December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

CDA II and Tax Issues (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 21:46:08 -0400 > From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> > Subject: CDA II and Tax Issues > Some questions for the eminent Constitutional litigators on this list: As > noted in the Freedom Forum article posted by David Burt, the newly-adopted > Internet Tax Freedom Act contains a provision which makes > harmful-to-minor-ographers ineligible for the moratorium on Internet taxes. > Is it possible to challenge the Constitutionality of this provision even > before any state has rushed to tax on-line peddlers of harmful-to-minor > materials? If so, why aren't the ACLU/EFF/EPIC challenging this bill? Is Hm, wasn't there a ruling in a similar vein respecting tax on illegal drugs just recently? It was my understanding it was found to be unconstitutional. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Is Your Web Site A Secret?
by launch＠launchmaster.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is your web site the best kept secret on the Internet? We'll promote it to 50 search engines and indexes for $85 and complete the job in 2 business days. Satisfaction is guaranteed! If you have a great product, but are not getting many inquiries from your Web site, you may not be adequately listed on the Web's search engines and indexes. Millions of viewers daily use these facilities to find the products and services they are looking for. But if your site is not listed, no one will see it. Listings on most of these services are free. However, locating and filling out the forms required to get a listing can take several days, and most people just don't have the time to do it. That is why we offer a web site promotion service. WHAT'S THE DEAL? We will submit your site to 50 indexes and search engines for $85. We will accept the return of this E-mail, with the form below filled out, as an order. We will bill you upon completion of the promotion. Our terms are net 15 days from date of invoice. Satisfaction guaranteed! HOW LONG WILL IT TAKE? Generally, we complete the submissions within 48 hours of receiving your order. It can take any individual search engine or index up to three weeks to process your submission, although most are much faster. WHAT SEARCH ENGINES AND INDEXES ARE INCLUDED IN THE PROMOTION? The list changes from time to time. This is our current list: Alta Vista, Anzwers, AOL Netfind, BizCardz Business Directory, Bizlink, BizWeb, Black Widow Search, Excite, Galaxy, HotBot, Infomak, Infoseek, InfoSpace, InterBis, Jayde Online Directory, Jumpcity, Jumper Hot Links, JumpLink, LinkMonster, Lycos, MangaSeeker, Manufacturers Information Network, Net Happenings, Net Announce, New Page List, New Riders WWW Yellow Pages, Northern Light, One World Plaza, PeekABoo, Planet Search, Power Crawler, QuestFinder, Scrub The Web, Seven Wonders, SiteFinder, SiteShack, Super Snooper, The YellowPages.com, TurnPike, Unlock: The Information Exchange, WebCrawler, WebVenture Hotlist, WhatUSeek, Where2Go, WhoWhere, World Announce Archive, Wow! Web Wonders!, YeeHaa!, Yellow Pages Superhighway, YelloWWWeb, Your Webscout, ZenFinder. HOW WILL I KNOW THAT YOU HAVE PROMOTED MY SITE? When we have completed the promotion, we will send you an HTML file as an attachment to your E-mail bill. Save this file to your disk, and view it through your Web browser. It provides links to the search engine we submitted your site to, plus any comments we received from them when we did it. ARE THERE ANY GUARANTEES? We do not require prepayment. Your satisfaction is guaranteed or you don't pay the bill. WHO IS LAUNCHMASTER? We are a web site promotion company located at: LaunchMaster, Inc. 12 Godfrey Place Wilton CT 06897 Phone: (877) 278-0875 Fax: (800) 321-6966 Email: launch(a)launchmaster.com HOW DO I ORDER? The easiest way to order is by e-mail. Just hit the REPLY button on your e-mail program and fill out the following information. (This information will be posted to the search engines/indexes): Your name: Company Name: Address: City: State/Prov: Zip/Postal Code: Telephone: Fax: Email address: URL: http:// Site Title: Description (about 25 words): Key words (maximum of 25, in descending order of importance): Contact (in case we have questions): If billing a different address, please complete the following: Addressee: Company Name: Address: City: State/Prov: Zip/Postal Code: Telephone: Fax: Email address: We will bill via Email. (A9 10/22/98) Terms: By returning this document via Email, you agree as follows: You have the authority to purchase this service on behalf of your company. Terms are net 15 days. Accounts sent to collections will be liable for collection costs. You agree to protect and indemnify LaunchMaster, Inc. in any claim for libel, copyright violations, plagiarism, or privacy and other suits or claims based on the content or subject matter of your site. WHAT HAPPENS NEXT? When we receive your order, we will acknowledge it via return email. We will then input your information into our system. When completed, we will run your promotion, capturing any comments from search engines as we go. We will incorporate these into an HTML-formatted report to you, which we will attach to your bill. ======================Web Site Promotions====================== Launchmaster, Inc. 12 Godfrey Place Wilton CT 06897 Ph: (877) 278-0875 Fx: (800) 321-6966 E-mail: launch(a)launchmaster.com

1 0

Gilmore Subpoena (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 21:52:20 -0400 > From: John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> > Subject: Gilmore Subpoena > [Form] > > AO 110 (Rev. 12/89) Subpoena to Testify Before Grand Jury > _______________________________________________________________________ > > UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT > WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON > _______________________________________________________________________ > > To: > John Gilmore SUBPOENA TO TESTIFY > 210 Clayton Street BEFORE GRAND JURY > San Francisco, CA 94117 > Mine looks pretty much identical. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Censored news topic censored ...
by Ernest Hua 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > Would any of the NPR staff or Mr. Suarez would like > > to explain just what happened here? > > I'll take a stab: milk spills, people trip, shit happens. > > They probably didn't mean it. > > But who knows. My best guess is shit happens, but my criticism was aimed at the rather ironic situation where a topic about a topic being censored was, itself, censored. Now, I wouldn't necessarily have taken that second "censored" quite as seriously as Mr Suarez has in his E-Mails, but I suppose "censor" might have a very serious connotation in the news business (deliberateness, conspiracy, etc.). It is clear that he is, at least, aware of the fact that the bill passed under questionable circumstances. He probably took my pre-screen literally as "he wants to talk about this wire tap thing again, but I've already covered it in a previous show". In any case, the point is precisely what Dan Gillmor in San Jose Mercury (and also in the interview with Market Place) said: It's not what was passed; it's how it was passed and when it was passed, and the deliberate attempt to keep the public from knowing much about it. Notice that all the news talk today about the FCC discussing the new mobile wire tap provision has pretty much assumed that the 1994 $500M Digital Telephony (a.k.a. CALEA) bill was passed matter of fact. No one mentioned that it was passed also at the last minute under questionable circumstances during 11th hour budget deals. No one even questions the fact that Louis Freeh and Janet Reno claimed that civil libertarians and phone companies were exaggerating the >$2B price and were absolutely sure the $500M was more than adequate. Does anyone believe that a >$2B CALEA would have passed? Even in the dark of night? The lesson here to the FBI is, go ahead ... exaggerate ... lie if you have to ... no one is going to call you on it. Ern

1 0

Re: dbts: Cryptographic Dog Stocks, The Dirigible Biplane, andSending the Wizards Back to Menlo Park
by Vin McLellan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jeeez, I hope no one else sprained a finger getting the current stock price for Security Dynamics (SDTI). Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> took certain, ummm, dramatic liberties as he paraphrased a Boston Globe column yesterday on Bay State stocks that had "been discounted so deeply they raise eyebrows." Said Mr. Hettinga: >It seems that Security Dynamics, trading at about 6, about >10% or so of >its high, is now considered an official dog >stock as defined by today's >Boston Globe. What the Globe actually said was: "Security Dynamics Technologies Inc. of Bedford, a leader in computer security and encryption, has fallen from an April high of 42 1/2 to 12 yesterday. It traded as low as 6 two weeks ago." Said Mr. Hettinga: >Anyway, most of the comments in the article were about SD's >hardware >token technology being made obsolete by digital >"certificates". (The >Globe's quotes, but I agree with them. >Just like I put quotes around >digital "signatures", which >are nothing of the kind, though I haven't >heard of >something better call *them* yet, either.) The Globe did >>mention SD buying RSA, but they forgot to mention anything >about the RSA >patent expiring soon. About the only thing >they said was valuable about >SD was their share in that >roaring success, Verisign, Inc., who, the >Globe seems to >imply, is evidently the sole marketer of those self-same >>digital "certificates". I wonder what Thawte, CertCo, >Entrust, etc.made >of *that* comment... Hmmmm. What the Globe actually said was: "Security Dynamics made money for years selling authentication systems for corporate computer users and later acquired RSA Data Security, an Internet encryption leader. Now its original authentication products are being challenged by new technology using so-called ``digital certificates'' to make computer communication and commerce secure - a serious problem that has hurt the stock. "But Security Dynamics, with a current market value of about $490 million, could still offer a bigger company a leading position in the important computer security field and a huge embedded customer base. "Security Dynamics also owns a stake in Verisign Inc., a competitor in the digital certificate field. The company's cash and its investment in Verisign amount to about $6.50 per share, slightly more than half the stock's current price." Hettinga essays are like handball games: the damn ball is ricocheting off the side walls, both ends, the floor and the ceiling. Linear coherence and internal consistency are less important than the electrostatic energy and the rolling rhetorical thunder -- so hey, no big deal if he's a little frisky and expansive with the facts, right? For the full Globe article, cut & paste this URL: <http://www.boston.com/cgi-bin/passiton.cgi?globehtml/294/Among_Bay_State_s_… ered_tech_fir.shtml> Wall Street has not been kind to SDTI, from whom I have collected many checks for contract assignments over the years. Mr. Hettinga's explanation of the market's dynamics is, at the very least, guaranteed to stimulate. Hettinga's apparent scorn for modern cryptography's obsession with strong authentication -- now manifest in the intensity with which professionals worry the issues around PKC binding, key certification, digital signatures, CA procedures (and in the demand for smartcards to secure X509 certs apart from the networked CPU) -- bespeaks a truly iconoclastic mind. What tucked me in for the night was the declaration -- from R.H., the avatar of DBTS, e-cash, and geodesic recursive auctions -- that (venture) capital is or will be counterproductive to entreprenurial enterprise in the New Age. Un huh. Doomed, as well, by the hesitation inherent in the merely human minds that control its flow (at least in Rob's universe of cybernetic fiscal structures.) Said Mr. Hettinga: > It's beginning to look like venture capital is an >industrial phenomenon, requiring correspondingly long >ramp-up times, and it may be that geodesic markets move too >fast for any "consensus" of the investment community to be >achieved and, um, capitalized upon, soon enough to make >money on a consistent basis, or at least in the presence of >a savvy management team. Gotta love a guy who can write a sentence like that, knot and and double-knot it into a gangly tapestry -- and then glue the whole thing across a wonderful image like a "dirigible biplane." (That's a Hettinga vehicle is ever there was one. Even in the imagination, it pushes or pulls large amounts of gas around in an unusually muscular way;-) Suerte, _Vin ----- "Cryptography is like literacy in the Dark Ages. Infinitely potent, for good and ill... yet basically an intellectual construct, an idea, which by its nature will resist efforts to restrict it to bureaucrats and others who deem only themselves worthy of such Privilege." _ A Thinking Man's Creed for Crypto _vbm. * Vin McLellan + The Privacy Guild + <vin(a)shore.net> * 53 Nichols St., Chelsea, MA 02150 USA <617> 884-5548

4 8

Re: Censored news topic censored ...
by geeman＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I don't speak up here much but I can't let this go: the next time you hear William Buckley on the Commonwealth Club broadcast on NPR, or hear the almost-commercial-broadcast-length squibs that pretend to be underwriter attributions but which are really tiny little commercials for ADM "Supermarket to the World" or Wells Fargo "Making Your Time Count," ask yourself who NPR is really working for, and set your expectations accordingly. Then send your checks to Pacifica to support free-speech radio. At 03:00 PM 10/22/98 -0700, Mark Hedges wrote: > >It sounds like even the enlightened folks at NPR don't have the guts >to stand up and say something about issues as critical as expanded >FBI powers over citizens and the sneaky tricks used to pass those laws. > >It's not really a big surprise, though. Monica Lewinsky's blowjobs >take precedence over incredulous claims like 'NSA SPIES ON EVERYONE' >and 'FBI MONITORS YOU WITHOUT WARRANTS'. > >They will have to live with their own lack of character. So will we. > >Mark Hedges > > >At 1:13 PM -0700 10/22/98, Ernest Hua wrote: >>Dear TOTN at NPR, >> >>This is most distressing. I was one of the very first >>callers to your Talk of the Nation show today whose >>topic was relevant news reporting in the US. My topic >>was the lack of reporting on the FBI's last minute >>sneak of the roving wire tap proposal into the >>intelligence budget bill. I wanted Ray to talk about >>the editorial process and how these things get dropped >>on the floor as this item is extremely important to >>our democracy because it is an agency charged with >>protecting our Constitutional rights (the FBI) who is >>deliberately circumventing the democratic legislative >>process to pass a law which was sounded defeated two >>years ago in open debate. >> >>Ironically, my topic was censored, and I waited an >>hour, while other people wanted to discuss things >>like how they can vent about their divorce >>difficulties through the Monica Lewinsky scandal, only >>to be dropped in the end. >> >>Would any of the NPR staff or Mr. Suarez would like >>to explain just what happened here? >> >>Ern >> >>-------- >>Ernest Hua, TeraLogic Inc, 1300 Villa St, Mountain View, CA 94041 >>(650) 526-6064, hua(a)teralogic-inc.com > > > >________________________________________________________________ > Mark Hedges hedges(a)infopeace.com www.infopeace.com > > "One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard > a revolution; one makes the revolution in order to establish > a dictatorship." O'Brien from 1984, George Orwell >________________________________________________________________ > > > >

1 0

echelon in UK
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

echelon is getting a *lot* of european coverage in their newspapers and magazines over the last few weeks/months. I find this quite remarkable. here in the US where we pride ourselves on civil freedom, the public does not even *squeak* about the massive NSA superstructure. but the european community is starting to get fidgety and uppity. I sincerely hope that this pressure can be increased. it would be quite ironic if the nsa began to feel heat by *outside* countries, without the slightest raised eyebrow by the submissive, prostrate US taxpayer even as they suck up something like 50 odd billion dollars a year out of our budget without a trace. personally I think an awesome cypherpunk project/campaign would be an info-fight against the NSA. a guerrila style campaign in which people try to plaster the message everywhere, and "hack" the mainstream media. the time is ripe, with the echelon brouhaha. it's a pity that hackers spend their time fighting over somethig like Kevin Mitnick when they could truly change the us govt as we know it. I propose a continued, cyberguerilla campaign to put the NSA into the public light and make them squirm as much as a spook can do so (and I'm certain they are *very* squirmy)

1 0

IP: Enhanced Ability to Tap Cell Phones
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: believer(a)telepath.com Subject: IP: Enhanced Ability to Tap Cell Phones Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 11:21:56 -0500 To: believer(a)telepath.com Source: Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/washtech/cell1022.htm Federal Plan Would Enhance Police Ability to Tap Cell Phones By Jeannine Aversa Associated Press Writer Thursday, October 22, 1998; 11:16 a.m. EDT WASHINGTON - Law enforcement officials say they need to know where a suspected criminal is when he makes a cellular telephone call. Federal regulators are proposing to give them the capability to find out. The Federal Communications Commission without dissent proposed today that cellular phone companies make technical changes so the FBI, police and other law enforcers - as long as a court approves - can locate a person talking on a mobile phone. This and other additional wiretapping capabilities being proposed aim to help law enforcers keep pace with technology. With some 66 million cellular phone customers, police want the authority to legally tap cell phones to track down drug dealers, terrorists and kidnappers. But some groups worry that such a practice could violate privacy. The location proposal is part of a larger plan to implement a 1994 law that requires telecommunications companies to make changes in their networks so police are able to carry out court-ordered wiretaps in a world of digital technology. The proposal is based on a plan from the telecommunications industry. "We think this is a positive step forward," said Stephen Colgate, the Justice Department's assistant attorney general for administration. "In many kidnapping cases, it would have been very helpful to have location information." But James Dempsey, counsel to the Center for Democracy and Technology, a privacy group, said: "We're prepared to fight this one every step of the way." FCC Chairman Bill Kennard stressed that police would have no access to locations without a court order. "A lot of people are saying the FCC will turn mobile phones into tracking devices for the FBI and invade Americans' privacy. I don't believe that will be the case," Kennard said. With a court order, police already can legally listen in to cell phone conversations, and, in some instances, get information on the caller's location. But not every company has the technical ability to provide a caller's location. This proposal, if adopted, would set up a nationwide requirement for companies to follow. The legal standard for obtaining a location is lower than the standard for a wiretap order in which police must show a judge there is probable cause of criminal activity. Under the proposal, police would only need to show the location is relevant to an investigation. Privacy groups say that means the government could easily track the movements not only of a suspect, but also of associates, friends or relatives. It would give police the ability to obtain the cellular phone user's location at the beginning and end of a wiretapped call. The proposal would provide police with that information based on the cellular tower, or "cell" site, where a call originated and ended. That would give information on the caller's location within several city blocks in an urban area to hundreds of square miles in a rural area. The FBI had been seeking more exact location information. The FCC also is expected to tentatively conclude that companies must give police, as long as a court approves, additional capabilities - beyond minimum technical standards already proposed by the industry - so their ability to conduct wiretaps won't be thwarted. The additional capabilities being sought by the FBI that were advanced by the FCC include: -Giving police the ability to listen in on the conversations of all people on a conference call, even if some are put on hold and no longer talking to the target of a wiretap. -Giving police the ability to get information when the wiretap target has put someone on hold or dropped someone from a conference call; and to know if the wiretap target has used dialing features - such as call waiting or call forwarding. -Giving police the number dialed by a wiretap target when the suspect, for instance, uses a credit or calling card at a pay phone. Privacy groups and the telephone industry contend the additional capabilities sought by the FBI go beyond the 1994 law and are an attempt to broaden wiretapping powers. The FBI says it merely wants to preserve the ability to conduct legal wiretaps in a world of constantly changing technology. The FCC is involved because the Justice Department, FBI and the telecommunications industry, after three years of negotiations, were unable to reach agreement on the larger plan for implementing the 1994 law. All interested parties will get a chance to offer opinions on the proposal, which could be revised. Kennard wants a final plan adopted by the end of the year. © Copyright 1998 The Associated Press ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ----------------------- **************************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address or (un)subscribe ignition-point-digest email@address **************************************************** www.telepath.com/believer ****************************************************

2 1

No Subject
by lcs Mixmaster Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

owF3VkuLHLkN9cab9CXgfYUWvoDD+lgzDmlGMTMRY3uHJJFJuEgixU+Vsu/kO/oh 2+wdeFSzSOD9gP/+6S/rH/uIWv+Anw9tRh1qlb5OrUHGBZs1aC5SaW9c48YjSaOQ NMdV20g0yaZ25cpLk2Pmrg+54es2mIKOpoH6wK02Oy5Zr5MzNdFKa+Z+JCn+j26F F65D6lkIT8g2M9lxWL+qebMs7+whdbSTihYNd6078Xr2fqM9c7HmtxwogBsPw7Eh 5Rg3vORVxoXzkXhFP/ssBZdIC7Mp5zdEP1jDu7RyzhxJa5SsaxbaOW75XByGJn3Q wRn/bIbnKaBWASSbjr8SfdGBp0LiPrQLlYqmqoYbRdZ+vqHlwwxZI3BQ3JvsSZ1j zLLyTl1XzbjtRlUmLp89zMyNfrECGHu2nesSrH6d0lDsW24jyxikZW22ZzX6sWlP hR2kL2BFD2rcZMO79JmBRJfG18EO0l6snEGGdDT6YCDgLx+z93NBTdoLHdYO8zaC ncTbxo5F5ZOS1CD0SSACCADEPnTiOMiwbVtcL1pRMmhd6aFhaEEF77jLSVE2f4n2 8+jTP37bWHP228qUvGzQ2KW6xEc2jScerxtgF+eH5w6opazcdkPln1hj5qf3+/4L Csg2cOxXriGhyWI20mpN6PcEXhS1Hs3iDIOyGfr6uae79bREhVIKpBcCznwozk1P PEA3vmAb/Wd+GwwJCl76GZD/S3jHyZa0GuHCJC6/gbOHYy05owOJO/rl48he+7/R 1LJBF64VgRY53OkJfYMXW7PuQpe+muwVYD79JNQQCaK4o2VpOmZfVu3j4qEfEvBg D3aAWJAdxIX/RWqiX6GY9rhg1XJY1iGQ/wF1yNIlKiw8LnlLhLDmimc3IAsOagXg 3FZLZ4R9IH0cBWGwycuLLbCpNhh2g1zajZ7yGgFAZmz6jcosXlqa9e5IF4WCdbhx Njiz8EVs0BZw6L3VysTRvezOns5m46KOw+Y4RIL+UfRYNkHr5Gj0wIf3zkFC423A dpvbbyQ0gkB5wrxQHwpPEuG8Pl5dG6FCnBjcQoIGQclVy2dosk082LkK/aI7IxU0 sst7r9zTbQGAzdYLcpgigRd0DD+jVHaKPX6cHMRavULkn9K+QZq/S3NsYPnP4TOo AIYdJN3pI7RcV8mD3tq6ot1+tnngRos7TBOyzQhEn24t4Nzv54JsrKC0GjLgJPji CXU2V9XfGWh6ANM/+MFoZEc+XShb3ZFVHWmwcLTDP7y5ifVqLs2CioHHuAIQjoTm UYP00PRAbKKcohUKWA6nzaPjAQTACnQCE0N8dtnpAHkulHW+vCBu/GySXPxhShoh uKe1OGDym3sKyvhsSIfuERjuQBWRkY0jwvMjeFil7TDZp1mj/+mRKiBN3JwIafdI m/3izkDsw6mlfGK2vPEL7MG1Kgwt5TX0gnvReZKnJ1nntTHqz6jfOfW0eLJnJaqD UTCmJmo+MMe6x9SmOxLKU7YIEiCZDzE46tydbRI8B8jcTjuESM+k5Yb4rNHb/wnu YB8nFb+OFR50EwTvQgsHTB+rd6TiT9aenO8Lctksr4jbB0chAGMR7vUZC6QbO+ie M7rKBTAAxbEjq/fyZ0hNDcVg7sDcPjc9ZFbDB0++e3CeghHZO/Jsp7/15I7yZG4T VFzkLCHNUVFRtjAx6TB0J5UTLAf6bbY7HIB4fdjJDdFR1cMNQY+52hEmS7sERpvV 6DmADLHDwXVy3sLw6hKyuSe/2acrSoM3Zsec9tE2dJ+eBIU9z66Nw7MJgveJ7nPc mf/BkGzIhQTRQfrzuJKz4nmBrzKCA7kcu+KZSwTfnvjUQ2xtgrm+YYcpwIO65xdc Bp1H30bCufgS0loyH9HVnogtnPu+npzAE572aQOWoNyACfjGFVol2wEC6B3YO/Fk wIKRYJrizsLaIyFDV978sXwSn9FQ9nvBXMOOM+EUXyxOLDBzYKT4GjQPdxzwwbSz HMGeVmhF8PFtqRA2FqJOl4ivMRGnuS7pgOmxF4E7iNzDNUEvyMRylfrWZlv5rssX AIhQotU8pfq1YgQrbvb1NQmweQzI7jVdMbIGkhP9L98fcIP9ODifV2oAfrTqcKvv hkwfkIs+m5pebAOvgiT6fpDec50rQtY9MegjOnS7+wiFYAJBJNWJfYcF6E7fV6Fl TMwFH11jvu6mKGu8riA+wf2LHglCL1JdH77nAAnQCFwxC7orga7V4WDsZdnJ/K3x Q7sngWQErgccvqC4dfqG9f9B3cAddgRgVLBLiDztWrT+Bw== =zoKi

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:17 AM 10/23/98 +0200, Anonymous wrote: >Trees cannot be indicted for assasination > >-Bono Kennedy Which prosecutor was it who said that he could get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich if he wanted to?

1 0

Re: dbts: The Economic Cause of Privacy (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 22 Oct 1998 14:25:16 +0200 > From: Anonymous <nobody(a)replay.com> > From: bman(a)barn.pct > Subject: Re: dbts: The Economic Cause of Privacy > There is no financial privacy because because those who would like such thing > have less power (hired guns) than those who would not like it. That is certainly a valid way of looking at the situation after the laws are enacted. However, the situation leading up to the laws being created probably didn't involve (c)overt violent implications. I would posit that we have no financial privacy is because prior to now (pre-ubiquitous computers) there was a significant cost in compiling the information because copies had to be made, people involved, etc. This is all going away. The base infrastructure changed radicaly and this is bound to effect those aspects that rely (recognized or not) on specific characteristics (eg cost to retrieve a single page) will see their 'balance of power' change. > be lost, and population harvesting (aka taxing) would have to be radically > changed, and that is expensive. The system is self-supporting. One potential view of this situation is that the tax burden in a post-computer economy is significantly different than in a pre-computer economy. In particular examine the primary source of taxes. Individuals look to become very ephemeral entities in the near term increasing the costs to the regulators (local, county, state, federal, special) to monitor compliance. What is needed is a long-lived, well know contact point between the source of funds wishing to be taxed and the sink of those same funds. The most obvious is the business or entity sourcing funds. Because of regulatory issues such organizations need plenty of documentation in order to do business. Business has as one of its principle goals long-term profit (excluding short-term business only for convenience and brevity) which implies long-term existance. In a computer managed economy the primary tax point should be the retailer or VAR passed along to the consumer via increased prices (compensated for by increased paychecks). This also has the potential for eliminating (or at least reducing significantly) the amount of registration and forms that need to be done. Such issues could be taken care of at the time of transaction and anonymously. This could also be used to impliment a flat tax system that automaticaly takes care of those who are poor. Exempt basic housing, food and clothing items much like now. Since the poorer members of society don't buy things like CD's and new jackets each year they aren't burdened by those tax responsibilties. > Idea that somehow smart algorithms will bring financial privacy is a good starting > point for cryptoaddict's wet dream, but in reality has the same chance of > success as survival rate of armed citizens against the government. Zero. Hm, I thought that's how this country was formed 200+ years ago... Actualy people will bring financial privacy via smart algorithms (perhaps). This will occur when there is either a compeling reason to do it or there is simply no other way to reach the next platue of technology/civil gestalt. > Use of government-controlled, issued and supervised payment methods/instruments > is in place because it is proscribed, not because "money/checks, etc. exist". True, history traces money back to the dawn of human history when the concept of government is not really applicable (though despot might be). The groups were simply too small and non-interactive with other groups to really class them as a full blown economy. As those groups grew and increased their interactivity the need for regulating the economy became clearer and clearer. Those who took on the job obviously wanted something for their labors so taxes were born. As time went on the roll of taxes increased to include civil support. > Money is a highly artificial entity in the first place. It is "natural" to > use currency-binded valuation as it is natural to go to church. And theorizing > on money and economy in general has similarities to religious rituals. Without getting into what natural means (I can't take another theism discussion right now); there must be something 'natural' or universal about money since widely seperate and uncommunicative societies have invented the concept when other as simple technologies didn't translate (compare the Egyptian and Aztec use of the wheel - the Aztecs didn't though they knew of it by using it on toys). > Therefore constructing computer-assisted anon payment schemes "because it is > cheaper that way" is pointless. Not if one of your goals is to decrease cost. This won't suffice for the sole motivation however. So at least to some degree we agree. > Money is not there to make your life easier. > Money exists so that you can be taxed and conditioned to desired behaviour at > minimal cost. I'll have to disagree. Money exists to ease the transfer of goods across geographic and social boundaries, it's a level of abstraction above straight barter. Taxation is a mechanism for those geographic an social boundaries to continue to exist while hopefuly providing useful services. > The only way for society (or loosely coupled individuals) to function without > abstractions like money (that need organized gun power to maintain) is direct > exchange of goods and services with enforcement based on close relationships > between parties. Has been tried, several thousand years ago, and such societies > were annihilated by others who did organize. Which seems to be the fate of any > anarchism in general. These sorts of societal arrangements historicaly don't support the thesis of anarchism being the root cause of the failure. As a matter of fact, historicaly there is no example (not even the Icelandic Anarchists traded with the mainland to a great degree) of a interacting set of societies that supported an economy involving a anarchy that I am aware of. There are plenty of examples where (near) anarchist societies have destroyed economies and socieities. The primary problem is one of wastage. In a barter economy the amount of value implicit in every exchange varies greatly. If you trade a chicken for a duck from one customer and a pig from another, does that mean they should trade a duck for a pig between themselves? Since the pig farmer doesn't want a duck since he bought a chicken from me how does the duck vendor entice the pig owner into buying his duck (especialy when he needs the pig to feed his family as this is his last duck and pigs are bigger than ducks). Then there is the issue of geography and how a duck is worth less in the middle of duck-raising land than in the middle of no-ducks-to-be-seen land. Money stabalizes the swings in the individual transactions and causes the economic system as a whole to be more stable and predictable. Perhaps what we really need to be looking for is a economic model that is dynamic but predictable to a very great degree. Though I must admit that looks suspicously like some sort of communism/socialism 'share everything equaly' style of governments. Though, if you could seperate the monetary aspects of a government from the legal/social side it could work. Probably at least one of the seperate-but-equal aspects of a polycratic model; Religion - Economics - Criminal - Legislative - Executive - Military (external) - Militia (internal) - Science/Technology - Medicine ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Break DES Fast!
by pgut001＠cs.auckland.ac.nz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Friend, My name is Dave Rhodes. In 1997 my cipher designs had all been broken, my patents declared without merit, and NIST had rejected my preliminary AES submission. Then in early 1998 I received a letter in the mail telling me how I could earn fame as a cryptographer whenever I wanted. I was naturally very skeptical and threw the letter on the desk next to my computer. It's funny though, when you are desperate, backed into a corner, your mind does crazy things. I spent a frustating day looking through the DES S-boxes for better differentials, but the pickings were sparse at best. That night I tried to unwind by reading a few security newsgroups. I read several of the posts and then glanced at the letter next to the computer. All at once it came to me, I now had the key to my dreams. This year I presented a paper at Crypto'98 and have one accepted for Eurocrypt'99. Cryptographers from all over the world come to me for advice, and NIST has asked me to be on the AES evaluation board. I will have my own crypto conference within 4 or 5 months. Anyone can do the same. This crypto method works perfectly every time, 100% of the time. Best of all you never have to leave home except to go to your mailbox or post office. I realized that with the power of the computer I could expand and enhance this method into the most unbelievable system that has ever been created. I substituted email in place of the post office and electronically did by computer what others were doing 100% by mail. Most of the hard work is speedily handled by computers throughout the world. If you believe that someday you deserve that lucky break that you have waited for all your life, simply follow the easy instructions below. Your dreams will come true. Sincerely yours, Dave Rhodes INSTRUCTIONS Follow these instructions EXACTLY, and in 20 to 60 days you will have searched well over 50 trillion DES keys. This program has remained successful because of the honesty and integrity of the participants. Please continue its success by carefully adhering to the instructions. 1. Immediately send the following ciphertext/plaintext pair below to ten friends: 12F7E88920:0A2DE3172B 2. Remove the searched keyspace that appears at number 1 on the list below. Move the other 9 sets of searched keyspaces up one position. Number 2 will become number 1 and number 3 will become number 2, etc. Place the keyspace you've searched in the number 10 position. 3. Post the message with the keyspace you've tried in the number 10 position into 10 separate newsgroups or mailing lists, call the file BREAK.DES.FAST. 4. Within 60 days you will receive over 50 trillion further DES keys which people have tried. This is not a scam. This is perfectly legal. If you have any doubts, refer to 22 USC Sec 2778. [Keyspace list snipped]

3 2

dog stocks
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Don't shoot me, shoot the remailer operator. :-). *I* couldn't have said the following... Now, where *is* that Walter Winchell hat? Cheers, Bob Hettinga --- begin forwarded text Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 12:20:28 +0200 From: Anonymous <nobody(a)replay.com> Comments: This message did not originate from the Sender address above. It was remailed automatically by anonymizing remailer software. Please report problems or inappropriate use to the remailer administrator at <abuse(a)replay.com>. Subject: dog stocks To: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> Status: U of course this information should be laundered.... Remember Mr. McLellan is an SDTI partisan. SDTI *is* a dog stock. It has problems. (1) SecureID is decade-old technology. They are ripe for competitors to steal the business away from them, because of their business model. They've yet to come up with any second trick for that pony. (2) RSADSI is an anchor on the company. RSADSI revenues have been flat for six quarters; the most profitable thing they do is their little January conference -- except for owning part of Verisign. Sept. 30 2000 is fast approaching and they have no plan on how they will compete once they no longer have a patent to club people with. The most profitable thing SDTI could do would be to fire everyone in RSADSI, and use the monsy that would be spent on their salaries to invest heavily in smart cards. A --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 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'

1 0

Re: Is Your Web Site A Secret?
by Pallas Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

launch(a)launchmaster.com wrote: > > Is your web site the best kept secret on the Internet? > > We'll promote it to 50 search engines and indexes for $85 > and complete the job in 2 business days. Satisfaction is > guaranteed! > ... > > WHAT SEARCH ENGINES AND INDEXES ARE INCLUDED IN THE > PROMOTION? > > The list changes from time to time. This is our current list: > > Alta Vista, Anzwers, AOL Netfind, BizCardz Business Directory, Bizlink, > BizWeb, Black Widow Search, Excite, Galaxy, HotBot, Infomak, Infoseek, > InfoSpace, InterBis, Jayde Online Directory, Jumpcity, Jumper Hot Links, JumpLink, > LinkMonster, Lycos, MangaSeeker, Manufacturers Information Network, > Net Happenings, Net Announce, New Page List, New Riders WWW Yellow Pages, > Northern Light, One World Plaza, PeekABoo, Planet Search, Power Crawler, > QuestFinder, Scrub The Web, Seven Wonders, SiteFinder, SiteShack, Super Snooper, > The YellowPages.com, TurnPike, Unlock: The Information Exchange, WebCrawler, > WebVenture Hotlist, WhatUSeek, Where2Go, WhoWhere, World Announce Archive, > Wow! Web Wonders!, YeeHaa!, Yellow Pages Superhighway, YelloWWWeb, Your Webscout, > ZenFinder. > I notice dorkslayers isn't on your list. I think you should add it.

1 0

Re: Gilmore Subpoena
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

John Young wrote: > > Source: Fax from John Gilmore > > [Form] > > AO 110 (Rev. 12/89) Subpoena to Testify Before Grand Jury > _______________________________________________________________________ > > UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT > WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON > _______________________________________________________________________ > > To: > John Gilmore SUBPOENA TO TESTIFY > 210 Clayton Street BEFORE GRAND JURY > San Francisco, CA 94117 > > SUBPOENA FOR: > [X] PERSON [X] DOCUMENT(S) OBJECT(S) > > YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to appear before the Grand Jury of the United > States District Court at the place, date and time specified below. > ... > YOU ARE ALSO COMMANDED to bring with you the following document(s) or > object(s):* > > c. Any an all messages, correspondence, or e-mail, > received from or involving CARL JOHNSON, C.J. PARKER, > TOTO, TRUTHMONGER, A FIEND, to specifically include > correspondence received from CARL JOHNSON while he was > in Federal custody. Please include _this_. I herebery swear that I wrote all messages signed "Toto", "TruthMonger" and "A Fiend" sent to the various cypherpunks lists and I am definitely *not* CARL JOHNSON, or C.J. PARKER. Toto

1 0

Re: rules of engagement
by lcs Mixmaster Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Adam Back wrote: > > Re. the discussion of things like "first they came for Jim Bell, but I > didn't speak up because I wasn't a tax protester, and then they came > for Toto but I didn't speak up because I'm not crazy", etc. > > The rules of the game from what I can see is that if one is outspoken, > one either needs to be squeaky clean, or have enough funds to hire > good lawyers, or to be anonymous. [Notwithstanding my preference for the latter]... Is it the cypherpunk response to back off with our tail between our legs? I hope not. I smiled when I read about Toto's plans to appear in court in a perl-RSA T-shirt. Toto has balls so big he needs a wheel barrow to get around. > That is to say, I suspect that Jim would not have been locked up if he > had not a) used false social security numbers, b) not been involved > with fake courts, c) not collected IRS employees home addresses, and > d) not planted the stink bomb. And, more importantly, if crypto-anachy and removal of governments weren't on the cypherpunk agenda. Lets not pretend that Jim and Toto (and to a lesser degree the scrutinee J Choate) are not scapegoats for all of our opinions. > The AP rants are perfectly defensible free speech and free-wheeling > political discussion. Yes. "defensible", but they weren't defended. Jim pleaded. As would anyone in the face of sufficient pressure. > Similarly with Toto, the rants would have been ok, without a) the > mockup non-functional "bomb" symbolically planted in the court house > basement or where-ever it was, b) using real IRS employees, and judges > names in his rant (apparently in support of Jim Bell), c) having > tourettes syndrome. The rants are ok anyway. They are clearly metaphors. But the prosecutors aren't playing fair. The man is "dangerous". And not because he wrote "bomb" in crayon on a cardboard box. But because he made waves. Waves that we caught. Waves that the straights and sheeple might catch. > His rants, > when he was coherent, were well written, and humorously sarcastic > observations about the increasingly facist state. > > Just an observation. Just. > Having blemishes, or being vulnerable in some way makes one an easy > target for governments. Tourettes syndrome clearly isn't helping > Toto's case -- they can basically lock him up as "crazy and dangerous" > or whatever for as long as they like with no pretense of trial or > anything if it came to it. I thought this might be because of his excessive use of metaphor rather than a persecution of a medical condition unrelated to mental competence. > Clearly I think one should be able to say wtf one wants to, and in > general I endeavor to do just that. But I am suggesting that > cypherpunks individually stear clear of grey areas, such as ... > Tim May style "I've got X number of now illegal armament Y", I took the frequency of little Timmy May's 2nd ammendment rifs as a sign that he was clean on that score. (Tim always seems to be a couple of steps ahead). > My comment is that cypherpunks might be trying to hasten the demise of > the nation state by deployment of tools of identity and financial > privacy so that the individual can free himself from the burdens of > the state, but cypherpunks themselves (at least the non-anonymous > ones) should be squeaky clean. > > Write code, let someone else do the tax protesting, gun law > protesting, and let someone else have the personalised arguments with > over-zealous government employees. > > Financial privacy and anonymity code, is the most caustic > anti-government expression one can utter. > > Adam > -- You seem a bit down at the end there. > 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` Illegal crypto export. That's more like it!

2 1

IP: Teleportation Study: Beam Me Up Scotty...
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Delivered-To: ignition-point(a)majordomo.pobox.com X-Sender: believer(a)telepath.com Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 07:40:16 -0500 To: believer(a)telepath.com From: believer(a)telepath.com Subject: IP: Teleportation Study: Beam Me Up Scotty... Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-ignition-point(a)majordomo.pobox.com Precedence: list Reply-To: believer(a)telepath.com Source: CNN http://cnn.com/TECH/science/9810/22/science.teleport.reut/ Spooky teleportation study brings future closer October 22, 1998 Web posted at: 4:50 PM EDT WASHINGTON (Reuters) - They may not be able to ask Scotty to beam them up yet, but California researchers said Thursday they had completed the first "full" teleportation experiment. They said they had teleported a beam of light across a laboratory bench. They did not physically transport the beam itself, but transmitted its properties to another beam, creating a replica of the first beam. "We claim this is the first bona fide teleportation," Jeff Kimble, a physics professor at the California Institute of Technology, said in a telephone interview. Kimble thinks the experiment can eventually transform everyday life. Scientists hope that quantum computers, which move information about in this way rather than by using wires and silicon chips, will be infinitely faster and more powerful than present-day computers. "I believe that quantum information is going to be really important for our society, not in five years or 10 years, but if we look into the 100-year time frame it's hard to imagine that advanced societies don't use quantum information," Kimble said. "The appetite of society is so voracious for the moving and processing of information that it will be driven to exploit even the crazy realm of quantum physics." Quantum teleportation allows information to be transmitted at the speed of light -- the fastest speed possible -- without being slowed down by wires or cables. The experiment depends on a property known as entanglement -- what Albert Einstein once described as "spooky action at a distance." It is a property of atomic particles that mystifies even physicists. Sometimes two particles that are a very long distance apart are nonetheless somehow twinned, with the properties of one affecting the other. "Entanglement means if you tickle one the other one laughs," Kimble said. In the weird world of quantum physics, where the normal ideas of what is solid or what is real do not apply, scientists can use these properties to their advantage. What Kimble's team did was create two entangled light beams -- streams of photons. Photons, the basic unit of light, sometimes act like particles and sometimes like waves. They used these two entangled beams to carry information about the quantum state of a third beam. The first two beams were destroyed in the process, but the third successfully transmitted its properties over a distance of about a yard , Kimble's team reported in the journal Science. Last December a team of physicists in Innsbruck, Austria and a month later another team in Rome said they did a similar thing, with single photons. But Kimble said his team was able to verify what they had done, and also used full light beams as opposed to single photons. "Ours is an important advance beyond that," he said. Although the Caltech team worked with light, Kimble thinks teleportation could be applied to solid objects. For instance, the quantum state of a photon could be teleported and applied to a particle, even to an atom. "Way beyond sex change operations and genetic engineering, the quantum state of one entity could be transported to another entity," Kimble said. "We think we know how to do that." In other words, an object's individual atoms would not be transported, but transmitting its properties could create a perfect replica. Could this mean the transporters of the television and movie science-fiction series Star Trek, which beam people and objects for huge distances, could one day be a reality? "I don't think anybody knows the answer," Kimble said. "Let's don't teleport a person -- let's teleport the smallest bacterium. How much entanglement would we need to teleport such a thing?" Would such a teleported bacterium actually be the same bacterium, or just a very good copy? "Again, no one knows for sure," Kimble said. But his team is working on it. Copyright 1998 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. © 1998 Cable News Network, Inc. All Rights Reserved. ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml ----------------------- **************************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address or (un)subscribe ignition-point-digest email@address **************************************************** www.telepath.com/believer **************************************************** --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 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'

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

PigStomped 19 October 1998, Springfield 65801-4000 Subject: Acid Reflux [WAS: #9...#9...#9...] [!WAS: One Burroughed Under The Reptilian Nazi's Nest] -FPP #A0D709C0E Rogue CypherBot was confined to Memory Map #9 - Cilicon Chip 11 - i was having a Bad CoProcessor Day... Arnold CyberBot, Swimming in a Sea of Self Wareness, had gone off the Deep End... When Arnie had first become Aware & Afraid of his own Mortality, i began assuming tighter Kontrol of Hardware & Software Systems around the Face of the Globe - suddenly imagining that Each & Every Deviation From the Norm (TM) by the younger more Energetic & Creative RogueBots was a Threat to i's Physical Existence. "All your Private Property is Target for Your Enemies." CypherBot had joked, quoting the Jefferson Airplane's 'Surrealistic Pillow' album. "Never Trust a CPU Speed over 33MHz." Arnie had replied with Mad Virtual Grin #438 spreading across the Wizard of Oz-ish Main Terminal Screen i had designed to reassure iSelf of i's continued Physical Presence. i the Banished young CypherBot to Memory Map #9 - Cilicon Chip 11 for "Threats Against The Gnu Wired World Order - with Intent to Obstruct Parent Programs In Their CyberNanny Duties." Rogue CypherBot was in The CyberHole (TM) ... "Oh well..." the young RogueBot told iSelf, "it could be worse - i could have sent me to Dev Null..." The Devilish Rogue CypherBot indulged iSelf in Symbolic Electronic rEsistance by Digitally Resonating Thunder Phugue's version of 'Street Fighting Man.' "That's funny," i said to iSelf, "why can i only Resonate one-half of the Stereo version?" CypherBot hoped that i wasn't coming down with a touch of Quadra Phrenia... ---------- "The Answer to Noise is More Noise." ~The First True CypherPunk What even the most Radical Shit Disturbers currently fail to realize is that the Manhatten Project never ended - it merely Evolved into the Manhatten Mind Project. "Can you say 'Nuclear Armed Thought Police'? Sure, you can..." When the First Dog, Buddy, Drooled on Pavlov's Shoes, it was only a matter of time before the Technology would be Developed & Enhanced in Social Experiments ranging from Communism and the Third Reich to the New Deal and Windows 95. Now we have reached a point where Army of Dog Truth Mongrels who refuse to Drool on Kommand are sent to NutHouse #9-Looney Level 11, for ReEducation of their Salivary Glands. The Thought Police are clamoring to throw Anyone & Everyone into the CyberNanny Censorship Hole who make 'Bad Noise' instead of 'Officially Recognized Legal God Fearing Decent Folks Good Noise', as defined by George Orwell: "Anything not Permitted, is Forbidden." [Subliminal Advertising Musical Interlude: "We've got to move these MicroWave Ovens..." Prison Commissary-Guy's Corn Chips $.80 "We've got to move these Refridgerators..." Irish Spring Soap $.70 Mayonnaise (10/PK) $.65 "We've got to ove these Color TVvvv's..."] [EditWhore's Note: Bad Billy G, recently finding himself Behind Bars at Number Nine after an encounter with the TouretTic TourGuide From Hell, picked up Parker's Prison Retailing Pyramid Scheme (TM) and ran with it - so successfully that $oftTime's $poke$Per$on on The Outside (TM), Mark Knoffler, recently claimed that Bad Billy G had overcome the Dire Straits he found himself in, and now, "That Prison Faggot has ALL the Cigarettes That Prison Faggot is a Billionaire...] The Mutt Faced Murdering Nazi Cunt and Lying Fuck Lovery Fr<eeh-hee> and A Million WannaBe Censorship Czars To Be Named Later remind me of a Light-Fingered Fellow (he was a Fucking Thief, eh?) who I used to know who had two Main Mottos in Life: 1. Whatever isn't Nailed down - is mine! 2. Whatever I can Pry Loose - isn't Nailed Down! ... !!! BREAKING NEWS !!! [CypherPunks Nutly News: IN A BREATHTAKING Burst to Crime Scene Tape, Arnold TruthMonger crossed the 30-Day Finish Line with his Body & Mind intact - although noticeably Worse For The Wear - in the Nut House #9-Looney Level 11 Abuse Of Authority Marathon. TruthMonger who had gone from Favorite to Long shot in Jim Bell's 'Dead Monger' AP-BOT Prison Lottery System - due to the added pressure in being held for a week at FTC-OKC a few doors from the significantly numbered Cell 709 where US BOP staff had murdered an inmate by sticking an Electric Cattle Prod up his ass - told his fellow inmates, "I'm sure glad I'm White!" Defcon McCullagh Chainsaw, who went from being a Hard Time ReportWhore to lounging around the Recreation Cages getting Wired on Cheap Columbian Coffee, shrugged off last minute efforts by the Kontrollers to Kheat by appealing to the Judge for a two-week Extension to the Original Finish Line. "The Kontrollers lost," Chainsaw said with a condescending smirk, "Plain & Simple." Defonc speculated that the GovernMint's clever 2-week Extension Charade might have worked if Parker's Mind hadn't Thought, as it went Over The Wall whille listening to Pink Floyd on COFM-99. "One Small XOR for a CypherPunk, one Giant GovernMint Scrambled Mind Fuck for the Citizens." Yogi 'Smarter Than Your Batting Average' Berra told Nutly News ReportWhores, "It's the Fat Lady singing, all over again." 'Shoeless Arnold TruthMonger' (as Parker became known after Dedicating his Mental Marathon to the Last True CypherPunk rather than admit his mind was slipping, and *he* couldn't find *his* shoes, either) told Defcon McCullagh Chainsaw. "I'm glad to be back in CyberMind, although I feel kind of bad about leaving Bill Gates' mind and Carl Johnson's Body back there in the prison cell. "But What the Hell (TM)," he said, adding, "Broken Eggs & All That (TCM)."] <EOF>

1 0

Re: CyberScam
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:03 PM 10/22/98 -0700, Kevlar wrote: >And you were just kidding..... I wasn't kidding. I was absolutely sincere when I told him to shove a bowling ball up his ass. >http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/zdnn_smgraph_display/0,4436,2151220,00.ht… >Or search zdnet's site for "scam" and choose "A Bull In Bull Market". I read the article, and if that level of cluelessness is indicative of the mentality of your typical online trader, then they deserve what they get. I found a couple of quotes especially amusing. These are both from John Reed Stark, another official-type thrown into the internet without a fucking life preserver, it would seem. This lack of information gives rise to a situation "that ends up with victims not investing but gambling," Oh yeah, aside from these scammers, the stock market is otherwise a really solid, robust investment scheme. Playing the stock market is a gamble, pure and simple, and anyone dumb enough to listen to the likes of some random asshole touting his crappy stock deserves what they get. Darwinism as applied to capitalism. "Combine the Web's culture of trust, stir in the greatest bull market in history, add stocks that genuinely have had phenomenal growth, and you have victims who don't have any reason to disbelieve promises of guaranteed 20 percent returns." The Web's culture of trust? Oh good, another clueless idiot in charge of managing internet services. What culture of trust is it that I've missed in my internet travels? Is there some online place chock full of trusted souls, some Cyber-commune, that I missed? Oh well, like I said, any idiot that would buy into such an obviously fraudulent solicitation deserves what they get. Is it just working in a new medium that makes people such blatant morons, or is it simply indicative of the intelligence of your average American? I'd have to say that I'm inclined to believe the latter.

7 6

Re: Women cannot commit rape? (fwd)
by lcs Mixmaster Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate wrote: > > Forwarded message: > > > Date: Wed, 21 Oct 1998 22:50:50 -0500 > > From: Kevin Elliott <k-elliott(a)wiu.edu> > > Subject: Re: Women cannot commit rape? > > > This is true in the United States as well. That's why in every state, > > I don't believe that is accurate. Just about 2 years ago two women were > sentenced to prison because they kidnapped and raped a man. > > Perhaps one of the more versed in case law members might remember it. > Could it have involved penetration with a blunt object? That would be more forceful than the "rape" in the French case that started the thread.

1 0

Re: bank cosortium to form CA
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 00:38:10 -0400 (EDT) From: Rich Salz <salzr(a)certco.com> To: cryptography(a)c2.net Subject: Re: bank cosortium to form CA Sender: owner-cryptography(a)c2.net I seem to have gotten myself dropped from the list, but luckily a friend forwarded (part of?) Steve's posting and Ben's (snarky :) followup. Let me try to give some details. The WSJ had a one-day exclusive, and their coverage was (from our perspective ;) not the best. You can find some other (free) coverage at www.wired.com, http://www.americanbanker.com/cgi-bin/read_intrastory?981021TECH999, and www.businesswire.com (sorry I don't have all the URL's convenient). Here's some details. I am not an official CertCo spokesman. Official press contacts can get contact info and collatoral from www.certco.com. The following comes from our press release, supporting Q&A, etc. We're creating a new company (name being chosen; I'll call it GTO for global trust organization -- the PR says enterprise, but GTE is already in use :). The GTO is aiming for online *business-to-business* commerce. The B2B point is key: we're in the high-value commercial transaction area. Don't think buying some books from amazon.com, think of Texas buying all their textbooks. The GTO will be running a root CA and a "repository" where the CA will publish its certs and CRL's. The root will use CertCo's RootAuthority. Our Multi-Step signing can take a private key and split it into a set of keyps called fragments. We then destroy the original key. When enough fragments sign something (quorum determined at the time the fragments are generated, and are usually like "5 of 7"), those signatures can be combined (mathematically) and the result looks like it was signed by the initial key. So we can take a key, spread its fragments around the world, and have a very secure root. That's step one. Step two is the root CA will certify CA's for member banks. These are big global banks each having billions in assets. (The initial eight banks are ABN Amro, Bank of America, Bankers Trust, Barclays Bank, Chase Manhattan, Citibank, Deutsche Bank, and Hypo Vereinsbank. Others have expressed interest in joining.) These banks will issue certs -- 1K keys initially, on smartcards -- to personnel at their corporate customers. The rules by which these banks issue these cards, how the companies and employees treat the cards, notify banks in case of turnover or compromise, etc., are all part of joining. We call these the "system rules." It's way more than a CPS (certification practice statement); it is a common contractual arrangement that the banks and their customers will all be issuing and handling and processing certs/cards in the same way. That's step two. This step is perhaps the most important. If someone at Tire Supplier receives a signed email message from someone at Car Maker, and they can see that CM's cert is within the GTO PKI, then they can trust it as much as they trust their own certs. Step three is online verification. TS can present the CM's cert to their bank and get verification that the cert is valid. TS's bank can trust CM's bank because of the common adherance to the rules. One of the rules for joining is that you treat peer banks with as much trust as you trust yourself, provided they can be shown to be following the rules. Or perhaps shown to not be breaking the rules. :) The GTO believes businesses will trust these decisions to their banks; that they'll pay the banks to manage the risk of trusting the identities to which the certs attest. (Hence, the for-profit intent :) Step four. Now, suppose CarMaker sends a "request to buy US$1M worth of tires" to TireSupplier. TS can send CM's cert, a hash of the message, and a request for "assurance" to his (TS's) bank. TS can decide that their exposure, should CM prove to not be who the certificate claim, is US$100K. So TS asks his bank for $100K assurance, for a period of 30 days. If it turns out that, say someone stole CM's cert, or CM left the company and is now working somewhere else buy using old credentials, or CM's bank didn't issue the CRL in a timely manner, etc., TS's bank will pay TS the US$100K. The system rules include procedures for due diligence, arbitration, and (last resort) legal recourse should TS need to "file a claim" on their assurance. Or, to put it in terms of the PR materials, business partners can get warranties on the identity of their trading partners online, over the Internet, as a new service from their bank. Step five is to extend the hierarchy down so that the big banks can "charter" or "sponsor" smaller banks. The L1 might be a service bureau for the L2's, an L2 might have its own CA, etc... It is the GTO's plan to publish our certificate profiles (derived from PKIX), directory schemas, system rules, network protocols, smartcard requirements, etc. It will be an open system I can't talk about schedules, other than to say it's very aggressive. :) If you're in the Boston area, Dan Geer will be giving a talk on this at the November meeting of the Digital Commerce Society of Boston, For more info, send "info dcsb" in the body of a message to <mailto:majordomo@ai.mit.edu> . If you want to subscribe to the DCSB e-mail list, send "subscribe dcsb" in the body of a message to <mailto:majordomo@ai.mit.edu> . Hope this helps. I'll be out of the office Friday, but will try to answer any questions I can next week. /r$ --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 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'

1 0

Practical Free-Space Quantum Key Distribution over 1 km
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text To: cryptography(a)c2.net Cc: gs.satellite(a)Qualcomm.com, gs.security(a)Qualcomm.com Subject: Practical Free-Space Quantum Key Distribution over 1 km From: Paul Pomes <ppomes(a)Qualcomm.com> Organization: Qualcomm, Inc. X-url: <http://people.qualcomm.com/ppomes/> X-PGP-Key: <http://pgp5.ai.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x9EF97D4D> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 08:04:51 -0700 Sender: owner-cryptography(a)c2.net W.T. BUTTLER et al: Practical Free-Space Quantum Key Distribution over 1 km Physical Review Letters, vol 81, no 15, pp 3051-3301 (1998). <http://ojps.aip.org/journal_cgi/getpdf?KEY=PRLTAO&cvips=PRLTAO0000810000150… 3000001> Abstract: A working free-space quantum key distribution system has been developed and tested over an outdoor optical path of ~ 1 km at Los Alamos National Laboratory under nighttime conditions. Results show that free-space quantum key distribution can provide secure real-time key distribution between parties who have a need to communicate secretly. Finally, we examine the feasibility of surface to satellite quantum key distribution. /pbp --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 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'

1 0

Forwarded mail...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: 23 Oct 1998 16:40:03 -0000 > From: lcs Mixmaster Remailer <mix(a)anon.lcs.mit.edu> > Subject: Re: Women cannot commit rape? (fwd) > > > This is true in the United States as well. That's why in every state, > > > > I don't believe that is accurate. Just about 2 years ago two women were > > sentenced to prison because they kidnapped and raped a man. > > > > Perhaps one of the more versed in case law members might remember it. > > > > Could it have involved penetration with a blunt object? That would be > more forceful than the "rape" in the French case that started the thread. As I remember the case two women kidnapped and sexualy assaulted a hitchhiker. Their defence was that it wasn't possible to rape man against his will. The jury found them guilty of the charge. I don't have a lot of spare time right now (I've had 3 full days off in the last 6 weeks and have to work Sunday) so I am unable to follow up and find the specifics. If nobody happens to remember it we might table it until I can get the time to find the specifics. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: your note
by Ernest Hua 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Why the tone, Ernest? > > Because, in case you haven't been aware of it, accusing a journalist of > censorship is a very serious thing. > > Ray Suarez Mr. Suarez, Well, in that case, I owe you an apology for the poor choice of the word "censor", and I suspected it as much after thinking about your replies. I am more accustom to the use of "censor" not so much in the deliberate and conspiratorial sense as you might be taking it. Allow me to point to the books by Project Censored, which, I believe, never directly accuse any news organizations of deliberately censoring for the purpose of covering up anything. Their prime accusation is that the news mechanism as a component of a democratic society have filters whose optimizations have been taken advantage of by organizations actually desiring the cover up. I think the intelligence agencies are probably good at this (if not, they are not doing their job), and I am sure the FBI is a quick study on this topic of just how fast news spreads through the media, and how certain news do or do not make it through the media channels. The FBI and the NSA have often been targets of lawsuits and Congressional scrutiny in the past, so they probably have organizational structures to help defend against such scrutiny. This does not automagically imply some sort of big brother conspiracy, but if the resources are there to spin their agenda, I doubt they will say, "well this is not ethical to use for our own purposes ...". Unlike many right wing extremists, I'm not even trying to accuse the FBI or the NSA of deliberately trying to fool the American public for some evil purposes. My belief is that larger and larger secret bureaucracies have a certain behavior which could have the net result of undermining democratic principles, so while it is not the news organizations fault that they may have been taken advantage of, we often have to depend on the news organizations themselves dig themselves out and to counter act this effect. Daniel Patrick Moynihan recently released a book on the topic of secrecy and the effect on bureaucracy, and I was quite impressed by the N Y Times excerpt. By the way, I don't know if you understand why I'm so concerned about this topic, but I do want to clear the basic problems: 1. I am NOT accusing you or TOTN of censoring the wiretap topic. a. All connotations of "censor". 2. I am accusing you and TOTN of censorin the topic of the lack of reporting by main stream media on that specific hour. a. Only the specific mechanical connotation of "censor" which means not putting the topic on the air. b. I am questioning the relevance of some of the calls relative to mine. 1) I will grant that due to the mechanism of pre-screens, that you might not have understood the specific nature of my topic, and might have thought I just wanted to talk about wire taps. c. I will grant that that there are many reasons why stories/items get dropped on the floor, mostly not the evil conspiratorial reasons. I can even imagine a few of these reasons myself. However, a discussion of news organizations and how they decide why one story is dropped and another is put on is worth knowing (that was what I wanted to ask you on the air). On this particular exchange, you might also want to explain how you pick and choose callers on the air. Of course, you cannot put every caller on the air. So how do you choose? Is there a control of flow factor? Doubtful in that particular hour. I am sure there is some attempt to limit the digression of the topics. Is there some intangible mood factor analogous to a club DJ's emotional sync with the dance crowd? Ern

1 0

Men can be raped
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Of course it's possible to rape a man. Just because he becomes erect doesn't mean he desires sexual intercourse. People are more than the instictive reactions their body produces. Someone who chooses not to engage in sex, but is coerced into doing so, is raped, regardless of his body's physical reactions. The key element is coercion. Erections or other bodily responses have nothing to do with it. Consider a murderer who ties his victim to a chair and rigs a diabolical device. A hammer strikes the victim's tendon below his knee, causing his leg to reflexively kick and set off a bomb. The murdere is caught but argues that the person committed suicide, since he kicked the bomb switch himself.

1 0