December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: effective GACK fighting
by Blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vlad the Mad wrote: >hence, I think we need to rely more on the courtroom-- it's >the only "language" that bureacrats understand. extremely >expensive, but more effective. it forces us to put our money >where our mouths are. "the price of liberty is eternal vigilance" >and a lot of cash as well. the PRZ case proves the public >can support such a campaign. also tactics >as used by Softwar such as the FOIA attack approach. ....................................................... I'm agreeing with Vlad (euwwwww), mainly because I've had the same idea for a long time, about the effect of winning intellectual battles in a courtroom. This is a prime location for the airing-out of ideas, clarification of concepts, and making decisive conclusions about what is/is not the right way for governming bodies to behave, to do, to treat citizens, in relation to the original ideal (and could that ideal be clarified even further, for those who still don't get it?). It would require some 'real' libertarian lawyers of the kind cpunks could support. But wouldn't it be grand to watch as they decimated the opposition, as they reminded everyone of the raison d'etre for this exceptional nation, and as they 'put it to' a jury, in black & white, just what the deal is in a free society? Shoot, we don't need another President - just a good lawyer. Just imagine! Dream on! .. Blanc

2 1

Re: effective GACK fighting (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 01 Nov 1997 19:50:49 -0800 > From: Blanc <blancw(a)cnw.com> > Subject: Re: effective GACK fighting > Vlad the Mad wrote: > > >hence, I think we need to rely more on the courtroom-- it's > >the only "language" that bureacrats understand. extremely > >expensive, but more effective. it forces us to put our money > >where our mouths are. "the price of liberty is eternal vigilance" > >and a lot of cash as well. the PRZ case proves the public > >can support such a campaign. also tactics > >as used by Softwar such as the FOIA attack approach. > ....................................................... > > I'm agreeing with Vlad (euwwwww), mainly because I've had the same idea for > a long time, about the effect of winning intellectual battles in a > courtroom. This is a prime location for the airing-out of ideas, > clarification of concepts, and making decisive conclusions about what is/is > not the right way for governming bodies to behave, to do, to treat > citizens, in relation to the original ideal (and could that ideal be > clarified even further, for those who still don't get it?). It would > require some 'real' libertarian lawyers of the kind cpunks could support. I also agree. It is high time those of who believe in our rights put their money where our mouth is. But, why do we need a lawyer? We have the right to represent ourselves, why let somebody who has a intimate stake in the status quo represent us? Has there ever been a law suite brought against the Supreme Court or Congress claiming their actions were unconstitutional? The amendment relating to taxation for a start, repeal individual taxation and return to the system originaly intended by the founding fathers. Also, let's start something relating to the 2nd. We should also move to have an amendment which requires all existing and future legislation pass constitutional review *prior* to being voted into existance. We should also move to have an amendment that *requires* government employees be responsible for their actions on a individual basis and eliminate the protection that Congress has put in place, that is *not* in the Constitution. We should further move to have the seizure laws revoked because they are not constitutional. The drug laws should also be attacked on that level as well. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

cute.
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>What's the point in distribuing your public key through the same >channels as a signature? Kinda defeats the purpose. Esp since I can't >verify that the given public key is indeed yours, since you're anonymous. Well, there's some point in it. If I send an anonymous message, sign it with a key, and then include that key you can use that key to verify that it indeed was the key used to sign the message. For this to be of any value, however, future messages should be signed with that key but should not include it. This just proves that the person who wrote the last message is the same guy who wrote the first. That's about the only poitn I can see, though.

1 0

What I've been up to
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 As some of you may know, I have been working on a skunk works project to further knowledge about smartcards and add smartcard support to crypto applications. While the latter isn't nearly ready for release, the former has resulted in a number of tools some on this list should find useful. Namely, we have a truly universal smartcard reader and software. Unlike the proprietary protocol garbage the smartcard vendors will sell you for lots of cash together with their overpriced toolkits, our reader uses only ISO standards and can handle *any* smartcard. In addition, we developed drivers and fully-automated scanning software for UNIX and Win32. If you don't get results just by typing "scan", then whatever you inserted isn't a smartcard. :-) At this time, we need sample smartcards and documentation. Anonymous donations of both is encouraged. For more information, please see https://www.cypherpunks.to/ All questions/offers should be directed to scard-admin(a)cypherpunks.to - -- Lucky Green <shamrock(a)cypherpunks.to> PGP encrypted email preferred. "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNFwSMvXUPTw3WtkkEQLSZQCg8EVW2bprGr4E21W8Qg6EELc9+gcAoMdZ 6LbtU7WCfpfsYPi+Gj4l5ecX =5Bi8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: effective GACK fighting (fwd)
by Blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate wrote: >But, why do we need a lawyer? We have the right to represent ourselves, why >let somebody who has a intimate stake in the status quo represent us? Well, first of all I was being facetious, because of how people are always saying we need Leadership (tm) and need to elect another President in order to have a more Perfect Union. But I said we need a "good" lawyer - a libertarian lawyer - because I expect that it would take someone who had studied the legal system and made it their project to be well-educated and articulate on these matters, to be able to successfully represent the Consitutional values which we subscribe to. Maybe not. I myself don't think I could do it, although I would lend all kinds of backend support to whoever would, and frankly I don't think I would select you, either, Jim, because I don't think your arguments would be effective. I would be thrilled if someone like Tocqueville existed. He would get my vote. >Has there ever been a law suite brought against the Supreme Court or >Congress claiming their actions were unconstitutional? The amendment >relating to taxation for a start, repeal individual taxation and return to >the system originaly intended by the founding fathers. I don't know. But this is the sort of issue I was thinking of. >Also, let's start something relating to the 2nd. We should also move to [. . . ] Okay, you first. heh. You're being quite free with your recommendations. Remember, right now we're just a bunch of people sitting around their computers talking. Don't count your chickens before they hatch.

1 0

Re: democracy?! (Re: Terrorism is a NON-THREAT (fwd)
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Adam Back wrote: >[Ed Note: Jim Choate wrote:] >> At the height of the range wars there were only 9 murders >> associated with the conflict, not hundreds as the popular >> entertainment media and spin-doctor culture would have you >> believe. Get your fucking facts straight. > >I know, that was my point; recall that I said the murder rate was >low. The point was there were way less laws, and few were telling >their neighbours what they could think. It's not hard to believe that this was the case in some places and in some times, but a term like the "Wild West" covers a lot of time and territory. For example, in San Francisco in the early 1860s there was a very high murder rate, something like 1000 people were killed in one year and nobody was convicted. (Forgive minor factual errors as I haven't studied this in awhile.) I have also read reports of substantial violence in the mining communities of Nevada and California with minimal enforcement action taken. It seems likely to me that the low murder rate claim has some exceptions, even if we ignore the mutual atrocities between various native groups, Americans, and Mexicans. I would also like to see how pervasive the temperance movement was in the Wild West. By the late nineteenth century my impression is that it was going strong in the Wild West although it possibly hadn't grasped the levers of power yet. >> Face off's at high-noon simply didn't happen and poeple didn't run >> around having gun fights all the time. > >Right! I'm pretty sure there were gunfights, but that they happened a lot more quickly and a lot less formally than we see on TV. But, I could believe that overall they happened infrequently. Anybody have a reference? I am told that knife fighting was a lot more common than is widely known. A lot of poor runaways showed up to work in various mining towns and they were unable to afford expensive toys like guns. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFu5n5aWtjSmRH/5AQGsoQf7BfsZArO2JaJEGVAw9IzRGEQeykgrkFzc JXmCkT32PmZOA0uhMxPW9cC7ehmijwhr7HOVOKO7j4BlxqXemD4oV5M9/EwQfqzU rFgJJ/GIW5LF7h+HCI8gjsoS0VJtbpDs/d2zsuCOvwM4yXkQ330jwaAfk/iErgYs 3thfm7ZAgYcLJPeeCDc541b+eKAtxvbHoOCp3UTqM3EBws0NpDlD9+A3ZzT1a87e UAUsvesecZyz3e1ZHlqw4L08eHdmaMxtkHE3bDrnfJQA4Ij4HPa1ayMMlJmC1XhR U7PEl8CWC9dSLN2Z6pUpC0pIp3A6zqhISPxDW8nGpUipKwhojicXfQ== =lL5j -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: cute
by Mixmaster 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > There was a discussion a little while ago suggesting that toad.com had > been compromised by people who were sowing dissension by partially > distributing certain messages. Had toad signed all of its messages, > it would be possible to obtain evidence supporting this hypothesis > without relying entirely on the word of people we may not know. How do signed messages deal with the incompleat distribushun problem? If legit signed messages are not sent to half the list, what does the sig gain us? > Had somebody compromised toad, they would still have to correctly sign > messages. But, depending on the compromise, this could be possible. > > This would also prevent an attack where somebody forges mail from a > > cypherpunks list machine to flush out identities. If the attacker > > sends a unique message to every person, he or she will be able to > > break an identity if the message is replied to on the list. Thats why its a good ideal to missquote peaple. And to only reply from the account you read on. And to use remalers. Monty Cantspell Editor in Chief Groan Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/groan_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantspell_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFu/fZaWtjSmRH/5AQGSdAf8DdZj05c4/WS/V9YF/o1lZ9W7/5vGlTDf mvU8nFPNT4TB9eha7UW/Ub2xaUI4TneBrWrIwXTeEqo1slUbzmShneeUoUlKMEho +PlrA8NjQhh/QRwMXsVUp4vtoV3oDUbCTRLE8PWIikC7Rpo92UocujfFhsey3Ewu /SCA/TrkjVO8efeR4H6GOBnVWd/+4YigLPtZhP6QzlKjf3Soq5OJNfVlHA3ci+3a UgbM+IQ/OTTkXMVbya60veWrN6/Njo/66D0EyUuHB5/bUHkFIjnWaz1DSG8g0vJq XfFNOusz9Dkrhz0gearv/fbRb93GxXRejTK/Jo9sMJta8pWAm4d1Yg== =5Loi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Japan's Constitution and GAK
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does someone have access to a verificable copy of Japan's Constitution? Someone pointed me to one on the web, which would seem to make difficult implemmenting international GAK systems. http://www.leftjustified.com/leftjust/lib/sc/ht/wtp/japan.html Article 21. Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed. No censorship shall be maintained, nor shall the secrecy of any means of communication be violated. -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

new PGP key
by J. Lasser 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Due to a hard drive crash near the beginning of last month and an inane lack of backups, I lost my old PGP keys (2047/0xDED5B791 and 1024/0xEC001E4D). I've generated a new key, enclosed below. Key info is as follows: Type Bits KeyID Created Expires Algorithm Use sec+ 2047 0x4CDD6451 1997-10-12 ---------- RSA Sign & Encrypt f16 Fingerprint16 = D8 5A 85 06 93 6C 86 E8 79 3A 07 AA 15 6E 3A BD I will personally verify this information at the physical DC Cypherpunk meeting tomorrow (well, today, actually), as well as hand out copies of the fingerprint. The key is also available at my web page, at either http://students.goucher.edu/jlasser/interests/pgpkey.html or http://gwyn.tux.org/~lasser/interests/pgpkey.html Yes, I keep backups now ;-) Type bits/keyID Date User ID pub 2047/4CDD6451 1997/10/12 Jon Lasser <jon(a)lasser.org> -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQENAzRBY9QAAAEH/2q2YaKg6zOpzWNHyPuO2cdEAIAIhsmOPjOp61bnrU9LAyKK gNJn2+Tn9PTfbnq0S8HupLTvgUsSuv0P0d1SzgDV0LtgUy9CYrtwkcExvK6UO103 RksrpAP0+wbaAWjp2Qogn2ZJskn8wayl1J9cHX4VfFQNUxQyqBqV8HUK5W+R4N91 76bWX0QrX+yQm0wCW8PT6xTe5L23N7lfUsDawOxsjIxHom3dg2lr1zQ1Pu/4wrw7 Mcoj1Wy+kxOxpZaMPF8ylyu953LKaPPJw5yQpjtzKBdi/ZxFI86rB7K2nra1NxGi c8Yq+Jy+LzGwI0RF330zI2/wpvqsoSqcnUzdZFEABRG0G0pvbiBMYXNzZXIgPGpv bkBsYXNzZXIub3JnPokAlQMFEDRCtOcalOfjf5iOyQEBBTID/iqETsBM1EZaOJlr nbkSYEcfrnM29Uo2fgbD7mQlrgOb/jNScvh7LaHdU7yZMaYmszCrC29S06RZYSOf HUCN62yVVZyFlWECvqcjspTzi0tdmhhpjHLAdW3/odmEbW6fsWhTauPCo1pp4IXq lyo9so9iAtjGSDB6QfFhf4htAcuWiQCVAwUQNEGY2xN3Wx8QwqUtAQHLxgP6AnOj ZWIMYazhH2pYemXrHmmyMTtM+CqW+YFCgD4ioDnwZqsghaNF8d7klJ7zL2GNK9XX o2PbBowsrZJ8Nt4tAMdC++giYLqW4UCb0BO1oLnKO/khbcPR0J3F0nBfIejbc82U aM72raafmZjpqCspjD5hBMRSaoS0xZaTe+sCJzOJARUDBRA0QZiLXprN4cSo7vEB AUmoB/0YspOyZ0u+0XbQsMsM4GPVlPWib0WiVeWpF2sBmzzCET7JIM5LcmqU71GG sGa1j/1Xc4rXMflzdPTCm2l+oRiQIOAfhW6daLR13DXYLPnyZl6dpy2SvRA5gdpj vztoLc4WafmEs5T0+cLkD6WqJ2fUBFH30UO8kJgIm7dGucFE73pdQJ75Ss+AmeM7 9Hu0lKKtTnaLnxLktuiJb6/xyzmAReW+dT1BJg0iKn0J2qJD5ZvPm1KRsBINgSO+ mmxtjo8IgCX71KLcWy/JtdD3Dizm1sXjg+wBD81WLhuQzhbbA8yNvhjQOnHqSfpC hq4ixqQUA7WQXicq21hy+xQW4eHciQEVAwUQNEFj1aEqnJ1M3WRRAQFdtAf/RRdT nUmU/hCY+lnA5V5O0zEQa9kX3/WWQ5f8asVEjij2NqZcBxnthwDxF0kFcq89TmjS oOg+FGJv7r23H7rloIHcLowFq3Eg0+enR/RqOv32N3KxJCC2OIu2FuXs2bBKs64+ kqHqs6+SL0hTuWGAn9y+7VuXE+Qy1F/rUQ/Rj3w2ZKQKS9x/c8Nukor3yGAfgvce pr20K5AgMSGjZXO4GttyTkw4SSRL+OdT3cZ+b0JLwe2R4AU5lb3oVXpjkD1eMcCJ isTGMGc9kMBCDMarCbhr1tvJlAAp7I7A5GQgUI77r5y8OjEVOoOxTjiTmXDvUdp9 KTjzW/PqE9xzo0sLWA== =xg8Z -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- -- Jon Lasser (410)383-7962 jon(a)lasser.org http://wauug.erols.com/~lasser/ New PGP key coming soon "Flap your ears, Dumbo! The feather was only a trick!"

1 0

No Subject
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

## In-reply-to: <199711020051.QAA23884(a)sirius.infonex.com> (message from Mix on Sat, 1 Nov 1997 16:51:19 -0800 (PST)) Subject: Re: cute. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Monty says > What would be really nice is if the mailing list machines time stamped > messages. That would be nice. I wonder, could one of our list hosts add a script to sign outgoing majordomo traffic? Here's a script to do it: - --------------------8<-------------------- #!/usr/local/bin/perl $userID="cypherpunks\(a)algebra.com"; $pgp="/usr/local/bin/pgp"; $tmp="/tmp/.sig$$"; undef($/); $post = <STDIN>; ($headers,@body) = split(/\n\n/,$post);$body = join("\n\n",@body); open(PIPE,"|$pgp -satf +batchmode +verbose=0 -u $userID > $tmp"); print PIPE $body; close(PIPE); open(SIGNED,"<$tmp");$signed=<SIGNED>;close(SIGNED); print "$headers\n\n$signed"; unlink($tmp); - --------------------8<-------------------- It handles one mail only. If you want to run it on a mail folder, use formail. > This would also prevent an attack where somebody forges mail from a > cypherpunks list machine to flush out identities. If the attacker > sends a unique message to every person, he or she will be able to > break an identity if the message is replied to on the list. You could do something similar with independent parties posting hashes of messages in the feed they got to the list, or to subscribers to the service. The list bot signing is more convenient to check though with existing software. Also, unfortunately, most MUA pgp software doesn't check nested signatures, so a signature from the list would break ability to auto check signatures from posters. Here's another script to check the list added signature on receipt: - --------------------8<-------------------- #!/usr/local/bin/perl $userID="cypherpunks\(a)algebra.com"; $pgp="/usr/local/bin/pgp"; $tmp="/tmp/.sig$$";$in="/tmp/.in$$";$msg="/tmp/.msg$$"; undef($/); $post = <STDIN>; ($headers,@body) = split(/\n\n/,$post);$body = join("\n\n",@body); open(BODY,">$in");print BODY $body;close(BODY); $res = system("$pgp -f +batchmode +verbose=0 -u $userID < $in > $tmp 2> $msg"); open(SIGNED,"<$tmp");$signed=<SIGNED>;close(SIGNED); open(ERR,"<$msg");$err=<ERR>;close(ERR); if ($res==0) { ($who) = ($err =~ m/Good signature from user "(.*)"\./); if ($who !~ m/$userID/) { $res=1; } } $headers =~ s/\[FORGERY\]//g; if ($res) { $headers =~ s/(Subject: )([^\n]*)/\1\[FORGERY\] \2/g; } print "$headers\n"; print "X-Signature: ", $res ? "forgery" : "ok $who", "\n"; print "\n\n$signed\n"; unlink($tmp,$in,$msg); - --------------------8<-------------------- > I'm not sure a timestamp matters that much for "authenticating" your > key. After all, you don't own "Amad3us", you own key 0x4D162BBE1. Yes. Except for minor nit: 0x4D162BBE1 is susceptible to a 0xdeadbeef attack, anyone can generate another key with that keyID. Even the fingerprint is spoofable. But the combination is truly hard to spoof, and this I do own: 0xa11a8a18bf6dbe8362926e9458a3616d/0x4d162bbe1 (fingerprint/keyID). Amad3us (0xa11a8a18bf6dbe8362926e9458a3616d/0x4d162bbe1) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQCVAwUBNFwjxvKMuKFNFivhAQGYnAQA33Ss68TKF+QfDGweQZ7TAkbmlOeqPC/J iBoV5zA+skqdgs+PD2afLAhQn5otm7xbx7rBEnBgMOYff9GyKB6Bfs/po7juwqs5 dACGPZhc5kNf4f18V04jv5sr6PWLWdwsoVegshVsiHmQgWtG9UlnZ0wKe2ORKzxf sQkJsIe3/jA= =naXX -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Privacy Software
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- nobody(a)replay.com (Anonymous) wrote: >After seeing the intents of PGP Inc. with the release of their new >PGP that breaks the old free versions, I have all but written them >off as anything but the Enemy, and am waiting for a public reply on >the list by Tim May to make it official. Personally, I don't think it is that useful to draw up enemy lists. It is clear PGP, Inc. cannot be relied upon to achieve our goals for us. I think a lot of people half expected something like this out of them, anyway. All that left wing politics and weird anti-business stuff from the PGP crowd did not augur well. >But now what? Please someone answer my questions about PGP - it >appears that the 5.x versions are not compatible with the 2.x >versions which came previous. Is this so? Also, the direction they >seem to be heading is in providing more and more non-free GAKked >product. But aren't the 2.x and 5.x versions freeware? If so, can't >others - a group of individuals - take that source code and build off >of that? The PGP source code is not the worst I've ever seen, but it's kind of odd. We should consider a rewrite, which gives us the added benefit that it will be completely unencumbered. It also gives us the opportunity to write it in a language other than C, one which truly supports encapsulation. C code is hard to verify with great confidence because it is possible to obfuscate it and introduce security holes. This means that C requires one to trust the authors to a greater extent than is desirable. It would also be neat if the code were written outside the United States and were put into the public domain. If a company snaps it up and bases a product on it - great! The more people using the code the better. The whole issue of compatibility is an interesting one. Would it be a good idea to have a cryptographic system which was completely incompatible with PGP, given the Big Brother risk? Something I've never liked about PGP is their approach to encrypting to multiple keys. For one thing, the PGP crowd seems overly conservative with bit expenditure, which is silly because bits are cheap. This means that creating entirely separate messages is completely economical. It also introduces security risk. Let's say one of the three public keys used to encrypt a message has been compromised. Let's say the other two parties live in places where they aren't supposed to be exposed to bad ideas. Once one key is compromised, the other recipients are compromised in receiving a forbidden message. On the other hand, if they were separately encrypted, the link between the three messages is not obvious. And, even if the messages *are* linked, it's still not obvious that the other recipients didn't get something else. It provides a lot of deniability. So, perhaps a protocol which does not support anything more than one encryption key per message would be a good idea. Something else that bothers me about PGP is compression. It strikes me as bad design to build this into an encryption program. Zimmermann has suggested that this increases security. I doubt this. Modern algorithms like IDEA (please correct me if I am wrong) have the property that if you get one bit, you've got them all. And, I wonder if compression doesn't actually weaken security? Let's say I forward a known message with some commentary. Since the compression tables will be known, it seems like the increased size of the message could provide some interesting information about the preceding commentary. All by itself, this probably doesn't matter, but combined with other information it might result in a breach. In any event, that which is ambiguous should be eliminated. It would also be nice if the messages were padded to predetermined sizes, say 10K, 20K, 40K, etc. (Once compression is eliminated this is less of an issue.) Anyway, if Adam Back wanted to undertake it, a nice project would be design a good cypherpunk communications protocol. Simple, clean, and secure. It seems to me that issues like wiping the stack as every function returns, the formats of key rings, and security measures on the users computer should not be in a communications standard. Some other features: maybe a hashcash field which makes it possible to quickly weed out junk. The challenge string could be related to the key. Also, it would be neat if the system were designed with steganography in mind. How about a one time pad mode? One time pads are more practical than widely believed. Many things we talk about we *do* want to keep quiet for the rest of our natural lives. Our present tool set and practices do not do this reliably. (But, I could be persuaded that one time pad mode is actually something which should tunnel inside the cypherpunks communication protocol. Might as well keep everything clean and orthogonal.) >Piss on these assholes and their licensing fees. There's nothing wrong with paying people for their work! It's even desirable if you want tools to be available. >It was inevitable, anyway. They are a corporation after all, and the >corporations are not on "our" sides. > >I can see a scenario where government is impotent and destroyed >within 10 years. What will remain and will be harder to eradicate are >the corporations. I don't think we should rely on corporate software >whenever possible, because it always comes with an ulterior motive. I am of two minds on this question. Free software is pretty darned neat. It's extremely easy to deal with and it's nifty that you can write and release something and tens of thousands of people end up using it. If the code is simply placed in the public domain, then anybody can use it for any purpose they like. This has appeal. On the other hand, corporations can be a good way to get things done, too. It is possible that the PGP approach of giving away software was ultimately a mistake because now people don't expect to have to pay for their code. Elimination of a crypto market might be a bad thing. It's clear that going the corporate route has to be handled with some care. Given the political implications, investors have certain risks. Also, many people seem to switch into a different mode as soon as they have a company. Anything which they perceive as increasing their profits becomes good. PGP, Inc. has gone this way, we've seen First Virtual do some unsavory things, and even good old C2 has made a few people uncomfortable. It doesn't have to be this way, of course. Look at Comsec Partners. We don't see any "conversation recovery", lying press releases, or any other nonsense from them, just a beautiful product. The key probably has to do with understanding clearly what it is you want to do. If you know you want to promote privacy and free speech and are willing to volunteer a substantial amount of your time to do so, then foregoing some blood money or maintaining your integrity is a lot easier to do. What I like about selling software is that you could actually make good living by doing the right thing. And, after all, if you've spent six months writing something, why shouldn't the users kick in a little money instead of freeloading? I would like to see more crypto users in the habit of paying for tools and in the habit starting security companies. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFwdNpaWtjSmRH/5AQEBZAf+IKyhaAdUWVAYWidPAOu/qw/qiGAYB6go hxix3lOpj3RHDj87OlzzPIpY7aSbvvPOq6PkOCIecpjsO/e2F4vkXlWMtwONJ7gV azGEC//voYyvC55diSHfqUg0zOY/8Ddsy460uIDX4jWJUkJzPMRSRIfvsmo/Lpf+ HFJcIcze/w8bD2k9gelBthbIgZOpCjplY68MyPNurCcVbpKlIw/RmyX6WI4hAkYk UoRlFh4SeAmNWla4t0l3NGkpdxfVJ8tIAl6uNvV3enjjfctgm/5KRr8n7lcjLvOT jKUJn0DDFD2pdZ66Unp3xeKpOMxLZ4Bqf704piaCSmj4Erul7x1Gmg== =USz8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

ANNOUNCE: pgp5-pine 0.1
by Jeremey Barrett 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 This is to announce version 0.1 of pgp5-pine, a set of shell (sh) scripts for integrating pgp 5.x for unix into the pine mail reader. The scripts operate via pine's facility for filters, both incoming and outgoing. You can encrypt, decrypt, sign, and verify messages with some ease. The send filter will automagically retrieve keys from a keyserver if told to do so, and leans toward paranoia when it cannot encrypt a message. This is the first released version, there is always the possibility of bugs and/or behaviors you don't agree with. Note that these scripts do _not_ handle PGP/MIME, as pine does not pass the MIME structure of messages to filters. For more information, see https://www.cypherpunks.to/ Disclaimer: I am not responsible for the choice of colors on the cypherpunks.to web site, or any damage to anything yours from using this code. Please direct all bug reports, requests, or other inquiries to jeremey(a)cypherpunks.to Regards, Jeremey. - -- Jeremey Barrett jeremey(a)cypherpunks.to -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNFxJmILSRssP+J/GEQKHEwCg8v+wYCumDIpYhow4+vh/bVfYploAoOkh XWe+IJGVTEj9dAFECSGuD259 =CmDv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Definition: Spin Doctoring
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Definition: Spin Doctoring You are standing naked in the gas chamber with a thousand of your fellow ethnic outlaws when the voice of Herr Himmler blares out from the speakers, "I have decided to spare your lives." The loud cheers of yourself and your grateful ethnological comrades are cut short by the sound of a deadly gas being released from the ceiling vents. A different voice comes over the speaker, saying, "What Herr Himmler _meant_ to say, was" Sick humor? Moi?

1 0

InfoWar Feedback Form #AB7-09-C3F87-%&((&%$%*
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I, the undersigned undertoad, herby express my evaluation of the TruthMonger multi-user persona, based on my understanding of the contents of Epilogue 8 of 'InfoWar'. TruthMonger should: 1. Run for President of the United States of America. [ ] ~ Y/N 2. Seek medical help immediately. [ ] ~ Y/N PLP Signature: Thanking you for your input, A Concerned Illegal Immigrant

2 1

Change in Bernstein oral argument time
by Cindy Cohn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The time for the oral argument in the Bernstein case has been moved by the court from 1:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. Hope to see you there, Cindy ************************ Cindy A. Cohn McGlashan & Sarrail, P. C. 177 Bovet Road, 6th Floor San Mateo, CA 94402 (415) 341-2585 (tel) (415)341-1395 (fax) Cindy(a)McGlashan.com http://www.McGlashan.com

1 0

InfoWar Epilogue 8 / TEXT
by Don't Ask... 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- The True Story of the InterNet Part III InfoWar Final Frontier of the Digital Revolution Behind the ElectroMagnetic Curtain by TruthMonger <tm(a)dev.null> Copyright 1997 Pearl Publishing ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- InfoWar Table of Contents * Epilogue * TruthMonger#1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Epilogue ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subject: Infowar circa 1850 From: nobody(a)neva.org (Neva Remailer) To: cypherpunks(a)Algebra.COM -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "Blood Meridian: Or the Evening Redness in the West" by Cormac McCarthy The Reverend Green had been playing to a full house daily as long as the rain had been falling and the rain had been falling for two weeks. When the kid ducked into the ratty canvas tent there was standing room along the walls, a place or two, and such a heady reek of the wet and bathless that they themselves would sally forth into the downpour now and again for fresh air before the rain drove them in again. He stood with others of his kind along the back wall. The only thing that might have distinguished him in that crowd was that he was not armed. Neighbors, said the reverend, he couldnt stay out of these here hell, hell, hellholes right here in Nacogdoches. I said to him, said: You goin to take the son of God in there with ye? And he said: Oh no. No I aint. And I said: Dont you know that he said I will foller ye always even unto the end of the road? Well, he said, I aint askin nobody to go nowheres. And I said: Neighbor, you dont need to ask. He's a goin to be there with ye ever step of the way whether ye ask it or ye dont. I said: Neighbor, you caint get shed of him. Now. Are you going to drag him, *him*, into that hellhole yonder? You ever see such a place for rain? The kid had been watching the reverend. He turned to the man who spoke. He wore long moustaches after the fashion of teamsters and he wore a widebrim hat with a low round crown. He was slightly walleyed and he was watching the kid earnestly as if he'd know his opinion about the rain. I just got here, said the kid. Well it beats all I ever seen. The kid nodded. An enormous man dressed in an oilcloth slicker had entered the tent and removed his hat. He was bald as a stone and he had no trace of beard and he had no brows to his eyes nor lashes to them. He was close on to seven feet in height and he stood smoking a cigar even in this nomadic house of God and he seemed to have removed his hat only to chase the rain from it for now he put it on again. The reverend had stopped his sermon altogether. There was no sound in the tent. All watched the man. He adjusted the hat and then pushed his way forward as far as the crateboard pulpit where the reverend stood and there he turned to address the reverend's congregation. His face was serene and strangely childlike. His hands were small. He held them out. Ladies and gentlemen I feel it my duty to inform you that the man holding this revival is an imposter. He holds no papers of divinity from any institution recognized or improvised. He is altogether devoid of the least qualifications to the office he has usurped and has only committed to memory a few passages from the good book for the purpose of lending to his fraudulent sermons some faint flavor of the piety he despises. In truth, the gentleman standing here before you posing as a minister of the Lord is not only totally illiterate but is also wanted by the law in the states of Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and Arkansas. Oh God, cried the reverend. Lies, lies! He began reading feverishly from his opened bible. On a variety of charges the most recent of which involved a girl of eleven years - I said eleven - who had come to him in trust and whom he was surprised in the act of violating while actually clothed in the livery of his God. A moan swept through the crowd. A lady sank to her knees. This is him, cried the reverend, sobbing. This is him. The devil. Here he stands. Let's hang the turd, called an ugly thug from the gallery to the rear. Not three weeks before this he was run out of Fort Smith Arkansas for having congress with a goat. Yes lady, that is what I said. Goat. Why damn my eyes if I wont shoot the son of a bitch, said a man rising at the far side of the tent, and drawing a pistol from his boot he leveled it and fired. The young teamster instantly produced a knife from his clothing and unseamed the tent and stepped outside into the rain. The kid followed. They ducked low and ran across the mud toward the hotel. Already gunfire was general within the tent and a dozen exits had been hacked through the canvas walls and people were pouring out, women screaming, folk stumbling, folk trampled underfoot in the mud. The kid and his friend reached the hotel gallery and wiped the water from their eyes and turned to watch. As they did so the tent began to sway and buckle and like a huge and wounded medusa it slowly settled to the ground trailing tattered canvas walls and ratty guyropes over the ground. The baldheaded man was already at the bar when they entered. On the polished wood before him were two hats and a double handful of coins. He raised his glass but not to them. They stood up to the bar and ordered whiskeys and the kid laid his money down but the barman pushed it back with his thumb and nodded. These here is on the judge, he said. They drank. The teamster set his glass down and looked at the kid or he seemed to, you couldnt be sure of his gaze. The kid looked down the bar to where the judge stood. The bar was that tall not every man could even get his elbows up on it but it came just to the judge's waist and he stood with his hands placed flatwise on the wood, leaning slightly, as if about to give another address. By now men were piling through the doorway, bleeding, covered in mud, cursing. They gathered about the judge. A posse was being drawn to pursue the preacher. Judge, how did you come to have the goods on that no-account? Goods? said the judge. When was you in Fort Smith? Fort Smith? Where did you know him to know all that stuff on him? You mean the Reverend Green? Yessir. I reckon you was in Fort Smith fore ye come out here. I was never in Fort Smith in my life. Doubt that he was. They looked from one to the other. Well where was it you run up on him? I never laid eyes on the man before today. Never even heard of him. He raised his glass and drank. There was a strange silence in the room. The men looked like mud effigies. Finally someone began to laugh. Then another. Soon they were all laughing together. Someone bought the judge a drink. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFf3Xj7jyGKQlFZpAQFAVwgAnY5GGhOnj97T7fUzmNF1fSthVoVOSLr7 8pVFBUOdTXgKGtDmlr+TqaEzkdEzxJMUE+ACA6uGb/LwmyIhxnPYwRqfhWBjOHD3 /Y1uDVan81uVAtCgIZeOxOTskoM0hE3N3qxNSiITutbM2fxZiiUH1kWTs1+JuyLp h1sfwyzV4UL4sG6fZRKdf+4Mtg7jZvOJNbjKtzp7A19zxfLuLawM6DC31OlnDduw wdSWvv3CG/rOyExeCUtD/sTunPF4a7nsRb7mZQfj564ibvhbrKFcUv/z1lo7X06I yCC4JTOshBBmkzc6PNuUGc7hRGeghoXjHw1cClGjiOlr1HDoxdVVvg== =hKGE -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- You are What you do When it counts - The Masao ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- TruthMonger#1 "Identity Theft Is the Sincerest Form of Flattery." I would be the last one to deny that those who have followed the Chronicles of InfoWar and/or my posts to the CypherPunks mailing list would be justified in concluding that I am a raving lunatic, suffering from some bizarre form of psychotic delusion which has yet to be properly researched, defined and categorized by medical science. However, please allow me to say a few words in my own defense, in the hope of giving you at least a modicum of insight into the method of my madness, and vice-versa. I have lived a life which many people would consider rather remarkable and, in some aspects, rather unbelievable, as well. {In reality, 'unusual' is probably a more fitting, though mundane, description.} In order to impress upon you that I am not consciously or (too) subconsciously attempting to pretentiously portray (or inwardly deem) myself as some kind of eminent, all-wise, all-seeing guru or genius at the expense of the individual uniqueness, talents and value of others, such as yourself, let me state that I truly recognize, even in my moments of cynicism, egoism, or a plethora of other human states of consciousness and being, that what I regard as the absolute wonderment of my own life is no less remarkable than that of each and every other being sharing this corporeal and metaphysical existence with me. If I were able to single handedly bring about world-peace upon the earth tomorrow, heal all of the sick and lame, and make life a proverbial bowl of cherries for all humankind, I would still regard myself as no more remarkable than any man or woman who is capable of bringing new life into this world. Anyone who has ever been present at the birth of a child is likely to understand that I am speaking of the folly of our pretensions and our posturing, in the face of the genuine mystery of creation. Having said this, let me proceed to attempt to elucidate the reasons for the sincerity I strive for in writing, no matter how 'right' or 'wrong' I may be in my beliefs, values and world-view. I was very young as a child OK, seriously The expression "been there, done that, got the T-shirt" applies to each and every one of us in our own way. My life has been a process of going everywhere, doing everything, seeing and experiencing an amazing variety of the reality-bytes that life has to offer. Many whom I have come in contact with, who have 'settled down' to live a life very similar to that of their family, friends and neighbors, find me to be an interesting fascinating 'character.' What many of them do not fully realize is that I find them to be equally fascinating. Despite the wild, far-ranging roller coaster of life I have experienced, I recognize that it is in no way more reality-encompassing than the life of someone who has borne and raised a child, or children, or who have dedicated their life to the pursuit of total understanding of minute area of the total scheme of reality. I have sometimes been involved in conversations with people who pour out their woes, their self-doubts, their regrets of 'roads not taken,' etc., and I have said, in reply, "You have raised a wonderful child. You, and everyone else who has done so deserve a Pulitzer Prize. No one on the face of the earth, however renowned, has ever done anything which is superior to what you have accomplished." Everyone has things that they have the background and ability to do and corresponding life lessons and experience that they have to share with their fellow terrestrial travelers. What I believe I have to share is the perceptive viewpoint of someone who has garnered a reasonably objective outlook on the life and society around them, as a result of having always stood slightly outside the boundaries of whatever situational reality they were interacting with at any point in time. To illustrate, allow me to point out that I have been through "The End of the World" twice, in my lifetime to date. The first time was as a baptized member of Herbert W. Armstrong's Worldwide Church of God. (I am not only Washed In The Blood Of The Lamb, but I also scrubbed behind my ears-mom would be proud of me.) One of the reasons I still regard the members of the WWCOG very highly is that during my stay in the church I suffered very little discrimination or judgment as a result of being vastly different from almost all other members of the church, in ways that would have resulted, as a member of most organizations (religious or secular), in my being the target of coercive attempts at 'changing me for the better', or [Your Example of Infringement of One's Right To Self-Determination Here]. Hard to believe that hard-core Christians could be this liberal (Example # 6): "We would rather that you didn't strip naked during church services, paint yourself blue and stand on your head while chanting 'Allah is goodAllah is great. Hopefully, further Bible study will lead you to understand that these actions are not necessary for spiritual development. But, hey! We could be wrong." While you may be chuckling at my humorous representation of what I am explaining, here, let me assure you that this tongue in cheek example is no more outlandish than 'the real facts.' When "The End of the World" was announced, church members made preparations for holing up on the specified date, having a fantastic 'last meal' and preparing for a final night of fellowship during which most 'masks' would be dropped (being as how the last day before the end of all physical existence doesn't lend itself to being pretentious in the hope of receiving future benefit from misleading yourself and others). {FYI: Yes, I was tempted to make the obvious "going out with a bang <nod-nod, wink-wink>" suggestions, all in good humor, but this was one of the few times in my life that I was able to resist my basic urge to be infantile and immature.} After the WWCOG members, including myself, awoke the next morning to find that it still hurt when they pinched their arm, so this couldn't possibly be Heaven , the church went through a major shake-up, with many members becoming disillusioned and leaving for browner pastures. Most of those who remained in the church went through great mental and emotional turmoil in the process of resolving the dichotomy of remaining a member of a 'True Church' which had failed the ultimate test of 'infallibility'. Not me This is part and parcel of what I am trying to explain as an example of what I regard as an ability on my part to exercise a great deal of objectivity, even during my active participation in entering into membership in a particular or specific belief-system. I never, at any time, believed that the proverbial "End of the World" was imminent. Quite the opposite, in fact, yet I participated fully in the event. Why? When you are a member of a bowling team, you bowl ten frames because that is what you are there to do, as a member of the team. That is how those involved keep score and the agreed basis upon which they judge the results. I made no attempt to burst anyone else's bubble while preparing for an event which I was certain would not occur but, when asked by other church members, I did not attempt to obfuscate my beliefs in this regard, instead speaking honestly about my view that the person reading the road map of the future was not aware of the concept of magnetic deflection affecting the perception of True North. On the other hand, neither did I negate the possibility that I might, at the appointed time, be proven wrong, as I found myself swept up into Heaven , to be confronted by a Supreme Being who was wagging a finger at me, saying, "You are going to find your eternal stay in Heaven considerably more enjoyable if you drop the cynicism." As a result of having the objectivity which comes from being what I characterize as "an insider watching from the outside," I found that I could observe or participate in the debates between the 'True Believers' and the 'Disillusioned' and manage to separate the wheat from the chaff, chiefly because I didn't have a 'position to defend.' i.e.-I hadn't given away my bowling ball (metaphorically speaking) to charity, out of certitude that I would not be needing it the following day, so I had no need to 'place blame' on anyone for my having to buy a new bowling ball for the upcoming tournament. Although I ceased actively participating in the WWCOG shortly after The End of the World , it was a result of having already learned and experienced most of those things which I was there to apperceive. In the wake of the World inconsiderately failing to End on schedule, the titular heads of the Worldwide Church of God rechecked their figures and, sure enough, realized that they had forgotten to 'carry the three' and that it had been a mistake to use the recently legislated value of pi (3.0) in their calculations. I found this to be very disturbing. I personally had absolutely no problem with the World failing to End as predicted, nor with those who had mistakenly (as it turned out) made the prediction. My beliefs and core values were neither strengthened nor weakened by the details of the event-I am proud to say that I felt no need to paint myself 'green' instead of 'blue' thereafter, in an attempt to rebuild a non-existent ivory tower of religious/spiritual belief. Had those involved not busied themselves with attempting to pretend that they were still infallible, but bad at math, my sojourn in the Worldwide Church of God would have undoubtedly lasted a little longer. As it was, I felt that there were more precipitous routes to additional knowledge and learning, since advancement of corporal and ethereal cognitive capabilities had been put on hold in the church in the interests of regeneration of structures which were not truly necessary to the objectives of religious spirituality. To tell the truth, I find it rather ironic that intelligent, spiritually oriented individuals who recognize the foolishness of worshipping golden calves often fail to recognize that the 'semi-worshipping' of 'wooden' calves may be a step forward, but is equally foolish, nonetheless. My participation in the second (non-annual) "End of the World" was as a member of the Institute of Applied Metaphysics. The event/process was very similar in concept to the WWCOG "End of the World" , with only the circumstantial details being significantly different. i.e. - As a member of IAM, I stripped naked, painted my self purple, and stood on my head during the meetings, conferences and classes. Once again, those involved in "The End of the World" awoke the next morning to find that it still hurt when they pinched their arm (or when I pinched their butt). Again, there was a certain amount of disillusionment in the wake of continued corporeal existence, but less so than in the WWCOG, since there was less of a structured, ritual schematization involved. i.e. - more people wearing jeans, fewer people wearing suits and ties I eventually moved on to a divergent path in my quest toward finding new and better ways to investigate the underlying unity within the boundaries of diversity, once again taking along the lessons and experiences I had garnered during my hiatus from constant motion (as opposed to fleeing from the abomination of human fallibility). The wake of this second failure of the World to End according to schedule was of lesser amplitude than the previous one I had participated in, rocking the boat of established position/beliefs less than before. I attribute this to the fact that the response of the titular heads of the Institute of Applied Metaphysics was not to 'deny' that there had been no failure, only a slight miscalculation (PolitiSpeak), but was, instead, to 'reveal' to the participants that the world had, in fact, come to an end, exactly as predicted. The 'loophole' that validated this Nostradamian spin-doctoring was that the precise wording of the original prediction was "the world AS WE KNOW IT will come to an end." {Petty and cynical way to have fun with 'voices pontificating in the wilderness' when they are so foolish as to give a date and time to their "End of the World" prediction: Ask them if the time quoted is Eastern Time, Pacific Time, or Greenwich Mean Time. NostraCanadaIsis: "The 'End of the World' will be at 9:00 p.m. (9:30 p.m. in Newfoundland). Definition: Spin Doctoring - You are standing naked in the gas chamber with a thousand of your fellow ethnic outlaws when the voice of Herr Himmler blares out from the speakers, "I have decided to spare your lives." The loud cheers of yourself and your grateful ethnological comrades are cut short by the sound of a deadly gas being released from the ceiling vents. A different voice comes over the speaker, saying, "What Herr Himmler meant to say, was" Sick humor? Moi? The two examples above involve group participation events which are synchronous with individual examples of 'what I do.' Everyone has things which they 'do'. What I am speaking of here is something which I believe most people inherently understand, but which is difficult to put into words. i.e. - I can only describe my understanding of the concept I am expressing, in the hope that you can compare and interpret what I say in the light of your own knowledge and experience, be it a translation of what I say into a mathematical equation, an emotional feeling, a graphical representation, or whatever What some people do is to live a life of optimism which drives cynical people crazy, particularly in light of the fact that the history of events in the optimist's life confirms that his or her world-view is valid. What other people do is live a life of cynicism which drives optimists crazy, in light of the fact that the cynic's observations and logic are irrefutable, thus forcing the optimist to face the fact that life is not a bowl of cherries for those whose destiny is not to reflect the benefits of the power of positive thinking but, rather, the reality that life is a crap shoot. i.e. <squared> - Some people always find a parking space exactly where they need one, and other people never find a parking space in the needed spot. The "End of the World" is something that I do. 'Participate in' might equally describe what I refer to as 'something I do', if viewed from the perspective of the interplay between myself and others. To explain, on a one-on-one level of individuality, what I am speaking of, I should explain that, on occasion, people I know, vaguely know, or don't know from Adam, will show up on my doorstep, and spend time with me. A total stranger sometimes shows up on my doorstep and, without a word of explanation, spends several days helping me install a new carpet, trim my hedges, or whatever I happen to be involved in at the time. All without saying a word before departing at some point, never to cross my path again before making their exit from this mortal plane. Or, they may show up and sit in my living room for an hour, a day, a week, and tell me their life story. "I was very young, as a childthen, this morning" Once again, after they have done whatever it is they needed to do, they depart. The common link between the people who enter my life to perform variations upon the above themes, before moving on, is that they die a short time later. What is the 'explanation of'/'reason for' the process I have just described? I have some opinions and/or theories in this regard, but the bottom line is that it does not matter in the least whether I am correct or incorrect in this regard. The bottom line is that it is something that I do/'participate in' and experience has taught me that if I try to interpret the 'true meaning and purpose' of these events, thereby convincing myself that I have some imagined 'cause of action' by which I can control/influence the 'outcome' of the event in a 'proper' manner, everything goes to hell and takes longer than it would have if I had resisted the impulse to control/interfere. At this point, I would like to point out that many people might regard the preceding as what Tim May refers to as 'magical thinking' and that they would, in a certain sense, be right. Tim May has, in more than a few missives, indicated his disapproval of those who engage in the 'airy-fairy' process of 'magical thinking,' in contradiction to the known physical laws of reality. I have long regarded Tim May as the original Philosopher King of the CypherPunks mailing list, and I give considerable weight to his missives, knowing that they are, for the most part, composed in a process which involves careful thought and analysis of the issues or technicalities of whatever topic that his missive is addressing. If my first reading of his post to the CypherPunks list seems to indicate that he is simply 'on the rag' and 'blowing smoke,' then I read the post again to see if I am correct in the assumption that he is having a 'bad hair day,' or if I have my head up my butt and I am failing to understand what Tim is attempting to communicate. Tim May sometimes comes off, in the context of the not-totally-encompassing-media of InterNet communication, as a bit of a Redneck/Ugly-American/Materialistically-Grounded/Fuck-the-Hippie-Crystal-Worshipers kind of guy. i.e. - Nuke Magical Thinkers However, I think he would be surprised, given my above claims, to find that I agree with him, for the most part-listen closely-within the context of his definition of 'magical thinking.' However, 'magical thinking' is something that I do, and I believe that it is valid from within the context of my definition of what the term truly comprises. i.e. - I care not in the least whether you (or I) claim that it is possible to 'psychically will' the balance of a bank account to increase by $100.00. My view is that this-or-that claim doesn't matter in the least. What matters is whether the bank account does or does not increase. What I am getting at is that, as a mathematician, the certitude of what you recognize and accept is not dependent on my mathematical ability to understand the concepts which you know and understand. My belief that 1 + 1 = 3 is not likely to cause you to come to the belief that your whole life is a lie, and that you should kill yourself. Why is this? Because mathematics is something that you do. Likewise, metaphysics is something that I do. What I implore you to understand is that I have no more personal, emotional investment in a blue aura meaning 'this' as opposed to 'that', than you, as a mathematician, have in 1 + 1 = 2, as opposed to 1 + 1 = 3. Your concern as a mathematician is that the value you recognize is valid within the boundaries of the logic system within which you are working. My concern as a metaphysician is the same. In effect, what I am saying is that people, be they friends, acquaintances or total strangers, show up on my doorstep and do whatever it is they need to do before departing and going off to reunite with the Spirit of the Cosmic Muffin, or whatever. You don't understand? Me neither Do you believe or disbelieve what I am telling you? Do you think it is a 'good' thing or a 'bad' thing, if true? Do you think it is the work of God, or the work of the Devil? Pick 'one from Column A and two from Column B', or vice-versa-it's fine by me. Regardless of your or my belief/disbelief, attitude or opinionit happens. If you feel the urge to show up on my doorstep and spend the next few decades helping to prove or disprove what I perceive as reality, feel free to do so, but I believe that there are probably much better ways to spend your time. I guess what I am haphazardly attempting to explain is my view of what objectivity truly means, insofar as I understand the concept and strive to arrive at an objective, truthful perception of existence, during my journey through 'madness cleverly disguised as sanity' (or vice-versa). Non-Taoists often perceive those who are journeying in a direction opposite to, or tangent to, their own vector of impetus as being 'in opposition to' themselves. >From a Taoist perspective, however, no one is truly 'going the wrong way.' In effect, it is as if we live in a world where traveling both North and South are required for survival/enlightenment/whatever. Those who are dimly aware that they are traveling North after having already fulfilled the 'traveling South' part of the equation, are likely to subconsciously recognize that those traveling in the opposite direction may be doing so because have already fulfilled the 'traveling North' part of the equation. Those who have not yet traversed the opposite side of the equation are more likely to believe that those traveling in the opposite direction are 'evil incarnate', actively seeking to subvert the will of the OneWay True God who rules the 'Turn Left To Go Towards Righteousness' universe. I believe that it might help to clarify the concept I am attempting to express here if I ask you to think of examples from your own life, and from the lives of others you have observed, which might serve to illustrate people who unthinkingly shout "You are going the wrong way!" to total strangers when, in fact, they have no idea where the person they are shouting at is coming from, or going to. A parallax example would be a mature person trying to impose the logic of grownup reasoning on a teenager who is firmly ensconced in the hormonal grip of a still-growing movement toward balancing reason and emotion. The value that our experience and understanding can play in communicating with others is directly related to the degree to which we have recognized, faced and resolved those events and situations in our life that require us to strike a balance between order and chaos, individuality and communion with the 'other', stability and evolution-Yin and Yang. Obtuse Parallax Non-Involvement Participation Theory: The fact that life is a crap shoot in no way detracts from the validity of 'self-determination through the exercise of free will' playing an essential part in determining the final outcome of the unfolding of our predestination. {Pretty profound, eh? I wonder if it actually means anything} But, seriouslyI was very young as a child OK, I'll quit kidding around. (Honest!) Despite the extremely multitudinous verbal effusions which I often use to convey my understanding of life's realities and peculiarities, much of what my preceding voluminous asseverations are aimed toward communicating can be summed up in a two-line poem which was written by an eccentric schizoid component of my overall persona which lurks omnipresently behind the scar tissue on the periphery of my brain, as the result of a failed lobotomy attempt by a well-meaning, but misguided, member of the Manson family. "All My Lies Are True" All my lies are true And everything I do, I really am. In short (but time-and-volume expanded to give you the benefit of enlightenment through overcoming the confusion of my verbal obtuseness), there exists-in the heart of the time-space continuum that is conspiring with extemporaneous metaphysical actuality to bring us all to a sorry end-two separate and distinct enemies of the current direction and goals of our lifelong aspirations. The first enemy is whatever runs contrary to our beliefs, aims and purpose in life, and which threatens our existence/being/survival because of our failure to recognize its value in our life, due to the fact that it encompasses arenas of life which we have not yet had occasion to confront and/or experience. The second enemy is the 'friendly enemy' which represents those arenas of life which we have already traversed, and which constitute a hazard to the evolution of our consciousness only by virtue of the fact that it is always tempting to bathe in the glory of treading familiar ground, deluding ourselves that our competence in rehashing already-learned lessons in life is a sign of superiority to those poor souls we pass by as they stumble and fall in their evolutionary journey through unfamiliar territory. For those of you who have consumed less than a quart of Scotch in the last half-hour, and are thus mystified as to what I am talking about, here, I will point out that what I have just expressed might be considered to be the equivalent of those who teach second-grade math indulging themselves in the bizarre and obscene delusion that the godlike reverence which the six and seven year old children impute to them as a result of their superior understanding of the mysteries of multiplication is somehow reflective of their innate superiority to the entirety of humanity around them. Or, as a parallax example, a school yard bully who considers himself to be a 'tough guy', despite the fact that he is six-foot eight, two hundred and forty five pounds, forty three years of age, and is still in the third grade. [No, asshole, this example is not based on my own life experience.] As you may have already guessed, I have pretty much lost track of what the hell it is I had originally intended to communicate in this duplicitous soliloquy concerning the divine triad of incremental quaternion. So perhaps it is best that I toss my Thesaurus in the trash and entrust to my limited lexicon the responsibility of conveying an important, though insipid, axiom of life which should serve as an shining beacon which has the capacity to enlighten the waters beyond the rocky shores of my limited attention span, and open the door to a complete understanding of how to properly interpret and evaluate the Chronicles of InfoWar. In other words-in plain English-articulating my unknown thoughts in a manner which accurately expresses my lack of social skills and my disposition toward not really giving a fat rat's ass if my efforts at elocution are appreciated, or whether I am just pissing in the wind I am the living, breathing incarnation of the Jules Pfiefer elucidation of the "Mad Dog in possession of the last false smile." I AM the TruthMonger. If you think that my irreverence, sick humor, and my propensity toward expressing myself in a manner which will lead those reading my mad ramblings to conclude that I am an uncouth, insane asshole is an indication that I am not totally sincere in seeking to share the enlightenment that it has been my blessing to experience during the course of my life, then Fuck You! We are all born into a predestined domain wherein our role as a warrior is to fight the battles which can be waged by none other than ourselves. My predestined battle is to rail loud and long against the anal-retentive scourge of counterfeit substantiality which we and our fellow anthropological sycophants kneel in obeisance to, for lack of true belief in the primacy of our sovereign franchise which not only deems us to be the captain of our ship of life and master of our ultimate destiny, but which also demands that we recognize our divinity and our obligation to throw off the bondage of outside authority, accepting total responsibility for living our life according to the dictates of our conscience and our innate soul pattern. "To he who does what within him lies, God will not deny his grace." - Saint Thomas Aquinas "We make our Gods, do battle with them, and they bless us." - Herman Hesse "All my lies are TruthMongering." - The Last Canadian Outlaw ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- "The Xenix Chainsaw Massacre" "WebWorld & the Mythical Circle of Eunuchs" "InfoWar (Part III of 'The True Story of the InterNet') Soviet Union Sickle of Eunuchs Secret WebSite ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

InfoWar Epilogue 8 (Part III of 'The True Story of the InterNet')
by Don't Ask... 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

PGP 5.0 international patches and hacks
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A new resource page is up on the cypherpunks.to web site, to host various patches and hacks to the pgp 5.0i source. Currently a patch which fixes the expiration date for the software and "Version" comment in ASCII-armored messages is available. For more, visit https://www.cypherpunks.to/ -- pgp5hacks(a)cypherpunks.to

1 0

Re: What Will Revolution Look Like?
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Warmaking is ever changing in response to the last wins and losses. However, winners are less likely to change than losers, for why change a successful formula, publish it, or a well-spun dissimulation. As ever, unknown forms of war are in gestation, being tested and debriefed, in military institutions and wargames, in business, in education, in the amorphous culture at large through legal competition and crime and their variable gray areas where fair and unfair, civilized rules and their breaking, are ever in grim and vicious dispute. While there are piles of studies on organized and guerilla wars of the past, the most provocative are those that attempt to describe what's coming, how to recognize its early warnings and what can be done to head it off or, more likely, advance it. The highest warmaking art is winning without physical fighting, to outfox the enemy by demoralizing, by demonstrating that attack is futle, that there is no chance of defeating a superior force. That's why military exhibitionism and psy war is reputed among military and political leaders to be as vital as that of brute force, as best exemplified by the Cold War 50-year stalemate and psychological "win-win" to a status of Cool War. To get a handle on what's in store, imagine that completely unbelievable methods of warfare, overt and covert, are being concocted now, composed of strategies, tactics, warfighters and armaments never before used -- and will not be revealed and understood until too late for defense. Try to forget everything you know about warfighting, crime fighting, conflict resolution, rules of engagement, black operations, guerilla tactics, hiding among the people. Assume the enemy knows everything you know and more, is better armed and smarter than you, has more spies among your supporters and in your most intimate circle. Imagine that your toilet, your bed, your fridge, your car, your is triggered to explode by radio or your computer by your password. Consider that there will be no time to reflect and reconsider when things go catastrophically wrong and the enemy is unrelenting attacking with inhuman viciousness, when you're defenses are crumbling and weapons failing, when mates are squealing, dead or run away, when you can't stop shitting yourself, when your legs are buckling, when your minds racing out of control, when you're begging god and mom for mercy and the upraised axe is descending, the barrel back of head is firing. Remember that who the enemy is is no secret to either side, on whichever side you're on, and presume that the emeny is more ready and able to cook your goose than you are theirs. What actual war carnage teaches, what the current civil war in the US is showing, is what the TV-sofa war does not: nobody wins, ever, except the mindfuckers who've never gone berzerk in combat or in the jobplace, killed friend and foe to save own asses. You only win wars by never having to fight them, those started by weakling cowards unable to steal, cheat and lie well enough to satisfy their demonic lusts. Best to outsmart the enemy in war, work and love, so that what you're up to is revealed only years later if ever. For the best won wars are never known at the time, no parades, no medals, no glory, no war stories, no memorial cemeteries and monuments, no veteran hospitals filled with carrion, just peace and tranquility shooting deer, harpooning dolpins, rip-tearing the landscape for profligate cowboy wargames riding homicidal freeways. We're all gonna lose our civil war in market place killings and road rage, thanks to today's warfighting lesson in free fire criminal enterprise by those who've never been shot and shot and shot, and lost for good -- the vainglorious winners, the losers desperate to regain glory days.

1 0

re: Speech as co-conspiring? I don't think so.
by Mix 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Tim May wrote: >Since when is broadcasting a radio or television show or writing an >essay evidence of complicity in a murder, even when it "pushes >someone over the line"? The producers of the show had better hope that it is not evidence of complicity in a murder. Let's say Tim is crazy.(*) He told us how much he enjoyed seeing the BATF agent take one in the face. If this were to inspire him to try the same thing in real life, how would the producers of the show be less guilty than the talk show host? After all, the most intense and graphic aspect of the episode was the scene where the BATF agent was killed. The people who made the show obviously intended this to have the most impact. It must be the actual point of the show. (It's well known that television watchers are far more responsive to imagery than boring dialogue.) The rest was obviously a cynical attempt to undermine the machinery of justice by appearing to be on the side of law enforcement. Bad People try this trick all the time. Fortunately, the jury usually isn't fooled. I'm looking forward to the miscreants getting the justice they so richly deserve, aren't you? (*) Tim seems too wiley to be crazy. Instead, he seems to be playing The Most Dangerous Game: Fed baiting. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFwn1JaWtjSmRH/5AQEuYwf8DRGHHp1C2uaecJ87tVjE8gSQJNJJUJMA Z0uX+xjse7RSvlcszCZ1/tU0R9IY5iw1uXV9GqDK3JY/mSEKznd994cTo0PfO5PP sgOIJq42ynz9q7eguqsE1I591hhNdhKE1mitPMirvm5Rh2Rwic1veiJMEc3uaHP+ SEiit3LcmqoV9xZ57oxuMRhHr63KQ24HaKDZkSnIIxC6c+8RiJ0pDy94hL15e/GQ O3Yw/M5vZ/CfKYDgQbMzfavbV9QPszgSYg944HinBgWIuo+JbV13eypmLXDw7yxI WlA8Zxt5NNba4sQCe17m0Drxf9e99fX+inIVYKONK3kH2oCF564Hag== =49tL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Japan's Constitution and GAK (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: Adam Shostack <adam(a)homeport.org> > Subject: Japan's Constitution and GAK > Date: Sun, 2 Nov 1997 02:16:36 -0500 (EST) > Does someone have access to a verificable copy of Japan's > Constitution? Someone pointed me to one on the web, which would seem > to make difficult implemmenting international GAK systems. > > http://www.leftjustified.com/leftjust/lib/sc/ht/wtp/japan.html > > Article 21. Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, > press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed. No censorship > shall be maintained, nor shall the secrecy of any means of > communication be violated. It also outlaws secret or under-cover police such as the Kempetei (or however you spell it, too lazy to look it up). ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: democracy?! (Re: Terrorism is a NON-THREAT (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: 2 Nov 1997 05:47:36 -0000 > From: Secret Squirrel <nobody(a)secret.squirrel.owl.de> > Subject: Re: democracy?! (Re: Terrorism is a NON-THREAT (fwd) > Adam Back wrote: > >[Ed Note: Jim Choate wrote:] > >> At the height of the range wars there were only 9 murders > >> associated with the conflict, not hundreds as the popular > >> entertainment media and spin-doctor culture would have you > >> believe. Get your fucking facts straight. > > > >I know, that was my point; recall that I said the murder rate was > >low. The point was there were way less laws, and few were telling > >their neighbours what they could think. > > It's not hard to believe that this was the case in some places and in > some times, but a term like the "Wild West" covers a lot of time and > territory. It was the case in all places. The Wild West simply wasn't that wild. > For example, in San Francisco in the early 1860s there was a very high > murder rate, something like 1000 people were killed in one year and > nobody was convicted. (Forgive minor factual errors as I haven't > studied this in awhile.) Damn, I have this book - but not here, at my shop apparently - that was written by a eastern newspaper report who was in California, to write the book, and he described San Francisco in the 1800's during the first gold rushes. He doesn't note significant violence. What really makes the book interesting is that the reporter took the 'long way' to California - across Panama via coastal steamers and such. Very interesting descriptions. I'll make note and get the book next time I'm out there and post to the list for review. Would you happen to remember your source? Nothing I have read has ever mentioned a 1000/year homicide count in San Francisco - ever. > I have also read reports of substantial > violence in the mining communities of Nevada and California with > minimal enforcement action taken. That's interesting since this is a specific and commen example of free market anarchy supporters, the low violence rates in the Cali. gold fields during the rush. In particular J.D. Davidson & Lord W. Rees-Mogg go to great lengths at a couple of places in their book "The Sovereign Individual" to hold it us as a 'model anarchy'. Me thinks something is going on here below the covers when both sides of the discussion use the same example (which is why I intentionaly don't use it but wait for others to bring it up). > It seems likely to me that the low > murder rate claim has some exceptions, even if we ignore the mutual > atrocities between various native groups, Americans, and Mexicans. If you read "My Life as a Indian" this might change your view of how it was in that period. "The Texas Rangers" also has quite a lot to say about what the Indian wars were like in Texas (not really since there really wasn't much). It is interesting to note that when the cattle drives started in the 1800's the people oppossed didn't pick up a gun and fight as a rule, they hired lawyers and sued the cattle owners for damages to their farms and ranches. This one was one of the primary forces behind the closing of the fronteir - putting up barbed wire - the cattle barons kept losing the cases. > I would also like to see how pervasive the temperance movement was in > the Wild West. By the late nineteenth century my impression is that > it was going strong in the Wild West although it possibly hadn't > grasped the levers of power yet. Let us know how your research goes. > >> Face off's at high-noon simply didn't happen and poeple didn't run > >> around having gun fights all the time. > > > >Right! > > I'm pretty sure there were gunfights, but that they happened a lot > more quickly and a lot less formally than we see on TV. But, I could > believe that overall they happened infrequently. Anybody have a > reference? See above books as well as the Time*Life series I mentioned in a previous submission. I would wager that from 1800 to 1900 there were less than a dozen face-to-face shoot-outs at high-noon, if any at all. There is also a very good book that covers the French and Spanish explorations of the southwest starting in the late 1500's up to the early 1800's when they were either forced out by political agreements or force. I believe the University of New Mexico puts it out. If I stumble across it (I'll keep an eye out for it) I'll get identifiying info. Very good book, but a mother to read. > I am told that knife fighting was a lot more common than is widely > known. A lot of poor runaways showed up to work in various mining > towns and they were unable to afford expensive toys like guns. Generaly people shot each other with rifles from a distance or back-shots. But the fact is that most, stats put it as high as 60%, of all homicides (accidental or intentional) were people shooting themselves with their own weapon by accident. These sorts of incidents were clearly much higher than Indians or homicide. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: Clinton's Bigger Gun Ban
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/29/97 8:08 PM, Tim May (tcmay(a)got.net) passed this wisdom: >The Klinton Klan has already effectively banned imported SKS ammo >(7.62x29, as I recall, given that I don't have any rifles >chambering this popular round). > --- >Before you rush to correct me, I _meant_ to write "7.62x39" of >course. > >(A round used by the Chinese, Soviet, and East Bloc nations, and >roughly equivalent to the American M-16 round, known either as the >.223 or 5.56mm. The NATO "7.62" is in a longer case length. >7.62x54, as I recall. Known in America as .308. If I remember right they were able to do this because the only ammo available for 7.62x39 is from the Chinese and uses steel core projectiles not lead. Then when Olympic Arms came out with the cutdown weapon chambered for 7.62x39 it was able to be banned uder a regualtion banning "armor piercing ammo that could be used in a handgun." One thing though, 7.62x39 really could not be compared to the 5.56 NATO, its really more potent out to 2-300 meters; it is still a .30 cal vs 5.56 NATOs .223, but its far less potent than 7.62 NATO (7.62x54). The 7.62x39 was the standard caliber of ComBloc weapons for several decades, most specifically the AK-47, AKM-44 (sniper weapon), and SKS carbine. I think the Dragunov sniper system used a more potent cartridge. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNFyiGMdZgC62U/gIEQJ62gCfbBu3uY42gRThKwxyi1I/uDm6pAwAoMkl GuTW74QapGZbXo/kGN4KokYM =qkl4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Brian B. Riley --> http://www.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key> "Bacon and eggs: A days work for a chicken; a lifetime commitment for a pig"

3 2

auto signing messages Re: perl from Amad3us
by Antonomasia 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> #!/usr/local/bin/perl > $userID="cypherpunks\(a)algebra.com"; > $pgp="/usr/local/bin/pgp"; > $tmp="/tmp/.sig$$"; > undef($/); > $post = <STDIN>; > ($headers,@body) = split(/\n\n/,$post);$body = join("\n\n",@body); > open(PIPE,"|$pgp -satf +batchmode +verbose=0 -u $userID > $tmp"); Real paranoiacs don't put temporary files in world-writeable directories. If a hostile user symlinks your majordomo binary (or something) to /tmp/.sig999 you're going to overwrite it with garbage. A single purpose directory /tmp/mdsig writeable only by the list account 'majordom' would be my preference. (Correct owner and mode for this directory and parents could be checked by the perl script before it decides to write there.) -- ############################################################## # Antonomasia ant(a)notatla.demon.co.uk # # See http://www.notatla.demon.co.uk/ # ##############################################################

1 0

Re: democracy?! (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 1 Nov 1997 19:55:02 -0800 > From: Steve Schear <azur(a)netcom.com> > Subject: Re: democracy?! (fwd) > >If it's so damn good how come it doesn't exist anymore? If it provided such > >a superior governmental system providing the maximum return on investment > >why did it go away? Why did they instead elect to go with a king? Futher, > >explain how such an anarchic system can be expanded without demonstrating > >the exact same sorts of scaling problems consensual democracies such as > >ancient Greek ran into? It's one thing to rule a few 10's of thousands of > >people who are related, share world-models and have limited resources and > >quite another to rule 4+ Billion people who speak hundreds if not thousands > >of languages and concommittent cultural beliefs? > > So, a solution is to encourage (e.g., through technological means) the > break-up of nation-states into smaller geo-political groupings. Technological, societal, political, religous, whatever non-confrontational (ie avoid the use of force unless physicaly attacked) mechanism that is present in human societies. Exactly! See that is the aspect of our democracy that so few people seem to understand. The relationship between the fed's and the states is supposed to be as equals. If the fed's want to do something they have to get a lot of the states to go along with it or else they don't get the resources. The states can't get too far out of line because of their ability to represent the other n-1 states. The problem now, fundamentaly to my view, is that the states are seen as chatels or sub-servient to the fed's. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Fwd: Re: Fwd: William Louis ... Pol Pot speaks...
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I forwarded a copy of the above article to my friend Roger who lives and works in Thailand and this was his response ... I thought it might be of interest to the list. ---------------- Begin Forwarded Message ---------------- Date: 11/02 9:13 AM Received: 11/02 10:39 AM From: Roger Adams, rogera(a)mozart.inet.co.th To: Brian B. Riley, brianbr(a)together.net >Brian B. Riley wrote: >>I came across this piece the other day and am rereading it for the >>fourth or fifth time. "Food for thought" doesn't even begin to >>describe it in my rarely very humble opinion. > (snip) >>Pol Pot Speaks >> >> On Oct. 16 Nate Thayer, an American correspondent for the weekly >>Far Eastern Economic Review, conducted the first known interview >>since 1979 with Cambodian Communist Pol Pot. The New York Times >>printed excerpts Oct. 23. >Brian, > >Nate is actually based in Bangkok and I have met him quite a few >times in one of my favourite watering holes. I was there last Friday >(31st Oct) and was told that he had gone back to Phnom Penh to >confront Hun Sen for calling him a liar and questioning the validity >of his interview with Pol Pot. Nate apparently got very upset at >this so he decided to sort it out. All of us who know him feel that >he is risking his life by going back to Cambodia at this time. The >situation there is very unstable and life is very cheap. We all >hope he makes it back safely. > >Just for some background information, Nate is a very intense and >proud fellow who takes his profession very seriously indeed. He is >the only journalist to have been able to get close enough to Pol >Pot (by close, I mean in very near proximity) to be able to watch >and film him being tried by his fellow commanders and to interview >him. A very facinating chap and very likeable. I am sure you came >across some of these types during the Vietnam War. > >Will keep you posted. > >Roger ----------------- End Forwarded Message ----------------- Brian B. Riley --> http://www.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key> "Civilization is the progress toward a society of privacy. The savage's whole existence is public, ruled by the laws of his tribe. Civilization is the process of setting man free from men." -- Ayn Rand - The Fountainhead (1943)

1 0

Free Software
by 1gh9TbMi2＠gen.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We are giving away over $700.00 in promotional software that can increase your business by over 150%. How would you like to send your ad to thousands of people that have an interest in your product or service? Just imagine the results. We are giving away the software to do just that. With this limited time offer you can receive an email extraction program that will extract targeted addresses for you to send your advertisement to. You will also receive an email program for sending your advertisement. This software is yours FREE! when you purchase our CD Rom with over 37 million email addresses on it. This CD Rom is ready to use with your email program. If you can click a mouse, you can boost your sales by 150% or more overnight. This offer is for a limited time. As an added bonus, we will submit your web site to over 250 search engines for free when you place your order. All orders are taken by phone, so hurry and call (904) 908-5444 Please mention ID# 6682 when calling...

1 0

Re: Infastructure Protection and Paranoia
by John Kelsey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [ To: cypherpunks ## Date: 10/30/97 ## Subject: Re: Infastructure Protection and Paranoia ] >Date: Tue, 28 Oct 1997 23:35:41 -0800 >From: Bill Stewart <stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com> >Subject: Re: Infastructure Protection and Paranoia >At this year's CFP one evening we were playing the game of >"You want to cause maximum disruption to the US >infrastructure, and you've got 100 small explosive devices. >Where do you put them?" Much creativity was displayed and >substantial amounts of testosterone reveled in, and the >overall conclusion was that we'd be in deep trouble if >anybody even vaguely competent wanted to monkeywrench the >system. I agree. This has always been my reaction to the infowar folks--anyone who understands how to attack a system can look around and find hundreds of fairly easy targets. Some of these targets just *can't* be protected in a cost-effective way. (Note the way the IRA and various Palestinian terrorists still manage to find soft targets, despite the fact that their intended victims have spent years and millions of dollars hardening the obvious soft points.) >After that, we played the Russell-Brand-like game of >"Destruction is easy. What would you do if you wanted to >create the most joy in the world instead." That was harder >:-) Of course. Any moron with a hammer can ruin a car engine; it takes a skilled mechanic to fix one. The same applies almost everywhere--destroying something takes a fraction of the skill of building or maintaining it. > Thanks! > Bill >Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com >Regular Key PGP Fingerprint > D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639 --John Kelsey, Counterpane Systems, kelsey(a)counterpane.com PGP 2.6 fingerprint = 4FE2 F421 100F BB0A 03D1 FE06 A435 7E36 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNFje30Hx57Ag8goBAQFORgQAtfPNvbzHvsVQXTO8OY7VmKwmyqxWB5By w+WPU4YCMWq8DWG6OywWsK9VoPGePPTZSUhtVd/PXV0lZs/jSbJZoFUYNVM7kscR SA581vMenUYM74Uryut2gTAgUORjvrSLtfM1cm5/sIVGfNefTvmo5VMQzye7gh7d 89SW0QFzo/o= =YmO9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --John Kelsey, Counterpane Systems, kelsey(a)counterpane.com PGP 2.6 fingerprint = 4FE2 F421 100F BB0A 03D1 FE06 A435 7E36

1 0

Copyright commerce and the street musician protocol
by John Kelsey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [ To: Perry's Crypto List, Cypherpunks ## Date: 11/01/97 ## Subject: Copyright commerce and the street musician protocol ] I've been working on various copyright protection schemes from time to time over the last three years. The general goal is (naturally enough) to make some digital data hard to copy without some kind of permission or payment or record being made. Thus, a user may have a book (mostly text, perhaps with some illustrations) he is reading on his computer, and the publisher wants to make sure that that user can't give copies of the book to all his friends, or post it to the net, or whatever. I'm convinced that there will never be a secure solution to this problem. (I can't imagine that this is news to anyone on these two lists.) I have somewhat mixed feelings about this--I'd hate to see my favorite authors and musicians either waiting tables for a living, or having to insert references to their sponsors' products in their stories. (``And then he bought her a Coke, and her eyes lit up.'') On the other hand, a widespread copyright commerce system that really works is most of the infrastructure for a massive censorship mechanism. (Reset the price of books you don't like to a billion dollars US per copy made.) Suppose I want to get paid for the next chapter of my thrilling novel. A whole bunch of people want to see me publish my next chapter. So, I make some statement like ``When I get $1,000 in donations, I will publish the next chapter in this novel.'' Readers can go to my website, see how much further there is to go, and donate money to the cause of getting my novel out. Note that I, the author, don't care *who* pays to get the next chapter out; nor do I care about free riders. Instead, I just care that my $1,000 pot gets filled. When it does, I publish the next chapter. There are basically three things that can go wrong here: a. I set my price too high, and never reach my amount. (It might be possible to decrease the total amount required later, though it would be a little questionable to do this often.) b. I set my price too low, and get lots less than I could have gotten. (This is self-correcting.) c. I get my amount filled, but still don't publish the next chapter of my novel. The trust issues, especially with (c), are worth considering. The obvious (clunky) way to solve this is to have a trusted third party handle the whole transaction. We will call him the Publisher. Now, I submit my novel, or parts of it, to the Publisher. He has his editors review it to see if it's worth trying to sell (like any publisher, albeit with rather low printing/binding costs). If so, he and I agree on a price and split. For unknown authors, the first several chapters, or even the first few books, may be freely available, in hopes of drawing in customers. For known authors, perhaps the first chapter or two is free, and the rest go through the payment mechanism. He has my whole novel, and on his web site, he makes available, say, chapters 1-3 for free, and chapter 4 will become available when $1000 is donated to the cause of getting it out, or on January 1, 1998. If enough readers want to hurry up and see the next chapter, they can make a payment. The publisher needs no identification for this, so anonymous payment systems work quite well. The Publisher holds the payments in escrow until the chapter is released, and then sends me my cut. I think I can build a similar protocol without the Publisher taking anything but a backup role--he gets the money transfers and holds them in escrow, and if the chpater isn't released, either he can release it or he can return the money, or donate it to some charity, or whatever. (The whatever has to be spelled out beforehand, and the money mustn't go to the author, directly or indirectly.) This is obviously not a complete solution. The neat thing is, it can be used with other systems. (Thus, if you want to include a shareware/guiltware message on each copy, or try to use some kind of software or hardware protection for the chapters once they're published, then this system doesn't alter that much--the donors simply get prepurchased copies of the book, released on the normal release date.) Similar ideas may work in other areas. In software, I suspect it would be a way of getting a feel from the market for what new features are wanted. In music, perhaps this could be used for individual songs, or maybe it would work better for whole albums. Television and movie serials could work this way (it works for PBS, doesn't it?). Some books, music, and movies would be *awful* to release this way, though. I wish I had a more useful general solution, but maybe this will help a little. Comments? This is clearly not all that new, but I've never seen it in a crypto context from anyone but me. --John Kelsey, Counterpane Systems, kelsey(a)counterpane.com PGP 2.6 fingerprint = 4FE2 F421 100F BB0A 03D1 FE06 A435 7E36 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNFt4jEHx57Ag8goBAQHQewQA5ri7HOr/z1vlLhIfvagK2Gmcp/BX9fTk FE3NI/L6sg0S5HvGYre6/Pql+zOvbkN6pq/I5C4kepW/K0Y4tQNYiycbzFaQ3htH EA+3ZZPzuj5Ka7ob/AHSnsKpCVJQaMFgZhLJMZPXG9jWjzSG3k8pVKqJklAlu7Tk x6dpqhE1jZ8= =qjO0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --John Kelsey, Counterpane Systems, kelsey(a)counterpane.com PGP 2.6 fingerprint = 4FE2 F421 100F BB0A 03D1 FE06 A435 7E36

12 12

Kyl's internet gambling bill
by John Kelsey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [ To: cypherpunks ## Date: 10/30/97 ## Subject: Kyl's internet gambling bill ] >Date: Wed, 29 Oct 1997 13:31:21 -0800 >From: Steve Schear <azur(a)netcom.com> >Subject: Re: Kyl S-474 Anti-Gambling Bill passes committee [Stuff about Kyl's anti-internet gambling bill.] >Prediction: this bill will be about as effective as >outlawing spring. >About 20% of gamblers are 'problem' types who now regularly >game illegally and could careless about the penalties. Once >all on-line casinos offer real and 'play-money' wagering and >strong crypto it will be neigh impossible for the Feds to >know or prove which players are wagering real money and >therefore gambling. Once Onion and Crowds routers are >operational and widespread the Feds won't even be able to >find the casinos, and even if they do they may not be able >to shut them down (especially if they are built in a >distributed fasion). I always find these laws entertaining. In Missouri, we have state-run gambling in the lottery system, and state-licenced gambling on the riverboat casinos. Our Attorney General has been very vocal about shutting down internet casinos, to protect Missouri's citizens from being exploited. His concern for the welfare of problem gamblers in our state is touching. Odd that he isn't worried about those same citizens being taken advantage of by the in-state operations. Of course, the real issue here isn't about protecting citizens from themselves, or even about keeping citizens from being cheated by the electronic equivalent of weighted dice. It's about protecting the financial interests of those who now benefit from having local gambling monopolies. The state gets quite a bit of money from the lottery, and the companies that have invested in building riverboat casinos here are surely concerned about potential competition via the internet. The cities that have riverboat casinos typically get some part of the money made from them, which nicely brings those city governments into line. Presumably, something similar is happening with various states' Indian Reservations opening casinos. It's an interesting side-point that really anonymous communications and payment systems applied to gambling systems mean not only that *governments* can't shut down competing gambling schemes, but also that organized crime can't shut them down, whether through influencing corrupt governments to try to shut them down, or through direct action. Ob Crypto: There are cryptographic gambling protocols that can be verified (given some set of assumptions about underlying operations) to be fair. Thus, it's possible for a gambling operation to make their client software freely available in source, and allow people to see what it does and review it for fairness. If you find a reviewer or two you trust, you can ask them to digitially sign the executable they got when they compiled the code, and refuse to use any other code. This gives you a level of certainty that you're not being cheated by weighted dice that you simply can't get in physical casinos. (Sure, government agencies inspect those casinos, but the inspectors aren't incorruptible, and they can't be everywhere at once.) For a simple example, consider a situation where Alice and Bob need to agree on a shared seed. Assume they already have established a secure (encrypted and authenticated) session. They can easily generate a new shared seed by doing something like this: 1. Alice generates random R_0 and sends hash(R_0) to Bob. 2. Bob generates random R_1 and sends hash(R_1) to Alice. 3. Alice sends R_0 to Bob. 4. Bob sends R_1 to Alice. 5. Alice and Bob each generate their shared seed, R_0 XOR R_1. If the hash function doesn't leak information about its inputs, and if it is collision-resistant, then this protocol should work. If either party generates a random number, then the resulting seed is random, regardless of the other party's input. (You still have to work out administrative issues, like what happens when communications fail conveniently just after Alice sends Bob R_0, but these are easy enough to solve.) >--Steve --John Kelsey, Counterpane Systems, kelsey(a)counterpane.com PGP 2.6 fingerprint = 4FE2 F421 100F BB0A 03D1 FE06 A435 7E36 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBNFje6UHx57Ag8goBAQEsZQP/TWqpL70gThhETuqDlrTJsCCy5PeTMNte t0tzg8fwPFK3cESSN+5ndRAjUXmdS8dmNZW1U8RcDFpH8YRd1uAfJ4CdmMrK8zgk OGcegYoSDgwtdLw43Zslx88nl7OgkfvyQqzZZmDkWwyXn0g1RMLcTVt8nyccm6O+ WPH3VLc+7Ho= =H+YB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --John Kelsey, Counterpane Systems, kelsey(a)counterpane.com PGP 2.6 fingerprint = 4FE2 F421 100F BB0A 03D1 FE06 A435 7E36

1 0

Re: Clinton's Bigger Gun Ban
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 11/2/97 11:14 AM, Tim May (tcmay(a)got.net) passed this wisdom: [snip] >Some in the gun community are vilifying Olyarms for introducing this OA-93 >"assault pistol" (the name often applied to politically incorrect pistols >like this). As if Olyarms should have been cowed into not introducing a >product out of fear that Clinton would abuse his authority to ban Chinese >ammo. I would not villify them, but I would wonder if they considered that aspect when they decided to market the weapon. >> One thing though, 7.62x39 really could not be compared to the 5.56 >>NATO, its really more potent out to 2-300 meters; it is still a .30 >>cal vs 5.56 NATOs .223, but its far less potent than 7.62 NATO >>(7.62x54). The 7.62x39 was the standard caliber of ComBloc weapons for >>several decades, most specifically the AK-47, AKM-44 (sniper weapon), >>and SKS carbine. I think the Dragunov sniper system used a more potent >>cartridge. > >I've never owned anything in 7.62x39. I hear the SKS rifles are pretty good >for $150, or whatever, and a lot of people have bought them. To me they >look a little crude. And since I can afford things out of the AR-15 line.... Having faced down the SKS carbine in Nam on a couple of occasions, I can say its a rugged built and seemingly idiot proof weapon of reasonable accuracy out to 2-300 meters tops. Many versions come equipped with a three-fluted bayonette thats considerably longer than what we used and its *most* impressive when some guy comes out of the brush with one in your direction ... I got a chance to examine the blade from a few inches when I deflected his thrust and delivered a blow of my own ... I would just a soon have remained in blissful ignorance of the details ... <sigh> >(Debate rages in rec.guns and elsewhere about the relative merits of the >cartridges. I certainly see more variants of the AR-15 here in America, >more use by tactical and law enforcement teams, and more accessories. But >maybe I'm not looking in the right places.) The 7.62x39 really isn't much of a cartridge, its not potent enough to justify its size, 7.62x54 is more potent and its not small enough to capitalize on its wimpiness, 5.56 NATO delivers as much oomph in much less size. It is relatively simple to appreciate the size difference. When the standard issue service rifle was the M-14 (7.62x54 NATA) the standard load for a soldier was six(6) magazines of twenty plus the seventh in the rifle. When the M-16 became the standard service rifle, the same ammo load weight permitted twenty (20) magazines of twenty plus a twenty-first in the rifle. 140 rounds versus 420 rounds - biiigggg difference >One of the more interesting images I ever saw was a photo in one of the gun >mags of a friendly meeting in the U.S. between Eugene Stoner, principal >designer of the AR-15 (the M-16 in its military version) and Mikhail >Kalashnikov, whose name needs no further explanation. > >I suppose tree-hugging peaceniks would be aghast at a meeting between these >two merchants of death. I, being an antigovernment type, was nevertheless >impressed. I too was quite impressed with that meeting, but not surprising. I brought a prisoner in once, an NVA regular, a major, and spent several days in the field with him before we could get lifted out. He spoke excellant English and wonderful education and a wry wit. I found I related better to him than I did to most of the upper ranks in the 1st MarDiv in DaNang ... almost had half a mind to say 'screw the suits' and let him go. Of course therein lies the problem of 'the suits' ... so long as they can get us to think of the enemy as 'gooks' or 'ragheads' or 'krauts' they can con us into killing them ... but as soon as you realize they have wives and kids and jobs and bills and neighbors and aunts and uncles and nephews, in short, are just like use save for the cut of their uniform ... its gets a lot harder to see just why you should kill them (unless of course they are pointing a gun at you!) Brian B. Riley --> http://www.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key> "The strongest evidence of intelligent life on other planets is that they haven't come here yet.' -- from somewhere on The Net

1 0

$600 Worth of FREE Software!
by equit＠hotmail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello, You don't want to trash this one! I "WILL" give you absolutely "Free" a New Software called "Freedom", that sells for $400. I WILL NOT ASK FOR ANY MONEY! Freedom software allows you to extract email addresses from the internet, classified ads, newsgroups, AOL subscribers, Etc. Freedom has many features, including easy extractions of the addresses you need to flag for removal. You can extract a "batch" of a few hundred, or a "catagory" of thousands at a time. BONUS!! Now I also provide you with a free Check software,"Checker", a $200.00 value that allows you to take checks by Fax, email, and phone! "FREE" Will your business "EXPLODE"? You bet it will! IT HAS TO !!!! You will become a part of a DOWNLINE THAT HAS THIS CAPABLITY! Along with "Freedom" and "Checker", I provide you with a "GREAT", "FREE BUSINESS", that you can promote on the internet and off. Additional BONUS - you will receive one of the cheapest long distance rates available today!! For quick and FREE details, just send an email with FREEDOM in the subject line to: <mailto:cmillerton@hotmail.com> and you will receive information about this exciting opportunity right away! I look forward to your response. You may email me at: cmillerton(a)hotmail.com for an immediate response for more info. Thanks,

1 0

Re: cute.
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 0xa11a8a18bf6dbe8362926e9458a3616d/0x4d162bbe1 a.k.a Amad3us wrote: >> I'm not sure a timestamp matters that much for "authenticating" your >> key. After all, you don't own "Amad3us", you own key 0x4D162BBE1. > >Yes. Except for minor nit: 0x4D162BBE1 is susceptible to a >0xdeadbeef attack, anyone can generate another key with that keyID. >Even the fingerprint is spoofable. But the combination is truly hard >to spoof, and this I do own: >0xa11a8a18bf6dbe8362926e9458a3616d/0x4d162bbe1 (fingerprint/keyID). Uhhh... that's what I meant to say. (Although I can't think of a circumstance where the fingerprint matters if the reputation is bound to the key only.) While we're on the subject, why are key IDs used anyway? People don't really use them for anything. Software might as well use the complete description of the key internally. For that matter, I'm not sure the the e-mail address and user name are good things to associate with the key. The e-mail address changes all the time. The user name should be assigned by you as part of the authentication procedure, not by the person offering the key. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFzktJaWtjSmRH/5AQHm8wf+Lkw/iHSwn/zEpttQws49R3pmDAjtSkrz Q8+6qI09JgfY4xnlljJkYMoeHpij9TEZ59SlBl5exSzCH6dQoStJXPACxm5UUQil J9YnDd3q4ehHMH9wQd8eXYpDNdRxqUGwqMZR8+eRlo1X2yGDvOY40+Ayd0/jnX8X AEhZ8io669eQ3+55n/25LkGT7Zc26zRLsiU+07pBWRIj2cwV7BiQF2gZqx9owf2E lrhKRJ7b7iDT7/Q+thrifzBHq1mUnugPlUXpYqv4SKPDzoK8zpGODIzLntv4M91b AllRO5ytCoSu1IFCTKJ4D3oT4OsftrjHy7MYNcsLNQDoKTbp7JewNA== =m1a1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

re: Speech as co-conspiring? I don't think so.
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Tim May wrote: >According to the dubious logic of that episode, no doubt they would >say they were innocent because they had not _met_ me on any >occasions. If, however, the prosecution could produce a witness >saying she had seen me in the company of the writer, director, >producer, etc., then their bacon would be cooked. By the logic of >their episode, of course. That's what their smart alecky lawyer will claim, anyway. I am confident that a jury made up of good red blooded Americans will see through this sham. The producers of the show certainly know that there are terrorist elements and psychopaths who would be watching. They know that these people will be turned on by the imagery of a BATF agent being brutally murdered. They could have told the same story using different imagery. Instead of using graphic violence, they could have expressed the idea of the BATF agent getting killed with a heartrending scene of his wife getting the phone call. That certainly would not have been inflammatory. But they didn't. The opted to go with a glorification of the act. Why? Incompetence won't wash - anybody getting to national TV has spent years in the business and is a total pro. They know what effect they are having. They glorified this act of violence to encourage others to do the same. Where is the FBI? Why isn't anybody doing anything? If the life of only one BATF agent is spared, it will be worthwhile! Think of his poor wife and kids. >>(*) Tim seems too wiley to be crazy. Instead, he seems to be playing >>The Most Dangerous Game: Fed baiting. >> > >It used to be called "free speech." > >Nowadays, admitting that one has guns is fed baiting. Admitting that >one will defend one's self is fed baiting. Admtting that one has read >certain books is fed baiting. And using unbreakable crypto is fed >baiting. > >Ah, what has the world come to? Remailers? ;-) Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFznlZaWtjSmRH/5AQHXxAf9H3MKpSwCCDl0HHjH8eKQ+k6p+knULe0y L4VHlx0ZHO45De3zIAkp/j4RMQtAxrC7tsWWbVe+FDeLUTJpOzZPauH43xAfcEsL nJZUkgIgMFv9CiUC5ybhjJdzyfTeuxeqo1juTVSQlOkUzqUb78EgawhsqebFeOlp /Qni+kVdjMeMiwoJR6wDL7bntVg5ojmiBH1CEdSth0hLm7fF7pn3kzJPlod0SXzJ NWanQa7TZwEpqkWFJ0n4ompYb/Hu6E407MhmushDQFT0W1/ayBP8pa3m65PmCSpf B/+Y49KK49b7GLUyHaoqJ8KB39+uVAbFZ4ZlX03/nXpUFUarGrV/tw== =NKOt -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: PGP compatibility
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Lucky Green wrote: >On Sun, 2 Nov 1997, Robert A. Costner wrote: >> My copy of PGP 5.0 seems to be completely compatible with 2.6 versions. This >> message is signed, and my key is included within the message for those of you >> who have software that discards the non signed portion. (If you don't know >> how to extract my key, copy it and fix the broken dashed line, or use a >> keyserver) > >Of course your copy of PGP 5.0 is compatible with prior versions. I know >this, you know this, and the anonymous author claiming otherwise knows >this. He simply hopes that there are some people that don't know this. The >idea behind the original post and others like it over the last few days is >to spread FUD about PGP 5.0 after other attacks failed for lack of merrit. >If you repeat a lie often enough, eventually some people will believe you. >PSYOPS 101. Let's not fall for it. Actually, the cry of "Infowar!" itself could be used as a disruptive technique. It undermines dialogue. It breeds suspicion and paranoia. It encourages people to think of those who disagree with them as The Enemy. It can be used by a mole for cover. Gee, come to think of it, isn't Lucky the one who keeps trying to demoralize everyone by saying that Big Brother is inevitable? And, who was it that was waving around firearms at a Cypherpunks meeting? Isn't that a classic provocateur technique? (See the Earth First experience, for example.) Now, I think it's unlikely that Lucky is a mole. I'm just trying to show that once you start witch hunting, it turns out that the supply of witches tends to be highly responsive to demand. The Back Technique of fighting Infowar seems to be effective. Treat the claims of the suspected Infowarrior as if they are credible and carefully explain why there is an inaccuracy. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFzh3ZaWtjSmRH/5AQH8FQf7BzzvEog2DpaqwcEaHC5uaxI8D5xE5m1l Vr1oToONAHmnXelol2vTDyNITymQAY/LpVP5liFGAI3sWUQuLJmPOnfYsLD4xCj0 ZG0dXjWoujkNbMWd/kDtCOmngeCO7c+nW7u1xrI0vJXKtPM3+ipkQNvmpo9mTSaW 2MGdFAsAdbsRoUUQYXcDqJ+A19O0pVhaCU9rlhuqcX/RlHgTrWXXZk8MRlEiPdq5 gJad0cWRHIWPgtSUmTQoRbwxyV6ZaUHlPpEUw0V9zdH7N9Cz4WS1c+ylUaY/L+OA lqEqWksZVDKTbW8Bwc/1Up5Eek/YXzj1kT/YMnxB2bbnASfIA19GtA== =E0Vy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: effective GACK fighting (fwd)
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Blanc wrote: >Jim Choate wrote: >>But, why do we need a lawyer? We have the right to represent ourselves, why >>let somebody who has a intimate stake in the status quo represent us? > >Well, first of all I was being facetious, because of how people are always >saying we need Leadership (tm) and need to elect another President in order >to have a more Perfect Union. But I said we need a "good" lawyer - a >libertarian lawyer - because I expect that it would take someone who had >studied the legal system and made it their project to be well-educated and >articulate on these matters, to be able to successfully represent the >Consitutional values which we subscribe to. [snip] Fortunately some of these "good" lawyers already exist at the Institute for Justice. Basically, they are a libertarian version of the ACLU. They've accomplished some good things and deserve the support (read $$$) of freedom-minded individuals everywhere. (note: I'm not connected with them in any way; just letting the cypherpunk community know about an organization in sync with our views) "If you seek a courtroom champion for individual liberty, free market solutions, and limited government, look only as far as the Institute for Justice. When politicians pass sweepingly intrusive laws and bureaucrats build their empires of paperwork and power, only the Institute for Justice brings them to account in court." -- http://www.InstituteforJustice.org/ >>Has there ever been a law suite brought against the Supreme Court or >>Congress claiming their actions were unconstitutional? The amendment >>relating to taxation for a start, repeal individual taxation and return to >>the system originaly intended by the founding fathers. > >I don't know. But this is the sort of issue I was thinking of. Bill Benson has done some extensive research (his book is called The Law That Never Was) regarding the 16th Amendment (the so-called Income Tax Amendment) and how it was ratified. According to the information he has uncovered through exhaustive research in D.C. and all of the state capitals of the then 48 states, the 16th Amendment was never ratified by 3/4ths of the states. (see http://www.trustclarks.com/theman.html for more info) Friends of mine have spoken to Mr. Benson about this, and he says that the courts won't touch it with a ten foot pole. He even sells a package (or at least he was selling it back in 1995) of legal information about the non-ratification of the 16th that can be used as a defense in an income tax case. According to Mr. Benson (in 1995), each of the cases was dropped when the defense made it clear they were going to argue their defense based on this point. I understand that folks in the "patriot" movement have tried to take this to the Supreme Court without success. The Court refused to hear it. Assuming Mr. Benson's research is accurate and legitimate, the 16th didn't even come close to being ratified and is truly a Law That Never Was. Think about that next April 15th...the IRS's "lawful" authority is based upon a legal fiction. That's why it's called >voluntary< compliance. Nerthus - -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 mQENAzRc0lEDFQEIALF2JX7RgDLC6nnSa7BmcczGumTRxhXx5mHoqPcGY95VGAVD 49iN/+59BBrHKxOU5JX5F9kWEsBG92KbOdB3XGCsub7AYmCl+iMrG+h+vJl9qCyc 134sq7WNfInA9TxiQ28/DldHj++gDeQJr9BvUU8Ez2Iu70uW5T7rlHFyBUWQBh3P 2dB/Q9A/dixhAzNTaeTuVH4TunoyDN6OrRrSTdZhsPs8dLVLLeqKC3qM28wLX5Mt qQCUb/pRb9TR9ygwaznAIdqSJ1qc/xqlQY6U0Vh6YVOaId+MQwzsq1ZRPlW0kYSS wgka2WXELH5ZpQLmCppM1pdkHhm54VbBl7TmNwkABRG0I05lcnRodXMgPGN5cGhl cnB1bmtzQGN5YmVycGFzcy5uZXQ+iQEVAwUQNFzSUeFWwZe05jcJAQFxVQf/WUSH ltCrUpoQwQ9oTGCJiRycTQqUzDuqaqR55xgyz8W5mARixBigd/sL63EoBlQmyHR3 NIgwIW3I8hcPfUlXi84hsZ+89/HVW3CoMk2g6692UEoKHUX6bMkeAi85hIfJVhFj EONhx3xFmdOZqkEbdFm81J/0JJIhtAe0Ut2DPu4B49yjO7NBTg97QWwO6ZymE09v BUv5esuvdxFbmn8qfPHdurs+MrvoKbhZIA8Xz03eTS1auT8pNvdEO4EDaac0njZ4 5wAbAeC79AqztS75GpT7cf0jZcYJPwtW8LPXj7SQCMimseZ7/2OxNPditI9e58CI EL/Dl0D9qn1NRPiVwA== =8W8j - -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNFzU4eFWwZe05jcJAQEuEQf/cU+8VTsG7GRbP14eMtUIs2Hb9jKmCD8v +au46lGCy8NuuMl+3leRGT9tAARoe2+yVg6FJbwzCZvJMBNIR3YmEEm3WxEH9TZQ ghVk1nrCtZg0eLdKSHYIV8q061kcrNmgtn/J8zP4SH39NtcHBfTaqpqt6wwky0jd 7A096utO4p3ip870ss4V5P2LiW71riJh3L/pqCJnUMbQleLT5OK/+el7tnUZYX2g 8mNNA5qydHIleyoDB72Aj3u15Z1TLmCKXGt+Uj3fwzytjYDtwfs9d+7AI7Kk1kBQ RLw07pNou03Fr3M8SSeSiSkUGea4Hv0j8wJtSjIQoJ9on03zOsJAlw== =+v+X -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Vote CypherPunk!
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 20:24 -0500 10/31/97, TruthMonger wrote: >* In August, the Boston Globe profiled the Taiwan National >Assembly (which specializes in constitutional issues), where it is >fairly common for the minority New Party to filibuster by merely >grabbing the microphone and physically restraining majority-party >members so that they cannot call for votes. Fights break out, >sometimes bloody ones. Said a local political science professor, "It >may not be civilized, but it's efficient" because citizens respond by >re-electing the aggressive legislators. I'd probably have a lot more respect for Congresscritters if they cared enough about any issue to physically fight about it. Maybe we could issue them weapons, too; then term limits would become a moot point. (Who would win if Jesse Helms and Diane Feinstein had a fight to the death? The American citizens.) A suitable quote from Monty Python: We would like to apologize for the way politicians are represented in this programme. It was never our intention to imply that politicians are weak-kneed, political time-servers who are concerned more with their personal vendettas and private power struggles than the problems of government, nor to suggest at any point that they sacrifice their credibility by denying free debate on vital matters in the mistaken impression that party unity comes before the well-being of the people they supposedly represent, nor to imply at any stage that they are squabbling little toadies without an ounce of concern for the vital social problems of today. Nor indeed do we intend that viewers should consider them as crabby ulcerous self-seeking vermin with furry legs and an addiction to alcohol and certain explicit sexual practices which some people might find offensive. We are sorry if this impression has come across. In fact, they could run this at the top of every hour on C-SPAN. I'll call my cable company.

2 1

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

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 2 Nov 1997 23:10:11 +0100 (MET) > To: cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net > From: nobody(a)REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) > Fortunately some of these "good" lawyers already exist at the Institute for > Justice. Basically, they are a libertarian version of the ACLU. They've > accomplished some good things and deserve the support (read $$$) of > freedom-minded individuals everywhere. (note: I'm not connected with them > in any way; just letting the cypherpunk community know about an organization > in sync with our views) > > "If you seek a courtroom champion for individual liberty, free market > solutions, and limited government, look only as far as the Institute > for Justice. When politicians pass sweepingly intrusive laws and > bureaucrats build their empires of paperwork and power, only the > Institute for Justice brings them to account in court." > -- http://www.InstituteforJustice.org/ Thanks, I'll check them out as I am unaware of their position. > >>Has there ever been a law suite brought against the Supreme Court or > >>Congress claiming their actions were unconstitutional? The amendment > >>relating to taxation for a start, repeal individual taxation and return to > >>the system originaly intended by the founding fathers. > > > >I don't know. But this is the sort of issue I was thinking of. > > Bill Benson has done some extensive research (his book is called The Law > That Never Was) regarding the 16th Amendment (the so-called Income Tax > Amendment) and how it was ratified. According to the information he has > uncovered through exhaustive research in D.C. and all of the state capitals > of the then 48 states, the 16th Amendment was never ratified by 3/4ths of > the states. (see http://www.trustclarks.com/theman.html for more info) > > Friends of mine have spoken to Mr. Benson about this, and he says that the > courts won't touch it with a ten foot pole. He even sells a package (or at > least he was selling it back in 1995) of legal information about the > non-ratification of the 16th that can be used as a defense in an income tax > case. According to Mr. Benson (in 1995), each of the cases was dropped when > the defense made it clear they were going to argue their defense based on > this point. > > I understand that folks in the "patriot" movement have tried to take this to > the Supreme Court without success. The Court refused to hear it. > > Assuming Mr. Benson's research is accurate and legitimate, the 16th didn't > even come close to being ratified and is truly a Law That Never Was. Think > about that next April 15th...the IRS's "lawful" authority is based upon a > legal fiction. That's why it's called >voluntary< compliance. Actualy, his research is one of the reasons that I am so interested in an actual lawsuit. What if somebody were to go for several years with no contact at all with the IRS, and no intention of making contact. Then when approached that person makes enough noise to guarantee that they will be going to court. What would it then take to bush-whack the beggars? What is the absolute last point that your defence must be revealed prior to your presenting your case to the jury? The reason I use the first person is because to me it seems critical that no lawyer is actualy used in the defence. As I understand it, and I ain't no lawyer, there are some actions that a defendent may do if representing themselves that lawyers are prohibited from doing. Among them is stating the obvious fact, if the jurors don't believe the law is just they may refuse to find for that reason. If the Constitution and the actual record of votes in concert with the general feeling of excess regarding this matter doesn't prove the case, what will? ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: democracy?! (fwd)
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [Long discussion about crypto-anarchy vs. democracy removed] I suggest reframing the argument. Right now, the discussion seems to be: "If we were Gods, how would we institute a just political system on these people." Unfortunately, only a few Gods are reading the cypherpunks list and they refuse to do our bidding. The real question is: what should we do? Our (oversimplified) choices: 1. Democracy: Participate in the political process by joining various organizations, lobbying, begging for money, voting, etc. etc. 2. Crypto-Anarchy: Write code, buy guns, make money, make more money, etc. etc. The second choice is clearly better in terms of protecting your own hide. What if we want to protect the hides of other people? I believe choice 2 is still the better one. In any event, this is the more interesting discussion. The problem with choice 1 is that even if you can convince yourself that a group of people and an institution are sound and reliable today, you do not know what it will be doing later on. Choice 2, on the other hand, is a low risk investment and brings you into contact with a better group of people. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFzVSpaWtjSmRH/5AQG9LQf/WCepJirikSAU4DIVlRTqYQkfkahLDtxi H8E3a0HSoOYSJAJefx4h2Zl0yy2lYT6mdNjNYsjIR3lDbkDJh97DfgueLHAhmivE Ht4C9XzyzKB2CRGiLD5hlbGRzBYACUWU2sm5xNIxYJ44AuwyhHgpVp8vhQts7XRM xQzLtF4fDD+8Hc5AKq4vE4lTpJzwHUO7T2yANZlFMpx0clJDj7/pr+gSUTaWQcK4 pok4wAj+Hd9wrTtOLG40SqEQmmISi8owutvGStQgb3PSjDFsmpAQimxr4agMcylZ 7qxkNRc/sUzfdN5uc89n1cQ+E2fenocs5W6GJ7N8GRnfYP6127uveQ== =OuX5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

re: Speech as co-conspiring? I don't think so.
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Monty Cantspell, Editor in Chief of Groan Magazine, wrote: >> There was a discussion a little while ago suggesting that toad.com had >> been compromised by people who were sowing dissension by partially >> distributing certain messages. Had toad signed all of its messages, >> it would be possible to obtain evidence supporting this hypothesis >> without relying entirely on the word of people we may not know. > >How do signed messages deal with the incompleat distribushun problem? >If legit signed messages are not sent to half the list, what does the >sig gain us? When Attila says "I have this message from the list" and it has a valid signature, it makes things considerably more interesting because we don't have to trust Attila very much. For instance, it may give the owner of the signing key incontrovertible proof that his machine was compromised. If we have several examples of messages which are slightly different from each other and are signed by the list key, we know that an attack was mounted, although we may not know by whom. >> Had somebody compromised toad, they would still have to correctly sign >> messages. > >But, depending on the compromise, this could be possible. I phrased that badly. What I meant to say was that the person who compromised the machine may be able to sign messages, but he or she will still have to sign all the messages going out. Which means that they can be compared later, which may show incontrovertible proof that Something Is Wrong And It Is Wrong In A Most Interesting Way. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFzqp5aWtjSmRH/5AQFAsgf7B2F4xDdQZc4koltSO1exTkAGIzxH8nCP 7lh5r2P3vPhC1BfxkCMr3+kTIAuTcXPhvkmGxXNGjud+wqPOW/BYDPUfyjGDQ/rD TZOM23iqVYZIfiiyEdl3DbqmiIv7W0Zrs8b9yhlDnjWPXGnqmgu5QV8LM3QHEEKk nOhKz+qm3cv4UNI9wK87+PjmFKNN9JZCq3WsFCYPI9QSCJR9qgZ7YXnGAPGs7dbG CYRhRYRUMPYBha2RfROvkU5xWH32iRE0bdLQ/uxCjL0vZxoMSq5gDMAjm1Hu02+L 8qTsyCK/LeCRBwtNBCHTO70E71lsV2jD+03Xcxm3SzYHnNo5G6RUHQ== =x/pi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

RE: Protocols for Insurance to Maintain Privacy
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 10/31/97 12:46 PM, Tim May (tcmay(a)got.net) passed this wisdom: >I had an engineer working for me who cheerfully used the company medical >plan for all it was worth. If his kid had a cold, off to the doctor. If his >wife felt feverish, off to the doctor. If he had an upset stomache after >lunch (understandable considering the state of company food and >burrito-vending machines in 1980), off to the doctor. He may have paid $5 >per visit. Of course, he took off a lot of time to make these various treks >to have his kids, himself, and his wife "treated" (given aspirin, told to >drink plenty of fluids, whatever). A nice racket for the hospitals. This is one (of many) things my ex-wife and I used to disagree on ... she would want to haul the kid or herself off to the Emergency room everytime anything happened ... the idea of sleeping on it and seeing how it seemed in the morning was foreign to her; I can see that broken limbs getting sharp raps in head etc ... but every little sniffle ... of course premiums are up. For us, it was zero co-pay since between my retired military status and back then Raytheon medical coverage I never had to lay out a penny, when its that free eats easy to over-indulge ... and during those times I spent in the ER waiting room I saw many other doing the same thing. Brian B. Riley --> http://www.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key> "Home is where your books are" -- Kitty O'Neal

1 0

Re: Bell sentencing timed to coincide with raids on militia members?
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 10/31/97 3:01 PM, Tim May (tcmay(a)got.net) passed this wisdom: >Get ready, folks. By the way, I'll be at the gun show at the Cow Palace in >San Francisco on the weekend of November 8-9, probably Saturday, the 8th. >Seems I'm running low on certain types of ammo, and I may want to pick up a >couple more assault rifles before Swinestein succeeds in completely banning >them. I used to think that way ... but then I thought, why pay all that money and walk the line of whatever Swinesteen et al come up with. Instead I have my deer rifles and a shotgun or two and ammo for both. The way this all is working now, I have more combat experience than 90% of the active duty military and most cops, and every day goes by more and more are retiring. If it ever comes down to that, I'll take down one or two of them with my deer rifle and help myself to their weapons and ammo ... also kind of makes sure I haven't set myself up to depend on an obsolete caliber ... if I am not good enough to take some of them down and take their weapons, no 300 nor 30,000 rounds for my very own Armalite is going to make any difference. Brian B. Riley --> http://www.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key> "Everyone who lives dies; but not everyone who dies has lived" -- back of a 'No Fear' t-shirt

1 0

S/MIME
by Nobuki Nakatuji 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is S/MIME secure than PGP ? ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

4 3

Smartcards - Drivers Licenses in New Jersey
by Robert A. Costner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The New Jersey legislature has announced that they will begin issuing smartcards for driver's licenses. The New license is reported to contain * biographical info * auto insurance info * medical insurance info * health info The cards are also claimed to be capable of carrying * fingerprints * photographic images * health records * billing statements The Capitol Report article and a Web based feedback forum can be found at http://www.cpanj.com/legislative/drivers_license_1196.html -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh@efga.org http://www.efga.org/ run PGP 5.0 for my public key

3 2

List of reliable remailers
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{'cyber'} = '<alias(a)alias.cyberpass.net> alpha pgp'; $remailer{"mix"} = "<mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = "<remailer(a)replay.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = "<remailer(a)cypherpunks.ca> cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = "<winsock(a)rigel.cyberpass.net> cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord ?"; $remailer{'nym'} = '<config(a)nym.alias.net> newnym pgp'; $remailer{"squirrel"} = "<mix(a)squirrel.owl.de> cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{'weasel'} = '<config(a)weasel.owl.de> newnym pgp'; $remailer{"reno"} = "<middleman(a)cyberpass.net> cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{"cracker"} = "<remailer(a)anon.efga.org> cpunk mix remix pgp hash ksub esub latent cut ek reord post"; $remailer{'redneck'} = '<config(a)anon.efga.org> newnym pgp'; $remailer{"bureau42"} = "<remailer(a)bureau42.ml.org> cpunk mix pgp ksub hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"neva"} = "<remailer(a)neva.org> cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub ?"; $remailer{"lcs"} = "<mix(a)anon.lcs.mit.edu> mix"; $remailer{"medusa"} = "<medusa(a)weasel.owl.de> mix middle" $remailer{"McCain"} = "<mccain(a)notatla.demon.co.uk> mix middle"; $remailer{"valdeez"} = "<valdeez(a)juno.com> cpunk pgp pgponly hash ek"; $remailer{"arrid"} = "<arrid(a)juno.com> cpunk pgp pgponly hash ek"; $remailer{"hera"} = "<goddesshera(a)juno.com> cpunk pgp pgponly hash ek"; $remailer{"htuttle"} = "<h_tuttle(a)rigel.cyberpass.net> cpunk pgp hash latent cut post ek"; catalyst(a)netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura(a)replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer(a)crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix reno winsock) (weasel squirrel medusa) (cracker redneck) (nym lcs) (valdeez arrid hera) This remailer list is somewhat phooey. Go check out http://www.publius.net/rlist.html for a good one. Last update: Thu 23 Oct 97 15:48:06 PDT remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- hera goddesshera(a)juno.com ------------ 5:03:45 99.86% nym config(a)nym.alias.net +*#**#**### :34 95.82% redneck config(a)anon.efga.org #*##*+#**** 2:00 95.44% mix mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com +++ ++++++* 19:18 95.27% squirrel mix(a)squirrel.owl.de -- ---+--- 2:34:19 95.16% cyber alias(a)alias.cyberpass.net *++***+ ++ 11:26 95.11% replay remailer(a)replay.com **** *** 10:06 94.93% arrid arrid(a)juno.com ----.------ 8:50:34 94.41% bureau42 remailer(a)bureau42.ml.org --------- 3:38:29 93.53% cracker remailer(a)anon.efga.org + +*+*+*+ 16:32 92.80% jam remailer(a)cypherpunks.ca + +*-++++ 24:14 92.79% winsock winsock(a)rigel.cyberpass.net -..-..---- 9:59:18 92.22% neva remailer(a)neva.org ------****+ 1:03:02 90.39% valdeez valdeez(a)juno.com 4:58:22 -36.97% reno middleman(a)cyberpass.net 1:01:28 -2.65% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien

1 0

the one Unbreakable crypto scheme.
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

/* Generic xor handler. With no args, xors stdin against 0xFF to stdout. A single argument is a file to read xor-bytes out of. Any zero in the xor-bytes array is treated as the end; if you need to xor against a string that *includes* zeros, you're on your own. *Hobbit*, 960208 */ #include <stdio.h> #include <fcntl.h> char buf[8192]; char bytes[256]; char * py; /* do the xor, in place. Uses global ptr "py" to maintain "bytes" state */ xorb (buf, len) char * buf; int len; { register int x; register char * pb; pb = buf; x = len; while (x > 0) { *pb = (*pb ^ *py); pb++; py++; if (! *py) py = bytes; x--; } } /* xorb */ /* blah */ main (argc, argv) int argc; char ** argv; { register int x = 0; register int y; /* manually preload; xor-with-0xFF is all too common */ memset (bytes, 0, sizeof (bytes)); bytes[0] = 0xff; /* if file named in any arg, reload from that */ #ifdef O_BINARY /* DOS shit... */ x = setmode (0, O_BINARY); /* make stdin raw */ if (x < 0) { fprintf (stderr, "stdin binary setmode oops: %d\n", x); exit (1); } x = setmode (1, O_BINARY); /* make stdout raw */ if (x < 0) { fprintf (stderr, "stdout binary setmode oops: %d\n", x); exit (1); } #endif /* O_BINARY */ if (argv[1]) #ifdef O_BINARY x = open (argv[1], O_RDONLY | O_BINARY); #else x = open (argv[1], O_RDONLY); #endif if (x > 0) { read (x, bytes, 250); /* nothin' fancy here */ close (x); } py = bytes; x = 1; while (x > 0) { x = read (0, buf, sizeof (buf)); if (x <= 0) break; xorb (buf, x); y = write (1, buf, x); if (y <= 0) exit (1); } exit (0); }

1 0

PGP 50i Beta 8a for Unix.
by Ryan Anderson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I jsut went and got myself a copy of this. It's frustratingly hard to get to compile. The source directories are all missing header files (filling src/include with all the headers via symlinks seems to work) but other files seem to be missing. Is there a better distribution of this than the mess on pgpi.com? Ryan Anderson - PGP fp: 7E 8E C6 54 96 AC D9 57 E4 F8 AE 9C 10 7E 78 C9 RSA in Perl: (Export violations for the lazy) print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

1 0

Re: Why Jodi Hoffman must be called a 'Dumb Cunt' and told to 'Go Fuck Yourself' at all costs, by TruthMonger
by wabe 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

THE FOLLOWING IS AN OPINION, (this is a forged post anyway) So I read Jodi's lawsuit as it is posted on her web page. I'll post some interesting parts below. Keep in mind that I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one in cyberspace... Basically the lawsuit (supposably) is(was?) against a school board in Florida where Jodi sent her 3 children to middle school. Jodi seeks mucho casho for emotional damages she was inflicted by having to discover and fight the sex-ed class. Apparantly she originally was one of the mothers who opted her children out, but the school fumbled (or the child "forgot" to hand the paper back in) and they took the class anyways. After one day, she yanked the kids out of school for a week, and engaged on the legal battle we see here. She also seeks to shut down (or heavily amend) the sex ed class, along with the newspaper part of a civics class, and she wants more supervision of the children's internet access. As far as I can tell, oddly enough, the internet part of the case is the only part with any real merit. (She doesn't want her children using the internet at school to see pornography while she isn't watching.) That's reasonable, and the school could have someone watching (or claim to) to avoid it. There's a lot of whining about the "secular humanism" of the school which is entirely without merit and sounds foolish in the context of a legal paper. Selected interesting points are as follows: (claimed as the school board's damaging sex ed class. . .) c) giving inaccurate and incomplete information about HIV/AIDS transmission, by claiming students should not worry if their cut-free leg was splashed with HIV positive blood; How innaccurate is this? Do we have some "studies?" k) failing to emphasize abstinence from activity outside of marriage as the expected standard for all school-age children and failing to teach the benefits of monogamous hetero marriage; This is CRAZY! Not only does she want them to accept whatever she believes as the "expected standard" but she wants them to expound upon the glories of a boring sex life! :> l) failing to emphasize that abstinence is a certain way to avoid out-of-wedlock pregnancy, ly transmitted diseases, including acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS) and other associated health problems; abstinence was only briefly mentioned and then ridiculed at length; Not true! As claimed in her previous points (see 'bloody leg' above) m) failing to respect the conscience and rights of parents and students; respect is a hard thing to measure, and is often something EARNED. n) in addition, the opt out letter failed to fully and properly advise parents of the nature and content of the lecture so that parents could meaningfully decide to let their children opt out or attend the lecture; Actually has some merit. (Then the school board showed a laser disk purchased from the "homosexual propagandizer" ABC which...) c.) failing to promote an awareness of the benefits of abstinence, by failing to equip students with abstinence decision-making techniques; That last phase is just funny! e.) promoting a secular humanist philosophy by teaching children that they alone should decide when to become ly active; hmmm.... (Now they have the GALL to buy some newspapers and provide them to the children....these newspapers:) a.) favoring, justifying, promoting, condoning and/or providing biased, inaccurate and incomplete information about homo , by failing to discuss adverse mental, physical and emotional consequences of engaging in homo behavior and not discussing the changeability of orientation; If they had advised the students that some of them could, if they wanted, become homosexuals, would that have been more proper? d.) failing to teach monogamous, hetero marriage as the expected standard to prevent ly transmitted diseases and unwanted pregnancy; HAHAHA, isn't homosexual marriage a better way of avoiding pregnancy? Then Jodi objects to some newspapers being shown in geography class which contain an "adult" advertisement section (aparantly) Here are the whole of her objections to this particular point: a.) providing inappropriate material as part of curriculum (one ad for an adult video store invites customers to bring their wife, girlfriend, boyfriend or all three); b.) providing material that does not promote core values; c.) providing material which does not promote the contributions made by women to society, such as ads for sex-for-sale businesses; d.) failing to promote an awareness of the benefits of abstinence and the consequences of teenage pregnancy; e.) failing to teach monogamous hetero marriage as the standard; f.) failing to teach respect for family and marriage; g.) failing to promote a moral society; h.) encouraging early activity of children; i.) contributing to the delinquency of minors by encouraging activity. Those were very funny! She is a comic in the classic Milk and Cheese sense! I especially loved c) which claims that ads for sex for sale businesses are contributions made by women to society! I wholeheartedly disagree! How can she be sure the ads were placed and created by WOMEN!? Couldn't a man have made the ads? Other problems Jodi had with sex ed were: a.) giving inaccurate, incomplete or biased information about masturbation, by teaching there is no evidence that it is emotionally harmful, when there is substantial evidence to the contrary; k.) failing to encourage respect for parents as authority figures by telling children they can make decisions without consulting or relying on parents' advice; l.) establishing a secular humanist philosophy by teaching, for example, that children are in charge of their bodies and are free to make decisions based on what they feel is the right thing to do at the time and by excluding parents and other adults from decision-making processes; Further explainations follow: 42. The actions of Defendant in paragraphs 25-28 , 30-32 and 34-40 were outrageous, intentional and/or reckless and were intended to cause plaintiff JODI HOFFMAN severe emotional distress and as a result of said acts, Plaintiff suffered severe distress. 43. Plaintiff suffered an inability to sleep properly, met with the publisher of the Miami Herald to ask that the ads be removed from the schools, and suffered other emotional injury, loss and distress, became anxious, worried about the safety and morals of her children as a result of Defendant's conduct. She then whines about the word "orientation" being added to the school's policy of anti-discrimination because "the undefined class known simply as " orientation" appears to protect persons who could pose a threat to the health and safety of students, impair the right of the school board to reject applications for employment based on good cause and who, under 231.02 (1), may not be of good moral character." Among the many things she demands are: (m.) Order that the school board institute a balanced comprehensive health curricula, one that emphasizes abstinence until marriage and fidelity within marriage, (5) Money damages for Defendant's intentional infliction of emotional distress on Plaintiff parent and for the loss of educational opportunity to Plaintiff's minor children. Summery: I WISH I could say that she was only going after the money. In this case, that would be a severe case of moral improvement. Specific phrases jump out of her case ("failing to promote a moral society") that nail her down as a Fundamentalist Christian with an agenda, using the Law as one arm of her attack. She ranks up there with those terrorists in Texas who filed liens against practically everyone, in my opinion.

1 0

No Subject
by Ghost＠workline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

F <Ghost(a)workline.com> R <cypherpunks(a)toad.com> (remote destination) R <jlhoffm(a)ibm.net> (remote destination) R <fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu> (remote destination) X - Start Received: by soi.hyperchat.com id 00e700 at Mon, 03 Nov 1997 17:58:33 -700 (Mountain Standard Time) Message-ID: <345E731B.12(a)workline.com> Date: Mon, 03 Nov 1997 19:58:03 -0500 From: Abstruse <abstruse(a)technologist.com> X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com CC: Jodi Hoffman <jlhoffm(a)ibm.net>, fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Re: Why porn must be stopped at all costs, by Jodi Hoffman References: <199711032057.MAA08856(a)k2.brigadoon.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Someone on this list, I forget who, has made numerous attempts at > convincing us that pornography 'does no harm' to children. It is > exactly at this point that I must draw a line. Studies have shown that > an event which lasts even so much as three-tenths of a second, within > five to ten minutes has produced a structural change in the brain. > Exposure to porn causes actual brain damage, especially in a child. let me guess . . . scientology? it sounds to me as if you just despise porn so much that you're seeing red, and hence . . . not seeing the facts straight (or believing whatever you [want to] hear).

1 0

SynCrypt: the new PGP?
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anybody heard of syncrypt? www.syncrypt.com It is like pgp but has lots of cool features. File wiping, group encryption, automatic encryption of files put in certain directories. Get this, hiding encrypted files in pictures! Automatically. It pulls them back out again too. Plus it has an interesting "20 questions" method for backing up your passphrase. If you forget your passphrase you have to answer 25 of 27 questions like "who was your favorite teacher" to get it back. Bruce Schneier is working with them, so they should have good crypto. It has blowfish, des and triple des, and idea. The keys are el gamal. Problem is the freeware is crippled to 10 encryptions (unlimited decryptions). $50 for full functions. Is this the new pgp? No gak or even cak in sight. SynMonger

3 2