December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

TSB_pbs
by adwestro＠ouray.cudenver.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - From The Economist, Oct. 7, p.78: TSB, a British bank, held a launch party in August at Cyberia, London's first "Internet cafe", for its Digital Trip home page, aimed at attracting student customers. I assume this refers to TSB Bank Channel Islands Limited, 8 David Place, PO Box 597, St. Helier, Jersey (NOT Joisey!), JE4 8XW. When I last checked (a couple of years ago), TSB offered Offshore Premium Accounts -- interest-bearing checking accounts that pay 11.5 percent interest per annum on a minimum deposit of 2000 pounds, as well as providing a VISA debit card. TSB is said to be the tenth largest bank in the world. Quite an interesting addition to the Net...anyone checked out their home page? BTW, the American PBS "Frontline" show on Tuesday, Oct. 31 (in the Denver area, anyway) will discuss "High Stakes in Cyberspace -- the business rush to stake claims in cyberspace, otherwise known as the Internet, may someday create a cyber-revolution." Hopefully it will be a worthy successor to their show about Caribbean money laundering, though the blurb's conflation of cyberspace with the Internet is not encouraging... Alan Westrope <awestrop(a)nyx10.cs.du.edu> __________/|-, <adwestro(a)ouray.cudenver.edu> (_) \|-' 2.6.2 public key: finger / servers PGP 0xB8359639: D6 89 74 03 77 C8 2D 43 7C CA 6D 57 29 25 69 23 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMIDwuFRRFMq4NZY5AQECOgQAm1FJQyni4U7ulKvT8Zd3P1pEBieKXeqo rxaCA14K/MhaTnaCcWix0vvPYzFjgnspxUpc7PtuP46w++ilrfZiYDM1BZ1+HpkZ MZaSiH8W+cUkQAxDTuAVNve9PM8zj8Qv+CQ7mABqLu5+f93GubUQtMElEmikR69J kL/2ewMllI4= =O2Py -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

DUM_not
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

10-15-95. NYPaper, longish Page One semi-rehash, semi- disinfo of LATimes of July 23: "Emerging Role For the C.I.A.: Economic Spy." During the Clinton Administration's tense negotiations with Japan last spring Mickey Kantor received inside information gathered by the C.I.A.'s Tokyo station and the electronic eavesdropping equipment of the N.S.A. "But in the end, did it help much? Beyond some valuable detail we could not have gotten elsewhere, did it tell us much about which way Hashimoto would go? It would be hard to make that case." Many Administration officials suggest that the agency simply does not have the talent for such analysis. "The best graduate students don't go there and who can blame them?" said one of the Administration's top economic officials. "And yet, when you sit in a meeting, the views of the C.I.A. are often given more weight than the Council of Economic Advisors. Go figure." Allan E. Goodman, a former C.I.A. official and academic dean of Georgetown University's School of Foreign Service, said "We don't have the sources, we don't have the expertise. To develop an understanding of the people who trade currencies, their motivations, their lifestyles, you'd have to send your people to Harvard, Stanford and Wharton for years. Currency traders keep secrets very, very well, and to penetrate that would be the equivalent of cracking all the Japanese codes in World War II." DUM_not (14 kb)

1 0

bouncing mail
by s1018954＠aix2.uottawa.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can anyone anyone get in touch with the bouncing mail guy, Jason P Jones <jonesj(a)ala.usmc.mil> ? He needs to wipe that mailbox of his. ( I just tried to unsub him, I guess it's reassuring you can't get away with it without forging headers, which I can't do.) rom owner-cypherpunks Sun Oct 15 05:19:24 1995 Return-Path: <owner-cypherpunks> Received: by toad.com id AA09946; Sun, 15 Oct 95 05:19:24 PDT Received: from panix.com by toad.com id AA09937; Sun, 15 Oct 95 05:19:20 PDT Received: (from frissell@localhost) by panix.com (8.7/8.7/PanixU1.3) id IAA25104; Sun, 15 Oct 1995 08:19:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 1995 08:19:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Duncan Frissell <frissell(a)panix.com> To: Alan Westrope <adwestro(a)ouray.cudenver.edu> Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: TSB_pbs In-Reply-To: <BBPgwkkAsmsM085yn(a)ouray.cudenver.edu> Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.951015081704.22935B-100000(a)panix.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk On Sun, 15 Oct 1995, Alan Westrope wrote: > I assume this refers to TSB Bank Channel Islands Limited, 8 David > Place, PO Box 597, St. Helier, Jersey (NOT Joisey!), JE4 8XW. > No, I would assume that it refers to the parent company TSB on the mainland UK. It has an extensive branch network in the UK. DCF

1 0

Re: Yes, indeed the PA law is for real!
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Historic comment: ... "You read it here first." Nostradamus said it way before you. This kind of dredging up old posts in order to claim certain foresight intellectual properties is kinda silly. Watcha gonna do, patent it? It's gonna rain tomorrow. You heard it here first. Of course, I don't plan on doing anything about it other than tell you all...

1 0

No Subject
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I want to see Netscape succeed, but when you hear about things like product >being released on the net without warning those people responsible for >supporting it, bug reports being ignored so a ship date can be made, and the >like, it makes you really wonder. I am finding problems with 2.0b1 that >could have been found just by using the product for a couple of days! Most >of the problems I have seen with Netscape could be solved with better >communications between departments within the company and some strong >testing procedures. > I totally agree with this. There are an awful lot of GPFs I've been experiencing with 2.0 that I never experienced with 1.2, and I am still trying to figure out that cause. The first one happened like 5 minutes after I ran the program whilst it was loading the Netscape homepage! Another irritating one that should have been caught is the download time indicator. When I download a file, the estimated time taken is shown in hours! These trivial problems are really quite inexcusable, and should've been caught with good quality assurance before it even went out the door.

1 0

ORW_lea
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

10-15-95. NYPaper: "Law Enforcement and Privacy Interests Clash on Technology." The legality of mobil data terminals, which put records at the fingertips of officers in their cars, is in question. Some other machines could well be props in a James Bond movie: long-range eavesdropping devices that, placed in a briefcase, pick up conversations a football field away, or infrared radar monitors that, mounted on a car, can detect weapons on a person a half-mile away. For law enforcement officials, they are new-generation weapons in the war on crime that enable the police to better protect the public, even at the expense of a little privacy. But for civil libertarians, they conjure Orwellian images of Big Brother armed with technologies that are subject to abuse and prone to error. ORW_lea (8 kb)

1 0

Re: Netscape question transformed
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Fri, 13 Oct 1995, Rob L wrote: > Actually, it is not jeapordy that they get from doing so, but some of the > best bug finders and security experts on the planet.. for close to free. Actually, this is a very dangerous game to play, because realistically Netscape gets both, foe and friend. And they risk not only the entire company by taking this action, but they also pose risk to the public They might get someone who responsibly tries to point out an incredibly poor design methodology within ALL of Netscape's code -- the existing installed code base as well as the new beta code. Someone who points out this fatal design flaw to the public and not only to Netscape. Or they might confront someone who announces that numerous pointers have been placed in roulette programs making the Web under Netscape a little more like playing Russian Roulette, rather than safe, fun entertainment. Netscape clients might face a customized plexus, one that delivers dynamic documents. One time in six (if you're running CURRENT Netscape release software) it deletes your WIN.INI. Some machine in Bucharest reaches right out, and wipes you clean. Or maybe it just downloads all of your Quicken files. Netscape is clearly not thinking clearly, here. The issue here isn't "Bugs" and Netscape's so-called Bugs Bounty program. It's a broader question of design methodology and of design process. Does Netscape have a product that has any worth and utility?? Does Netscape have a product which can go through a "Product Evaluation" and then a "Certification Evaluation" as set out in the US Department of Defence's Orange Book?? Or does Netscape's product fail the giggle test. > If hackers can find 10 bugs before final release, it means there is a > good chance that they will fix those bugs before final release. > > Think of it this way.. you practice a new task until you are competent at > it.. beta code is the same.. it is the practice or scratch code that may > be refined into the final product. I'll beg to differ on this one. This is not about hackers, nor is this about crackers. We are not talking about some shareware game program here. Nor are we talking about a word processor, spreadsheet, or draw program. We are talking about a program that has a different mission profile. The standard here is different. A bug in code that makes your system freeze is different than a sloppy design methodology that allows someone to literally take complete control of your machine from any other machine in the world, whether that machine is foreign or domestic. Code which seeks to secure a public network connection, calls for a different programming altitude, than writing common PC code. The tolerances are different, the expectations are different, and the challenge (which was summarized most cogently by a UK friend) distills to a single basic issue. How do you invite a few billion people into your home without having one of them nick the silver?? Evaluation of technical computer security effectiveness is not accomplished by the release of "practice code". It has to start from the ground up. And it is certainly not assisted by having a corporate communications policy that is geared to NOT opening a communications pipe with someone who has attempted to offer constructive technical criticism. Let me make this absolutely clear. It should not be up to non-US citizens like myself to safe-guard US economic security, and protect vital national interests. It is not my job and certainly not my responsibility to protect the international public and Fortune 500 companies from poor security. When that attempt is made however, the effort should not be stymied by Netscape's thinly veiled attempt at information free-loading through public-relations puffery. From this vantage point, Netscape's press releases have the stench of some two-bit penny stock hustler -- something I'd expect from some Vancouver Stock Exchange promoter, rather than the standard expected of a company with a Two Billion USD ($2,000,000,000) market capitalization. After emailing the company more than two days ago, I would hope that a communications channel would have been opened, or alternatively I would have held out a hope that someone from Sun or Netscape might have made an official comment here or publically. I would have expected something other than a stone-walling silence. My Friday the Thirteenth post obviously has people shaken. Clearly, Friday was not the day to comment about this serious problem. There was no utility in causing panic and disrupting trading in Netscape stock, especially in a market that can only be characterized as frothy. But now here we stand, many hours and days later, with the questions raised remaining unaddressed, and with my copyright restriction on my Friday post hereby, and herein explicitly waived. The question is no longer simply a question of whether Netscape can produce quality code, but a new question rises on the horizon. Does Netscape have the management depth and experience to meet daily corporate requirements?? And is the promise of Internet commerce whether put forward by Netscape, Microsoft or AT&T simply a pipe dream. A very risky game, they like to play ... Or since I had already spoken of Dominick Dunne on Friday, perhaps a turn this Sunday to Johnnie Cochrane and his fine choice of words: "Whom will I trust as I will adders fang'd They bear the mandate; they must sweep my way, And marshall me to knavery. Let it work; For tis the sport to have the engineer Hoist with his own petar: and 't shall go hard ..." Alice de 'nonymous ... ...just another one of those... P.S. This post is in the public domain. C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E.

2 1

National Insitute of Justice
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

For more on the NIJ, oft-cited by The NYT as the sponsor of wizard crime fighting devices, see: URL: http://ncjrs.aspensys.com:81/aboutnij.html There are helpful links there to the ever-expanding universe of the terrifying trust-me evangelists.

1 0

I am looking for a way to create a zombie process
by fc＠all.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am writing a paper that, among other things, talks about detecting zombie processes. I find that, due to my systematic hunting down and eliminating of these processes, I no longer have any hanging around for demonstration purposes. How embarassing - I don't know how to create one! Is there anyone who can give me a simple program or set of commands that creates a zombie process? Thanks in advance. -- -> See: Info-Sec Heaven at URL http://all.net Management Analytics - 216-686-0090 - PO Box 1480, Hudson, OH 44236

3 2

Re: Int'l Money Laundering, Part the Second
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:31 PM 10/10/95 -0800, Douglas Barnes wrote: > When you combine these elements, you get a strategy that > permits the US government to confiscate worldwide correspondent > accounts of banks, even if they don't have a US presence. This is doubtless one of the reasons why the US$ is rapidly losing its place as the preferred currency for international transactions. > acceptance of US-dollar negotiable instruments by a bank anywhere > in the world outside of the US renders the bank susceptible > to US criminal jurisdiction in the money laundering field. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: WWW> One If By Congress, Two If By White House
by jgrubs＠left.webcasters.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Path: left!hypnos!ragnarok.oar.net!malgudi.oar.net!kira.cc.uakron.edu!neoucom.edu!news.ysu.edu!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!paladin.american.edu!gatech!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mid.net!news.mid.net!not-for-mail From: Gleason Sackman <sackman(a)plains.nodak.edu> Newsgroups: comp.internet.net-happenings Subject: WWW> One If By Congress, Two If By White House Message-ID: <45lt48$db4(a)shocker.mid.net> Date: 13 Oct 1995 09:29:28 -0500 Sender: infoserv(a)news.mid.net Organization: MIDnet, the Midwest's Gateway to the Global Internet. Lines: 14 Approved: ralphie NNTP-Posting-Host: shocker.mid.net *** From Net-Happenings Moderator *** Date: Fri, 6 Oct 1995 07:51:13 -0500 From: jrw(a)ix.netcom.com http://www.geopages.com/CapitolHill/1783 A website dedicated to Jeffersonian Conservatism, the underlying principle of which is a strong faith in the American people -- the individual citizen -- rather than in an overgrown, cumbersome, impersonal and too powerful bureaucracy. Good links to the entire political spectrum, government, books, etc. The goal is to provoke thoughtful discussion and informed political action.

1 0

Re: Netscape rewards are an insult
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by stripes(a)va.pubnix.com ("Josh M. Osborne") on Sun, 15 Oct 12:0 AM The PR of Bugs Bounty is the aim, as the quick-market-adapter Netscape Chair speechified in FR. Promoting the notion that hackers are earnestly attacking Netscape and reporting its bugs increases its credibility to the stock market porkers. Is that not why dear all-too-attentive Jeff has been assigned duty on this list, feeding peanuts to chimp hackers and champ newshacks?

6 5

Re: Netscape rewards are an insult
by Brad Shantz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Josh Osborne writes: > Note well: Netscape is offering this reward for finding bugs in *beta* > release code. In other words the code that they *know* crashes, code > that they susspect has security releated bugs, code that they don't think > is (yet) good enough to charge a mesely $40 for! Whoops, wrong. BETA does not mean code "they know crashes." In fact it is quite the opposite. This is pre-release code that they are bug fixing. most of the catastrophic bugs, they probably know about. A BETA program is to increase the testing and quality assurance staff to find all of the bugs they DON'T know about. Then, they will have a reasonable amount of time to fix those bugs before release. It makes for a much more stable product. Now, look at companies like SPRY/Compuserve or Logos Research Systems. Both companies I have worked for. SPRY didn't really have a BETA program that amounted to much until Internet in a Box version 1.0. Even that was a lame beta program. Mostly internal use and testing. Logos (a Bible software company) never even had a beta program. As much as I like the guys at Logos, they released version 2.0 recently and it's buggy. Simple cosmetic things like not being able to "cancel" out of the options dialog, or "help" buttons taking you to wrong places in the help file, these are all things that would have been caught in a decent testing environment or a beta program. Microsoft, who I don't necessarily like all the time, has a great beta program. Usually it is several months to a year of intense testing, bug fixing, feature cleanup, usability testing, etc. Their software may not be the best, but more often than not it is stable. Anyway, I see Netscape's move to paying for beta testing will result in a more stable browser, and hopefully more secure software. > If they don't get buried in bad press for this, I would guess that they > may have a diffrent program with a diffrent set reward for finding bugs > in their for-sale version. Why would they get bad press? > Besides nobody said you have to report your bugs to Netscape just because > they gave you free software and offered some sort of reward for finding > bugs. If you don't think the "pay" (including the posability of having > the software fixed) is high enough, don't report the bugs. Once again, Josh, I'm afraid I have to disagree with you on this one. Especially in regards to secure software. I see your point, but... Whether or not you have to report the bugs is immaterial. Netscape is doing a service by making their app available for testing before saying "this is secure." As a person who does business over the net, if I found out that my software was NOT secure, I would seek either a secure update or another company's software. If I'm happy with Netscape's software, I'll report the bugs to improve it's quality. In my humble opinion, improving the software is reward enough. Very few companies have paid beta programs. I'd rather see bugs fixed before release than getting the bad press after release for shoddy workmanship. Sorry this was so long. I didn't mean to ramble. I'll get off my soapbox now... Brad

3 2

Re: Idea Futures
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:40 AM 10/15/95, s1018954(a)aix2.uottawa.ca wrote: >On Sun, 15 Oct 1995, Timothy C. May wrote: > >> (Some of his game theory simulations--on betting markets and >> preference-revealing--were a main inspiration for the "Crypto Anarchy Game" >> I put on at the first Cypherpunks meeting in '92.) >> >How did that work out anyway? What were the rules and usual outcomes? >(Got a file on it anywhere? In your faq?) >Sounds like something that'd be nice to implement over the net. Great way >to get everyone's productivity reduced to zero. (insert wry smile) To educate the folks about the technologies now more common (mixes, digital cash, information markets, data havens...), we simulated on paper these things. For example, certain people were randomly assigned the role of being a "mix" (remailer), with envelopes addressed to them being openable only by them, and with them then remailing to the next destination. The game went on for about 5 hours, amidst much confusion and hilarity, and helped to show people how ecologies of anonymous and pseudonymous entities could interact. --Tim May Views here are not the views of my Internet Service Provider or Government. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

(fwd) CyberSpace Detective Agency
by imschira＠nyx10.cs.du.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Path: mnemosyne.cs.du.edu!hermes.cair.du.edu!carbon!csn!gw1.att.com!gw2.att.com!news.midplains.net!chi-news.cic.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!Empire.Net!news.net99.net!news.crosslink.net!news.vais.net!ppp-b.vais.net!user From: konowe(a)investigator.com (Dr. Lee Konowe) Newsgroups: comp.infosystems.www.misc Subject: CyberSpace Detective Agency Date: Fri, 13 Oct 1995 10:18:14 -0700 Organization: Background Research International Lines: 41 Message-ID: <konowe-1310951018140001(a)ppp-b.vais.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp-b.vais.net Background Research International (B.R.I.) was the first online Detective Agency to serve the Internet. B.R.I. is an affiliate of the FairFax Group, Ltd. a world class corporate agency with offices and client firms world-wide. B.R.I. provides many of the information retrieval services, first offered by the Fairfax Group and makes them available to small and moderate sized businesses. The purpose of this notice is to invite you to visit the B.R.I. home page at http://www.investigator.com/bri Our web page will introduce you to many of the B.R.I. services and explain how a Public Records search firm can assist your company. Perhaps you are: BRI now offers the first resume verification service. This service means employee' resumes can now be verified prior to submission to potential employers. We believe you will be pleased with the many services offered and surprised at the reasonable fee structure provided. As an added incentive, when you decide to use our services, just tell your B.R.I. investigator that you found out about B.R.I. from this newsgroup and receive a 10% discount on your first order. Sincerely, Lee Konowe Director/Internet Operations -- -- http://yakko.cs.wmich.edu/~frogfarm ...for the best in unapproved information To be a skeptic is to refuse to be a victim. "This is my .sig. There are many like it, but this one is mine." Freedom...yeah, right.

1 0

transaction costs in anonymous markets
by Wei Dai 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Some people have predicted (advocated?) frictionless capitalism, which will be brought about by the use of digital technology to reduce transaction costs. However, in anonymous markets these costs may be quite high. Two main components of transaction cost in an anonymous market will be the cost to maintain anonymity and the cost to evaluate reputations. Maintaining anonymity requires that communications be done through special untraceable protocols. The current state-of-art (i.e. RemailerNet) adds several hours of transmition time to each message to achieve effective untraceability. Contract negotiation, for example, becomes very difficult under these circumstances. Untraceable communications also use up more computing and communications resources. Although remailers don't yet charge any money to pass along messages, this is sure to change in the future. Unless the structure of the Internet is completely redesigned, untraceable messages will always cost more than traceable ones, although I hope this cost difference can be reduced through technical advances. The second big part of transaction cost in an anonymous market is reputation evaluation. Of course, normal, everyday transactions require reputations to be evaluated. However, more effort and cost will be expanded on these evaluations in an anonymous market because the effects of misevaluations will be much more damaging. Reputations must be constantly reevaluated, as pseodonyms are easily transfered. Since no good theories of reputation currently exist, these evaluations are difficult to automate. Perhaps theoretical advances can make these evaluations easier and/or more accurate. However there does not appear to be any major research effort in this area. If these costs remain high, but anonymous markets develop regardless, it will be interesting to see how these costs affect the structure of the markets. Will special protocols for contract negotiations develop to minimize the number of round-trip messages? Will each market be dominated by a few big entities because people can't keep track of reputations of many smaller players? But then how will these big entities be organized? Wei Dai

3 2

My chat with Goeff Greiveldinger
by Michael Froomkin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I will be appearing with Goeff Greiveldinger, he of the Justice Dept, at a discussion of commercial key escrow next Thursday in Bethesda. Anyone with fun questions I should throw at him should contact me... Please note that the ostensible topic of this discussion is *commerical* key escrow, not Clipper per se, so I have to be diplomatic.... A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin(a)law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | New address, but it's still just as hot here.

5 7

Re: Netscape question transformed
by Mark Neely 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Alice de 'nonymous wrote.. >> What would you >> rather see? A company makes a beta release for people to attempt to >> break, fixes the bugs, and then releases a better product? Or would >> you rather see a company release a product, tell people it is secure, >> and then get bitten by numerous holes in it? > >Well, I'm not sure that I'd want to make any representations or imply any >warranties whatsoever. Ahhh.... this sort of thinking really lets the user down. The reason Netscape (et. al) has market capitalisation is because they sell their product to us, the users. It is a bit of a worry if software authors can write and then release for sale "buggy" software, and hide safetly behind "I make no warranties etc." To adopt an analogy... would you be happy to buy a car from Toyota (or whoever) if they were allowed to hide behind a warranty disclaiming liability should it break down (or blow up)? Somewhere along the lines, those who make their money selling software should have to be responsible for bugs. Thoughts? Mark Neely ___ Mark Neely - accessnt(a)ozemail.com.au Lawyer, Professional Cynic Author: Australian Beginner's Guide to the Internet Work-in-Progress: Australian Business Guide to the Internet WWW: http://www.ozemail.com.au/~accessnt

1 0

Re: Weekly MixMaster list
by Daniel Miskell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What is the MixMaster list, and what is it for? Apologies on my newbie status. Munster --- _________________________________ *!Cheese Doctrine:!* Though cultured over time, and aged to perfection, one must not yield to produce mold. One must also not belittle themselves by conforming to the "whiz", but melt over the unprocessed ideas of Ghuda. _________________________________ re reported. You don't need a strong authentication technique >if a stolen card is easy to cancel. The card's easy to cancel, but the cash ain't. Credit cards are cleared with the issuer. Digital cash with smart cards acting as transaction observers don't need this. The thief need only transfer the cash from the stolen card to his own, just like he does with regular cash. >Even with a weak PIN system for authentication, you can always provide >a "duress" PIN, right? Sounds like a better choice.

1 0

called as juror (fwd)
by rosaphil 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(Better Living Thru Better Living) *************************************************************************** * SNAIL ME + GABRIELLI'S *ZINFANDEL* (RED) & * * YER ROSEHIPS + * * IF YOU LIKED THIS POST! + *ASCENZA* (WHITE-BLEND)---YUMMY! * *************************************************************************** [Ask Fer *Gabrielli Wine* at yer local liquor store if'n ya want to tend yer rugosa] Let your voice be heard in the campaign to save the life of Mumia Abu Jamal ++++ stop de execution of Mumia Abu-Jamal ++++ ++++ if you agree copy these 3 sentences in your own sig ++++ ++++ more info: http://www.xs4all.nl/tank/spg-l/sigaction.htm ++++ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 3 Sep 95 17:50 EST From: lindat(a)iquest.net To: news(a)aen.org Subject: called as juror From: landers(a)AZStarNet.com (L. A. ANDERSON) IF YOU'RE CALLED FOR JURY SERVICE Don't worry! Be happy! Look at jury service as an opportunity to "do good" for yourself and others. It's your chance to help the justice system deliver justice, which is absolutely essential to a free society. Also, you can do more "political good" as a juror than in practically any other way as a citizen: your vote on the verdict is also a measure of public opinion on the law itself--an opinion which our lawmakers are likely to take seriously. Short of being elected to office yourself, you may never otherwise have a more powerful impact on the rules we live by than you will as a trial juror. However, unless you are fully informed of your powers as a juror, you may be manipulated by the less powerful players in the courtroom into delivering the verdict they want, instead of what justice would require. That is why this "kit" was written--to give you information that you're not likely to receive from the attorneys, or even from the judge. _ Justice may depend upon your being chosen to serve, so here are some "words to the wise" about how to make it through voir dire, the jury selection process: You may feel that answering some of the questions asked of you would compromise your right to privacy. If you refuse to answer them, it will probably cost you your chance to serve. Likewise, if you "talk too much"--especially if you admit to knowing your rights and powers as a juror, as explained below, or that you have qualms about the law itself in the case at hand, or reveal that you're bright, educated, or are interested in serving! So, from voir dire to verdict, let your conscience be your guide. _ Nothing in the U.S. Constitution or in any Supreme Court decision requires jurors to take an oath to follow the law as the judge explains it or, for that matter, authorizes the judge to "instruct" the jury at all. Judges provide their interpretation of the law, but you may also do your own thinking. Keep in mind that no juror's oath is enforceable, and that you may regard all "instructions" as advice. _ Understanding the full context in which an illegal act was committed is essential to deciding whether the defendant acted rightly or wrongly. Strict application of the law may produce a guilty verdict, but what about justice? If the jurors agree that, beyond a reasonable doubt, the accused did act as charged, then "context becomes everything" in reaching a verdict you can live with. Credit or blame for the verdict will go to you, so be sure to ask the judge how you can pose questions to witnesses, so that you can learn the complete context, should the lawyers fail to bring it out. _ When they believe justice requires it, jurors can refuse to apply the law. Jurors have the power to consider whether the law itself is wrong (including whether it is "unconstitutional"), or is being applied for political reasons. Is the defendant being singled out as "an example" in order to demonstrate government muscle? Were the defendant's constitutional rights violated during the arrest? Much of today's "crime wave" consists of victimless crimes--crimes against the state, or "political crimes", so if you feel that a verdict of guilty would give the government too much power, or help keep a bad law alive, just remember that you can refuse to apply any law that violates your conscience. _ Prosecutors often "multiply charges" so the jury will assume the defendant "must be guilty of something". But one of the great mistakes a jury can make is to betray both truth and conscience by compromising. If you believe the defendant is not guilty of anything, then vote "not guilty" on all counts. _ You can't be punished for voting according to your conscience. Judges (and other jurors) often pressure hold-out jurors into abandoning their true feelings and voting with the majority "...to avoid the expense of a hung jury and mistrial". But you don't have to give in. Why? Because... _ Hung juries are "OKAY". If voting your conscience should lead to a hung jury, not to worry, you're doing the responsible thing. There is no requirement that you must reach a verdict. And the jury you hang may be significant as one of a series of hung juries sending messages to the legislature that the law you're working with has problems, and it's time for a change. If you want to reach consensus, however, one possible way is to remind your fellow jurors that... _ Jurors have the power to reduce charges against the defendant, provided that "lesser included offenses" exist in law (ask the judge to list and explain them, and the range of potential punishments that go with each). Finding guilt at a lower level than charged can be appropriate in cases where the defendant has indeed victimized someone, but not so seriously as the original charges would indicate. And, if it will be up to the judge to decide the sentence, it's within the power of the jury to find the defendant guilty of a reduced charge which will, at most, entail the amount of punishment it thinks is appropriate. _ The Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA) hopes the above information helps you to find a verdict that you believe is conscientious and just, a verdict which you can therefore be proud to discuss with friends, family, legal professionals, the community or the media, should any of them want to know what happened, how, and why. If you have further questions, or want a hard copy of this article and others contained in FIJA's "Jury Power Information Kit", phone 1-800-TEL-JURY, and leave your name and address on tape. The office phone number for FIJA National HQ is 406-793-5550.

1 0

MUZ_zle
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

10-16-95. NYPaper: "The New Watchdogs of Digital Commerce." Think of them as a truth squad of cyberspace, these crusading graduate-student hackers from Berkeley. "This is a tradition of unfettered inquiry and curiosity," said John Gilmore, "for hackers, nothing is sacred and everything is subject to verification before you can really believe it." "The hacker ethic is transferring some of its better lessons to the world of commerce," said Steven Levy, "we're groping for a way to use the Net in a way where information will flow freely and people can still make money. The hackers are going to help us find ways to have a more humanized system of commerce." "Will Netscape be the next Microsoft, or the next victim of Microsoft?" Some investors believe Netscape could become "the next Microsoft." Other people believe that Netscape could become the next Microsoft victim, and that the next Microsoft is none other than Microsoft itself. All these new features of Navigator 2.0 send a clear notice to the industry that Netscape has no interest in bowing to the traditional Internet procedures for setting software standards by academic and scientific committee. The Internet has become primarily a commercial medium, where standards are set by whoever has the highest market share. It is a concept Microsoft knows well, and one that Netscape has grasped. MUZ_zle (16 kb)

1 0

Re: Netscape rewards are an insult
by daw＠lagos.CS.Berkeley.EDU 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <9510141153.AA16412(a)all.net>, Dr. Frederick B. Cohen <fc(a)all.net> wrote: > The idea that Netscape (like Microsoft) thinks they can get free > testing services from all over the net by real experts just by offerring > a tee shirt is down right offensive. But (amusingly enough) they can get free testing services from this aspiring student for free just by providing source code. Hey, it's fun! :-) I'm no expert, but you get what you pay for. <grin> [Psst: anyone wanna offer source code to the security modules?] I do think their ``bug bounty'' system is an improvement -- at least they're showing some concern for security, and beginning to admit that outside review of security-critical code is...well...critical. Still, I do agree that they really oughta be employing true experts to carefully evaluate their system, if they wanna claim anything about its security. - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBMIGMAyoZzwIn1bdtAQG98wF9Hr8lU8nXqP50MNwO2SNhsMUg5XhzfcWg 22Tsp8OkYV3F22gUcI6Un1w7peK7ciT5 =hs1A -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: My chat with Goeff Greiveldinger
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <199510152027.NAA23085(a)mycroft.rand.org>, jim(a)acm.org (Jim Gillogly) wrote: > You might try addressing the areas of liability for escrow agents. If > private escrow agents can be sued for loss of information due to theft > or other authorized or unauthorized release of keys, their liability could > be horrendous, depending on the value of the compromised data. The problem of liability should be managable. There are commercial data storage firms (microfilm, etc.) that not only have access to the key for your data, but to the data itself. Still, liability lawsuits have not driven them out of business. I therefore belive that liability issues will not pose a significant obstacle to commercial key escrow. - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBMIGMiCoZzwIn1bdtAQHiJQGAlFhXEVKkf329xCbpWHHXYRkMNJUpbdDZ nrEKcYvu9SVt/wlPLSq97sWukyQPxth0 =c5Wl -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Yes, indeed the PA law is for real!
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>PA Senate Bill 655 was signed into law on June 13, 1995, and it does >appear to make non-logged anonymous remailers illegal. This is rich! The PA legislature just set themselves up for an anonymous e-mail shit-storm from people using *foriegn* non-logging remailers to prove their point. Hold on to your shorts, you guys at hacktic, et. al., you're gonna have some fun now... Cheers, Bob ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf(a)clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<<

1 0

Re: Netscape rewards are an insult
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

All praise to Jeff and his fellow programmers for sharing the struggle to come up with stronger cypto, but, no praise at all to Netscape's front office guys bullshitting the stock holders and speculators. Check the press releases and the speeches to customers and investors. Scott McNealy shocked an audience into silence at a recent plush meeting of high-tech reps with investors by asking, "Anybody telling the truth here?" Then applause broke out for his shrewd beat-em-to-the-punch candor to offset the pervasive cynicism of oft-burned high-tech investors. Big bucks are not made by hard-working programmers but by the marketeers of NASDAQ and NYSE smoke and mirrors used to lure multitudes of unsavvy investors and Internet merchandisers. Netscape's leaders are protecting its major stockholding coldhearts, just like Microsoft, Intel, Motorola, AT&T, and the rest do, or they die in the financial fuck-the- public sharkpool. They couldn't care less about the bottom- of-the-ladder techies who do the grunge work, take the blame for programming mistakes produced under horrendous marketing deadlines, and then are left to commiserate with each other and gnaw knuckles. That's the joy and sorrow of this reading list, the ancient story, talented people working their asses off for sons of bitches who think employees are contemptible, disposable or bribeable for cheap change and backpats -- and easily replaceable on shore or off. Jeff's not alone in this bind.

3 2