December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

No Subject
by logos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You wrote: >Sounds like a heck of a good idea, if: >1. You can ID the bad logic with a high percent of success >(90+ ?). I shall endevor to do my best. Initially, I shall only comment on the most flagrant violations. 90+% should be easy. >2. You can comment/reply for all members fairly, but if> >limited by the large number of postings (and fallacies ?), >give priority to ??? Worst first. >As far as Congress expelling members, are you saying that >the Senate and/or H.O.R. can permanently eliminate a person >elected by the people? Yes, the congress is the sole determiner of the qualifications of its members. >Has this ever been tested? Adam Clayton Powell. Logos out

1 0

No Subject
by jens.melander＠vpress.se 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

unsuscribe cyberpunks

2 1

No Subject
by logos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An anonymous poster wrote: >Timothy C[*] May, a product of a* birth, appeared with >coathanger through his head. >/o)\ Timothy C[*] May >\(o/ I respectfully ask that the author of this post contact me. I am curious about his or her motives and would appreciate it if he or she would address these questions: 1) Why are you attacking Tim May? Has he harmed you in some way? 2) Do you think such posts harm Tim May or help you in some fashion? 3) What do you hope to accomplish by these posts? 4) Do you favor the use of strong cryptography to preserve privacy? 5) If Yes, do you think such posts are constructive to that end? If No, is it your intent that your posts harm the cause of strong cryptography and privacy? 6) Why have you chosen to hide your true identity? Logos out

4 3

No Subject
by logos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Blanc Weber wrote: >Statements like these, with which cpunks retort to each >other all the time, are examples of the ever-continuing >exercise of logic which goes on the list - even if not >formally delineated nor announced as being of such intent >(LOGOS). > >I am glad for the points which "Sir Galahad" brought up, >because they point out the difference between essential vs >non-essential elements in arguments like this one. My warmest thanks to Blanc Weber for 'beating me to the punch' about 'Sir Galahad's' thoughtful analysis. His post is the sort of give and take which focuses debate and raises the level of intellectual discourse. Thank you, 'Sir Galahad' and Blanc Weber. I hope other posters to this list can emulate your examples. Logos out

1 0

Re: "Just call the police"...yeah, right
by logos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 3 Dec 1996, Timothy C. May wrote: > Saying "just call the police" strikes me as being one of > the most absurd things I've ever heard on this list. > > (If I receive a "Logos-gram" warning me I am being > unpolite, you know where it'll go.) The name of the informal logical fallacy Tim May has *not* made is 'argumentum ad hominem' (literally, 'an argument to the man'; attacking one's opponent rather than dealing with the subject under discussion; aka name calling). Having said that, while Tim May has not committed a logical fallacy, neither has he advanced a logical argument. He has merely stated his conclusory opinion of the other person's comment. By itself, it adds little or nothing of substance to the argument. Logos out

1 0

Re: AOL
by AwakenToMe＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

yes.... they did knock off that $3.00 an hour thing. now.. $20.00 unlimited.. I'd hate to do an AOL spam to the list.. but someone asked.. and for all you that say 'get a real internet provider'. Well.. I get ALL the same access most of you do. No shell account...But I can telnet from AOL to one. So there. Nah nah nah =}

1 0

Re: Logos here
by logos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM <dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com> wrote: > LOGOS <logos(a)c2.net> writes: > > > Sovereign collegues, > > You already sound like a jerk. Perhaps you should suspend judgment until you have the opportunity to evaluate the content of my posts. What are you antagonistic to the use of honorifics? > > I am Logos. I have adopted this pseudonym to conceal my > > 'true name'. I want the ideas which I shall be espousing > > to stand or fall on their own merits and not on the basis > > of biases that my name, sex, ethnicity, etc. might otherwise > > sexual preferences... Yes, that and other catagorizations which are irrelevant to the primary focus of this list. > That's right. You lack the decorum to spell either my > first name or my last name correctly. 'Decorum' has to do with polite behaviour. While I was certainly remiss in my hasty spelling of your name, it was not intentional, therefore not a lack of decorum. I do apologize for my negligence. I shall endeavor to spell you name correctly in the future. > "Cypher punks" are a gang of uncouth juveniles I'm not sure I understand the relevance of this comment. Was it made in response to my error in spelling? In any case, it is a good example of the informal logical fallacy of 'over generalization'. As I understand it, there are circa 1000 people subscribed to Cypherpunks. To paint an entire group with such a characterization is both illogical and unfair. I also question your use of the word 'uncouth'. I have seen no posts on Cypherpunks that were any more 'uncultured; crude; or boorish' than those posted by you. I am not saying that uncouth posts have not been made by others, but it is disingenuous for one to judge others by a standard that one does not apply to one's self. > What logic? "Cypher punks" such as Paul Bradley are incapable of > discussing a technical topic (such as Don Wood's IPG proposal) without > putting "(spit)" after Don's name I could be wrong, but I believe this was done as an intentional parody of your own similar posts. If it is illogical for Paul Bradley to do this, does it not follow that is was illogical when you did it as well? It is obvious to me that you are an intelligent person. I am concerned, however, with your apparent intellectual dishonesty. It would appear that you know perfectly well that your posts serve no purpose in the cause of promoting privacy through the use of cryptography. It is hard to draw any other conclusion then that you are intentionally being provocative for the purpose of disrupting the work of this list. If this is not so, I apologize, but how else can we judge your actions? Please step outside of yourself for a moment and give us an honest self-assessment of your behavior and the motives behind it. Respectfully yours, Logos out

2 1

No Subject
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:18 PM 12/3/1996, Matthew J. Miszewski wrote: >At 01:45 PM 12/3/96 EST, Bovine Remailer wrote: >>At 10:50 AM 12/3/1996, Matthew J. Miszewski wrote: >>>Take, for example, the practice of redlining. How are people who live in >>>"bad" neighborhoods supposed to not reveal that information. >> >>You may lend your own money to whomever you wish. If you do not wish >>to lend money to somebody, that is your business. > >I consider it my business also, when people are denied opportunity because >of where they live. Why not simply disagree with me? You do not believe that people may lend their very own money, earned honestly, to anybody they please. If you are ashamed of that, change your mind. If you are not ashamed, proclaim it the world and justify it. >I may also hire whomever I wish, but I would have to pay the >consequences if I happened to discriminate based on a protected class >while doing so. That is the society in which I live. If I dont like >it, I try to change it. Our society is not libertarian. Current policy doesn't matter if we are discussing the wisdom or justice of possible policies. >If I would prefer that form of society I would have to accept that >result. Therefore I choose a balance between liberty and social >justice. It isn't clear to me whether you are discussing policy options or whether one should violate laws one does not like. When an action is illegal, it is still permissible to discuss its legalization. >There are times when government should intervene. I believe it >should be as infrequent as possible, but would not want to live in a >society where disinfranchised people have no possible recourse. Your >choice would apparently be different. Perhaps. In any event, it is important to understand precisely the mechanisms through which people are disenfranchised, if that is in fact what has happened. It is also important to understand the ramifications of phrases like "no possible recourse". To borrow money? It is safe to say that most poor people should be saving money rather than borrowing it. >>It is difficult to understand why redlining should be illegal, to the >>extent that it even occurs. When it does occur, we expect that eager >>entrepreneurs such as yourself will rush in to grab new customers. > >I have not heard serious doubts for a while that redlining occurs. It seems likely that people draw lines around certain areas and decide not to lend money there. What is less clear is that this is unreasonable. There may be a few good credit risks in poor neighborhoods. But, it may just be too much trouble weeding through the others to make it a paying business. It may also be the case that people lending money are behaving irrationally and drawing lines around neighborhoods for simple racial reasons and for no others. There is a word for this: opportunity. Bank of America was built by a man who perceived and exploited one such opportunity. Italian shop keepers in California could not get good banking services for, it turned out, irrational reasons. >I would love to have the financial wherewithal to startup such an >enterprise. Unfortuantely I reside in one such neighborhood. People start businesses without their own capital all the time. If there really is such a great opportunity, go find some rich people. Rich people, like other people, are always happy to hear about ways to make more money. They don't even have to put the money in for a long time. Once you've set up a package of mortgages, you can sell them off on the CMO market which is liquid and, I believe, quite colorblind. The beauty of this scheme is that you can take your profits right away and let other people take on the long term interest rate risk, default risk, and management hassles. This will make your plan easier to sell to investors. You might also look into the microlending market. The idea is to lend poor people small amounts of money (less than $10,000) to start businesses and the like. The default rates are claimed to be surprisingly low. I have my doubts, but it sounds as if you do not. Good luck. >It is difficult enough to raise money to run a small business (and >turned out to be much easier to do without any bank lending at all). >I have talked with people about starting their own banks. In principle, there is no reason at all why banks are the only institutions that can lend money for mortgages. There may be legal impediments, but then we are back to the actual culprit, the government. You might find that opening a bank was easier if all you had to do was take deposits and lend money rather than wading through the morass of legal requirements and paperwork. >When you are working to make sure all the bills are paid it is a bit >difficult to also build an entirely new socio-economic structure. You don't have to build an entirely new socio-economic structure. You just have to find some good credit risks, some people with money to lend, and put them together taking a cut for yourself, unless the government has thrown up some obstacles to this. >>Of course, we hardly live in a free banking era. Most people would >>prefer to bank with a company that respects their privacy. Yet, banks >>are so tightly controlled in the United States that they most often >>will not dare to protect the privacy of their customers for fear of >>regulatory consequences. When the service is provided, it cannot be >>advertised. > >Whom would the service be more readily available to? Who uses tax-havens? >Who has access to swiss bank accounts? Are you insinuating that my local >bank actually has anonymous accounts and just won't tell me? I wish that >people DID value anonymous banking in this country. The fact is they just >don't care. No, actually they do care, they just don't think (correctly) that they can get it easily. I have no idea if your local bank has "anonymous accounts". More probably, they have accounts for which they do not report transactions in excess of $10,000, but which are held by people they know fairly well. This is more common than you might think, and not just for laundering drug money. Tax evasion is widely practiced. >As long as they get short lines or myriads of ATM machines they are >happy. I am largely in favor of banking deregulation. There are >places where I simply draw the line. Utter racism is one of them. But wouldn't the racist banks be hurting their business? Doesn't the punishment go quite closely with the "crime"? If you believe that there is a huge opportunity which the racist banks (i.e., all of them) will not take advantage of, you had better explain why there is nobody anywhere with any capital who wouldn't want to make even more money off poor people. Can it really be the case that 99+% of rich people will run fleeing from such a great opportunity? Oh, and speaking of racism, where do wealthy African-Americans invest their money? >Everyone can now clamor that it just isnt true. Banks have never >discriminated. Its all a big lie. Whatever. Banks have practiced discrimination, and not just against black people. They have been able to get away with it. How? Because the government has protected the banking guild from competition. If opening a bank were as easy as forming a corporation, you would not see much discrimination, I assure you. There is no reason why a bank shouldn't be that easy to open. >(snip) >>You are in the unpleasant position of appealing for protection from >>the very people who have robbed you of your privacy. > >You are right. It is far from a perfect system. We make trade-offs every >day. Appeals to the very people who are exploiting you are not likely to meet with success, are they? >The real world I live in is just not as simple as the Libertarian Wet >Dream(TM). Then it should be fairly easy to refute my points instead making fatuous remarks such as the one above. Red Rackham

1 0

OPE_nup
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Two reports on BSA's letter Monday to Gore opposing crypto export regulations as "headed in the wrong direction." And claims the administration has "significantly backtracked" since announcing the new policy October 1. IBM, MS, et al are withdrawing earlier support for it. Without change, BSA said, encryption export policies will fail as did Administration policy of Clipper. ----- OPE_nup

1 0

Cool Website Check it out
by Wolf 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Check out my cool website at http://members.tripod.com/~wolf16

1 0

Angel and Javier can't unsubscribe!
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:46 PM -0400 12/3/96, Angel Luis Ortiz Ruiz wrote: > > Friend: Thank's for your asnswer but I already do that. The server say >that I'm not in the list but I still reacive the messages. Thankx And then there was another message: At 6:00 PM -0400 12/3/96, Javier Rivera wrote: > Friend: Thank's for your asnswer but I already do that. The >server say that I'm not in the list but I still reacive the messages. >Thankx again! Both seemed to come from "zeen(a)caribe.net". One under the Ruiz name, the other under the Rivera name. And similar messages, both in broken English. I suggest Angel and Javier get together and decide which one of them is the name they or it subscribed under, and use that. Oh, and I have a sneaking suspicion they sent in the increasingly-canonical "unsuscribe" or "unscribe" misspelling. I'm beginning to think that Cypherpunks appeals especially to morons. --Tim May To subscribe to the Cypherpunks mailing list: -send a message to: majordomo(a)toad.com -body message of: subscribe cypherpunks To unsubscribe from the Cypherpunks mailing list: -send a message to: majordomo(a)toad.com -body message of: unsubscribe cypherpunks

2 1

(no subject)
by Wolf 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

unsubscibe cypherpunks

1 0

Go to my website
by Wolf 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Games,links,and a hacking page under construction http://members.tripod.com/~wolf16

2 1

Re: testing
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 3 Dec 1996, Eric Murray wrote: > Phiberelic Phreaker writes: > > > > PhReAkInG iS a ViOlEnT pOiSoN. iT cAnNoT Be ApPlIeD > > eXtErNaLlY tO aNiMaL oR hUmAn TiSsUe WiThOuT sErIoUs InJuRiOuS > > rEsUlTs. It CaNnOt Be TaKeN iNtErNaLlY wItHoUt InDuCiNg VoMiTtInG, > > bLiNdNeSs, AnD GeNeRaL pHySiCaLlY uLtImAtElLy ReSuLtInG iN dEaTh. > > PhReAk ThE pLaNeT--http://www.angelfire.com/ne/PhreakThePlanet/index.html > > > Evidently "PhReAkInG" causes uncontrollable ourbursts of CaPiTaLiZaTiOn due > to horrible shift-key spasms... > > > > PhIbErDeLiC PhReAkEr > > You probably want alt.2600, it'll be more your style. > BTW, you've posted the same fucking message 4 times now. > Plonk. 4 only? We have received over 30 copies of this shit.

1 0

RE: Modulating the FM noise spectrum considered infeasible
by Charley Musselman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:38 AM 12/3/96 -0500, Bob Hettinga wrote: >At 9:52 am -0500 12/3/96, James A. Tunnicliffe wrote: >> At 2:55 am -0500 12/3/96, Timothy C. May wrote: >>> [...]Having said this, Johnson noise makes a superior noise source, > ^^^^^^^ >>> if a physical source is desired. ><snip> >>Yours makes NOISE? Impressive... >> >>In this case, I guess entropy is preferable to atrophy, though. :-) > >Indeed. > >I've found that my Johnson only makes noise with the proper, er, >peripheral, though... Geez, guys, what's this? Pound the physicist day? Johnson noise is the Brownian motion of electrons in an electronic circuit. It is the irreducible noise, often measured in temperature (obvious?) Cheers, Charley "We accomplish what we work at." | Rules from "We get better at what we practice." | childhood.

2 1

RE: IP address
by Internaut 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Even greater than denial of service I believe that there are other threats. Like I just found this file on c2.org (I believe it was) on using an IP address to explore somebody's hard drive under certain conditions. EXPORTING YOUR ENTIRE FILESYSTEM Samba When a Windows for Workgroups or Windows 95 machine shares any folder, bugs in Microsoft's SMB implementation over all network protocols allow access to the whole drive, with whatever permissions the sharename was given. These resources are advertised on a browse list that is made available to anyone on the local network by default, and to anyone on the Internet who knows the machine's IP address. Any user sharing any folder over TCP/IP without a password is opening the whole disk to the whole Internet (for those that can locate the machine) and those with a password should be aware that Windows has no protection against brute force attacks. SMBCLIENT, an ftp-style browser for any UNIX, plus a complete file system for Linux and a few UNIX versions, are available from the Samba web site. Please note that Samba's exploitation of this fundamental bug in Microsoft file sharing was unintentional, and was immediately reported to Microsoft. It could have happened with any client over any protocol. An alleged fix for Windows for Workgroups was quietly released in early October, and Microsoft publicly announced a fix for Win95 on October 20th. It has not been rigorously tested, but it appears to fix the problem. The fix for Windows for Workgroups might not be a complete fix, but rather a patch for one way to exploit the problem. (The release version of Win95 prevented cd .. below the shared folder "root," but not cd ../) The patches and Microsoft press releases (which have been corrected at least twice, but which still erroneously identify Samba as shareware, neglect to credit the people who notified Microsoft of the problem, and neglect to mention that this is a fundamental bug in Windows, not a problem specific to TCP/IP or Samba) are available on Microsoft's Windows 95 Updates Page. The patch only works on the US/English version of Windows 95; at this writing, all non-English versions of Windows 95 are still vulnerable. Troy Varange wrote: > Well, the "danger" of posting a static IP must be even > greater than with a temporary IP. > > Just call the police if you uncover a bonafide case of a > denial of service attack. From what I gather, they take > this shit seriously, and have better capacities of > getting lazy admins to reveal the relevent data in their > logs. I just have this gut feeling that sitting out here without any protection somebody could write something that could hook into a program, or even worse the system (i.e. Explorer). Perhaps my fears are totally unfounded (besides above problem w/ samba), but I have not heard anyone say that one *is* secure. -- Internaut PS: I am running win95 but feel free to answer this question for any os.

1 0

Sorry for the "TWIT" messages
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Well seems I had a rather intresting morining. :) After receiving several "Phreak messages I went to modify my "twit" scripts. Unfortunatly the changes I made caused ~50 "twit" messages to go out. My appologies to anyone who received these messages. Thanks, -- ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of PGPMR2 - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii(a)amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info ----------------------------------------------------------- *MR/2 ICE: OS/2: Logic, not magic.

1 0

Re: more IPG and random numbers
by Clay Olbon II 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:24 PM 12/3/96 -0800, Eric Murray wrote: >I did some more experiments with the IPG stream-cipher >algorithim and random number tests. Since IPG claim that their >algorithim passes chi-square tests of randomness, I found >a chi-square test program. It's written by Peter Boucher >and was posted to sci.crypt in '93 (<2bum8sINN98j(a)roche.csl.sri.com>). Eric, The chi-square test is fairly easy to implement. Understanding the alogrithm and interpreting what the test results mean is as important as a proper implementation. An excellent text that covers testing PRNGs (including, chi-square, KS, runs (up, down, above & below the mean), and autocorrelation) is Simulation Modeling & Analysis, by Law & Kelton. >> Does the 'runs up' (or 'runs down') test with run-length equal to two >> get me anything over the standard chi-square test? I left it in. Yes. It tests yet another aspect of "is the data truly random?" >First I ran the output from my version of the IPG algorithim that I >posted a couple days ago : > >% ./boucher < ipg.out >Occurances: n = 12000000, V=-8375833.71 >Character occurances non-random >Successions: n = 46875, V=62287.82 >Character successions non-random Unless the V is a typo, there is an error in the code. The chi-square statistic can never be negative. >Then I ran output from a test RNG that's basically a loop around random(): > >% ./boucher < myrandom/out >Occurances: n = 3414720, V=213050.62 >Character occurances non-random >Successions: n = 13338, V=1143.41 >Character successions non-random I did considerable testing on random() a while back. It is actually quite good at producing a uniform distribution. There were other problems however (notably autocorrelation in triplets). >Eric Murray ericm(a)lne.com ericm(a)motorcycle.com http://www.lne.com/ericm >PGP keyid:E03F65E5 fingerprint:50 B0 A2 4C 7D 86 FC 03 92 E8 AC E6 7E 27 29 AF I suggest you take a look at the chi-square program and check it for errors. Based on the above observations, I am a little suspicious of your results. As a side note, I tend to test PRNGs using stream lengths that are similar to what I will need in a real use of the generator. I also test multiple seeds, because statistically, some seeds will fail. Of course, testing multiple seeds has its own problems (see the bonferroni inequality) of which most non-statisticians are unaware. I have been curious for a while about developing a statistical test that would examine the expected number of failures of a repeated statistical test. Haven't had the time to look into it yet though - not enough hours in the day. ******************************************************* Clay Olbon olbon(a)ix.netcom.com engineer, programmer, statistitian, etc. **********************************************tanstaafl

2 1

No Subject
by logos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dimitri Vulis wrote: > Lame losers who call themselves "cypher punks" and bend > over for John Gilmore. It is obvious that you, Dimitri Vulis, intend to be disruptive to the operation of this list. I have politely asked you several specific questions about your motives. I am politely asking you again, Dimitri Vulis, why are you unwilling to rationally and politely discuss whatever grievances you have with specific Cypherpunks? I believe you are capable of rational discourse, you allegedly have some academic credentials so you must have a passing familiarity with formal debate. Why are you unwilling to join this discussion with anything other than immature insults? If the facts are on your side, a reasonable demeanor can only enhance your arguments. If the facts are not on your side, why can you not graciously admit you are wrong and withdraw your accusations. I have been unfailingly polite to you. Do you have it within your character to respond to me in kind? Thank you for your attentions to this matter. Logos out

4 4

[NO CRYPTO] Recommended reading.
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The current (Dec 2) issue of Forbes is a special - the cover article is 'Cyber power gives financial markets a veto over the President and Congress', by Peter Huber. This has already been covered in this list. However, the real prize is a second complete magazine included with the Forbes in a plastic bag - the premiere issue of Forbes ASAP: "The Big Issue - Where do we go from here?", which contains 53 essays from various commentators on the significance and future of the techno revolution. I haven't finished it yet, but found the essays by Tom Wolfe on the social implications of neuroscience and Mark Helprin on life's accelerating pace superb. Other authors include: Gingrich, Fukuyama, Nader, Simon Schama, Rifkin, Esther Dyson, Al Goldstein, Buckley, Paglia, Gates, Negroponte,, Richard Leakey, Steven Weinberg, Brokaw, Limbaugh, Huber, and George Gilder, among others. Highly recommended! Peter Trei Senior Software Engineer Purveyor Development Team Process Software Corporation http://www.process.com trei(a)process.com

1 0

Copyright violations
by alzheimer＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bank Mutual Fund Report: December 2, 1996 Consumer Bankers Association Adopts Privacy Guidelines The Consumer Bankers Association has adopted a set of voluntary "best practice" privacy guidelines that it will offer members for use in structuring their own consumer financial privacy programs. This is becoming especially important as banking regulators continue to scrutinize banks' sales practices of investment products and insurance. In a related announcement, CBA said that it has scheduled an information workshop for Dec. 9, where member banks will discuss the implementation of privacy guidelines and other steps that can be taken to improve customer privacy protection. In adopting the guidelines, CBA stressed that customer confidentiality is a long-standing and essential principle of banking; but it noted that developments in technology have made it easier for financial institutions and other companies to collect, store and analyze data relating to their customers. The guidelines are intended to help member banks keep their privacy policies in step with these advances in technology. "Our director of government relations, Marcia Sullivan, worked closely with a committee of Board members for more than a year to design these guidelines," said Joe Belew, president of the Consumer Bankers Association. "All of us are proud that their efforts have put our industry in the forefront of the drive to keep pace with technology in protecting consumer privacy." "We worked closely with privacy, marketing, and database experts to give our industry this blueprint for consumer privacy," said Pam Flaherty, a member of CBA's Board of Directors and a senior vice president of Citibank. "We are confident that these guidelines will enable our members to continue delivering top-quality service and choice, while maintaining the trust of consumers." The announcement of the new guidelines was welcomed by experts who study issues surrounding consumer privacy. "I applaud CBA for taking this first, industry-wide step to further protect customers' privacy," said Alan Westin, professor of public law and government at Columbia. "These guidelines should give consumer bankers a solid foundation on which to base their future privacy protections, especially as they move toward new consumer financial products such as smart cards, money cards, and Internet banking." The CBA workshop on customer information is being conducted in partnership with the Washington law firm of Morrison & Foerster. The one-day session will be attended by retail bankers, compliance managers and database marketing managers of the member banks. "Consumer privacy concerns are an understandable result of the advent of virtual information systems," said L. Richard Fischer, a partner with Morrison & Foerster and author of "The Law of Financial Privacy," adding that, "this is clearly the time to champion such industry-wide guidelines." Houston Chronicle: Sunday, December 1, 1996 Gtech Loss 'Significant'; Penalties Light in Welfare Card Launch BY POLLY ROSS HUGHES Persistent problems with the Lone Star card -- widely credited for cutting food-stamp fraud -- could have cost the company behind it $ 7 million in penalties had state officials not let it off the hook. Despite losing a ""significant'' amount of money during the first year of operation, Transactive Corp., a subsidiary of the controversial lottery operator Gtech Corp., insists that Texas' Lone Star card for welfare and food stamp benefits is a model of success. Likewise, Comptroller John Sharp last month sent out a press release calling the statewide launch a year ago "a successful experiment in welfare reform. '' But a box full of documents obtained under the Public Information Act tells the darker side of what Texas Department of Human Services spokeswoman Jessica Shahin calls the ""yin-yang'' of government contracts. The Lone Star card is the nation's first grand-scale system to issue welfare benefits through a private technology company. The card, which resembles a credit card, replaces food stamps at the grocery store and can be used to withdraw welfare benefits. Use of the card could be expanded to include unemployment insurance, child support collections and other government payments. Texas is also the first and largest state planning to privatize the screening of welfare applicants. State officials intend to arrange a much larger, $ 2 billion contract with a private company to handle that job. But a look behind the scenes of the Lone Star card could prove helpful as the state moves toward more public-private partnerships. The history of the contract shows what can happen when the state tries to do too much too quickly with too little money. Just as the statewide start-up was about to begin, problems with the card's help line for retailers and customers were so bad that DHS officials cut off payment to Transactive for three months. "The Lone Star Help Desk continues to function at an unacceptable level,'' Bob Ambrosino, DHS' director for the project, wrote to Transactive officials at the time. "One thing is quite clear. Transactive is not providing the level of service promised in the contract. '' To make matters worse, the start-up months were marred by several system shutdowns and technical glitches that made it impossible to process Lone Star sales electronically. Several grocers complained of lost sales, and customers went home with less food as a result. Grocers could ring up $ 50 with handwritten vouchers, but only if they got approval via the help line. If they couldn't get through, they could ring up sales of no more than $ 25 -- "extremely risky transactions subject to fraud,'' Ambrosino said. Complaints rolled in. Among them: A grocer in Midland said he tried unsuccessfully all day to get through to the help line. ""He stated the phone rings and rings -- he literally let it ring over 100 times -- and no one picks it up,'' reports say. The Lone Star system shut down for 10 days near Christmas at Big B Food Store in Karnes City, but the help desk repeatedly advised the owner to unplug the machine and try again later. This didn't work. When the grocer finally asked to speak to a supervisor, the help desk hung up on him -- twice. In San Antonio, a retailer said he tried for five months to get a terminal installed. He called the help desk four times seeking the equipment and each time was told it would arrive in a week. It never did. DHS itself complained of several breaches of the contract terms, including Transactive reports that were habitually late, inaccurate and sometimes incomprehensible. ""This was an extremely ambitious project. It had a very short time frame,'' Ambrosino said in a recent interview. "The complexity, the size and the time frame all added to the risk. '' The other obstacle was skimpy funding, stemming from federal and state requirements that the Lone Star card system had to cost the same as the old paper food stamp system. The contract is worth about $ 224 million over seven years. Three bids were made for the contract, coming from Transactive, Deluxe Data Systems with EDS, and Citibank with Lockheed Martin. "All three vendors had a problem with the fact that we had a limited amount of money,'' Ambrosino said. "The bids all came in too high and we had to start all over. '' In the second round, Transactive prevailed. "Absolutely, no question, hands down, it was the best bid,'' Ambrosino said. "It provided the most services for the amount of money that was available. '' One of Transactive's promises that proved decisive in winning the contract, records show, was a superior help line. The outcome of the bidding drew formal protests from Deluxe Data Systems, which argued that Transactive's lack of experience should have disqualified it. Since awarding the contract, DHS officials have documented more than $ 7 million in fines they could have assessed because of Transactive's mistakes, but the agency never did so. Ambrosino said his contract management team chose instead to hold the possibility of penalties over Transactive as an incentive to improve while the system was relatively new. He also said that DHS withheld $ 6 million in payments to the company during the statewide start-up as an alternative to actual fines. As the company made improvements, DHS reinstated the held-up payments in early 1996. However, last week, after inquiries from the Houston Chronicle, DHS decided to fine Transactive $ 345,300 for foul-ups occurring in May, June and July. Assessing the damages had been recommended as early as Oct. 8 in an internal memo to Ambrosino from Hank Dembosky, DHS' Lone Star contract manager. Nearly half of the fine is related to an AT&T network failure on July 11, a problem that set off a chain of negative reactions. Retailers again had to process Lone Star sales manually but couldn't get quick enough authorizations, resulting in lost sales and "associated inconveniences. '' Finally, with a flood of retailers dialing the help line for authorizations, calls from cardholders with questions were abandoned. The fine includes $ 60,000 for slower system response times than the federal government requires, a failure that has occurred every month since the Lone Star card went statewide. Additionally, there is a penalty of $ 135,300 for late or inaccurate reports. Meanwhile, Transactive reported "significant'' losses for the fiscal year ending in February 1996 and predicted more losses to come in the current fiscal year. Parent company Gtech's most recent annual report points to investments exceeding $ 61 million for electronic benefits systems to support its business in Texas and start-ups in Illinois and Mississippi. Transactive received $ 24 million from Texas in the state's fiscal year that ended in August, said Shahin, the DHS spokeswoman. Gtech's report to stockholders says Transactive plans to increase sales, cut costs and line up more business in other states. If the plan fails to turn the losses around ""within a reasonable'' time, the company would consider a joint venture. Failing that, Gtech could be required to recognize a loss on part of its Transactive investment. Transactive is betting on a dual strategy to make its start-up investments pay off, said company spokesman Marc Palazzo. First, it is banking on the Texas contract as a selling point for winning similar contracts in other states. Transactive also hopes to snare more business should Texas expand the government benefits it distributes through the Lone Star card. Transactive won't say how much of its Lone Star investment went toward solving major problems. But Ambrosino said he believes the company was forced to pour millions into perfecting the system. "Certainly there have been problems that have developed during the implementation of this system,'' said Palazzo. ""This is a new system. In a project of this size those issues are to be expected. I think the program is working, and that is the bottom line. ''

1 0

test
by jamie＠comet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

'scuse the spam.... jamie ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ jamie dyer Send empty message to jamie(a)comet.net | Comet.Net | pgpkey(a)comet.net | Charlottesville, Va. | for pgp public key. | (804)295-2407 | | http://www.comet.net | "Linux perceiveth of The Dos, the Dos perceiveth not of the Linux." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

no subject (file transmission)
by captain.sarcastic 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Wed Dec 4 11:22:29 1996 Received: from RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU (root(a)RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU [130.91.195.242]) by mail1.panix.com (8.7.5/8.7.1/PanixM1.0+) with ESMTP id LAA14598 for <kkoller(a)panix.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:22:24 -0500 (EST) Received: from poboxer.pobox.com (poboxer.pobox.com [207.8.188.2]) by RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA13349 for <kkoller(a)RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:23:19 -0500 Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by poboxer.pobox.com (8.7.6/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA24598 for <kkoller(a)sarcasm.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:21:08 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA12176 for cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 04:34:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from uu.psi.com (uu.psi.com [136.161.128.3]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id EAA12170 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 04:34:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA25881 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 96 07:26:15 -0500 Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Wed, 04 Dec 96 06:51:51 EST for cypherpunks(a)toad.com To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: Anyone considered adding crypto into Microsoft Outlook? From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Comments: All power to the ZOG! Message-Id: <9PueyD62w165w(a)bwalk.dm.com> Date: Wed, 04 Dec 96 06:50:07 EST In-Reply-To: <01BBE14A.04580F10(a)crecy.ai.mit.edu> Organization: Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y. Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk "Phillip M. Hallam-Baker" <hallam(a)ai.mit.edu> writes: > It just struck me that it would probably make the most convenient = > platform for integrating cryptography. After all MAPI is an open, = > extensible API allowing ready access to the email "hooks" necessary. The = > integration of an address book with the email system makes it very easy = > to add public key information into a person's entry. Yes, this would be feasible. Problem is, "cypher punks" don't write code. They only write flames and postmaster complaints. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

[Noise]RE: Modulating the FM noise spectrum considered infeasible
by James A. Tunnicliffe 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Charley Musselman writes: >At 10:38 AM 12/3/96 -0500, Bob Hettinga wrote: >>At 9:52 am -0500 12/3/96, James A. Tunnicliffe wrote: >>> At 2:55 am -0500 12/3/96, Timothy C. May wrote: >>>> [...]Having said this, Johnson noise makes a superior noise source, >> ^^^^^^^ >>>> if a physical source is desired. >><snip> >>>Yours makes NOISE? Impressive... >>> >>>In this case, I guess entropy is preferable to atrophy, though. :-) >> >>Indeed. >> >>I've found that my Johnson only makes noise with the proper, er, >>peripheral, though... > >Geez, guys, what's this? Pound the physicist day? Johnson noise >is the Brownian motion of electrons in an electronic circuit. It >is the irreducible noise, often measured in temperature (obvious?) >Cheers, Charley And to think some folks perceive physicists as lacking a sense of humor... Johnson (n., [vulgar slang]) A euphemism for penis. joke (n. [L. jocus]) 1. Anything said or done to arouse laughter, as a humorous anecdote 2. a thing done or said merely in fun Tunny (steadfastly resisting any temptation to attempt humorous comment on "Brownian motion") ====================================================================== James A. Tunnicliffe | WWWeb: http://www.inference.com/~tunny Inference Corporation | PGP Fingerprint: CA 23 E2 F3 AC 2D 0C 77 tunny(a)Inference.com | 36 07 D9 33 3D 32 53 9C ====================================================================== begin 600 WINMAIL.DAT M>)\^(A\0`0:0" `$```````!``$``0>0!@`(````Y 0```````#H``$(@ <` M& ```$E032Y-:6-R;W-O9G0@36%I;"Y.;W1E`#$(`06 `P`.````S <,``0` M" `5`!P``P`?`0$@@ ,`#@```,P'# `$``@`%0`=``,`( $!"8 !`"$````P M.39&131!,#!&-$1$,#$Q.3,P0S P04$P,$$U1C8P1 `:!P$-@ 0``@````(` M`@`!!( !`$(```!;3F]I<V5=4D4Z($UO9'5L871I;F<@=&AE($9-(&YO:7-E M('-P96-T<G5M(&-O;G-I9&5R960@:6YF96%S:6)L90`2& $#D 8`U <``!H` M```#`"8```````,`-@``````'@!P``$````W````36]D=6QA=&EN9R!T:&4@ M1DT@;F]I<V4@<W!E8W1R=6T@8V]N<VED97)E9"!I;F9E87-I8FQE```"`7$` M`0```!L````!N^'D]7.@Y&PV30\1T),,`*H`I?8-``4RJ;<``P`N```````# M``80&<2TJ ,`!Q!;! ``'@`($ $```!E````0TA!4DQ%64U54U-%3$U!3E=2 M251%4SI!5#$P.C,X04TQ,B\S+SDV+3 U,# L0D]"2$545$E.1T%74D]413I! M5#DZ-3)!32TP-3 P,3(O,R\Y-BQ*04U%4T%454Y.24-,249&10`````#`! 0 M``````,`$1 ``````@$)$ $```"B! ``G@0``-$'``!,6D9UB!)=P_\`"@$/ M`A4"I /D!>L"@P!0$P-4`@!C: K <V5T;C(&``;#`H,R!$8"`'!P<G$Q( A5 M![("@S.7`\8'$P*#-!4/9C4#Q4,3@Q(B<W1E;0* ?1<*@ C/"=D[&9\R-34/ M`H *@0VQ"V!N9S$PWC,4\ L*$O$+\F,`0!/@41'!;&5Y!=!U!!!EFFP#@G<% M$!AP<SH*A8P^005 ', Z,S@5< )-(+ R+S,O.38`("TP-3 P+""@0F]B($@2 M`'0+@'1G81^1;QAP( <@@CGD.C42(&%M(<0A1B(@!DHD@ >102X@5'62;@,` M8VP&D&9E(P[6/A5P!4 R)$ U)'\B("L'82,P:![@0R8036$G'N F_B?@6RXK MP%U()&%V(L$@<PMP9"!G*> $`"6!;V@`@ (@(-QN;P0`)M `P&L'D2+P^'-U M< 9Q!;$MI"U@"'!H8V4L(W<@,'\Q!EYO,A0J^@:0+E%P*? `D&-_!T O93,P M!" -L "0&:$N22-W/',#`' ^)UA9!PAA!" N!$Y/25-%<C\Q`$EM$Z 'D "0 M=FYE*\$G6"=820.@+,(@QS/@$? B($D@9PI0!!'U"?!T`V!P'N TD3@Q)L#N M<@&@'L LL&\H<#NB*? G(B IX A@9V@F$" Z_"TI(W<C=SH@#; U&C[X^B<X MD" "$"9 +*(]$"WP]Q[@+28"(&P>X"X$+:0#\/\IX"RQ)M 3H#O !) B($2A M[R-W+J(SD#QQ;#V'.,@@%GI'">!Z(B [(!A0(B!WW4'1)P0@+,(WX5!!=41! M]S.C! `%0&0J8#?A+2L@%NLTD40B0@-@=P,``Y$IP?\NT$*A,U ?0 60.Z$& M,0N /RAP`Z!.)B9P.I T\&-U<Q_ /@%)=$P--/ 9H75_2H \HBVC(B!-\!AP M36%E_SJP"' )@$ZR&'$NH3T04U'$"@B4"P@"&!)4#Y7'H"_"> 1X"(@'G8* MA0J%04&2<SSP+,%N:R]A!X!!46S^:SP1!) OL#B!2B@N000@^0M@8VLL,BYA M"?!+YTWQ=&AU!&!R.+@*A2TF*(1N+B(@6W9U;"+@Y07 <QR"72D5<#MP+I#] M1#!M! `HD (0!< NH ,`<G,U-FIO+B!=XBN@3-<F$&$04 !S7Q$Q)A!7D.YY M6 (L506Q9 (@/,0#8/\?$";0"V ]T1AP1/<Q`5I1_R+P7!-4X4[A!9!CH!AP M,0#^,B80(O!BQ&.C!;$L<P> ]QF@0N%.P68F0%:$C)6IJ(H&&%A9&8ZL'1" MX?\X04J16L-BH%/#`9!-HSSC]VSC9@@%H&T'@ (P6W8#H.HB3/TB/E8]<7]R MCW.?/72O/64F):\FLC$`?"!B5W?@96(Z7 `"0'#0.B\O=WC +@N /&'+"? O ML"YNT2]^5$!JF.<X`'D6$^%R< 6P;31WL>!01U @1B+!!) 3H!T+@'1X,%8A M7T R,R!*11(@1GW 04,H($1D(#!^4#<W929Y\T"_>L=YDC$"=\" _X$@,R&P M8# W($0Y(a)B!]P#.5?H S$B U?< Y0W$/OX2OA;^&SW5.5KP8P0"*````0 `Y M`"#VV#/_X;L!`P#Q/PD$```"`4<``0```#(```!C/553.V$](#MP/4EN9F5R M96YC93ML/4Q!3D1252TY-C$R,#0Q-C(Q,CA:+3$S,C0X`````@'Y/P$```!* M`````````-RG0,C 0A :M+D(`"LOX8(!`````````"]//4E.1D5214Y#12]/ M53U.3U9!5$\O0TX]4D5#25!)14Y44R]#3CU454Y.60```!X`^#\!````%0`` M`$IA;65S($$N(%1U;FYI8VQI9F9E``````(!^S\!````2@````````#<IT#( MP$(0&K2Y" `K+^&"`0`````````O3SU)3D9%4D5.0T4O3U4]3D]6051/+T-. M/5)%0TE0245.5%,O0TX]5%5.3ED````>`/H_`0```!4```!*86UE<R!!+B!4 M=6YN:6-L:69F90````! ``<P<#5O//KANP% ``@PX-Y -/_ANP$#``TT_3\` M``(!%#0!````$ ```%24H< I?Q ;I8<(`"LJ)1<>`#T``0````$````````` M"P`I```````+`",```````(!?P`!````40```#QC/553)6$]7R5P/4EN9F5R M96YC925L/4Q!3D1252TY-C$R,#0Q-C(Q,CA:+3$S,C0X0&QA;F1R=2YN;W9A 8=&\N:6YF97)E;F-E,BYC;VT^`````,I+ ` end

1 0

no subject (file transmission)
by captain.sarcastic 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Wed Dec 4 11:52:55 1996 Received: from RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU (root(a)RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU [130.91.195.242]) by mail2.panix.com (8.7.5/8.7.1/PanixM1.0) with ESMTP id LAA08214 for <kkoller(a)panix.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:52:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from serve.com (serve.com [206.1.57.2]) by RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA15135 for <kkoller(a)RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:54:19 -0500 Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by serve.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA32480 for <kkoller(a)sarcasm.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:47:45 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA12660 for cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 05:30:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from uu.psi.com (uu.psi.com [136.161.128.3]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA12644 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 05:30:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA29852 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 96 08:20:12 -0500 Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Wed, 04 Dec 96 08:11:41 EST for cypherpunks(a)toad.com To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: Angel and Javier can't unsubscribe! From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Comments: All power to the ZOG! Message-Id: <PgyeyD69w165w(a)bwalk.dm.com> Date: Wed, 04 Dec 96 08:10:48 EST In-Reply-To: <v03007801aecae3e3d400(a)[207.167.93.63]> Organization: Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y. Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk "Timothy C. May" <tcmay(a)got.net> writes: <Racist garbage, this time directed at Hispanics> > I'm beginning to think that Cypherpunks appeals especially to morons. > > --Tim May Me too. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

no subject (file transmission)
by captain.sarcastic 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Wed Dec 4 11:55:03 1996 Received: from RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU (root(a)RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU [130.91.195.242]) by mail1.panix.com (8.7.5/8.7.1/PanixM1.0+) with ESMTP id LAA17828 for <kkoller(a)panix.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:55:01 -0500 (EST) Received: from serve.com (serve.com [206.1.57.2]) by RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA15267 for <kkoller(a)RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:56:37 -0500 Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by serve.com (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA32629 for <kkoller(a)sarcasm.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:50:14 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA12517 for cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 05:15:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from mule0.mindspring.com (mule0.mindspring.com [204.180.128.166]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA12512 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 05:15:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from default (slip166-72-219-242.ny.us.ibm.net [166.72.219.242]) by mule0.mindspring.com (8.8.2/8.7.3) with SMTP id NAA26708 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 13:15:44 GMT Message-Id: <1.5.4.32.19961204131259.0069a9d0(a)pop.pipeline.com> X-Sender: jya(a)pop.pipeline.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.4 (32) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 08:12:59 -0500 To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com From: John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> Subject: OPE_nup Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk Two reports on BSA's letter Monday to Gore opposing crypto export regulations as "headed in the wrong direction." And claims the administration has "significantly backtracked" since announcing the new policy October 1. IBM, MS, et al are withdrawing earlier support for it. Without change, BSA said, encryption export policies will fail as did Administration policy of Clipper. ----- OPE_nup

1 0

no subject (file transmission)
by captain.sarcastic 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Wed Dec 4 11:55:04 1996 Received: from RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU (root(a)RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU [130.91.195.242]) by mail2.panix.com (8.7.5/8.7.1/PanixM1.0) with ESMTP id LAA08377 for <kkoller(a)panix.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:55:02 -0500 (EST) Received: from poboxer.pobox.com (poboxer.pobox.com [207.8.188.2]) by RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA15261 for <kkoller(a)RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:56:28 -0500 Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by poboxer.pobox.com (8.7.6/8.7.1) with ESMTP id LAA29435 for <kkoller(a)sarcasm.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 11:54:13 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA12478 for cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 05:12:53 -0800 (PST) Received: from spain.it.earthlink.net (spain-c.it.earthlink.net [204.119.177.66]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id FAA12473 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 05:12:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from prosac (Cust62.Max20.Boston.MA.MS.UU.NET [153.35.79.62]) by spain.it.earthlink.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA09364; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 05:12:32 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <32A579A8.718(a)earthlink.net> Date: Wed, 04 Dec 1996 08:16:24 -0500 From: Stephen Boursy <boursy(a)earthlink.net> X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: freedom-knights(a)jetcafe.org CC: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: The Rise and Fall of Cypherpunks WAS [Re: the Dennings] References: <Pine.SUN.3.91.961203233536.10915A-100000(a)crl11.crl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > C'punks, > > On Tue, 3 Dec 1996, Dave Hayes wrote: > >> The very existance of the "profane" keeps the "sacred" in >> existance as well. If you cannot see that, then John Grubor's >> lesson is wasted on you. > > If this bit of verbal legerdemain makes any sense at all > (Logos?), then Grubor must be personally responsible for the > existance of every saint on the Catholic calendar...not. Well saints come on go on the Roman Catholic calander--doesn't mean a hell of a lot. Dr. Grubor does an excellent job of bring the vermin out of the woodwork. Steve

1 0

no subject (file transmission)
by captain.sarcastic 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Wed Dec 4 12:13:32 1996 Received: from RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU (root(a)RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU [130.91.195.242]) by mail1.panix.com (8.7.5/8.7.1/PanixM1.0+) with ESMTP id MAA19692 for <kkoller(a)panix.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 12:13:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from poboxer.pobox.com (poboxer.pobox.com [207.8.188.2]) by RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id MAA16268 for <kkoller(a)RES2.RESNET.UPENN.EDU>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 12:15:08 -0500 Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by poboxer.pobox.com (8.7.6/8.7.1) with ESMTP id MAA32202 for <kkoller(a)sarcasm.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 12:12:55 -0500 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA12796 for cypherpunks-outgoing; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 05:40:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from uu.psi.com (uu.psi.com [136.161.128.3]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id FAA12790 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Wed, 4 Dec 1996 05:40:24 -0800 (PST) Received: by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA02842 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 96 08:38:47 -0500 Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Wed, 04 Dec 96 08:32:49 EST for cypherpunks(a)toad.com To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com, freedom-knights(a)jetcafe.org Subject: Re: The Rise and Fall of Cypherpunks WAS [Re: the Dennings] From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Comments: All power to the ZOG! Message-Id: <DZyeyD70w165w(a)bwalk.dm.com> Date: Wed, 04 Dec 96 08:22:00 EST In-Reply-To: <32A579A8.718(a)earthlink.net> Organization: Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y. Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk Stephen Boursy <boursy(a)earthlink.net> writes: > Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > > > C'punks, See punks post. See punks rant. See punks flame. Laugh, laugh, laugh. > > On Tue, 3 Dec 1996, Dave Hayes wrote: > > > >> The very existance of the "profane" keeps the "sacred" in > >> existance as well. If you cannot see that, then John Grubor's > >> lesson is wasted on you. > > > > If this bit of verbal legerdemain makes any sense at all > > (Logos?), then Grubor must be personally responsible for the "Logos" suffers from verbal diarrhea and can only be pitied. Anonymous cowards like him are the worst enemy of crypto-enhanced privacy. > > existance of every saint on the Catholic calendar...not. > > Well saints come on go on the Roman Catholic calander--doesn't > mean a hell of a lot. We have a Greek Orthodox church of St. Dimitri not too far from here. They mistakenly think that I'm Greek and send me the same newsletter they send to everybody else named Dimitri. Some of it is in English, so I learned quite a bit about the life of the original St. Dimitri: He was a foul-mouthed Greek who lived in 3rd century CE and got into trouble for badmouthing the Romans and other Pagans. I suppose he's an RC saint too. I used to work for the Jesuits - very educational. He is not to be confused with the Russian St. Dimitri Donskoy who beat the shit out of the Mongols. That was after the schism, so he's _not RC saint. > Dr. Grubor does an excellent job of bring the vermin out of > the woodwork. Yes - thank you Dr. Grubor for your fine work. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Codebreakers on the shelves!
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Codebreakers by Kahn is available at some stores. (Powell's Technical books in Portland, OR has copies. It is right next to Applied Cryptography.) It has not filtered down to some ordering systems, so some bookstores claim it is out of print. Warning: The book is $65.00 hardbound! (It is also *NOT* a small book. It is large. About 2000 pages by my guess. (Maybe more. I was being pulled out of the bookstore at the time. My wife was trying to save me from the evil mind control rays of Powell's Tech books.) I know what is on my shopping list for Christmas. --- | "Spam is the Devil's toothpaste!" - stuart(a)teleport.com | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com|

2 1

Re:
by Matthew J. Miszewski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>I consider it my business also, when people are denied opportunity because >>of where they live. > >Why not simply disagree with me? You do not believe that people may >lend their very own money, earned honestly, to anybody they please. Actually, I never said that. Anyone may. I may hire only white people (even with the intent not to hire others). I will also pay the consequences. And if someone feels that they need to do this, the teachers of civil disobedience indeed state it is their duty to. Anyone may give their money to whomever they choose. I was simply stating it was morally wrong. >If you are ashamed of that, change your mind. If you are not ashamed, >proclaim it the world and justify it. I have never been ashamed of my opinions. Its just that I never said they couldn't do it. I justify my position as follows: It is costly to everyone in the state to have areas of under and unemployment, poverty and usually high-crime rates. It is unjust and costly to deny opportunity based upon residence. It is just and efficient to allow markets to indeed be free instead of falsely supporting a certain hegemony based upon residence. Free and full competition is the only way to achieve a free market. This can only happen when access to capital is equal with regard to worthless indicators (race, sex, residence and aga's favorite, sexual orientation). I have never suggested that provably bad credit risks should be given money. >>I may also hire whomever I wish, but I would have to pay the >>consequences if I happened to discriminate based on a protected class >>while doing so. That is the society in which I live. If I dont like >>it, I try to change it. Our society is not libertarian. > >Current policy doesn't matter if we are discussing the wisdom or >justice of possible policies. It does if my argument is that this part of the system *is* just. I realize you disagree, but I am sure you are not dismissing my argument out-of-hand. If you disagree, as you say, then disagree. >It isn't clear to me whether you are discussing policy options or >whether one should violate laws one does not like. When an action is >illegal, it is still permissible to discuss its legalization. I agree. I am not arguing that we need to withdraw Title VII. Aparently you are? >>There are times when government should intervene. I believe it >>should be as infrequent as possible, but would not want to live in a >>society where disinfranchised people have no possible recourse. Your >>choice would apparently be different. > >Perhaps. In any event, it is important to understand precisely the >mechanisms through which people are disenfranchised, if that is in >fact what has happened. It is also important to understand the >ramifications of phrases like "no possible recourse". To borrow >money? It is safe to say that most poor people should be saving money >rather than borrowing it. Why are you stepping around your opinion? "...if that is in fact what has happened." Just say it. You do not believe poor people are disenfranchised. I understand the ramifications of "no possible recourse". How should poor people save money? Through some forms of civil disobedience like stealing food and clothes and then putting that money in the bank? Of course, the police will understand. The government will back them. Look, capital begets capital. I favor increasing opportunity. As I will discuss below, there are reasons why capital does not flow to poor areas. >>I have not heard serious doubts for a while that redlining occurs. > >It seems likely that people draw lines around certain areas and decide >not to lend money there. What is less clear is that this is >unreasonable. There may be a few good credit risks in poor >neighborhoods. But, it may just be too much trouble weeding through >the others to make it a paying business. I thought that it didnt matter where people came from as long as the risk was low in reality. Banks weed through the people coming to them from the suburbs. Is it harder for them to see past a red line? More costly? How? It is too much trouble because of the way that bankers think. >It may also be the case that people lending money are behaving >irrationally and drawing lines around neighborhoods for simple racial >reasons and for no others. There is a word for this: opportunity. It also screws up the market. I am glad that you admit that racism is irrational. That is the core as to why the problem doesnt go away. It is an infinite loop. Current interests wont go there. Generally, people who understand the problem are without access to capital. They would like to go there. They cant get capital. When they approach current interests, they wont go there. >Bank of America was built by a man who perceived and exploited one >such opportunity. Italian shop keepers in California could not get >good banking services for, it turned out, irrational reasons. > There are a few examples of people who actually realize this as a problem/opportunity. Oddly enough, this point reinforces mine. Redlining did exist. Bank of America realized it and made a lot of money. But it still exists elsewhere. Why dont business plans around the country spring up on venture capitalists desks with an approved stamp on them? >>I would love to have the financial wherewithal to startup such an >>enterprise. Unfortuantely I reside in one such neighborhood. > >People start businesses without their own capital all the time. If >there really is such a great opportunity, go find some rich people. >Rich people, like other people, are always happy to hear about ways to >make more money. Ahhh. This is the key (which I probably did not make as clear as I should have). They wont. It is a bit irrational, I know. But we just discussed irrationality. Racism doesnt see green. If it did, I agree with you that capital would flow there. It doesnt. >They don't even have to put the money in for a long >time. Once you've set up a package of mortgages, you can sell them >off on the CMO market which is liquid and, I believe, quite >colorblind. The beauty of this scheme is that you can take your >profits right away and let other people take on the long term interest >rate risk, default risk, and management hassles. This will make your >plan easier to sell to investors. I agree with you that it is a financially attractive proposition. At the Center for Public Representation where I worked during Law School we approached investors. The ROI was extremely attractive not to mention the added "goodwill" in a largely liberal community (I went to Law School in Madison, Wisconsin). No one bit. Hmm? >You might also look into the microlending market. The idea is to lend >poor people small amounts of money (less than $10,000) to start >businesses and the like. The default rates are claimed to be >surprisingly low. I have my doubts, but it sounds as if you do not. >Good luck. Actually, I am very glad you brought it up because I was just going to. Microloans are successful not only in this country but in India and around the world as well. The Grammeen Bank initiated its microloan program in India by loaning usually less than $100 to individuals. They fixed up their residences or started extremely small businesses. The default rate was less than 5%. (BTW, the system also encouraged community by a system of cyclical neighborhood lending where neighbors took responsibility for neighbors). Compare this now to people whom banks would generally consider a good risk. College Graduates. Generally, these folks live outside of the red line. Good risks right? What about those nasty student loan default rates? The red lines dont make business sense. >>It is difficult enough to raise money to run a small business (and >>turned out to be much easier to do without any bank lending at all). >>I have talked with people about starting their own banks. > >In principle, there is no reason at all why banks are the only >institutions that can lend money for mortgages. There may be legal >impediments, but then we are back to the actual culprit, the >government. > >You might find that opening a bank was easier if all you had to do was >take deposits and lend money rather than wading through the morass of >legal requirements and paperwork. I favor the elimination of illogical regulation. I favor ridding banks of burdensome personal property taxes. Hopefully the deregulation set for 1997 will help. My desire for regulation in this case is to eliminate redlining. It is far more burdensome to retain this system than it would be to eliminate it. >>When you are working to make sure all the bills are paid it is a bit >>difficult to also build an entirely new socio-economic structure. > >You don't have to build an entirely new socio-economic structure. You >just have to find some good credit risks, some people with money to >lend, and put them together taking a cut for yourself, unless the >government has thrown up some obstacles to this. I wish it were this easy. Economically depressed areas need new structures built. The current structure adds to the cycle of poverty. First, earnings are low. Second, costs are high (Warehouse foodstores dont locate there so corner stores become the means of feeding the family ($$$)). Again, business plans have been presented to no avail. Even private foundation subsidized events were tried. To no avail. >No, actually they do care, they just don't think (correctly) that they >can get it easily. > >I have no idea if your local bank has "anonymous accounts". More >probably, they have accounts for which they do not report transactions >in excess of $10,000, but which are held by people they know fairly >well. This is more common than you might think, and not just for >laundering drug money. Tax evasion is widely practiced. I am aware of this. But drug dealers hold more cash than CEO's. Aparently the laundromat isnt open for everyone. ;-) >But wouldn't the racist banks be hurting their business? Doesn't the >punishment go quite closely with the "crime"? They would not be making as much as they could. Irrational, I know. >If you believe that there is a huge opportunity which the racist banks >(i.e., all of them) will not take advantage of, you had better explain >why there is nobody anywhere with any capital who wouldn't want to >make even more money off poor people. Can it really be the case that >99+% of rich people will run fleeing from such a great opportunity? I once believed much like you. I saw an "opportunity" the existance of which I could not explain. It seemed irrational. And it was. Racism is irrational. As you seem aware (BTW, I applaud you on what seems to be an honest degree of care) some are trying to break through the cycle. The south side of Chicago recently started there own bank. It is working. As you mention, historically, the Bank of America story. Redevelopment efforts "seem" to abound. >Oh, and speaking of racism, where do wealthy African-Americans invest >their money? Huh? What is your point? >>Everyone can now clamor that it just isnt true. Banks have never >>discriminated. Its all a big lie. Whatever. > >Banks have practiced discrimination, and not just against black >people. They have been able to get away with it. How? Because the >government has protected the banking guild from competition. > >If opening a bank were as easy as forming a corporation, you would not >see much discrimination, I assure you. There is no reason why a bank >shouldn't be that easy to open. We agree. But I feel that a legal elimination of redlining would decrease costs to the industry. >Appeals to the very people who are exploiting you are not likely >to meet with success, are they? If they never did we would still have slavery and only white, adult, male, land-owners would vote. While success is rare, it has prevailed when the cause is just. >>The real world I live in is just not as simple as the Libertarian Wet >>Dream(TM). > >Then it should be fairly easy to refute my points instead making >fatuous remarks such as the one above. Come on, one fatuous remark in a whole post? I thought that was good ;-) >Red Rackham > Matt

1 0

Singapore Sling -- A second look, from The Netly News
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 12:38:28 -0500 (EST) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Singapore Sling -- A second look, from The Netly News The Netly News http://netlynews.com December 4, 1996 SINGAPORE SLING By Declan McCullagh (declan(a)well.com) Singapore seems to possess no more resolution than some primitive VR world. There is no dirt whatsoever, no muss, no furred fractal edge to things. Outside, the organic, florid as ever in the tropics, has been gardened into brilliant green, and all-too-perfect examples of itself. At least that's what William Gibson wrote about the country in Wired magazine three years ago. I'm in Singapore now to find out what's happened since then. Marvin Tay stands at the exit to the airport, waving a copy of the December issue of Wired in semaphore, as animated and affable as the corridors of the Changi Airtropolis are chilly and sterile. Marvin works at Information Frontiers Ltd, a local Internet firm. He's also my self-appointed tour guide and critic. "You've developed quite a reputation around here," he tells me on the drive into town. To Marvin, my criticisms of Singapore in previous columns were too harsh. The country is not a police state. Gibson was wrong. Singapore is not "Disneyland with a death penalty." Marvin is one of Singapore's growing number of digerati. Glued to his handphone, he tears around the island in a late-model Alfa Romeo that, thanks to the astronomical auto taxes, cost him more than I make in three years. "The government is basically very paternalistic," he says. "Like your government and J. Edgar Hoover in the 1950s." He doesn't seem to mind. Business is good. We drive on. Indeed, Singapore is like the U.S. of four decades ago. It's like flying into a kind of twisted central-planning father-knows-best time warp. Lining the streets next to such quintessentially American stores as Reebok, Esprit and Timberland are government agencies like the Board of Film Censors and buildings housing the "Social Development Unit" government-run dating service and the "Home Ownership for the People Scheme." Yet Singapore is aggressively marketing itself as an information city of the future. Data will flow through its cyber-byways and as an online hub the nation will prosper as it did as a 19th century trading center. At least that's the plan. Singapore's commitment to free trade is long-standing. Settled by the British in 1819, the 585-square kilometer island quickly became Fortress Singapore, the empire's key southeast Asia trading post. After WWII and independence from the crown came Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew, a censor-happy kind of politico whose accomplishments include a ban on jukeboxes. Lee Kuan Yew believes that this tiny island-nation prospers best under a blend of economic freedom and strict social controls. Political liberty is to be shoved aside in favor of strengthening economic muscle. As Ian Buruma writes in a recent issue of TIME Asia, now that Asians are in power themselves, they endorse the essentially colonial idea that Asian people are not yet ready for freedom. The public must become better educated, or wealthier, or more disciplined, or more virtuous. The point is that for an authoritarian government, people are never ready for freedom, not just yet. The traffic light turns yellow. We screech to a stop. Marvin glances at me. "Here we slow down for a yellow light," he explains. All is proper. Order is king. That's why criticizing Singapore is almost too easy. Chaos is verboten. Chewing gum sales are prohibited. Sell drugs, you face the gallows. Canings are routine. Playboy, Penthouse and Cosmo all are banned. (The offending article in Cosmo was the one giving women tips on how to commit adultery and not get caught.) Even a recent episode of "Friends" was censored. This summer, of course, the Singapore Broadcasting Authority (SBA) decided to regulate the Net. Now Internet traffic crossing the border must flow through filters blocking sites that may cause impure thoughts. But still. . . People live here. What do they think of this? In the five days I've spent here so far, at cafes on the Boat-quay, in government offices lining Orchard Road and over Indonesian oxtail soup, I've learned that netizens in Singapore are slightly embarrassed. They don't particularly care for the SBA's regs, yet they defend them with the lackluster effort that Americans might reserve for justifying the wackier actions of the U.S. Congress. "Americans distrust the government," the locals say. "Singaporeans don't. You know they'll do it right. The government has a track record of success." Small surprise; nobody likes to hear outsiders criticizing their culture. What's more, goes the argument, the SBA has only extended existing rules to the Net. "How can we argue for Net freedom without attacking the existing laws?" one lawyer asks me. Marvin suggests an answer: you can't. "Outwardly, Singaporeans may look like any western people. But by culture, by value, they're still Asian," he says. "Do we look repressed here?" a group of soc.culture.singapore denizens asks me. Marvin has driven me to one of the cyber-cafes overlooking the waterfront. I rest my $4 lime juice on one of the Sun Sparcstation 4s tied into a T-1. "No," I say. Perhaps it's that wealth, the economic riches so evident in the glittering glass-and-steel office towers, that permits Singapore cyberians to tolerate broad restrictions on online speech. Or perhaps it's the fact that the nation has no First Amendment tradition -- its constitution includes explicit provisions for government censorship. Besides, the restrictions arguably aren't overly burdensome. Only about 100 overseas sites are blocked by the proxy filters, and circumventing these automated border police is a snap. [...]

1 0

Re: Sorry for the "TWIT" messages
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Don't worry about it. You don't have to send anyone any more messages to confirm your twit-ness. diGriz > >Hi, > >Well seems I had a rather intresting morining. :) After receiving several "Phreak messages >I went to modify my "twit" scripts. Unfortunatly the changes I made caused ~50 "twit" >messages to go out. My appologies to anyone who received these messages. > >Thanks, > >-- >----------------------------------------------------------- >William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii >Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!!

1 0

RE: new mailing list & ITAR
by Mullen Patrick 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

==========> _______________________________________________________________________________ From: Michael C Taylor (CSD) on Wed, Dec 4, 1996 13:54 On Tue, 3 Dec 1996, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Meta-question: if someone posts strong crypto source code to the > moderated mailing list, can the moderator(s) be prosecuted under ITAR? The moderator would not prosecuted if the moderator & host machine wasn't located in USA and not a USA citizen and if the post was not from USA. The poster may be a target if located inside USA or a USA citizen. The moderator might be prosecuted if the post originated inside USA or went through USA to be exported outside USA & Canada. Welcome to the rest of the world. ---- Michael C. Taylor <mctaylor(a)mta.ca> Programmer, Mount Allison University <========== Wouldn't this be the case only if it was a *moderated* list? If it's moderated, the list operator becomes a _publisher_ and is responsible for it's content. If it's *unmoderated*, the list operator is a _distributor_ and therefore not responsible for the content his medium provides. Just like how a bookstore isn't responsible for the contents of the books; the publishers/authors are. (Well, public opinion may drive a store out of town, just like public opinion may kill a listserv...) My apologies if I'm behind in the times and this decision no longer stands. PM #include <standard_disclaimer> Spyjure(a)comports.com http://www.netforward.com/comports/?Spyjure Crypto-Anarchy-Security esp. WRT Linux <It's getting there, anyway... Work's been taking up too much time to update the site as often as I wish>

1 0

RE: The Good dr. Dobbs
by pclow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sorry Dr Boz, but all I saw on the page was this : "404 Not Found The requested URL /whitepaper.htm was not found on this server. " I would like to point out that our white paper with technical details can be found on our Web-site: www.dsnt.com/whitepaper.htm -- Dr. Eva Bozoki Chief Scientist DSN Technology, Inc. (516)467-0400

3 2

Mounties charge dealer over sales of U.S. Dishes
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

By Robert Brehl - Toronto Star Business Reporter Canada's satellite wars have heated up with the first dealers of the U.S. DirecTV dishes being arrested and charged under the federal Radiocommunication Act. ``Iraq doesn't allow its citizens to have satellite dishes either,'' said Stan LeBlanc, a dealer in Yarmouth, N.S., who was charged. ``Never thought I'd see the day when 12 or 15 Mounties would storm into my building because I'm selling things the public wants.'' LeBlanc was charged this week after Royal Canadian Mounted Police raided his electronics store Nov. 13 and seized 83 access cards for DirecTV set-top boxes, some computers, cash and two satellite dishes. The Mounties have raided dozens of satellite dealers from coast-to-coast, except in Ontario, since June. Now formally charged are LeBlanc; his father, Ray Sr.; and David Lloyd Williams. LeBlanc said the access cards were not the so-called pirate cards that allow viewers to watch DirecTV programming for free. The cards seized require customers to have U.S. addresses for DirecTV bills, he said. The dealers have been charged with possessing and selling equipment that decodes encrypted satellite signals. LeBlanc said he has seven competitors in Yarmouth that also sell U.S. satellite dishes, and none was charged. ``When they raided me, they even parked in one of my competitor's parking lots under a sign advertising the 18-inch dishes,'' LeBlanc said. Last month, Industry Minister John Manley issued a warning to satellite dealers and TV viewers that selling or using U.S. dishes could be illegal. Canada is estimated to have more than 200,000 U.S. dishes. Three Canadian firms have been licensed to offer direct-to-home satellite service, but none has yet launched. RCMP officials in Nova Scotia could not be reached last night.

1 0

No Subject
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:26 AM 12/4/1996, Matthew J. Miszewski wrote: >>>I consider it my business also, when people are denied opportunity because >>>of where they live. >> >>Why not simply disagree with me? You do not believe that people may >>lend their very own money, earned honestly, to anybody they please. > >Actually, I never said that. You say it below. >Anyone may. I may hire only white people (even with the intent not >to hire others). I will also pay the consequences. And if someone >feels that they need to do this, the teachers of civil disobedience >indeed state it is their duty to. > >Anyone may give their money to whomever they choose. I was simply stating >it was morally wrong. > >>If you are ashamed of that, change your mind. If you are not ashamed, >>proclaim it the world and justify it. > >I have never been ashamed of my opinions. Its just that I never said they >couldn't do it. I justify my position as follows: > >It is costly to everyone in the state to have areas of under and >unemployment, poverty and usually high-crime rates. > >It is unjust and costly to deny opportunity based upon residence. > >It is just and efficient to allow markets to indeed be free instead of >falsely supporting a certain hegemony based upon residence. > >Free and full competition is the only way to achieve a free market. This >can only happen when access to capital is equal with regard to worthless >indicators (race, sex, residence and aga's favorite, sexual orientation). See, right above there. If I earned my very own money honestly and I choose to lend it only to Albanians, you believe that this would be inefficient and, therefore, forbidden. In other words, you do not believe that I should be able to lend money to anybody I please. You can call it "equal access to capital" or "denial of opportunity", but the clearest and simplest description is that you believe I should not be able to lend my money to whomever I please. Instead of pretending otherwise, just say "I believe you should not be able to lend your own money which you earned honestly to anybody you please. I believe you should be allowed only to lend money in these circumstances..." Of course, non-discrimination is a vague term. Let's say I lend money only to people I know. I only know Albanians. Am I therefore a racist in my lending practices? That is unclear. Am I racist in my choice of friends? Perhaps we should make that illegal. >I have never suggested that provably bad credit risks should be given money. What is irksome is that you are talking about Other People's Money and not your own. The perspective tends to change when it's your own savings on the line. >>>I may also hire whomever I wish, but I would have to pay the >>>consequences if I happened to discriminate based on a protected class >>>while doing so. That is the society in which I live. If I dont like >>>it, I try to change it. Our society is not libertarian. >> >>Current policy doesn't matter if we are discussing the wisdom or >>justice of possible policies. > >It does if my argument is that this part of the system *is* just. I >realize you disagree, but I am sure you are not dismissing my argument >out-of-hand. If you disagree, as you say, then disagree. Actually, I have trouble following your argument. Please forgive me for my limited intelligence. If you are arguing that the current policy is just, that question is not related to whether it is the current policy. But, I suppose you were just sort of observing on the side something like "oh, and by the way, this is current policy." >>It isn't clear to me whether you are discussing policy options or >>whether one should violate laws one does not like. When an action is >>illegal, it is still permissible to discuss its legalization. > >I agree. I am not arguing that we need to withdraw Title VII. Aparently >you are? I do not know what is in Title VII. Perhaps it would be better to ask me about particular policies. >>>There are times when government should intervene. I believe it >>>should be as infrequent as possible, but would not want to live in a >>>society where disinfranchised people have no possible recourse. Your >>>choice would apparently be different. >> >>Perhaps. In any event, it is important to understand precisely the >>mechanisms through which people are disenfranchised, if that is in >>fact what has happened. It is also important to understand the >>ramifications of phrases like "no possible recourse". To borrow >>money? It is safe to say that most poor people should be saving money >>rather than borrowing it. > >Why are you stepping around your opinion? "...if that is in fact what has >happened." Just say it. You do not believe poor people are >disenfranchised. In fact, I am open to the possibility that poor people really are disenfranchised. But, if I am to believe that I must hear an explanation that makes sense to me. If poor people are poor because absolutely nobody will do business with them for completely irrational reasons, that seems extremely unlikely. Even if most rich people are able to control their greed just to punish poor people of the wrong race, which is already hard to believe, you actually have to claim that they are all this way. >I understand the ramifications of "no possible recourse". How should >poor people save money? Just like anybody else does. You watch every penny. You don't eat meat. When you buy food, you buy inexpensive healthy food like lentils instead of expensive unhealthy food like Coca-Cola and potato chips. You do not go to McDonald's. You walk when you can instead of taking the bus or you ride a (used) bicycle. You don't smoke cigarettes. You do not buy alcohol. You do not buy other recreational drugs. You buy your clothing used. You economize on your living arrangements, perhaps by having a large number of roomates. (Note that this is illegal in most cities. That is a form of disenfranchisment.) You do not make long distance calls. If you can, you share a phone with other people. etc. etc. etc. If you know poor people, you will know that few of them do these things. Also, you work hard to increase your earnings. You show up at work on time every time. You develop a good work ethic. You wear clean professional clothing at work. You treat your employer and coworkers with respect. etc. etc. etc. Read "Your Money or Your Life" by Joe Dominguez and Vicki Robin. It outlines a workable program that all poor people - and quite a few others - will be able to use to their benefit. >>>I have not heard serious doubts for a while that redlining occurs. >> >>It seems likely that people draw lines around certain areas and decide >>not to lend money there. What is less clear is that this is >>unreasonable. There may be a few good credit risks in poor >>neighborhoods. But, it may just be too much trouble weeding through >>the others to make it a paying business. > >I thought that it didnt matter where people came from as long as the risk >was low in reality. Banks weed through the people coming to them from the >suburbs. Is it harder for them to see past a red line? More costly? How? If you are going through prospective leads and the number of qualified people is, say, 10 in 1000, you will make a lot more money than going through a pool of leads that only has 1 qualified person per 1000. >>It may also be the case that people lending money are behaving >>irrationally and drawing lines around neighborhoods for simple racial >>reasons and for no others. There is a word for this: opportunity. > >It also screws up the market. But why isn't that good news? If it's really market inefficiency, why not exploit it? >I am glad that you admit that racism is irrational. A lot of human activity is irrational. In the case of racism, it is difficult to even define what it is for the purpose of writing a law under which people are to be prosecuted. This undermines the rule of law in the United States and opens the way to abuse and political corruption. Probably that was the idea. But, even if it were possible to define precisely what racism is, I would still believe it should be legal. There is no accounting for taste and it is wrong to dictate it to other people when they are causing no harm to others. >That is the core as to why the problem doesnt go away. It is an >infinite loop. Current interests wont go there. Not one? Absolutely no one? That's pretty hard to believe. >Generally, people who understand the problem are without access to >capital. They would like to go there. They cant get capital. When >they approach current interests, they wont go there. Maybe there's something funny about the deal. >>Bank of America was built by a man who perceived and exploited one >>such opportunity. Italian shop keepers in California could not get >>good banking services for, it turned out, irrational reasons. >There are a few examples of people who actually realize this as a >problem/opportunity. Oddly enough, this point reinforces mine. >Redlining did exist. Bank of America realized it and made a lot of >money. But it still exists elsewhere. Why dont business plans >around the country spring up on venture capitalists desks with an >approved stamp on them? More to the point, why isn't Matthew J. Miszewski drooling in anticipation of all the money he is going to make by recognizing this glorious opportunity? Giannini made a tremendous amount of money. Even if you don't care about money, which is unlikely, think of all the good you could do once you made that fortune! >>They don't even have to put the money in for a long >>time. Once you've set up a package of mortgages, you can sell them >>off on the CMO market which is liquid and, I believe, quite >>colorblind. The beauty of this scheme is that you can take your >>profits right away and let other people take on the long term interest >>rate risk, default risk, and management hassles. This will make your >>plan easier to sell to investors. > >I agree with you that it is a financially attractive proposition. At the >Center for Public Representation where I worked during Law School we >approached investors. The ROI was extremely attractive not to mention the >added "goodwill" in a largely liberal community (I went to Law School in >Madison, Wisconsin). No one bit. Hmm? Hmmm? Maybe it was lousy investment in spite of a good ROI number. Nobody? Not one person was willing to buy in? Hardly an endorsement. >>You might also look into the microlending market. The idea is to lend >>poor people small amounts of money (less than $10,000) to start >>businesses and the like. The default rates are claimed to be >>surprisingly low. I have my doubts, but it sounds as if you do not. >>Good luck. > >Actually, I am very glad you brought it up because I was just going to. >Microloans are successful not only in this country but in India and around >the world as well. The Grammeen Bank initiated its microloan program in >India by loaning usually less than $100 to individuals. They fixed up >their residences or started extremely small businesses. The default rate >was less than 5%. (BTW, the system also encouraged community by a system >of cyclical neighborhood lending where neighbors took responsibility for >neighbors). > >Compare this now to people whom banks would generally consider a good risk. >College Graduates. Generally, these folks live outside of the red line. >Good risks right? What about those nasty student loan default rates? The >red lines dont make business sense. I'm hearing that cash register ringing. Go for it! >>>When you are working to make sure all the bills are paid it is a bit >>>difficult to also build an entirely new socio-economic structure. >> >>You don't have to build an entirely new socio-economic structure. You >>just have to find some good credit risks, some people with money to >>lend, and put them together taking a cut for yourself, unless the >>government has thrown up some obstacles to this. > >I wish it were this easy. Economically depressed areas need new structures >built. The current structure adds to the cycle of poverty. First, >earnings are low. Guess rents must be low too, otherwise why live there? Rents are a dominant expense for poor people. >Second, costs are high (Warehouse foodstores dont locate there so >corner stores become the means of feeding the family ($$$)). That's easy. Once a month get ten families together to go to the nearest warehouse store in the suburbs and stock up on provisions. Or, one poor family could buy a bunch of stuff every month and sell it out of their house and save everybody the trip. Discussions regarding "the cycle of poverty" are usually little more than litanies of excuses. >Again, business plans have been presented to no avail. Even private >foundation subsidized events were tried. To no avail. Gee, you would almost think there was something wrong with the investment. I challenge you to put your own money into this venture. You don't even have to quit your job to get into the microlending business until you've built it up to the point where it can support you. >>If you believe that there is a huge opportunity which the racist banks >>(i.e., all of them) will not take advantage of, you had better explain >>why there is nobody anywhere with any capital who wouldn't want to >>make even more money off poor people. Can it really be the case that >>99+% of rich people will run fleeing from such a great opportunity? > >I once believed much like you. I saw an "opportunity" the existance of >which I could not explain. It seemed irrational. And it was. What I don't understand is why you are not excited by this opportunity. You claim there is this gaping hole in the banking business. If that is true, whoever exploits it is going to be unbelievably rich in addition to being a great human being. My point is not that there is a great opportunity so "somebody somewhere" will solve the racism problem. My point is that you yourself do not believe there is a great opportunity if it involves money you really care about, i.e. your own. >Racism is irrational. As you seem aware (BTW, I applaud you on what >seems to be an honest degree of care)... Don't get your hopes up. I've been poor and I've known many poor people. The unpleasant truth is that there are usually reasons why people are poor. >>Oh, and speaking of racism, where do wealthy African-Americans invest >>their money? > >Huh? What is your point? You are claiming that there are ZERO investors who will invest in this great opportunity because they are racists. Contrary to popular belief, most African-Americans are not poor or even gang members. There are large numbers of middle class African-Americans and a smaller number of quite successful African-American businesspeople. If everybody rich is a racist, go to these people and propose that they can make money pursuing a business opportunity which they are uniquely qualified to identify and exploit. If you are claiming that even African-American investors are irrationally racist about lending to poor people, you should be forewarned that I and many other people are going to find that a little hard to believe. >>>Everyone can now clamor that it just isnt true. Banks have never >>>discriminated. Its all a big lie. Whatever. >> >>Banks have practiced discrimination, and not just against black >>people. They have been able to get away with it. How? Because the >>government has protected the banking guild from competition. >> >>If opening a bank were as easy as forming a corporation, you would not >>see much discrimination, I assure you. There is no reason why a bank >>shouldn't be that easy to open. > >We agree. But I feel that a legal elimination of redlining would decrease >costs to the industry. Wrong. Redlining is devilishly difficult to define. That hurts a small bank more than any other because they have to figure out how to comply with the law and defend themselves against the regulators instead of just borrowing and lending money. It raises the costs of banking. That means it is harder for people to borrow and lend money. And that, if you care about efficiency, is inefficient. >>Appeals to the very people who are exploiting you are not likely >>to meet with success, are they? > >If they never did we would still have slavery and only white, adult, male, >land-owners would vote. While success is rare, it has prevailed when the >cause is just. I hate to admit it, but you do have a point here. However, the way privacy will be permanently eroded is through laws called "The Privacy Protection Act" which have clauses allowing the government to do whatever it wants. It is disconcerting to have the government dictating what information you may or may not keep on your computer or who you may give it to. Red Rackham

1 0

Re: Anyone considered adding crypto into Microsoft Outlook?
by Lee Fisher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

| The main problem so far seems to be the impenetrability of the | MAPI documentation. Does anyone know of a usable reference or | which of the gazillion Microsoft Developer network CDs one can | find more information? MAPI is in part of the Win32 SDK, whichi is available on MSDN level 2, in the \mstools\mapi subdirectory. http://www.microsoft.com/win32dev/mapi/ is the MAPI home page. http://www.microsoft.com/win32dev/mapi/internet.htm has some good MAPI/Exchange resource pointers. http://www.microsoft.com/msdn/sdk/ is a new site for downloading parts of the SDK online, but it is just getting started (i.e., i'm not sure that the MAPI part is ready yet). as for the other question about Outlook -vs- Exchange, see http://www.microsoft.com/outlook/documents/emailfs/default.htm for a comparison. Lee

1 0

Re: The Rise and Fall of Cypherpunks WAS [Re: the Dennings]
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

SANDY SANDFORT wrote: > On Tue, 3 Dec 1996, Dave Hayes wrote: > > The very existance of the "profane" keeps the "sacred" in > > existance as well. If you cannot see that, then John Grubor's > > lesson is wasted on you. > If this bit of verbal legerdemain makes any sense at all > (Logos?), then Grubor must be personally responsible for the > existance of every saint on the Catholic calendar...not. Now there's an example of properly used logic...not. Why didn't you be honest and just say "I don't understand this, please explain"? This could be because you *want* to be hostile, and you *want* to produce meaningless flames. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet "A terrorist is someone who has a bomb and doesn't have an air force." --some letter-writer in the Manchester Guardian, some years ago

2 1

Re: AOL
by Mark Rosen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> yes.... they did knock off that $3.00 an hour thing. now.. $20.00 unlimited.. > I'd hate to do an AOL spam to the list.. but someone asked.. and for all you > that say 'get a real internet provider'. Well.. I get ALL the same access > most of you do. No shell account...But I can telnet from AOL to one. So > there. Nah nah nah =} Hehe. Then you'll like this: http://www.geocities.com/TimesSquare/6660

1 0

RE: Silence is not assent (re the Vulis nonsense)
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Dale Thorn (in reply to Tim May) If you, Sandy, and the other offenders *really* want to keep the noise down, then next time ask John directly for a reply, and if none is forthcoming, say to the list *once*, "John will not answer up", etc., and let the subscribers draw their own conclusions from the silence, instead of from your inane "defenses". .......................................................... As for myself, I was not speaking for Gilmore nor defending him when I added my reply to the discussion. I brought up an item which others had overlooked (the fact that Vulis had challenged John to censor him) as specific reference to include in their judgement of his actions, as well as illustrating how Vulis had invested a lot of effort in motivating someone into just such a response. As I mentioned in another post yesterday, situations like this, where people overlook elements in an argument, are opportunities for others to "fill in the blanks" or add commentary to clear up the understanding of a situation. It is not unusual for cpunks to post their opinions about an event on the list. The cpunks have strong opinions regarding censorship and there are always arguments about the details of its impropriety or the place of it in a society; the list is a form of cyberspatial "virtual" society, and if the concept of censorship vs private property as it affects the list comes up, it is to be expected that the ideas will be addressed. So I (and others as well) were addressing the *ideas* of censorship & the actions of private property owners, arguing in regard of a more precise & correct understanding of the principles involved, as exemplified by John's actions - but not in place of his own "self-defense" of them. Frankly, most of the long-time members of the list would not need any such statements of defense from John in order to appreciate the nature of the circumstance and the reasoning for his symbolic 'censorship'. .. Blanc

2 1

Re: "Just call the police"...yeah, right
by Scott J. Schryvers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >The name of the informal logical fallacy Tim May has *not* >made is 'argumentum ad hominem' (literally, 'an argument >to the man'; attacking one's opponent rather than dealing >with the subject under discussion; aka name calling). > >Having said that, while Tim May has not committed a logical >fallacy, neither has he advanced a logical argument. He >has merely stated his conclusory opinion of the other >person's comment. By itself, it adds little or nothing of >substance to the argument. > >Logos out > Uh logos... Deal with it. If I needed some one to walk me through a mailing list when it concerns constructive arguements I'd be requesting a moderated list and since I find moderated news groups to be nonproductive affairs I tend to find this mailing list perfect for my needs. As for judging if Tim has advanced the arguement or not that is for each person to decide not you. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMqXvk/+hzPlzwZAdAQF5Lgf/e3/99SUkd9aADGeS8UjYYcSxTuH8LxE5 AdvIRgLmv11BdTgcyK+q03MYV1gGjmZmtWtEuCiPN/O39gtMM4RYcz2/c5f7bMMA h8QwKP9h4RNA1dWgDDF54PQuKElMr9SBJJwLdyYwPddkjjVEs0tjFRoJv2MsEkmB nK3REFH75U6F7q0NZB8IHxBbYNDYbTejRcx5yfP+W1lg2cLK2lonis/G4X6Kj7gu BdNLn3PLS6qr1YgTB1gWQD5JzCN6FJ7Gw0snjALLFbG0QbiMLJd7TT/bWc8ExDoo HUg+U4OKZ/oPLzNMiZqvzn9gMjGKWz0+hQbi8kR1f8OT/5+bJ4CFjw== =xM3k -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

No Subject
by Lurker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Could someone tell me where I can find a text file of *all* usenet newsgroups?

1 0

Suggestion for "the serious encryption customers" to end ITAR battle
by Ernest Hua 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I think we can all agree that the level of confidence in software-only approaches to security is clearly lower than combination software plus hardware approaches. It is clear that what is available over the Internet is software. (It is much harder to distribute "hardware" as you can only really distribute design information. The closest analogy could be a FPGA program, a Verilog description or some other ASIC net list.) How about the following as an approach to resolving the dispute over encryption exports: 1. Allow arbitrary exports of software-only encryption. This means that PGP is exportable as is DES crypt libraries. 2. Restrict exports of hardware-only or hardware/software encryption. This means that smart cards, HP's crypto policy cards, crypto processors with tamper-resistant casing, etc ... are restricted. Why does this make sense? 1. Reality check on export control of software: Software is just too transportable to be restricted, no matter WHAT the software does. Any restriction on WHERE software may be or may go is just not feasible, and it's not going to get any easier in the foreseeable future. 2. Take John Deutch at his word: Deutch has claimed that "serious users of cryptography" would not trust software downloaded over the Internet. We clearly do not agree with him on this aspect, but if he truly believes it (and is not just making PR spin statements for the NSA), then he must believe that allowing software exports will not significantly increase the user base (and therefore, harm CIA's or NSA's intelligence capabilities), but it will shut up the software companies' complaints. 3. Give the NSA what it wants: Software tends to standardize. Encryption is only a small part of the chain of security measures. Other weaknesses are surely part of the NSA's target for intercepts (no self-respecting codebreaking agency should stick to exploiting only one class of failures; if it is, we should question the value we are getting out of the billions of dollars we blindly give to the NSA). If the NSA stops whining about what is too hard to break, then protocol weakness and other non-encryption problems could easily creep into standards, and the NSA would surely have an analytical advantage over anyone else. Since the NSA is happily bragging that it does not even need to crack the code to break in, it should be able to live with hardware-only export restriction. The fact that the NSA is no longer drawing any lines anywhere for software will leave the bad guys guessing as to what it can really decode. In addition, hardware manufacturers will probably have a tougher overturning export restrictions on hardware-enhanced solutions after that because software companies will probably not care. It is clear that the NSA only trusts hardware implementations, as it required Clipper to be manufactured in tamper-resistant cases. All constructive replies welcome. Ern

2 1

Confirmation for subscribe cryptography
by Majordomo＠c2.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-- Someone (possibly you) has requested that your email address be added to or deleted from the mailing list "cryptography(a)c2.net". If you really want this action to be taken, please send the following commands (exactly as shown) back to "Majordomo(a)c2.net": auth 727e8b91 subscribe cryptography cypherpunks(a)toad.com If you do not want to this action taken, just ignore this message and no action will be taken. If you have any questions about the policy of the list owner, please contact "cryptography-approval(a)c2.net". Thanks! Majordomo(a)c2.net

1 0

Why Cryptography is harder than it looks?
by Brent Cunningham 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can you please either: 1) email me a copy; or 2) give me a pointer as to where I can get a copy; of Bruce Schneier's paper on "Why Cryptography is harder than it looks?" Much appreciated. - Brent Check out the Network Computing review of Entrust: www.nwc.com Brent Cunningham Nortel Secure Networks Post Office Box 190 Ramona, California 92065 Tel: 619 788-7676 Fax: 619 788-9696 Email: bc1(a)entrust.com www.nortel.com/entrust

5 4

[crypto] Avatar Protection?
by Ryan Russell/SYBASE 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A graphic-designer friend of mine and I were talking about VRML avatars, and custom design work, and could he offer a service designing them etc... His worry is that since everyone in the same virtual environment as his customer would see the designer avatar, wouldn't they also be able to easily rip off his work? (or his customer's property, take your pick.) I wasn't sure...it seems to me that I read something vaguely along these lines for a cryptography protocol of some sort.. The problem is this: Is there a way for a user to "view" the client's avatar (and in this sense, the user usually has to receive a copy of the code to render the avatar and render it on the local machine) but not save a copy? Assume that a client with no save feature is not a viable option...too easy to work around. I suppose an analogy would be: Is there a way for a person to see the plaintext, but not record it? I think that question really answers itself - no. How about alternatives? If the server of the environment only renders "views" (say, certain angles, or a bitmap) of the avatar, rather than sending the description file? Any other thoughts? Ryan

5 4

No Subject
by Jose Luis Delgado 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

unsuscribe cypherpunks

1 0

RE: Anyone considered adding crypto into Microsoft Outlook?
by Robert Barnes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I have downloaded, and strongly recommend, Jon S. Whalen's Microsoft Exchange Client PGP Command Extension. It adds PGP functionality to Exchange Client in a very neat and clean way. Rob -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.63ui iQCVAwUBMqYkarl39AMaT2JtAQHmtQP/Yu8rh5OkkMC1GVEnz4hY6xFczeDM0Y3U 7toMIDZLVnDwRXuoo9+10sUMnB289mkjoi54fuAhbkjDKYejXVIFilJoSFq+s5FZ K0Rdcaj8qv6VkJwL63gXMdXsFlxHIyQ/oK9/3r7tBgFyzab3tcjVXUGRy/NE5sLD osrJm4WzfVU= =+ffh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Strong-crypto smart cards in Singapore and Germany
by um＠c2.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Peter Gutmann writes: >The standardisation committee of the German banks have also produced >an electronic wallet which should have 25 million (yes, 25M) users by >January of next year. Again, this is a pure electronic wallet, with >2-key triple DES and 768-bit (to become 1024-bit) RSA encryption. >[...] This looks like a very nice system, and unlike Mondex doesn't >rely entirely on the hope that criminals can't get at the data on the >card. For 'security reasons', all transactions are logged in what is called 'shadow accounts'. Not what I would call a very nice system.

1 0

Microsoft & Key Escrow
by Blake Coverett 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Following are some of the relevent snippets from http://www.microsoft.com/intdev/security/export/exporfaq-f.htm. The comments in square brackets are mine. ---cut here--- What is Microsoft's position on supporting key escrow? Key escrow encryption is not a market-driven solution and it raises serious privacy concerns for many customers. It is also new, undeveloped, untested, and uncosted, and it will take a long time to be worked out. Additionally, customers have expressed hesitation about mandatory key escrow, especially if they have to give the keys to the government or a government-selected third party. Therefore, we are not actively adding support for key escrow in our products and technologies. [About as good as we can ask for. I would, however, like that last sentence better if the word 'actively' was missing.] Shouldn't the U.S. government be able to access information that could prevent terrorist acts and crime? Strong non-key escrow encryption is already available from retail outlets, foreign companies, and off the Internet. Thus the U.S. government is already having--and will continue to have--a harder time in the future accessing plain text regardless of U.S. export restrictions. [I suppose it would be too much to expect a third sentence reading. 'This is a good thing.'] What is key recovery? How does it relate to key escrow? Market-driven data recovery refers to a product feature that allows users to maintain a spare private encryption key in a safe place. Generally, a data recovery system escrows a copy of the session key with the message or file and the user (or perhaps his employer) controls the decision whether to utilize this feature. With key escrow the U.S. government holds or has access to a user's private encryption key. It is not yet clear whether such systems are exportable. In the October 1 announcement, the U.S. government referred to "key recovery" without defining it; in all likelihood, however, they still have in mind government key escrow, and not market-driven data recovery. [Hmm... it's just possible that Microsoft's spin doctors are better than those of the US government. Perhaps they can sell the world on their definition of 'key recovery' instead of the one we know the TLAs intended.] ---cut here--- regards, -Blake

3 2