > > prediction again, I would predict that soon posters will BEG to help > > them create comp.*.cypherpunks, because of spam and alt.flamage. > > Timmy has a valid point: the reason why a comp.* newsgroup might have less > cross-posted and "off-topic" crap is because net.cops would be more > likely to complain to posters' sysadmins. Having a charter state that > cypherpunks have technical means to ignore traffic they don't like, > and don't need anyone forging cancels or complaining to sysadmins > or otherwise getting silenced, is a good idea. It is not only because of that. There are two categories of people who simply do not visit com.* groups: sex spammers and trollers (who post articles like I RAPED A NIGGER CHILD to tens of newsgroups). If the group is created in a space that is isolated from them, that is already good. As for net.cops, check out what Scott Nudds does in comp.lang.c++ > What's going to happen when (not if) someone posts something in > alt.cypherpunks that Chris Lewis (spit) judges to be "spam" > and forges a cancel? Or someone posts a binary and Richard > "little dick" Depew forges a cancel? Chris Lewis can exclude newsgroups from his spam watch. I think that if cypherpunks put something forbidding third party cancels into the charter, he will not cancel stuff posted there. > > > 3. An unmoderated Usenet newsgroup would have even ore crap than this maili > > > list. I've been thinking of how to deal with crap, and with the obvious des > > > by some people to delegate their decision what to read and what not to read > > > to other people. > > > > It is alt.* and soc.* that has most crap, sci and comp are way better. > > There's a bunch of net.cops in e.g. comp.lang.eiffel that complain to > sysadmins of anyone posting to that newsgroup who's in a member of the > "in" crowd". It may or may not cut down on the crap, but is it worth it? Yes, there is a notorious net.cop The Right Reverend Colin James III (spit). A sample of his stukachestvo is attached at the bottom of this letter. >From ares.csd.net!cjames Fri Dec 8 00:00:29 1995 Return-Path: <cjames(a)ares.csd.net> Received: from ares.csd.net by espcbw.stat.ncsu.edu.stat.ncsu.edu with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #5) id m0tNxjG-000EDPC; Fri, 8 Dec 95 00:00 PST Received: by ares.csd.net (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA08055; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 22:02:44 -0700 Message-Id: <9512080502.AA08055(a)ares.csd.net> From: cjames(a)ares.csd.net (Colin James III (The Rt Rev'd)) To: ichudov(a)espcbw.stat.ncsu.edu (Igor Chudov), postmaster(a)espcbw.stat.ncsu.edu, postmaster(a)stat.ncsu.edu, postmaster(a)ncsu.edu Subject: Re: Nauseating typedefs -- pros and cons Date: Fri, 08 Dec 1995 03:13:53 GMT Organization: CEC Services Reply-To: cjames(a)ares.csd.net References: <461dph$ske(a)saba.info.ucla.edu> <48np3j$1b4(a)solutions.solon.com> <4a 7rpv$fj(a)taco.cc.ncsu.edu> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99b.112 Status: RO On 7 Dec 1995 23:02:23 GMT, ichudov(a)espcbw.stat.ncsu.edu (Igor Chudov) wrote with possible deletions: | Douglas Evan Cook (cookd(a)bert.cs.byu.edu) wrote: | * The real question comes down to: when do you need to | * use INT32 or INT16? Usually, you only need it when you are saving info | * to a disk or when you need to make sure that your numbers won't | * overflow. A little bit of hardware control is also given. But when you | * don't get those advantages, a plain int is just great. | | It is NOT great at all. Each variable is associated with a range of | values. This range of values comes from the requirements of external world. | Say, some program _must_ be required by business rules to store | $$ amount as an integer value, and it may be specified in the | requirements that $$amount cannot be more than $1,000,000. If I, | as a careless programmer, program variable dollar_amount as int | just because my RS6000 has 32-bit ints, this program will NOT be | portable to 16-bit computers. | | You can invent an untold amount of such situations. If I defined | DollarAmount_t as UINT32, I would effectively avoid this trouble. | | * So for your scanf | * vars, just use ints. Then do range checking and then assign them into | * the UINT16 type or whatever only if you need to. | | The solution is very simple and cool (IMHO). | | In the same file where you define INT16, UINT32, etc, add the following: | | #ifdef AIX | typedef long INT32; | #define F_INT32 "ld" | | typedef unsigned short UINT16; | #define F_UINT16 "u" | #endif | | #ifdef YOUR_FAVORITE_MACHINE | typedef short INT32; // Maybe for 64-bit machines, never worked with them | #define F_INT32 "d" | ... etc etc ... | | Then you define your user types: | | typedef INT32 DollarAmount_t; | #define DollarAmount_f INT32_F // You make it a rule to define | // formats right along with types | | Usually, in scanf (and printf) people write things like this: | | printf( "%ld is the dollar amount for customer %4.4d\n", | amount, cust ); | | Instead, you write | | printf( "%" DollarAmount_f " is the dollar amount for customer " | "%4.4" Cust_f, | amount, cust ); | | It is a totally portable code. All you need to port primitive types | is to recompile it. | | -- | - Igor. (My opinions only) http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/index.html | For public PGP key, finger me or send email with Subject "send pgp key" | | You know you have achieved perfection in design, not when you have nothing | more to add, but when you have nothing more to take away. | - Antoine de Saint Exupery. Kindly remove comp.lang.eiffel from distribution of this thread. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Colin James III, Principal Scientist cjames(a)csd.net CEC Services, 2080 Kipling St, Lakewood, CO 80215-1502 USA Voice: 303.231.9437; Facsimile: .231.9438; Data: .231.9434 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - Igor.

1 0

FW: I would like to be out of your mailing list
by Robert Nadra 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I would like to get out of your mailing list , please indicate the correct procedure. Thanks.

2 1

N.Y. judge rules for Planned Parenthood in web site case
by Vipul Ved Prakash 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

*** N.Y. judge rules for Planned Parenthood in web site case A federal judge has temporarily stopped an abortion foe from identifying his web site as belonging to Planned Parenthood and selling an anti-abortion book from that home page. The temporary restraining order, issued Wednesday, stops Richard Bucci from identifying his home page as "Planned Parenthood's Home Page" and using "plannedparenthood.com" as a domain name. Planned Parenthood, which has its own web site, sued Bucci for trademark infringement. The next hearing is slated for Feb. 20. For the full text story, see http://www.merc.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=1426121-b7e -- Vipul Ved Prakash | - Electronic Security & Crypto vipul(a)pobox.com | - Web Objects 91 11 2233328 | - PERL Development 198 Madhuban IP Extension | - Linux & Open Systems Delhi, INDIA 110 092 | - Networked Multimedia

1 0

FW: I would like to be out of your mailing list
by Robert Nadra 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I would like to get out of your mailing list , please indicate the correct procedure. Thanks.

1 0

Dale-Further proof
by Huge Cajones Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yet another Dale day (blah): :Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:37:58 -0800 :From: Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> :To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com :CC: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com :Another blood stain on Gilmore's shroud, as it were. As further evidence that Dale is unworthy to participate in any socially interactive behaviour other than grinding (that is, grinding) his nose in the naysayers, collective ass, I submit that he posts mixed and otherwise unclear metaphores. Ipso facto. As difficult as the good doctor can be, Dale is not intellectually worthy to lick his boots, though he tries. And, cc: Doctor V., no less. What cabal is this with cc's in the clear? Love you, fella. (You can tell, can't you.)

1 0

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Against Moderation 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 11:24:57 -0500 (EST) > From: aga <aga(a)dhp.com> > > Well, the fact remains that the homos are instrumental in creating and > forming a cliquish and censored usenet. There is just no question > about that. Remember the previous cypherpunk who stated that the > gays "created and run usenet." No. Who said that, and why do you think the person was serious, let alone telling the truth? > Your assumption that I am a "bigot" makes it you appear uninformed. > Sexism is good, but racism is bad. A sexist is not a bigot. > > The only one who qualifies as a "bigot" is a racist. According to the American Heritage dictionary: bigot n. One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ. According to Webster: bigot n. One obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his own opinions and prejudices I see nothing that limits bigotry to racial intolerance. > It is very logical and wise to discriminate on the basis of sex. Most would disagree, and decide based on that and other statements you have made that you must be an extremely unpleasant person. If you want to fight censorship effectively, going around telling people "You're a shit-eating faggot you fucking cock-sucking homo censor" in public forums is not going to win you many points. Instead, it will quickly land you in many people's killfiles, and will eventually lead some people with bad client software to wonder if it wouldn't be worth giving up some freedom of speech for the benefit of not having to see your rants any more. I'm not saying you don't have a right to express your opinions. I'm just remarking that you appear to be more in the business of inducing censorship than fighting it. If that's the case, so be it; someone has to get censored in order for people to fight censorship, and exposing people's willingness to censor is not necessarily a bad thing in itself. Unfortunately, it sort of makes life harder for those who actually fight the censorship when you pretend to be one of them. Your argument seems to run something like, "To protect freedom of speech, bad all faggots from the net, and especially don't let them run any mailing lists." If this offensive and highly noticeable argument eclipses many of the important, fundamental ones as the censors would like it too (why do you think your articles make it to cypherpunks- flames while mine only get as far as -unedited), you will end up not only inducing censorship but also seriously hampering the efforts of those who are legitimately fighting that censorship. > I am not a racist, so therefore I can not be a "bigot," regardless of > my views on homosexuality. See above.

5 9

Keep it Simple and the Cypherpunk Way
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups: alt.cypherpunks) At 11:42 AM -0500 2/13/97, Derek Atkins wrote: >Unfortunately, the messages that make it through to the cypherpunks >list have their MessageID changed when they get approved. So, >checking for duplicates by MessageID fails, given the current approval >mechanism. :( > >I've informed Sandy of the problem, but he doesn't know how to >preserve the original MessageIDs. I will phrase my message here as respectfully as possible vis-a-vis the goals of the moderation experiment. That is, I will only deal with one aspect, the one of _costs_ of the moderation experiment. To wit, the _costs_ of the moderation experiment--Sandy's time, our time spent debating moderation, and now the issues raised by Michael Froomkin and others about dealing with the chaos of multiple, overlapping lists--greatly exceed the relatively small amount of effort it took anyone to simply delete the insult posts, the ASCII art posts, etc. I respectfully submit that the huge costs incurred on several parties have cumulatively far exceeded the minor savings of not having a handful of the 'bot-generated insults of the day and some of the ASCII art generated. As to the "comity" of the list, the moderation experiment has clearly had just the opposite effect, predictably. (Imposing comity is rarely easy, especially given an independent bunch of folks who are suspicious of moderators screening their words for evidence of non-comity!). And the ill will generated toward certain folks has been regrettable, and vastly more costly than any minor savings in not having to see a few messages. "Keep it simple, stupid," the oft-quote KISS principle. A moderation scheme--except perhaps those run very tightly a la Peter Neumann's RISKS list--almost always bogs down into debates about the moderation criteria, the acceptability of certain posts, and so on. Now we see another effect: multiple lists and a confusing array of cross-posts, mail-to-News gateways, News-to-mail gateways, etc. The "Cypherpunks Way" is to encourage and empower people to filter their own stuff, or to hire outside contractors to do it for them. Failing that, to let them twist slowly in the wind. "Think of it as evolution in action." The Cypherpunks Way is also the simplest system. I hope this episode has reminded us of this lesson. --Tim May -- Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: distributed mailing list architecture
by pdh＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:11 PM 2/7/1997, Adam Back wrote: >Igor Chudov <ichudov(a)algebra.com> writes: >> I'd suggest a simplier solution: to connect each server with a couple, >> or maybe three, other servers. This scheme is rather robust, does not >> consume too much CPU time and bandwidth, and is easy to implement. > I'm not sure what the architecture you are suggesting is, but this is > what I suggest as the simplest to set up. > Have one main majordomo. > Have many mail-exploders. > You subscribe to the main majordomo request address, and it forwards > your subscription request to a random mail-exploder. > You unsubscribe to the main majordomo request address, and it forwards > your subscription to all the mail-exploders request addresses > (unsubscribe traffic is low anyway, keeping track of who is subscribed > where at the main major domo doesn't seem worth it). > Each person who wishes to run an exploder is subscribed (manually) to > the main majordomo. > You submit articles to the main majordomo, and it sends copies of the > articles to it's subscribers (the mail-exploders). > The mail-exploders send mail to the address on their subscriber lists. > (John Gilmore suggested this architecture, as a simpler alternative). This mostly solves the performance problem, but performance was not the only choke point. It is important to have many machines which accept posts and which send them to other machines. (Also, many interconnections means that few messages have to go through more than two machines which should make message distribution extraordinarily fast and highly redundant. Standing in the way of the cypherpunks list will be like standing in the way of the wind.) I suggest we consider the problem of subscriptions to be independent of the problem of posting and distributing messages. Some machine owners may wish to pool subscription activities. The fast and easy approach is to have an official cypherpunks subscription page which lists all of the mail servers which will accept new subscribers. (The person who maintains this page would ideally not be somebody running a mail server.) The interested person looks at the page and then picks a majordomo to subscribe to. It seems beneficial to me from a technical and social standpoint to have a web of relationships between list managers and subscribers. If as a subscriber you have some sort of problem (technical or social), it will work better if there is just one person to talk to rather than a loose network of volunteers. Peter

1 0

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C'punks, You have probably just read John's post. I truly hope YOU (each and every one of you) can rise to his challenge. If you have offered nothing in the past but criticism, it's now time to get a bit more real. What will it be, your money, time, equipment? I would hope that the loudest advocates of "free speech" turn out to be the most generous, but I'm not holding my breath. Maybe the solution(s) will come from you lurkers. I hope you can put down your beer long enough to get involved. Finally, if anyone wants to discuss why the Cypherpunk list has come to this, or what I did right or wrong as a moderator, let's talk about--on the new list(s) YOU create. For now, though, it's off-topic. We have work to do. S a n d y P.S. To all those people who privately supported me in my attempt to help the list deal with its problems, thank you. I wouldn't have come back without your and John's encouragement. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

7 9

The Konformist: Viewer Mail
by Robalini＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Note: Either you requested to receive a subscription to this e-mail, or someone else recommended you to be placed on this list. If you are interested in a free subscription, please e-mail Robalini(a)aol.com with the subject: I NEED TO KONFORM. (Okay, you can use something else, but it's a cool catch phrase.) Please e-mail me back with subject: CANCEL KONFORMIST if you're not interested in receiving this. Thanks, Robert Sterling. The following comments are from Alex Constantine. Subj: Jon Rappaport's Frauds Date: 97-01-27 14:29:28 EST From: alex(a)mach1.directnet.com (Alex Constantine) I want you to know I have no faith whatsoever in Rappaport. His "book" on the CIA and mind control is actually a file of transcripts compiled by Valerie Wolf, a New Orleans therapist. Rappaport wrote a five-page introduction, and he has since claimed ad nauseum that he is the "author" of the book. He is not. He did not even edit it. The material was used to advance his own career, and published as is. Yet he still claims he is the book's "author," and never corrects the many introductions in which he is credited with having "written" the thing. This is a fraud. His book on the OK bombing has its own problems, among them a reliance on General Partin of the Birch Society, discussed in my story on Calspan & McVeigh, and other dubious sources. This is not to say the book is totally false, but much of it does not check out. Rappaport also fawns over Bo Gritz. Need I say more? Robalini's Note: My sole experiences with Jon Rappaport is interviewing him on the phone and through my work with Jack Herer and the Hemp Legalization movement. Thief or not, Rappaport has a good collection of interesting info he's written about. As for General Partin and Bo Gritz, I take their information for what it is worth, and often it is worth a lot. Also from big Al: >>1) Alex Constantine, in his piece, has, to a degree, implied that McVeigh is >>guilty as charged but was brainwashed. > > I said specifically he was "monitored." I don't know if he was >brainwashed, and neither do you, but there is some evidence to support his >claim that he was implanted. Other killers in the article were NOT >brainwashed, and I did NOT "imply" that they were. Sweeny, the killer of >Allard Lowenstein, was ANGRY, not "brainwashed." The freeway killer in San >Francisco was NOT brainwashed, but ANGRY. The only brainwashed figure in >the story was Dan White. McVeigh was ANGRY, not BRAINWASHED. > >> Personally, I have some very serious >>doubts of his guilt, to say the least. I suspect McVeigh, though involved >>with the people who did the bombing, had no fucking clue what was going on. >> In fact, if you check out some other sites (including Tony Sgarlatti's web >>page at http://www.future.net/~thetruth/okc.html and the always stupendous >>Ian Goddard's http://www.erols.com/igoddard/facts.htm) you will soon discover >>that the evidence really leans to there being two bombs, and that neither of >>them actually came from the truck itself. > > I've talked to Scarlatti. He posted bogus information, and an >equally dubious explanation for the bogus information. I know there are >others involved, and possibly more than one bomb. Your view on the case >agrees with the militias, who I found to be lying on numerous occasions. >What I posted was an extract from a much longer story that answers many of >your questions, and clarifies some of the hazy areas and your >speculations. McVeigh is no innocent, but your analysis agrees with >Rappaport, whose book is totally made up of militia postings on the >Internet. Robalini's Note: Scarlatti's site, whatever the flaws are to it, is a mindblower, and should be read for that reason alone. I may add he's been very encouraging to The Konformist, and I'm certainly going to burn my bridges with him. Still, if you, or anyone else, has any specific criticisms of his (or other) sites, please let me know and I will forward it. As for the militas, well, I've never been into running around in the forest with guns (though it sounds kind of fun), and I suspect much of that crowd would hate my guts, but I believe they speak a lot of truth, and that their opinion needs to be heard. On the OK Bombing, in particular, they have been admirable in bringing forth evidence that the corporate media has pretended doesn't exist. In fact, if I fault militas members for anything, it is that they don't go far enough in their condemnation of society, and I think it is odd that a group which is very much anti-government could fawn over the military (the most powerful arm of the government) so pathetically. And, lets face it, racism and homophobia is quite rampant in the milta crowd (as it is in the rest of society), so I think there is quite a bit of fraudulence in many members claims of wanting "less government" and being for "freedom". But, hey, if I was going to cut off people who's opinion I disagreed with, I'd be living in a cave. Subj: Re: The Konformist - The Kempler Film Date: Sat, 08 Feb, 1997 06:11 PM EDT From: density4(a)cts.com Greetings Brother Bob, >> RABIN ASSASSINATION FILM REVEALS CONSPIRACY >> by Barry Chamish You're aware, I take it, that Brother Barry Chamish is also fond of writing articles about UFOs and little grey space aliens. Don't believe me, check it out: http://www.cco.net/~trufax/ufo/angel.html -Brother Blue, B:.B:., 33x Sacerdotal Knight of National Security, etc. http://www.users.cts.com/sd/d/density4/index.html E Pluribus Caeruleus -- "Out of many, THAT WHICH IS BLUE" Robalini's Note: That's fine by me. I hope to get some UFO articles and the like out on this list, for, as I've stated before, I think so far The Konformist has been a little too politically oriented. I have been told by many people that that's a bad idea, that I should stick to this niche, but screw it, if UFO articles bug you, you can kiss my ass. ************************************************************ The Konformist is interested in accepting articles, opinions, free subscriptions, and advertising. E-mail us at Robalini(a)aol.com, or call (310) 967-4195. The Konformist is a subsidiary of Sterling Operation Solutions, the trouble-shooting problem-solvers for all business needs. We charge on a sliding scale based on the difficulty (and legality) of the proposed solution. Call (310) 967-4195 for further information. Hey kids, don't forget to enter the "Rockin' To Armageddon Sweepstakes", sponsored by The Konformist, the Official Internet Investigative Journal of the 1997 Academy Awards. (Okay, it's not official, but we're anti-authority anyways.) Right down the day, month, year, and time of the end of the world, and, as a tie-breaker, your nominee for the anti-Christ. The winner will receive a t-shirt stating, "I CameClosest To Predicting The Apocalypse, And All I Got Was This Crummy T-Shirt." You will also receive a free one year supply of Twix candy bars. Also, this is a free magazine, but we'll still take your money if you want. Please send cash, check, money orders, and credit card numbers (Visa, Master Card, American Express, or Discover) to: Robert Sterling Post Office Box 24825 Los Angeles, California 90024-0825

1 0

Re: sci.crypt archive?
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Paul Rubin <phr(a)netcom.com> writes: > Is anyone on cypherpunks archiving sci.crypt? I'd be interested > in getting hold of some articles from some years back... thanks There is some one who archives it, it's up for ftp. Look in the sci.crypt FAQ, or do a web search to find the URL. I grabbed a copy for Remo Pini for the crypto CD, but I've lost the URL. The Crypto CD (I have one) has Jan 92 to Sep 94 (articles 6871 to 32742) on it. See http://www.rpini.com/ if you're interested. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

1 0

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Brad Dolan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

How do you encourage people to use resources more-or-less wisely? 1. The socialist/nanny model - take charge and give 'em orders We've tried that and it apparently didn't work out. 2. The market model - charge people for what they use A while back, omebody suggested a system which would be self-funding, by charging people for each post they made. Maybe we should try it? If each little piece of ASCII art cost a poster a buck or two to send, he might send fewer. On the other hand, we don't want to discourage interesting posters, so I think some system to reimburse interesting posters would be useful. I'm not the guy to set up the system, but I'll happily buy a modest amount of "posting tickets." Brad On Tue, 11 Feb 1997, John Gilmore wrote: > Sandy hit a pothole in the moderation experiment when Mr. Nemesis > submitted a posting containing nothing but libelous statements about > Sandy's employer. He never anticipated that he wouldn't be able to > follow his announced "post it to one list or the other" policy because > to do so would make him legally liable (in his opinion; he's a lawyer, > I'm not). His gears jammed, and the whole machine came to a halt for > a few days. > > Sandy has agreed to continue moderation through the end of the > original 1-month experiment (through Feb 19). And it's a good thing, > too, because the "cypherpunks community" had better get off its > whining butt in the next ten days, or it will no longer exist. > > I've come to the conclusion that I'm not willing to host the > cypherpunks list any more. It's not the true assholes that brought me > to this decision; it's the reaction from the bulk of people on the > list: suspicion, flamage, and criticism with every attempt to improve > things. I noticed few people volunteering some of their own time, > money, or machines to help out. Almost all the suggestions were > advice for *other* people to implement: > ...

1 0

[CRYPTO] Classic Cryptography
by Brian D Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 6 February 1997 Aegean Park Press proudly announces publication of CLASSICAL CRYPTOGRAPHY COURSE - VOLUME II by Randall K. Nichols [LANAKI]. [ISBN: 0-89412-264-9, 1997, 464 pages, $US 40.80 ] Volume II presents Lectures 11 - 22 (of a total of twenty five) from his successful course in Classical Cryptography taught in 1995 and 1996 to 391 students via the Internet and an additional 65 via regular mail. Volume II covers polyalphabetic substitutions ciphers in the Vigenere family (Viggy, Variant, Beaufort, Porta, Gronsfeld, Portax, Gromark), decimation, principles of symmetry, isologs and superimposition solution techniques. Volume II describes the difficult aperiodic cipher systems (Interrupted key, Autoclave, Progressive, Running Key used in cipher machines) and their analysis by isomorphs, and repetitions. Cryptarithm solutions for extended bases are presented. The theory of coincidences and statistical attacks (Kappa, Chi, Phi) derived from this important theory are detailed. Transposition theory and a variety of transposition ciphers are solved (Columnar, Amsco, Myszkowski, Cadenus, Grille, Swagman, Auto-Transposition). Volume II has two chapters on the difficult cipher systems invented by the famous French cryptographer Delastelle: Foursquare, Bifid and Trifid. Volume II presents a detailed chapter on passwords, law and data protection. Volume II ends with a historical look at codes, commercial code systems, and famous cipher machines. Volume II is a potpourri of advanced topics in classical cryptography. The Cryptographic Resources and References section has been expanded to cover all phases of involvement with cryptography: cryptanalysis, history, legal, social, classical, modern, NSA, mathematical techniques, recreational, intelligence, tactical, strategic, National Defense, INFOSEC: offensive and defensive, hardware, software, standards, public key cryptography, web sources, and applicable Senate and House bills. Readers are encouraged to expand their knowledge in the many directions possible to them through this section. For orders or Information Contact: Aegean Park Press, P.O. Box 2837, Laguna Hills, Ca. 92654. Telephone: 1-800-736-3587; Fax: 1-714-586-8269. Group discounts available. REVIEW OF CLASSICAL CRYPTOGRAPHY COURSE, VOLUME I By the Honorable David Kennedy, Director of Research, NCSA. Classical Cryptography Course, Volume I. By Randall K. Nichols; published by Aegean Park Press, (714) 586-8811 (phone) (714) 586-8269 (fax); (800) 736 - 3587; 301 pages (with index); $34.80 (American Cryptogram Association members receive a 20% discount through ACA or NCSA Members receive a 10% discount if purchased from the NCSA Bookstore) In Classical Cryptography Course, Volume I, author Randall K. Nichols has created a benchmark for serious students of the science of cryptography. This is a text. It is for learning, and with it one cannot help but learn about the foundations of the science. An outgrowth of Nichols' admitted "labor of love" in the online Cryptography Courses he teaches over the Internet, Volume I creates the foundation for understanding the development of the science. The ten chapters of this volume lead the student through simple substitutions, substitutions with variants, multiliteral substitutions, xenocrypts (foreign language substitutions), cryptarithms, the Enigma machine (separate Enigma95 program disk available direct from the author) and finally to polyalphabetic substitutions. Seven chapters conclude with problems; solutions and discussions are provided in an appendix. The text is indexed with twenty-four pages of references for further study. I found Nichols' sense of the history of cryptography particularly noteworthy. The volume is liberally salted with citations from history with applications of the methods developed in the text. From Revolutionary France through the American Civil War, the Tammany Hall scandal, Revolutionary Soviet ciphers and Japanese successes against Chinese codes prior to Pearl Harbor, the text provides touchstones for student to understand and relate to. Phil Zimmermann observed in the documentation to his Pretty Good Privacy Program to "Beware of Snake Oil." Among his arguments is this anecdote: I remember a conversation with Brian Snow, a highly placed senior cryptographer with the NSA. He said he would never trust an encryption algorithm designed by someone who had not "earned their bones" by first spending a lot of time cracking codes. Where Schneier's Applied Cryptography is a crash course in some encryption protocols and algorithms in use today, Nichols' text begins the teaching of Snake Oil detection and prevention. Learning the fundamentals, developed throughout the text, brings a richer understanding of the science, it's history and insight into it's possibilities and some vulnerabilities lurking for the unwary. Nichols plans for release Volume II in the series with advanced material on from the online course which includes statistical attacks and transposition in February, 1997. Reviewer: Dave Kennedy, CISSP, is Director of Research for the National Computer Security Association, Carlisle, PA. He is a retired Army military police officer and member of NCSA, ASIS, ISSA and the Computer Security Institute.

1 0

STE_pup
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

2-10-97: "Euro's creation raises money laundering fears" OECD task force report(*) identifies perils of a single currency and suggests Russian crime groups are linking up with the Mafia and Colombian drug cartels for laundering the new currency. Warns of other e-cash hazards. "Visa to Test Cards For Possible Use On the Internet" E-cash cards to be manufactured by Schlumberger and will use "virtually unbreakable" public-key cryptography. "Computer Security Becomes Biometric With Print Matching" Oracle's new fingerprint checking device to assure bona fide log-on privileges. Covers other such devices, quotes a maker: "if criminals or hackers get through these, industry will step up one more level." ----- STE_pup * A search is on for the report. Leads welcomed. The task force met last week in Paris.

1 0

Digital Signature Legislation (MN)
by Kevin L Prigge 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Minnesota Legislature has a bill pending in both houses regarding digital signatures, defines certification authorities, and provides for licensing of authorities. http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/cgi-bin/bldbill.pl?bill=H0056.0&session=… http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/cgi-bin/bldbill.pl?bill=S0173.0&session=… A quick read looks good, although I am not a lawyer. This only affects digital signatures used in financial transactions, AFAIK, and does not prohibit non-licensed cert authorities. -- Kevin L. Prigge | Some mornings, it's just not worth Systems Software Programmer | chewing through the leather straps. Internet Enterprise - OIT | - Emo Phillips University of Minnesota |

1 0

sandy who??
by anand abhyankar 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

hi guys, i am a new addition on the mailing list. i am amazed to find that half the mails talk about "sandy (god knows who he is) and he censoring mails" rather than crypto stuff. somebody please let me know who sandy is and what exactly is this censoring issue. anand....

2 1

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Brad Dolan wrote: > How do you encourage people to use resources more-or-less wisely? > 1. The socialist/nanny model - take charge and give 'em orders > We've tried that and it apparently didn't work out. > 2. The market model - charge people for what they use > A while back, omebody suggested a system which would be self-funding, by > charging people for each post they made. Maybe we should try it? If > each little piece of ASCII art cost a poster a buck or two to send, he > might send fewer. On the other hand, we don't want to discourage > interesting posters, so I think some system to reimburse interesting > posters would be useful. > I'm not the guy to set up the system, but I'll happily buy a modest amount > of "posting tickets." When you're a spy, you usually pay for info. In John's case, he's been getting the info for free. Now you're suggestion he charge people for providing him the info. This is not the direction John wants to go. He just wants cleaner info, that's all.

1 0

Re: Passphrase generation
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You want to think about how does someone attack the passphrase? Essentially, there are dictionary methods, where probably passphrasess are checked. These are enhanced by the use of changers, where the word is modified in ways common to people changing passwords: target Target targeT target0 0target target1 Crack, by Alex Muffet, produces on the order of 1000 derived words per word its given. I use phrases of 30-90 pink elephants with some arbitrary pizzas tossed on the floor. Adam Jeremiah A Blatz wrote: -- Start of PGP signed section. | Internaut <unde0275(a)frank.mtsu.edu> writes: | > Hi, | > I am wanting to learn how to generate a passphrase that is at least as | > strong as the IDEA algorithm. I have looked several other places on the | > web for an answer to this, but they all had different things to say that | > didn't add up (no pun intended :). | | Chech out the cannonical passphrase FAQ: | http://www.stack.nl/~galactus/remailers/passphrase-faq.html | | This one has some quick reminders of what to do and not to do | http://www.encryption.com/pphrase.htm | | Bottom line, totally random ASCII will have lots of bits per | character, but english has about 1.2 bits per character. Misspellings | can add to that, depending on the extent of mutillation . Combining | certain words can make your passphrase weaker (such as "To be or not | to be," "This is my passphrase," etc.). | | HTH, | Jer | | "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew | why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -- End of PGP signed section. -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sandy Sandfort wrote: > You have probably just read John's post. I truly hope YOU (each > and every one of you) can rise to his challenge. If you have > offered nothing in the past but criticism, it's now time to get a > bit more real. What will it be, your money, time, equipment? What challenge? An offer to break code for money? Not likely, is it? > I would hope that the loudest advocates of "free speech" turn out > to be the most generous, but I'm not holding my breath. Maybe > the solution(s) will come from you lurkers. I hope you can put > down your beer long enough to get involved. Generous with what? Get involved with crypto? That's why they're here in the first place, yes? > Finally, if anyone wants to discuss why the Cypherpunk list has > come to this, or what I did right or wrong as a moderator, let's > talk about--on the new list(s) YOU create. For now, though, it's > off-topic. We have work to do. I think they already talked about it, and the decision is in. What does "off-topic" mean? Does it mean further criticism will be censored? > P.S. To all those people who privately supported me in my attempt > to help the list deal with its problems, thank you. Help the list? You almost destroyed the list. If you wanted to help, you should have provided lessons on filtering. > I wouldn't have come back without your and John's encouragement. A lot of people wish you hadn't come back.

1 0