December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: FC: The tensions between Internet advocacy groups
by Marc Rotenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Danny - I think where the free expression groups differ fundamentally from the position CDT has set out is that we do not believe that the Net should be dominated by rating systems. We recognize that parents have some legitimate concerns about the availability of objectionable material. But we think that there are alternatives to widespread ratings -- including learning more about the benefits of the Internet -- that are preferable. We also recognize that there is a risk that Congress will try to pass CDA II. But we believe that it will be difficult for such an act to survive Constitutional review after Reno v. ACLU. We are perhaps more concerned that an architecture of ubiquitous ratings will provide, as Barry Steinhardt said well at the summit, a blueprint for legislation that would be upheld. What exactly does CDT plan to say to the enthusiastic member of Congress who backs your rating plan and wants to see it enforced with sanctions? What are your own views about a filtering search engine that block access to 99% of the references concerning the "American Red Cross"? A diversity of rating systems is the not the same as a diversity of viewpoints. It is rather a diversity of fears and prejudices. I hope we never see the day when national organizations are routinely called upon to draw up lists of what they do not want others to see. I suspect that those who are concerned about the future of free expression share this view. Marc Rotenberg EPIC

2 1

Censorship
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There are two pieces of code included in this message. Or, at least, there would be if I were allowed to express my ideas. Accordingly, the first piece of code has been carefully censored. The second piece of code is a Perl script which does the censoring. The model is that of a tape which the censor lays across anything "offensive." The Perl script has -C and -Perl modes which try to preserve comments. (They can be fooled, so you should look over the results before distributing.) You can also specify the string which is "printed" on the tape. The idea is that every time I write a piece of code which I cannot distribute freely, a censored version will be mailed to appropriate newsgroups, mailing lists, newspapers, and politicians. This should have the effect of continually raising and dramatizing the issue, as well as demonstrating repeatedly how ridiculous it is. I would hope that some decades into the future we will be able to look through the archives for these scraps of censored code and find it amusing. -------------------------------------------------- CENSORED BY THE UN /* A reference implementation of SHA1. */ ITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVE RNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNME NT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED ST ATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES /* Circular left shift operation. */ GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES G OVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UN I TED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORE D BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CEN SORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERN MENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GO VERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STAT ES /* Prototypes */ GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY TH E UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED S TATES G OVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES G /* Hash is contained in H array. */ OVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITE D STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES G O VERNME NT CEN SORED BY THE UNITED STAT ES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENS ORED BY THE UNITED ST /* Initialize H array here. */ ATES GOVERNMENT CE NSORED BY THE UNIT ED STATES GOVERNME NT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOV ERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES G OVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES G OVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STAT ES GOVERNMENT CENSORE D BY TH E UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED ST ATES GOVERNMENT CE N SORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED S T A TES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY T H E UNIT ED STATES GOVERNMENT CENS ORED BY THE UNI TED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATE S /* Handle latest character. */ GOV ERNMENT CENSO R E /* Add padding byte. */ D BY THE UNITE D STATES GOVERNMENT CENS O RED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMEN T CENSORED BY THE UN ITED /* Pad out with zeros. */ STATES GOVERNMENT CEN SORED BY THE U NITED STATES GOVERNMENT C ENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED ST A TES GO V ERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNM ENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNIT E /* Add padding byte. */ D ST ATES GOVERNMENT CENS ORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSO RED BY T H /* Pad out with zeros. */ E UNITED STATES GOVERN MENT CENSORED /* Add length information */ BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNME NT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSO RED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY T /* Final block. */ HE UNITED STATES GOVERN MENT CENSORED B Y THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNI T E D STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSO R ED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVE RNMENT CENSORED BY T HE UNI TED ST ATES GOVERNMENT CEN SORED BY THE UNITED STATE S GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GO V ERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNI TED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMEN T CENSORE D BY THE UNITED ST ATES GOVE RNMENT CENSORED BY THE UN ITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STAT ES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERN MENT CENSORED B Y THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATE S GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED S TATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOV ERNMENT CENSORE D BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED ST A T ES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GO VERNMENT CENSOR ED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED S T A TES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITE D STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENS ORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT CENSORED BY THE UNITED S TATES GOVE RNMENT CEN SORED BY T HE UNITED STATES GOV E -------------------------------------------------- #!/usr/local/bin/perl -w require 5; use strict; $main::censor_string = "CENSORED BY THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT "; $main::next_censor_char = 0; $main::c_mode = 0; $main::Perl_mode = 0; sub main { my($switch); while( $switch = shift(@ARGV) ) { if( $switch =~ /^-/ ) { if( $switch eq "-C" ) { $main::c_mode = 1; } elsif( $switch eq "-Perl" ) { $main::Perl_mode = 1; } elsif( $switch eq "-s" ) { if( scalar(@ARGV) > 0 ) { $main::censor_string = shift(@ARGV); } else { die "usage: censor.pl [-C] [-Perl] [-s censor-string]\n"; } } else { die "usage: censor.pl [-C] [-Perl] [-s censor-string]\n"; } } else { die "usage: censor.pl [-C] [-Perl] [-s censor-string]\n"; } } @main::censor_char_list = split(//, $main::censor_string); while(<>) { chomp; if( $main::c_mode && /^\s*\/\*.*\*\/\s*$/ ) { print "$_\n"; } elsif( $main::c_mode && /^(\s*)(\S*.*\S|\S)(\s*\/\*.*\*\/\s*)$/ ) { my($censored) = get_censor_chars(length($2)); print "$1$censored$3$4\n"; } elsif( $main::Perl_mode && /^\s*#.*$/ ) { print "$_\n"; } elsif( $main::Perl_mode && /^(\s*)(\S*.*\S|\S)(\s*#.*)$/ ) { my($censored) = get_censor_chars(length($2)); print "$1$censored$3\n"; } elsif( /^(\s*)(\S.*\S)(\s*)$/ ) { my($censored) = get_censor_chars(length($2)); print "$1$censored$3\n"; } elsif( /^(\s*)(\S)(\s*)$/ ) { my($censored) = get_censor_chars(length($2)); print "$1$censored$3\n"; } else { print "$_\n"; } } } sub get_censor_chars { my($length) = shift; my($i); my(@char_list); for( $i=0; $i < $length; $i++ ) { push(@char_list, $main::censor_char_list[$main::next_censor_char]); $main::next_censor_char = ($main::next_censor_char + 1) % length($main::censor_string); } my($censored_string) = join('', @char_list); return $censored_string; } main(); Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm Subject: Censorship To: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com 25BA1A9F5B9010DD8C752EDE887E9AF3 [Cantsin Protocol No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

1 0

Re: Censorial leftists (Was: Interesting article)
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan wrote: >Jamie, I may have missed the fab 50s but I suspect you spent a little too >much time in the psychadelic 60s. In 1997, a leftist can best be defined >as a big government fetishist. :) Oh my, this appears to suggest "leftist" means "liberal," the evil twin of evil libertarianism. Some, one or two or least, leftists are far right of the hard right in opposing big government, and even beyond that in opposing big business (Time-Warner, say, or ACLU), and ever further oppositon to big ambitions for big heads prescribing nostrums for the nation and the world under universalizing creeds of liberty, freedom and, well you know how liberals and kissing cousin libertarians lip and gum. Say, how do you distinguish between the two libers in matters of wanting to tell the world what's good for it, wanting to run it just so? Wasn't it the '60s radicals who pronounced pox on feverish liberals and rabid libertarians for their righteous complicity in gov, com, edu, etc., their common inability to forgo wanting to run things from the top, to hang out with the most influential, ahem, each other's dear friends, the "leaders"? Fabulous Ralph Naders, all.

1 0

Superdistribution development/release
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yet Another Watermark... Anyone wanna take bets on how long before it's broken, or at least easily pirated? Cheers, Bob Hettinga --- begin forwarded text From: "Blair Anderson" <blair(a)technologist.com> To: "dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu" <dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu> Cc: "Peter Cassidy" <pcassidy(a)triarche.com>, "Brad Cox" <bcox(a)gmu.edu> Date: Thu, 04 Dec 97 12:58:05 +1300 Priority: Normal MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Superdistribution development/release Sender: bounce-dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Blair Anderson" <blair(a)technologist.com> Silver Bullet for Digital Publishing Arrives TragoeS Announces General Availability of RigthsMarket(TM) PR Newswire - December 02, 1997 16:10 TRGO. %ENT %MLM V%PRN P%PRN CALGARY, Dec. 2 /CNW-PRN/ - RightsMarket hits the bull's-eye business opportunity of the 21st century - electronic commerce through digital publishing on the Internet for the $71.3 billion (US) publishing industry (Value-Line, April 11/May 20/May 30, 1997). ``RightsMarket harnesses powerful economic forces that will show people the money in digital document publishing on the Internet,'' stated Lindsay Moir, President of TragoeS Inc., during the company's news conference November 18th at COMDEX `97, Las Vegas. ``With RightsMarket suppliers of digital documents will be paid and 99% of the revenue loss due to piracy will be eliminated.'' TragoeS has successfully implemented the Superdistribution paradigm in RightsMarket. Superdistribution tracks usage rather than possession and is recognised as the best approach to selling digital property (digital versions of text, data, knowledge, pictures, music, videos, etc.) on the Internet. Pricing of RightsMarket is $50,000 (US) plus integration, support fees, and annual license renewal fees. Unique RightsMarket features include: Persistent Cryptographic Wrappers (RightsWrapper) - No matter where the digital document (financial newsletter, educational test, minutes from a court proceeding, sensitive health care records, etc.) goes, no matter how it gets there, whether it is used and then subsequently redistributed, etc. the document is always encrypted. It is never left decrypted and exposed even while it is being viewed. Rights Marketing `back office' (RightsServer) - Allows marketers to set the terms and conditions of use for the digital property. Features include support for the newly announced international Digital Object Identifier (DOI) publishing standard. Fault Tolerant Middleware (RightsConnection) - Provides a secure link to the `back office' from the user's desktop. As well, there is no requirement to be connected full time to the Internet in order to view the digital document. Metering and Enforcement (RightsClient) - Provides decryption services, meters use, and sends usage information to the RightsServer via secure middleware. Acrobat(TM) Trusted Tool plug-ins - Makes Acrobat, the world's most popular digital publishing tool from Adobe Systems Incorporated(C), ready for prime time digital document economic transactions on the Internet. With a plug-in for the Exchange and Reader, customers can encrypt documents and have a trusted player for viewing content. Shane Hayes, TragoeS' Vice President, Customer Implementation will be presenting at The Digital Object Identifier (DOI) Technology Forum Wednesday, December 10, 1997 in New York City. The DOI is an important emerging international standard for identification of published material online. It forms the foundation layer of a set of technologies that will enable commerce in published material on the Internet so that copyright is protected, content creators can be compensated for their work, and consumers can benefit from technology that is sophisticated, yet seamless and easy to use. The International DOI Foundation (IDF), a non-profit organization established to administer the DOI standard, is looking to technology vendors to implement the necessary technology components and integrate them into secure electronic publishing solutions for the IDF's constituency: the worldwide publishing industry and beyond. In April 1998 in Washington, DC, TragoeS Inc. will participate in a three day conference sponsored by the Library of Congress, the Association of American Publishers (AAP), and the University of Virginia. The conference is titled ``Exploring the New Media - The Paradigm Shift in Publishing: >From Book to Bytes''. TragoeS Vice President, Marketing and Sales, Fred Yee, will sit on a panel discussing `Solutions to Copyright Protection in Cyberspace'. TragoeS Inc., established in 1993, is a Canadian high technology company specializing in software products and services that support financial transactions. Its product, RightsMarket is the solution for the protection, metering and payment of digital intellectual property. TragoeS is a public company reporting in Alberta and Ontario and is listed on the Canadian Dealing Network (CDN TRGO). The Canadian Dealing Network or other regulatory authorities have neither approved nor disapproved of the information contained herein. SOURCE: TragoeS Inc. /CONTACT: Lindsay Moir, President, TragoeS Inc., (403) 571-1835, Fax: (403) 571-1838, Email: moirl(at)tragoes.com, Website: www.tragoes.com, www.rightsmarket.com or Mr. Peter Taylor, Investor Relations, (416) 368-0121, Fax: (416) 368-9175/ (TRGO.) Blair Anderson (Blair(a)technologist.com) International Consultant in Electronic Commerce, Encryption and Electronic Rights Management "Techno Junk and Grey Matter" (HTTP://WWW.NOW.CO.NZ [moving servers, currently inactive]) 50 Wainoni Road, Christchurch, New Zealand phone 64 3 3894065 fax 64 3 3894065 Member Digital Commerce Society of Boston ---------------------------- Caught in the Net for 25 years ---------------------------- For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "dcsb-request(a)ai.mit.edu" with one line of text: "help". --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: <http://www.fc98.ai/>

11 15

Janet Reno warns of "lawlessness on the Internet"
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno's weekly press conference, held this morning at the Department of Justice. She's speaking about an upcoming meeting of the G-7 nations and Russia: At this meeting we will be discussing ways in which our countries can work together to better identify and locate cybercriminals. Automation, computers, the Internet have now made boundaries, in many instances, meaningless. As I have said on a number of occasions at this table, a man can sit at a computer in Europe and steal from a bank in the United States. Someone in Germany can get a list of credit card numbers here and try to extort people for money on the threat of using these credit cards. I think it is imperative that we develop practices, procedures, and laws that will enable these countries - and indeed other countries throughout the world - to work together to focus on criminals who are exploiting the new technologies that so many of us are relying on. The solution is working together as nations. Our law enforcement agencies must learn to work together more closely on these issues and more quickly than ever before, since a split-second response can help catch a hacker while he is still online. The fight against lawlessness on the Internet will be one of the greatest law enforcement challenges of the next century. By working on agreements to help meet that challenge, we won't be left fighting 21st century threats with 20th century solutions. I think it is going to be incumbent upon us all to develop the expertise on the part of law enforcement, both at the federal and state level, to make sure that we know who our counterparts are around the world and that we come together on this issue. I guess this is the Department of Justice's response to "cryptoanarchy." -Declan

4 3

A great Christmas gift for less than $20.
by GreatTunes2＠ar.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(This is a one-time mailing. Removal request not necessary.) If you're looking for a really great gift for the holidays... we promise you'll like this! VelvetVista Recordings is proud to announce the new album from top L.A. piano-man: Jim Wilson with guest performances by over a dozen of L.A.'s and London's top session players and a world-renowned recording artist/ sax player. To check out the CD cover and get more info, visit our website: http://www.imagedepot.com/velvetvista Northern Seascape is a gorgeous collection of 11 piano-featured instrumentals that will take you on an emotional journey from the Irish shores of the North Atlantic to a swirling snowfall in the Sierras. Bittersweet, joyful, romantic, poignant -- this audiophile-quality CD fuses folk, Celtic, pop, and classical influences into a unique melodic style that you will lead you places youll want to revisit again and again. The response to this CD has been incredible. To help us get your copies to you in time for the holidays, please order today. We absolutely assure your satisfaction and offer a money-back, no-questions-asked guarantee. ******************************************************* TO ORDER: Mail order form information below along with check, money-order or credit card info to: VelvetVista Recordings 5152 Sepulveda Blvd, ste.123, Sherman Oaks, CA 91403 Please allow approximately 3 weeks for delivery. OR for faster service: Fax or e-mail order form information with credit card info to: Fax: (818) 789-1211 email: velvetvista(a)imagedepot.com (e-mail orders: please write "Northern Order" in subject box) ******************************************************************** ORDER FORM: The CD's list for $16.95, but for this special holiday offer, we are extending the following prices: ****CD'S*****$14.85 (for the first CD)__________________ $13.75 for subsequent CD's____________ ***CASSETTES***$11.85 for the first cassette___________ $9.85 for subsequent cassettes________________ Please include $2.95 shipping & handling________________ CA residents add 8.25% tax__________________________ TOTAL______________ Name:________________________________________ Address________________________________________ City___________________ State________ Zip______ Phone________________________________________ (Master Card, Visa, American Express or Discover Card) Card Number:___________________________________ Exp. Date:______________________________________ Cardholder's Name:______________________________ Cardholder's Signature:__________________________ *************************************************************** Thank you and Happy Holidays!! </PRE></HTML> c

1 0

Re: Censorial leftists (Was: Interesting article)
by Phillip M. Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Indeed, and in a wonderful case of schadenfreude, when the >Dworkin-MacKinnon anti-porn law was enacted in Canada, "Lesbitan Erotica" >bookstores and publishers were shut down. (I believe this was in Toronto, >and it may have only been in that city or region that the law was enacted, >not in all of Canada. Toto can clarify.) Tim you miss the best part one of the first books to be banned was by Dworkin. Dworkin writes with a pseudo academic style but despite a third of her book being 'references' very little of her argument is supported. She deliberately quotes out of context and tries to claim feminist icons such as Simone de Beauvoir for her cause despite the fact that "Mrs Jeane Paul Satre" was anti censorship. Don't write the feminists off too quickly Tim, de Beauvoir's essay 'Must we burn de Sade' is the anti-censorship equivalent of your cypherpunk manifesto. MacKinnon is a more respectable flake. Her book 'Towards a Feminist theory of the state" starts off explaining that she is trying to construct a Marxist theory of the state. Even this wouldn't be quite so bad if what she was writing had some recognisable connection to anything Marx wrote. Its more a sort of left wing US academia game in which the object is to shock your liberal friends. Phill

1 0

About the way of regulating Japanese encryption export
by Nobuki Nakatuji 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

About the way of regulating Japanese encryption export Permission shouldn't be necessary. ( For example, in such cases as the dealings of providing the technology of the public wisdom. ) And, if corresponding is considered, Export permission isn't needed. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

2 1

blowback
by David Honig 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Fed made up UFO stories to cover military flights. Later on, morons who believe this end up breaking into Feds computers looking for evidence. Ah, irony. Blowback is what Intelligence calls it when, e.g., soldiers you trained and armed to repel your mutual enemy do so, then turn on you. >> > More Naked Gun than Top Gun >> > >> > THE THREE year long case of the world's most notorious >> > "information warfare" attack on US government computer systems >> > collapsed last Friday. On a grey morning in a south London >> > court, a 23-year-old computer programmer from Cardiff walked >> > free as crown prosecutors told the judge it wasn't worth the >> > cost of trying to hold his trial. They acknowledged that he had >> > posed no threat to security. >> > >> > But Matthew Bevan, who was obsessed with the X-Files and the >> > search for alien spacecraft, and his 16-year-old accomplice, >> > Richard Pryce, had achieved a notoriety out of all proportion >> > to their actions. They were "Kuji" and "Datastream Cowboy" - >> > hackers whose haphazard penetration of US Air Force and defense >> > contractors' computers have been portrayed since 1994 as the >> > work of foreign agents and the greatest electronic danger yet >> > to hit the US Air Force on its home turf. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig(a)otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu Information is a dense, colorless, odorless material readily transmitted across empty space and arbitrary boundaries by shaking charged particles.

1 0

Re: Transcript of Gore's remarks at "Censorware Summit"
by Blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just had an incorrect thought that I've decided to share with everyone: The reason Al Gore (and the others) are focusing on helping All the Little Children, is that this is the only group they can offer assistance to in the U.S. who would accept it. Everyone else is stocking up on guns & ammo, waiting for The Big One. .. Blanc

2 1

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

AMEN. > >so far to the left comes out a libertarian rightist. No, this chick Dworkin > >is so far left she's just plain _left_. She argues that porn for womyn (or > >is it wimmin?) is fine and dandy, because this represents lesbian > >sisterhood exploring their own blah blah blah, but porn aimed and directed > > > > What you watch is pornography; > What I watch is erotica. >

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Unless there was decryption hardware in the monitor itself. Then I suppose you'd have to video the screen as each new "always encrypted" "totally secure" frame came up. > > On Wed, 3 Dec 1997, Robert Hettinga wrote: > > > > Persistent Cryptographic Wrappers (RightsWrapper) - No matter where the > > digital document (financial newsletter, educational test, minutes from a > > court proceeding, sensitive health care records, etc.) goes, no matter > > how it gets there, whether it is used and then subsequently > > redistributed, etc. the document is always encrypted. It is never left > > decrypted and exposed even while it is being viewed. > > They have lost their mind. Since humans are notoriously bad at performing > decryptions in their head in real time, whatever is sent to the display > *must* be cleartext. Any competent programmer can grab it at that point. > > -- Lucky Green <shamrock(a)cypherpunks.to> PGP v5 encrypted email preferred. > "Tonga? Where the hell is Tonga? They have Cypherpunks there?" > --

2 1

Fear of a Random Planet...
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

the following excerpt from tomorrow's WSJ... {snip} YELLOW C's NOW AVAILABLE... Be the first on your block to comply with HR-666/S-7, the 'Freedom and Sane Conservation in Social Technology' (FASCIST) Law, recently signed by Chancellor Clinton... As you know, new Federal Regulations require all cryptographers, both professional and amateur, to register with the State Department, surrender their passports, and sign Form 11065-R (Int'l Travel Prohibition Ban Consent Decree). The recent amnesty granted to the cryptographic community due to the shortage of YELLOW C badges ends January 1, 1998. The badges are now available at your local Post Office, Federal Building, or authorized Microsoft retailer. Remember, 'Export a Cryptographer, Go to Jail!' {/snip} love and kisses, CPL Kaos.

2 1

Mob Combat
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The those with an interest in extraordinary descriptions of the bloody, vicious mayhem and carnage of urban warfare, The Philadelphia Inquirer has been running a series since late November describing in gory detail a disastrous battle between US Special Forces and Somalian mobs in 1993. With gunship video, maps and audio of US and Somalis participants. You won't forget it: http://www3.phillynews.com/packages/somalia/nov16/rang16.asp

1 0

No Subject
by Mix 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

www.borders.com: "Borders is opening new stores almost every week. If there's not one near you now, there will be soon." This is depressing. Something has to be done about "free"-market capitalism. It is as destructive as government, and built on the same lies.

4 3

words have value, for good or ill
by Zooko Journeyman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anonymous wrote: > > >There's a fallacy which is quite common on this list, especially > >among members whose positions are otherwise indefensible. It's > >surprising in a way because this fallacy is more common among > >statists. > > > >There, the fallacy goes like this: if it is immoral, then it must be > >illegal. We see this all the time. People think of the government > >as their way of expressing moral values. Drugs are wrong, so they > >must be made illegal. Discrimination in employment is wrong, so it > >also must be illegal. We have countless bad laws based on this false > >premise. > > > >On this list we see the same fallacy, turned around: if it is legal, > >it must be moral. Someone is attacked for posting some vicious, > >hateful, immoral rant, and they respond that what they said was > >legal, because of freedom of speech and the First Amendment. Their > >critic must be opposed to free speech if he objects to their words. I didn't write this, but I wish I had. It is exactly correct, and well-done. If I had written I would've attached a nym in an attempt to accrue some reputation capital. (The author should e-mail me so I can credit her repcap account. :-) ) Monty Cantsin wrote: > > >Confusing what is legal and what is moral is a dangerous game. It > >leads to the false reasoning of the statists. We must remember that > >there is a clear distinction between morality and legality. > > This is a good thing to remember. However, what you seem to be > calling immoral is holding a belief with which you disagree. Actually I think we are discussing the morality of words, not of thoughts. Words are actions in my book. (ObDcashPunks: Note that the right words to the effect of "I hereby give you this cash token. Signed, Alice" _are_ the same as the action of giving the person the cash token. :-) ) > What you seem to be proposing is that Tim May (or whoever) should > refrain from expressing certain of their beliefs about the world > because they are immoral. I don't speak for Anonymous (:-)), but what _I_ propose is that the meme of "it was okay/justified/right for me to say it because it should be legal for me to say it" shall eradicated from cypherpunks discourse. The rightness of one's actions is independent from the legality of those actions. (Except, of course, that it is sometimes wise to avoid doing something illegal out of pragmatic concern for consequences.) If a cypherpunk is accused by her fellows of a wrong act, it is completely irrelevant and out of character for her to reply by stating that the act is legal. This is a such an obvious truth that I'm surprised no-one, including myself, has brought it up before Anonymous did. Regards, Zooko --- Software engineer for hire. http://www.xs4all.nl/~zooko/resume.html

1 0

Brown != Blue
by BrownList＠GOPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Giving you a BROWN reason to complain. Get busy. This BrownList is harder to find.

1 0

[Fwd: Please Read This!]
by webbiz＠MCI2000.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

P*L*E*A*S*E Do NOT Delete This Message! Hi, Just wanted to pass along some info about that I now call my "secret weapon". It's amazing! Listen to this... Myself and hundreds of others can now reach "millions of potential customers" absolutely FREE! A lot of us are creating immediate "cash flow explosions" literally overnight! And blowing our competition right out of the water! You have to check this thing out. To get some details, all you have to do is go to the web address below. Take care. I'll talk with you later. Bill Go to http://www.insider-secrets.com/home.html This is NOT wild spam! If you do not want this information and wish to be placed on a global remove list put "remove" in the subject box and mailto:hotline@insider-secrets.com

1 0

Re: Gary Burnore Caught in own Trap (Long)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Belinda Bryan <eridani(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote: > X-No-Archive: yes > What those who are capable of looking at this with an open mind might > notice is that there is much more to this story than you and Mr. > Know-it-All Sam are telling. Excuse me while I rain on your parade and > repost some SERIOUS ANALYSIS from someone with a clue: What motive would Sam have for being part of the mythical "Spam baiting/ forgery/libel/teenager-abusing/cyber-stalking conspiracy" you've concocted? Could it be that Gary is now searching for another person to falsely accuse of doing all of these things, now that he and the first person he accused sem to have declared a de facto truce? Is Sam going to be your next victim? > > What seems to have happened here is that someone telnetted to the SMTP > > port of myriad.alias.net and forged E-mail from your address. If > > these are full headers, then this forgery did not involve remailers at > > all. The perpetrator has therefore run the risk of being traced. Which blows a huge hole in Gary's own theory that some evil "anon asshole" used a remailer to do it, thus justifying his anti-remailer witch hunt. And since you've chosen to quote that opinion, what were the results of that trace he mentioned? > Oh, my. Looks like that shoots yours and Sam's theories right straight > to hell, doesn't it? On to the next lie: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ How many do you plan to tell? > In case you missed it, let me repeat: "looks like somebody sent you a > message with a Return-Receipt-To: header set to > alt.revenge(a)myriad.alias.net. To which the broken, mis-configured mail server at DataBasix autoresponded. Why would Gary have claimed he was going to fix it if it weren't broken? > >What would be the point in trying to forge a Usenet post to make it look > >like it came from "mmdf(a)databasix.com", anyway? > > You're the one with all the fricking "answers", why don't you tell us? You might start with asking yourself who stood to benefit from this happening. You and Gary are the ones who keep bringing it up, because it's the only "evidence" you have to support your grand conspiracy theory. Thus far, all of your alleged "evidence" has proven nothing because it's all (conveniently) had truncated path headers. > >Gary Burnore's forgery allegations against Mailmasher are similarly > >suspect. > > Methinks you are confusing your alleged villains. Usually Wotan gets > the blame for closing Mailmasher and Gary and I get the blame for > huge.cajones. While I have a lot of respect for Jeff Burchell (and I've > met him personally, can you say the same?), I disagree with the > allegations he made against Wotan re: the Mailmasher attack. Do try to > recall that even Jeff said he was *speculating* as to what happened with > MailMasher and the software piracy fiasco. And you've got a better explanation of what happened? Right after Billy McClatchie went on his campaign to get Mailmasher shut down, someone signs up for a Mailmasher account, puts out a fake post advertising some "warez", then dutifully turns himself into the SPA to get Mailmasher in trouble. Just a "coincidence", right? And just because you, Billy McClatchie (Wotan), and Gary Burnore are all staff members at DataBasix, and the two servers that you three attacked in sequence were both run by the same person, we're not supposed to make the conncection? As Gary himself once said "There are far too many coincidences". He was at least right about that. > And if you think Jeff closed huge.cajones because of Gary and me, you > obviously don't know the whole story. But what's new? What you don't > know, you just make up. I've read Jeff's account, and you, Gary, and Bill "Wotan" McClatchie are the only attackers he mentioned. > >First of all, before planning the attack, somebody apparently > >didn't do his homework, or he'd have realized that Mailmasher was a > >web-based 'nymserver, not a remailer. > > I'll freely admit I don't really understand the difference between the > two. But I distinctly recall seeing dozens of messages with a from line > with *my* email address and a message ID of mailmasher.com. Like so: > > ------ > > Path: > ix.netcom.com!ix.netcom.com!super.zippo.com!zdc!news1.mpcs.com!anon.lcs.mit…! > nym.alias.net!mail2news > Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 22:22:07 -0800 > Message-ID: <199702060622.WAA09539(a)mailmasher.com> > From: eridani(a)ix.netcom.com (Mailbomb^me) > Comments: Please report misuse of this automated remailing service to > <remailer-admin(a)cajones.com> > Subject: Nuke Your Local Junk Mailer! > Newsgroups: misc.entrepreneurs,biz.mlm,alt.sex.erotica.marketplace, > alt.sex.erotica.marketplace,alt.sex.erotica.marketplace > X-No-Archive: yes > Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster(a)nym.alias.net > Organization: mail2news(a)nym.alias.net > Lines: 5 > > This message is not intended for humans to read. Other than a Message-ID and a Comments line (both forgeable), what indicates this came from Mailmasher? Why was Mailmasher not in the path header? You still haven't produced a single shred of evidence that this came from Mailmasher. You haven't even shown from any of the Mailmasher help files that Mailmasher even had this capability. In someone's haste to point the blame at the remailers' ability to paste From: headers, they chose the wrong target -- since Mailmasher was not a remailer and had no header pasting capability. Mail coming from Mailmasher accounts all contained a pseudonym followed by "@mailmasher.com". Access was via a web-based interface, and there was no place to specify a From: line. > You're an idiot and a liar. Engaging in ad hominem is an obvious attempt to divert attention from your lack of evidence. > First of all, Gary stubbornly didn't start > X-No-Archiving his headers until a couple of months ago. You should > know, Mr.Whining About Not Being Able to Track Gary Through Deja News > Anymore. Actually, in the beginning it was YOU, McClatchie, and the so-called "spam baiter" that used the No-Archive header. Gary didn't use it until later when he became worried that people could actually read his old posts and see how his story changed over time. Gary has apparently gone back and even had his old posts nuked from the archives, as well. Apparently Gary "I have nothing to hide" Burnore has reconsidered that stance. If someone wanted to forge a post to embarass you, would it make sense to hide it with a No-Archive header? Why limit the readership like that? > Secondly, it's not possible to forge message IDs with a piddly > Netcruiser GUI account. Netcruiser accounts can't telnet into an SMTP server, which is your theory of how the "forgery" was done? Also, you, Gary, and Wotan have shell accounts that are quite capable of doing many of the things you claim that your mythical "spam-baiting/forging/libelling/cyber-stalking/child-molesting" mega-villain is guilty of. You also once claimed that this person had spam baited "every known email address of DataBasix staff and customers". Who but a DataBasix insider would have access to that kind of information? > Lastly, it certainly is convenient that every single spam bait > posted--thousands between 4/97 and 11/97--contained the X-No-Archive: > yes header. Makes it really easy for someone with a vendetta to say, > 'oh no, they don't exist, because we can't verify them!' Conveniently similar to the posts of Wotan and yourself. And that quote is obviously the reason that you, Gary, and Wotan also utilize that same header, right? So that you can later claim that anything you post and later regret was "forged"? > That's an insane theory cooked up by someone with a very twisted mind. As are most of Gary's theories. > How many people posting anonymously have > been inadvertently denied an audience because of one IDIOT ruining it > for everyone? When have you EVER had a decent thing to say about anonymous posters? Can you cite even one instance? Are you suddenly trying to polish up DataBasix' image? Polish that turd all you want, and it still won't smell any better! > Have we "harassed" any > other remailers since then? Hhm? Why don't you _ask them_, mouth? Jeff didn't reveal your harassment of him until AFTER he had shut down his remailer and had no further retribution to fear. And we didn't learn of your attacks on Jeff's machines until Gary made a similar taunt back in June. > <cue follow up consisting of selective snipping in order to post more > lies and distortions> Stop your pitiful whining about "selective snipping". Anyone who missed it the first time can read your epic whine-fest by following the reference headers. That's what they're there for. And if they're reading this thread via DejaNews and can't, well that was YOUR choice, not mine. My posts are archived for all to read. --

1 0

Re: Censorial leftists (Was: Interesting article)
by Jay Holovacs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:16 PM 12/3/97 -0800, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >Libertarians are self-governors in both personal and economic matters. >They believe government's only purpose is to protect people from coercion >and violence. They value individual responsibility, and tolerate economic >and social diversity. > Interestingly, New Jersey's recent Libertarian candidate (Sabrin) lost my wife's vote when his own ads portrayed him as anti choice. Several members of the religious right also call themselves libertarians. Sometimes what is meant is freedom from interference in the market rather than real freedom. Jay

6 8

Sabrin in NJ (Was: Re: Censorial leftists ...
by Jim Ray 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 06:45 AM 12/4/97 -0500, Jay Holovacs wrote: ... >Interestingly, New Jersey's recent Libertarian candidate (Sabrin) lost my >wife's vote when his own ads portrayed him as anti choice. Mr. Sabrin also accepted political welfare (matching funds, a form of compelled speech if ever I saw one). This annoyed me, since he did it in a nationwide campaign for contributions claiming that this retreat from principle would give him a chance to win. As I recall, he got about 10% of the vote, and IMO didn't even deserve that. He was, however, another great argument for NOTA's (None Of The Above) candidacy -- as if another one were needed. JMR -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Freedom isn't Freeh. iQEPAwUBNIaaKzUhsGSn1j2pAQGjHAfQ1a1MJKRyDr7gBgR1nGCcbTrVvLTdQ5NZ Ce2Z4w1XPzb/6ml8uilPZE1/4oDCmwWH5R42NW6QmPpQjeQSmqh3cCApo11AeZ+/ ZRQQxD+SO3FtrnGXr+kGD2CniY6UxXBfzTYtAjpdv5roF4jkRxJwkd9px/GyZjCg jyKMTTaZTVoTfZUbadjFhyX14OjJ7gkbxFOkZKHBZ1lYes6fpW4Yj6V0selR6CKp 3jJHmHAJUgWbdwhaU3rIHpV5+7QKYyk7dFRblS5pC0p91rec5JDNAecfXYltwNwR YLTcg0gqYLIPOQi0MlJxXYBogKMbYxXC7a7YOQS+OiUUug== =7bMC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Anonymous Threads
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Something that I have found irritating about the posts by non-persistent identities is that it isn't possible to support a meaningful discussion as previous statements can always be repudiated, or maybe even weren't made by the particular poster. I compared this to sound bites. On second thought, however, there is an easy way to solve this. If the anonymous poster accepts the context of previous messages, the discussion can continue. There's no reason why the person behind the virtual thread has to be the same, but the context itself is important if we want to have interesting discussions. So, if you don't want to sign your messages, just acknowledge the message ID of the relevant previous messages whose context you wish to use. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm Subject: Anonymous Threads To: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com 25BA1A9F5B9010DD8C752EDE887E9AF3 [Cantsin Protocol No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

1 0

Lieberman/Clinton
by Jeff Schult 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >Well, this isn't entirely true. Some of the loudest voices in >banning/regulating crypto come from the left:Senator Lieberman, >Senator Feinstein,Rep. Dellums, the Clinton Administration in >general, etc. The fear of 'bomb making information' and 'terrorist <snip> Lieberman is hardly considered "of the left" in his home state -- he squeaked out a win over former Sen. Lowell Weicker by staking out positions considered to the right of Weicker and has stayed over that way. There have been recent articles in the Connecticut media speculating that Lieberman could become a Republican. Though that won't happen, GOP leaders were effusive about how welcome the senator would be ... As to the Clinton administration, if you can pin it down from minute to minute on the political spectrum, you're a lot faster with pins than I ... Jeff Schult Marketing Director, JavaNet http://www.javanet.com Internet culture and technology writer, New Haven (CT) Advocate

1 0

Land Attack on Routers/Servers
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hackers Out for IP Blood with New Land Attack The Internet underworld last week unsheathed a new weapon capable of knocking out IP-based routers and servers, sending vendors scrambling to find ways to safeguard their gear. Land Attack, officially known as land.c program code, was posted on the Net by someone called "Meltman" and used last week in attacks on Cisco Systems, Inc. routers and Unix and Windows NT servers. Some of the targeted machines were slowed to a crawl, while others had to be rebooted. Land Attack represents a new twist on the dreaded "TCP SYN flooding" denial-of-service attack. But unlike TCP SYN flooding, Land Attack sends out just one sinister SYN packet in which the sending devices IP address has been swapped out for the IP address of the destination machine. When the destination machine tries to acknowledge receipt of the transmission, it ends up using its own address, which means it sends the message back to itself, resulting in a potentially fatal loopback condition. "If someone could find a way to use this Land Attack program to spread this across the Internet, it could cause major service disruptions," said Chris Klaus, chief technology officer at Internet Security Systems, Inc. ---------- More at: http://jya.com/land-attack.txt

1 0

Re: [RePol] Denizen
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

TruthMonger <tm(a)dev.null> wrote: > Ralph Hotmail wrote: > > > > In a moment of boredom, I took the opportunity to check into "Denizen". > > I also read his posts under a number of names to the critical mass > > mailing list and their replies. > > > In saner moments, Beckjord runs the UFO and Bigfoot Museum. > > > > This is the person who wants to use BCC from an anonymous remailer to > > get his opinion to the subscribers of the Critical Mass list. The > > message is simple - if you help him out,you can kiss your remailer > > goodbye. > > Perhaps Ralph could help the anonymous remailer 'cause' by providing > remailer operators with a list of the 'bad' people who should not > be allowed to use remailers to promote their 'wrong' views. > Maybe Mr. Hotmail could also provide a list of 'bad' words and You're a dangerous person, TruthMonger -- you make people THINK. <g> It's interesting that he mentioned the "Critical Mass" list, since one of the arrestees in last summer's Critical Mass civil disobedience blockade of San Francisco streets was none other than anti-remailer gadfly Gary L. Burnore of the fabled "DataBasix gang". I don't know whether he's a subscriber to that list or not. But according to Jeff Burchell's account of last summer's attack on the Huge Cajones Remailer by Burnore et al, someone from DataBasix did request that posts mentioning DataBasix and/or Gary Burnore should be blocked by the remailer net. Chutzpah! BTW, Burnore just made a post to alt.privacy.anon-server yesterday that looked like an attempt to suck up to the remailer user community. Unlike his recent practice of butting into TECHNICAL threads about the how-to of header pasting via PI, etc. to accuse the poster of wanting the information in order to "forge" posts in his name and "UCE bait" him, he actually gave the appearance of being helpful. Of course, in threads posted in other NGs, he's still fuming about "cowards" and "anonymous assholes" who "hide behind the skirts of a remailer". He's also indicated that he'll have databasix.com back on-line RSN. His hasty move from San Francisco to Raleigh-Durham, NC took DataBasix off of the air for awhile. Heads up! --

1 0

Re: Another of Gary Burnore's Lies Exposed
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

gburnore(a)netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) wrote: > X-No-Archive: yes > :This puts all other claimed forgeries from a mail2news gateway, that you > :have taken an issue with, and used as a basis to form your claims against > :UCE-baiting, and such, as suspect. > > > Sure it does in your mind and I'm sure in the mind of the anon-asshole. Call someone an "asshole" all you like, but when you have to qualify that and call him a "black asshole", "gay asshole", "Jewish asshole", or "anon asshole", it only demonstrates your personal prejudice and bigotry. Your arguments are so weak that you must resort to ad hominem argumentation to divert attention from the facts. Repeating your unproven accusations over and over does not make them true. > All of that aside, the point is it has stopped since the remailers blocked the > address. Note btw, that the anon asshole is still claiming databasix does > this and databasix does that and yet databasix hasn't been connected to the > net since august. Are you claiming that all the DataBasix personnel no longer have access to the Internet simply because the databasix.com domain is down? Considering how lax Netcom is with their servers, any abuse you might allege could easily have come from someone with a Netcom account. You might as well reconnect databasix.com to the net because having it down is not a credible alibi -- not when most of the players involved have Netcom accounts, and a few even have shell accounts from which they could have run Perl scripts. > The issue now is as it was then. An asshole, posting anonymously, apparently > in an attempt to cause troubles for remailers at my expense is still at it. > > He OBVIOUSLY wants remailers shut down. I obviously don't. Your cute little conspiracy theory does not exactly square with the account of one of the remailer operators that you along with fellow DataBasix staffers Belinda Bryan and William J. McClatchie (aka "Wotan") harassed. Reread his message exposing your anti-remailer activities: http://infinity.nus.sg/cypherpunks/dir.archive-97.11.13-97.11.19/0432.html > End of story as far as I am concerned. Not as long as you want to keep it alive by claiming that you are a "victim" of some grand forgery, "UCE-baiting", "cyber stalking" scheme. Sam is right in doubting your claims that most of the things you allege happened to you even occurred. He pointed out that the one flimsy piece of evidence you've been able to produce more recently than February of 1997 originated from YOUR OWN DOMAIN! --

2 1

- FREE Vitamins & Business -
by CallNow＠1-800-493-2328Ext116771 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

AMAZING INCOME: UNLIMITED! New Weight Loss Capsules! ALL NATURAL! New Pyruvate, Guarana, Ginseng, Chromium--All in One! * Only $12.25/90 Count! (+S/H) * Quantity Discounts Available! * Free 90 Count Daily Multi with First Order: ASK! * Automatic MLM Distributorship Enrollment w/o obligation * NO sign up fees-NO monthly purchase required * NO ORDER TAKING yet unlimited commissions PLUS * Full Vitamin Line at "Wholesale Club" prices WHY PAY MORE? HURRY! CALL: (M-F 9-5) Nutrition World 1-800-493-2328 Ext. 116771

1 0

NYTimes oped: Federal laws better than censorware
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Check out the last paragraph of Andrew's op-ed: it's Larry Lessig's argument, though conveniently unattributed. It's also a dangerous one, and a favorite of leftists, claiming that "accountable" government regulations are somehow better than "unaccountable" private classification schemes. Of course Andrew neglects to say that the CDA was not just civil regulation like many FCC rules: it, and its successor, are criminal laws with serious jail time and up to quarter-million dollar fines if you violate them. He also neglects to say that the reason PICS was created is pressure from the Feds. Try as hard as they may, not even RSACi can throw you in jail -- unless Congress passes Murray's bill, which means it's no longer private-sector action. If the market VOLUNTARILY comes up with a rating system, I don't know how you can say that's worse than government censorship and possible jail time. (Read Solveig's op-ed on this, which I posted earlier this week.) Arguing that private selection is "worse" than government censorship is simply incoherent. If government is coercing industry to adopt a scheme, which is the direction we're heading now, then it's time to make the argument that the government pressure amounts to state action. Then eventually challenge it in court. I'm not sure if Andrew is going here or not, but some leftists (or "liberals," if you like) oppose rating systems and censorware because they think children have a general right to access information. Even if their parents buy the computers. I think this is another incoherent argument that we should be careful not to buy into. It may be a bad idea for parents to install such programs -- as it may be a bad idea to feed Junior poptarts instead of bran cereal -- but children do not have a of Constitutional right to have censorware-free computers. -Declan ============== Opinion: The Danger of Private Cybercops By ANDREW L. SHAPIRO At a conference this week on protecting children from the perils of the Internet, consensus emerged on a strategy to keep minors away from cyberporn: let the private sector handle it. Rather than relying on Government regulation, Vice President Al Gore said, parents should look to industry for tools that will let them filter Internet content. Civil libertarians are largely responsible for the success of this approach. Indeed, they convinced the Supreme Court that it would do less harm to free speech than the Communications Decency Act, the law criminalizing on-line indecency, which the Court struck down in June. Yet those advocates may now regret what they wished for, because some of their schemes seem to imperil free speech more than the act did. For example, software that users install to block out certain Internet content often excludes material that isn't indecent. One such program, Cybersitter, prevents users from visiting the site of the National Organization for Women. And the makers of these programs often won't even tell adults what sites have been blacklisted. Still worse is a protocol known as PICS that changes the Internet's architecture to make it easy to rate and filter content. PICS is theoretically neutral because it allows different groups to apply their own labels, but could hurt the Internet's diversity by requiring everything to be rated. Small, unrated sites would be lost. Moreover, these technologies enable what might be called total filtering, where objectionable speech of any type can be screened out effortlessly. Benign as this may seem, such filtering might be used not just by individuals but by employers, Internet service providers and foreign governments seeking to restrict information that others receive. The ground rules for an open society could also be undermined. When total filtering meets information overload, individuals can (and will) screen out undesired interactions, including those crucial to a vibrant political culture -- the on-line equivalents of a civil rights protest or a petition for a reform candidate. In such a filtered society, civil discourse and common understanding will suffer. This should lead us to think long and hard about the way that technology can be an even more cunning censor than law. That's not to say that Government solutions are problem-free or desirable. But at least when the state goes overboard, speech defenders have the safety valve of a First Amendment lawsuit. This legal recourse is not an option when politicians simply persuade industry and consumers to use speech-inhibiting tools. Who knows, free-speech advocates may find themselves nostalgic for public regulation after all. Andrew L. Shapiro is a fellow at Harvard Law School's Center for no the Internet and Society and at the Twentieth Century Fund.

6 7

Re: words have value, for good or ill
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Zooko Journeyman <zooko(a)xs4all.nl> wrote: >Actually I think we are discussing the morality of words, not of >thoughts. Words are actions in my book. (ObDcashPunks: Note that >the right words to the effect of "I hereby give you this cash token. >Signed, Alice" _are_ the same as the action of giving the person the >cash token. :-) ) It looks like we lost some context across the Atlantic. In the United States when we are discussing free speech there are usually some common assumptions that are used to simplify the discussion. Usually when free speech is being discussed, we do not mean contracts, coercive threats, or copyrighted works. Strictly speaking, of course, those are speech, but that usually isn't what is meant over here. (1) The speech I am talking about is the kind of things which Tim May has been writing. To keep things simple, let's consider the statement "McVeigh did the right thing." It is not a contract. It is not a threat. It is not copyrighted. It is simply a belief which Tim May considered and posted to the list. I think we've fairly settled that it is not immoral to have this thought. So the question really is, if you have such a thought, is it immoral to express it? It's hard for me to see how. If the belief is correct, then other people certainly will benefit from hearing it. If the belief is not correct, then other people may be able to enlighten you. In either case, it is preferable that the belief be expressed. >> What you seem to be proposing is that Tim May (or whoever) should >> refrain from expressing certain of their beliefs about the world >> because they are immoral. > >I don't speak for Anonymous (:-)), but what _I_ propose is that the >meme of "it was okay/justified/right for me to say it because it >should be legal for me to say it" shall eradicated from cypherpunks >discourse. I'm not sure I understand what you are proposing. My dictionary defines "eradicate" in two ways: 1. to destroy utterly 2. to erase or remove I don't believe the meme should be "destroyed" and I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the means that would be required to do this. Nor do I see it as desirable to erase or remove posts which have already been made, if it were even possible. If you don't like somebody's ideas, I would suggest that you don't read their messages. If you don't want to see a particular idea, perhaps you could hire somebody to remove the posts from your mail queue that contain it. If you don't like other people hearing certain ideas, I recommend you get used to it. (1) It is interesting to consider a world in which these exceptions are not made. If there were no coercive enforcement mechanisms for contracts, then this exception would not have to exist. The idea of doing business solely on the basis of reputation is not only fascinating, but not very unlike much of the world today. There are two ways in which threats can be no ops. One is if the person being threatened is just a public key whose identity is simply unknown. A threat in that case is irrelevant. The second is if the person being threatened can adequately protect him or herself in which case the threat is dangerous to the threatener. And "intellectual property" is somewhat peculiar and implies a centralized enforcement mechanism. If we are to have "intellectual property" in a worldwide networked environment, it implies a de facto world government. The alternative may be preferable. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm Subject: Re: words have value, for good or ill To: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com 25BA1A9F5B9010DD8C752EDE887E9AF3 [Cantsin Protocol No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

2 1

- POWERFUL HOME BASED MONEY MAKER -
by CallNow＠1-940-383-1233 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

**************************** THE MOST POWERFUL HOME BASED MONEY MAKER IN THE WORLD! *$10,000 Plus Per Month Possible With Little Or No Effort! *The Only True Money Back Guarantee! *Complete Turnkey System Does All Of The Work For You! *Phenomenal Product! *Anyone Can Succeed Immediately! *Powerful Monthly Residual! *No Selling - No Recruiting *No talking To Anyone *No Presentation To Learn *No Meetings To Attend *No People To Manage *No Product Inventory *No Response HeadAches Never Worry About Money Again!!! Takes 2 Minutes To Find Out How!!! Call Now!!! TOLL FREE 1-888-248-1794 or (888) 693-5490 FOD 703-736-1600 Document 825 Please have a pen handy when making this call FOD 703-736-1600 Document 825 NEW: Customer Service Department (To Answer All of Your Questions!) (940) 383-1233 Hours - 9am to 9pm "CST" Monday thru Friday - Sat - 9am to 5pm -- Sun-- 12pm to 6pm "CST" P.S.hold on to this email. You'll need this control number. GI0927EM control number Dear Friend for the past 2 years, I've put countless hours into numerous business ventures and MLM. Yet I have never achieved true success. Then I found a program, where anyone can succeed immed- iately and put profit in their pocket almost overnight! This gets better and better every day! During my short tenure with this company, I received a profit check of $4579.83 after my second month. I didn't have to worry about the headaches of sponsoring of people. I signed the application and immediatedly, the company went to work for me. Prosperous regards, Leon S. Gillis CONTROL NUMBER: GI0927EM

1 0

Man-in-the-Middle Chicken Attacks
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

sampler-request(a)lmboyd.com wrote: > ====================================================== > At night, if you want to see the chicken without the > chicken seeing you, use a red light. > ============================================== > LMBoyd Web Site / U. S. Newspapers / Start Email / Stop Email > http://www.LMBoyd.com/postscript.htm

1 0

Cato forum tomorrow: should money laundering be a crime?
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Friday Noon. MONEY LAUNDERING - The Cato Institute holds a policy forum, "Should Money Laundering Be a Crime," with Lawrence Lindsey, AEI and former governor, Federal Reserve; Stephen Kroll, Treasury Department, and Richard Rahn, president, Novecon Corp. Location: Cato Institute, F.A. Hayek Auditorium, 1000 Massachusetts Ave. NW. Contact: RSVP, James Markels, 202-789-5256.

3 2

Household toxins
by info＠planet-solutions.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

TOP "10" KILLER HOUSEHOLD CHEMICALS AIR FRESHENERS: Most air fresheners interfere with your ability to smell by coating your nasal passages with an oil film, or by releasing a nerve deadening agent. Known toxic chemicals found in an air freshener: Formaldehyde: Highly toxic, known carcinogen. Phenol: When phenol touches your skin it can cause it to swell, burn, peel, and break out in hives. Can cause cold sweats, convulsions, circulatory collapse, coma and even death!! AMMONIA: It is a very volatile chemical, it is very damaging to your eyes, respiratory tract and skin. BLEACH: It is a strong corrosive. It will irritate or burn the skin, eyes and respiratory tract. It may cause pulmonary edema or vomiting and coma if ingested. WARNING: never mix bleach with ammonia it may cause fumes which can be DEADLY. CARPET AND UPHOLSTERY SHAMPOO: Most formulas are designed to over power the stain itself, they accomplish the task but not without using highly toxic substances. Some include: Perchlorethylene: Known carcinogen damages liver, kidney and nervous system damage. Ammonium Hydroxide: Corrosive, extremely irritable to eyes, skin and respiratory passages. DISHWASHER DETERGENTS: Most products contain chlorine in a dry form that is highly concentrated. # 1 cause of child poisonings, according to poison control centers. DRAIN CLEANER: Most drain cleaners contain lye, hydrochloric acid or trichloroethane. Lye: Caustic, burns skin and eyes, if ingested will damage esophagus and stomach. Hydrochloric acid: Corrosive, eye and skin irritant, damages kidneys, liver and digestive tract. Trichloroethane: Eye and skin irritant, nervous system depressant; damages liver and kidneys. FURNITURE POLISH: Petroleum Distillates: Highly flammable, can cause skin and lung cancer. Phenol: (see Air fresheners, Phenol.) Nitrobenzene: Easily absorbed through the skin, extremely toxic. MOLD AND MILDEW CLEANERS: Chemicals contained are: Sodium hypochlorite: Corrosive, irritates or burns skin and eyes, causes fluid in the lungs which can lead to coma or death. Formaldehyde: Highly toxic, known carcinogen. Irritant to eyes, nose, throat, and skin. May cause nausea, headaches, nosebleeds, dizziness, memory loss and shortness of breath. OVEN CLEANER: Sodium Hydroxide (Lye): Caustic, strong irritant, burns to both skin and eyes. Inhibits reflexes, will cause severe tissue damage if swallowed. ANTIBACTERIAL CLEANERS: may contain: Triclosan: Absorption through the skin can be tied to liver damage. LAUNDRY ROOM PRODUCTS: Sodium or calcium hypocrite: Highly corrosive, irritates or burns skin, eyes or respiratory tract. Linear alkylate sulfonate: Absorbed through the skin. Known liver damaging agent. Sodium Tripolyphosphate: Irritates skin and mucous membranes, causes vomiting. Easily absorbed through the skin from clothes. TOILET BOWL CLEANERS: Hydrochloric acid: Highly corrosive, irritant to both skin and eyes. Damages kidneys and liver. Hypochlorite Bleach: Corrosive, irritates or burns eyes, skin and respiratory tract. May cause pulmonary edema, vomiting or coma if ingested. Contact with other chemicals may cause chlorine fumes which may be fatal. OTHER NASTY THINGS THAT ARE AROUND YOUR HOME PESTICIDES: Most pesticides have ingredients that affect the nervous system of insects. Imagine what these extremely poisonous chemicals do to your body. or your baby's. Dimpylate: Better known as Diazinon, extremely toxic. Impairs the central nervous system. Chlorinate Hydrocarbons: Suspected carcinogen and mutantagen. Accumulates in food and in fatty tissue. Will attack the nervous system. Organophosphates: Toxic and poisonous. If you can smell it, your lungs are absorbing it. FLEA POWDERS: Why put toxins on "man's (or woman's) best friend." Carbaryl: Very toxic, causes skin, respiratory and cardiovascular system damage. Chlordane: Accumulates in the food chain, may damage eyes, lungs, liver, kidney and skin. Dichlorophene: Skin irritation: May damage liver, kidney, spleen and central nervous system. LICE SHAMPOO: Especially vulnerable are children. Lindane: Inhalation, ingestion, or ABSORPTION through the SKIN causes vomiting, diarrhea, convulsions and circulatory collapse. May cause liver damage, stillbirths, birth defects and cancer. CAR WASH AND POLISH: Petroleum Distillates: Associated with skin and lung cancer, irritant to skin, eyes, nose and lungs. Entry into the lungs may cause fatal pulmonary edema, most marked Danger, Harmful or Fatal. TAR AND BUG REMOVER: Contains XYLENE and PETROLEUM DISTILLATES. As you become more aware, you will realize that YOU have to make the first step. YOU have a responsibility to tell your friends, neighbors, and relatives to stop using these dangerous chemicals that are both hazardous to your health and the environment. So come join the revolution to rid toxic chemicals from the planet. That's our MISSION at PLANET SOLUTIONS! Clear Choice(non-toxic cleaner) Buy3 get 1 free. If you want to learn more about out "solution to the toxic dilemma please reply with the subject "More Info" in the subject box.If you would like a free sample of Clear Choice (non toxic cleaner) please send your name ,address and phone number. If you wish to be removed from this advertiser's future mailings, please reply with the subject "Remove" and this software will automatically block you from their future mailings.

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know of any banks that provide full internet banking services outside of the USA's banking regulations?

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know of any banks that provide full internet banking services outside of the USA's banking regulations?

1 0

Christmas Ornaments
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan McCullagh wrote: >BTW, I'm going to check on the Secret Service Christmas tree >ornaments and how much they cost. I'll post later on today if our >office manager tells me they're still available. (The U.S.S.S. is on >the top floor of my building and they give us a deal.) -----BEGIN CHEAP SHOT----- Hey, Declan, do they have any yellow stars? I understand we'll all be wearing them soon and I want to beat the rush. -----END CHEAP SHOT----- Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm Subject: Christmas Ornaments To: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com 25BA1A9F5B9010DD8C752EDE887E9AF3 [Cantsin Protocol No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

3 2

Re: A Question for Reporters
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Monty Cantsin wrote very sloppily: >Declan McCullagh wrote: >>Automation, computers, the Internet have now made boundaries, in many >>instances, meaningless. As I have said on a number of occasions at... That should have read: >Declan McCullagh quoted Janet Reno as saying: >>Automation, computers, the Internet have now made boundaries, in many >>instances, meaningless. As I have said on a number of occasions at... Sorry about that, Chief! Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm Subject: Re: A Question for Reporters To: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com 25BA1A9F5B9010DD8C752EDE887E9AF3 [Cantsin Protocol No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

1 0

A Question for Reporters
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan McCullagh wrote: >Automation, computers, the Internet have now made boundaries, in many >instances, meaningless. As I have said on a number of occasions at >this table, a man can sit at a computer in Europe and steal from a >bank in the United States. Someone in Germany can get a list of >credit card numbers here and try to extort people for money on the >threat of using these credit cards. > >I think it is imperative that we develop practices, procedures, and >laws that will enable these countries - and indeed other countries >throughout the world - to work together to focus on criminals who are >exploiting the new technologies that so many of us are relying >on. The solution is working together as nations. At the same time Janet Reno makes these proposals, the U.S. government, and this administration particularly, has done everything in its power to undermine the development and deployment of security enhancing technologies. Not only has the use of cryptography been greatly hampered, but TEMPEST equipment and knowledge is controlled, and there have even been proposals to control secure operating systems. Reno's statements and the administration's policies blatantly contradict each other. The very technologies which would solve the problem Reno raises are being discouraged at every opportunity by the administration she represents. My question is directed at Declan because he is handy, but any other reporters are invited to contribute. Why is this not reported accurately? Do you plan to write a story which explains to the American people how the administration is not telling the truth? If not, why not? Surely it is important for the American people to understand what their leaders say and do. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm Subject: A Question for Reporters To: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com 25BA1A9F5B9010DD8C752EDE887E9AF3 [Cantsin Protocol No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

1 0

Security of Encrypted Magic Folders
by Alex Woolfson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello, all! Back reading the list after a long hiatus. Glad it's still as good as ever. Anyway, thought I'd appeal to the collective brain trust as this question is over my head. Please "cc" me directly since I'm on the filtered cypherpunk list. I just downloaded Encrypted Magic Folders--a program that hides Windows 95 folders and then encrypts them to prevent a disk utility from revealing their content. In their help file, they try to answer the question "How Secure is it?"--and, of course, they say *very*, but I can't tell if this is so or if they're just blowing smoke. Particularly, their claim that key size doesn't matter. (My mom taught me size always matters... ) If someone with a stronger cryptography background than me could take a look at this and let me know, I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks! Alex * How Secure is it? EMF's encryption offers good protection and excellent speed. It hasn't been broken yet. It is, as far as we know, exportable. THERE IS NO BACKDOOR. Should you forget your password there is nothing we can do to decrypt your encrypted files. Quite a few people ask us how big EMF's key size is. They've learned from other encryption programs that the bigger the key the stronger the encryption. This really doesn't apply to EMF. We developed our own encryption instead of using a standard because we wanted EMF to be able to decrypt at the byte level. In this way we only need to decrypt/encrypt the data your programs require and not the entire file. In theory, because we decrypt at the byte level, the biggest key we could use would be 8 bits - which is a joke. So instead of decrypting every hunk of data using the same key, as most other encryption programs do, we developed an algorithm to vary the key based on the data's location within the file. In this way we get both high security and high speed. We are trying to patent EMF's encryption method. Having said all that, truth is, most encryption isn't "cracked" by breaking the algorithm, it's done by guessing the password. Brute guessing of passwords tends to level the playing field tremendously. We actually have an advantage because we aren't an established standard. Because we're small and relatively obscure chances are no one will take the effort to write a password guessing program (which incidentally would violate copyright and intellectual property laws.) Even if someone were to go thru all this effort we could easily change the encryption method for the next update. If we used an established encryption method like DES or Blowfish then your files would probably have to be fully decrypted when opened, would exist on disk as unencrypted while you're using them, and then would need to be encrypted when closed. This has multiple disadvantages. First, if your computer shuts down while you have "encrypted" files open, then those files would be unencrypted. This doesn't happen with EMF as your encrypted files are always encrypted as stored on disk. The second disadvantage is that it slows things down tremendously. As an example, let's say you retrieve your email and your email program needs to add today's message to the end of your 3MB email file. If we used a standard encryption method requiring the decryption of the file before use then the entire 3 MB file would have to be decrypted, your 300 byte message added to the end and then the entire file encrypted again. With EMF, no decryption would need to take place, and the only data needing encryption would be the 300 byte message. MUCH faster. Around 20,000 times faster in this example! If you still think you'd like to see us use a standard encryption method like DES or Blowfish, or have any other suggestions, let us know and we will consider your input in future updates

2 1

Re: [RePol] Bill Stewart kills babies after he molests them. Honest! / Re: Pasting in From:
by Charlie Comsec 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart) wrote: > At 02:20 PM 12/03/1997 -0000, Charlie Comsec wrote: > >You start to tread on dangerous ground when you concern yourself with the > >content (body) of a post. If, for example, you start to filter on content, > >then you're implicitly approving anything that you do allow to pass through. > >That sets a precedent that's hard to contain and exercising editorial control > >over the contents increases the remailer operator's legal liability for > >material posted. > > If some victim of forged hatemail to Usenet requests that your remailer > block all email containing her name and address, is that legitimate? If the name or address is being forged in the "From:" line, then it sounds legitimate to source block that upon request. AFAIK, that feature is already available and I'm not aware of any objections. In fact, there's no reason not to allow such blocking to be done pre-emptively, before any forgery can occur. > Or if somebody's forging death threats with her name at the bottom? > I think yes, assuming the forgee is not a sufficiently public figure like > Hillary Clinton or Janet Reno that would lead to obvious disbelief. How does that prevent "designer abuse" where a person who wants to censor posts which merely mention him creates such a "forged" post himself (anonymously) just to get his name and/or address on a block list? Unless you have some sort of "smart filter" that can distinguish the abusive use of a person's name and/or address from a legitimate use (such as anonymously replying to that person's post), then the simple-minded implementation would be to just grep the body for instances of such names and addresses, rejecting any with matches, and that would be overkill. Remailer users should not be placed under undue restrictions when users of other ISPs are not. > (If Gary Burnore makes the same request, you've got a tradeoff between doing > the safe thing, and blocking, or doing what he deserves and also reposting > copies run through some jive filter. :-) How is that the "safe" thing? Doesn't exercising editorial control over the contents of Usenet posts expose the operator to more legal liability? Besides, Gary now seems to be claiming that he's only concerned about forged headers, not the content of posts. (That's different than what he told Jeff Burchell.) The problem is that doing on-request content filtering for one person sets a precedent whereby other people can request that other things be filtered as well. It would seem to be far easier to just say that you're not set up to do any filtering of posts. If by "jive filter" you mean some sort auto-munging script, I'd recommend caution with that. It can wreak havoc with PGP-signed messages. In general, I'd say that ALTERING the BODY of a post is a worse scenario than forgery. Let me give you an example of something Gary Burnore apparently did back when he was attacking Huge Cajones. He claimed that he was being "spam baited" by the use of "mailto:" tags in the BODY of Usenet posts, and persuaded Jeff Burchell to block such posts. Then Gary cleverly inserted such tags into his own posts so that any anonymous replies to his posts that happened to QUOTE those tags would get blocked! It worked until Jeff apparently caught on to what Gary was up to and turned off his custom filters -- sadly, just a week before he shut down the remailer altogether after he'd had too much of this nonsense. > I agree that blocking postings based on content that isn't specifically > targeting someone who's requested in advance is probably not a good idea. I would argue that it's not a good idea at all. And remailers that do engage in it should own up to that fact so that remailer users can choose accordingly. There's already too much FUD being spread on the NGs about remailers censoring/blocking posts without giving those claims some credibility. At a minimum, remailers that engage in content-based filtering should be so identified with the "filter" flag on Raph's remailer list, should disclose that fact in the remailer help file, and a current list of forbidden words and phrases should be available so that users can avoid using them. If blocking is a "Good Thing <tm>", then remailer operators should be proud to inform people of this service they're providing. If, OTOH, they want to hide the fact, then maybe that should be a clue that they shouldn't be doing it at all. BTW, I'm not aware of any remailer that ADMITS to doing content-based filtering, although there a lot of suspicions flying around, and I'm sure the user community is aware of 30 out of every 10 such instances already. <g> - --- Finger <comsec(a)nym.alias.net> for PGP public key (Key ID=19BE8B0D) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNIbKdwbp0h8ZvosNAQEAMQf+PcuNWbGpS0VZmw4pkK25a8ehKiNWfZi6 z79MRVaq0fYWHQRDyAPWwxGrLAXjMeLzOhRDjJH6QiZneyfZv6OxV0hDKqMF2vI9 qCvoPa//tcsMDkpQrz1Vqx0Drs5GBlPGkf93ehaXFad4CaxQyPuONBk40FYFqVYZ Ah4v1n31e4rlaqWyP0OXdBPt536uCfpubJA4h3uLMCAbDawJ5Mj+WjNILL3rqvv5 ahNTpiXBRb6iNcOWVKHXRKOAC5nI93oDvevS5XvSgsZOTYlaeBE8NA8+Pz0UYcwJ 6lGJNthQRVZ1Inn6vrZMCtpnEC+Y28MvNgrBKZHq/W9+SbFgoYEobA== =X2vb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

ISDN is back!....yippeeee
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, The ISDN just came back online...now if only the POTS will return... Anyway, SWBT Level 2 and their protocol analysis seems to have done the trick this time. As soon as I get my POTS back I'll lack the ISDN folks and find out what the problem was. Be advised that SWBT may still have their analyzer online which means they are doing a full capture of all the Internet related traffic. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | | | We built your fort. We will not have it used against us. | | | | John Wayne - Allegheny Uprising | | | | | | _____ 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: Compelled speech was: CDT and the Threat of Gov't Intervention
by jay holovacs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

========================== >From: Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net> >To: David Honig <honig(a)otc.net>; Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> >Cc: "Michael Sims" <jellicle(a)inch.com>; fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu;cypherpunks@toad.com >Subject: Re: CDT and the Threat of Gov't Intervention >Date: Wed, Dec 3, 1997 2:56 PM >And even if truth can be determined, truth is not a requirement for free >speech. (Truth in courtrooms and in contract situations are of course >different situations than ordinary free speech, in speaking, writing, >publishing, and broadcasting.) > >(Yes, I am opposed to FDA and SEC rules on truthful speech, unless >contracts are involved. If Joe wants to advertise his Magic Elixir, let >him. Reputations and ratings services (truly free ones, that is) are the >key to bad speech.) This sounds superficially equivalent, but FDA labelling requirements are quite different from web labelling. Firstly, unlike religion and politics, which are by nature subjective, effectiveness and safety of a drug can be reasonably determined by objective double blind testing. The room for error can come mainly from invalid protocols or fraud, both of which can be investigated by outside parties. Secondly, looking at a mislabelled web site cannot harm you. Taking a worthless drug can cost your health or your life. Unlike many consumer products, where the market can be allowed to rise or fall on reputation, it is not possible to determine the effectiveness or side effects of drugs from reputation. Only rigorous cohort selection and peer reviewed statistical analysis will suffice. Additionally requiring verifiably truthful statements on drugs really does qualify as a "narrowly tailored" action. OTOH I don't see any reason to prohibit people from taking "unapproved" drugs if they do so with full knowledge. Jay

1 0

Fidelity Fires Nine Employees For Violating Company Policy
by ichudov＠Algebra.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Fidelity Fires Nine Employees For Violating Company Policy By JAMES S. HIRSCH Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL Fidelity Investments has fired nine employees and disciplined 16 others for violating various company policies, including participating in on-site betting pools for football and basketball games. Fidelity, the nation's largest mutual-fund firm, said the employees also misused company e-mail and spent "excessive" amounts of time using the Internet for nonwork activities. The discoveries by Fidelity sent alarms through the Boston company, which has about $600 billion in assets under management and has relied on a reputation for integrity to attract and retain customers. On Tuesday, David Weinstein, Fidelity's senior vice president of administration, sent electronic memos to all employees that said the company wouldn't condone the use of company e-mail for sports pools, and reiterated many company policies, including prohibition of employees from gambling on company time. "I trust a word to the wise is sufficient," Mr. Weinstein wrote. Fidelity spokeswoman Anne Crowley said the company took action three weeks ago, and the employees who were either fired or disciplined didn't include any mutual-fund managers. She declined to identify the employee positions or their business units, but said the affected employees worked in more than one city. She said that no customer accounts or funds were involved. Fidelity has 24,300 employees. Like many companies, Fidelity regularly monitors employees' use of e-mail and Internet and Intranet services, and Fidelity notifies employees that they will be monitored. Ms. Crowley declined to describe how Fidelity learned about the sports betting pools or to specify how much money was involved. Employees also bet on baseball and golf games, she said, and the betting pools occurred over a number of months. "Small bets were typically found," Ms. Crowley said. She also declined to comment on what nonwork activities the employees were engaged in. But several insiders said the infractions had to have been very serious to merit dismissals instead of warnings. Ms. Crowley said the 16 employees who were disciplined didn't have to pay any fines, but said "corrective actions" could involve verbal or written warnings, suspensions or probations. --Karen Hube contributed to this article.

1 0

Re: Censorial leftists (Was: Interesting article)
by Phillip M. Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>And her partner, Andrea Dworkin, belies the oft-quoted notion that someone >so far to the left comes out a libertarian rightist. No, this chick Dworkin >is so far left she's just plain _left_. So being right wing means being libertarian? I don't think so, the most right wing person I know is one M. Thatcher D Litt (failed). She is also one of the most authoritarian. I've always wondered whether she thought 'the road to serfdom' was a guide to managment of serfs. All the young libertarian types running round Smith square in sharp suits looking like Declan got purged one night. Dworkin and MacKinnon were dredged up by the right to front an authoritarian agenda being pushed by Bush in the guise of the Meese commission. MacKinnon would never debate feminists like Nadine Strossen because this gave the lie to her claim that she represented the whole of the feminist movement which in turn supported her. If we turn to an analysis of agenda denial we can see that MacKinnon was persuing such an agenda within the feminist community, refusing to engage in debate. The right was meanwhile using her as a tool to promote their own agenda of social control allowing them to present it in the context of 'protecting women' which was a recognized agenda rather than 'reactionary bigottry' which wasn't. Phill

1 0

Scientology war update
by Mark Hedges 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An excellent, amazing movie called Schizopolis pokes fun at Scientology in ways L-RON never dreamed. It's perfect. Try to find it and watch. Mark Hedges JonWienk(a)ix.netcom.com wrote on Sat, 22 Nov 1997 08:12:14 -0800: >At 12:50 AM 11/22/97 -0600, Eric Cordian wrote: >>There was a hilarious parody of Scientology on tonight's episode >>of "Millenium." A Cult named "Selfosophy," created by a really bad >>writer named Onan Goopta, with a propensity to sue everyone, was >>featured. It had a large celebrity membership, and helped people >>overcome negative thoughts with a device called an "Onan-o-Graph." > >Onan is commonly (albeit incorrectly) credited with the invention of >masturbation. (See Genesis 38:6-10 in the Bible) I wonder what sort of >thoughts the Onan-o-graph induces? [snicker, snicker]

1 0

Cycling For Freedom!
by David E. Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 The Bureau 42 Remailer (remailer(a)bureau42.ml.org) is proud to announce "Cycling for Freedom." Basically, this is a chance to help crack RC5/64 and support the remailer system, and all the good it stands for. Get the RC5/64 client from www.distributed.net, and follow the easy instructions to configure it for your favorite computer. Crack a few blocks, send 'em back to the server so that your personal address shows up in the stats. On the stats page, you can ask the rc5 server to send you a password that will allow you to join a team. Get that, and then ask to join the team "rc5(a)bureau42.ml.org" (it's listed as team number 1626). In the event this team finds the winning key, the money will be used for upgrades and maintenance on the computer housing the bureau42 remailer. (Specifically, a faster processor would be nice. After that, the rest of the money will be put away and used to buy/maintain a dedicated connection for that computer.) Thanks in advance for helping to support the remailer, and (more importantly) helping crack RC5/64. dave (bureau42 remailer administrator) - -- Today's pseudorandom quote: "My country is the world, and my religion is to do good" -- Thomas Paine David E. Smith, P O Box 324, Cape Girardeau MO USA 63702 Keywords: SciFi bureau42 Wicca Pez Linux PGP single! ;-) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNIdE2a6m0j5YvamrEQLJHACg1LiCRZwFxPRDG0VPjOa08bVvOeoAoIla UVfwEiiTgsmPgNAco3KRGKp7 =2dpS -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Radio-Free Europe
by Stewart_William_C＠bns.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Fortunately, the net is harder to jam than radio. Esther Dyson's new book has a good line about how the Net is a breeding-ground for conspiracies, but television is better-suited for propaganda. ======================================================================= Copyright 1997 Times Mirror Company Los Angeles Times December 3, 1997, Wednesday, Home Edition Part A; Page 5; National Desk INTERNATIONAL OUTLOOK; NATIONAL PERSPECTIVE; U.N. Hate-Radio Jamming Would Send Wrong Signal JIM MANN WASHINGTON -- In foreign policy, sometimes the noblest of intentions leads to lousy ideas. That's certainly the case with the recent curious proposal for a special United Nations "jam squad"--a special U.N. team that could be hurriedly dispatched to crisis points around the world carrying equipment to jam, or block, harmful radio and TV broadcasts. Writing in the current issue of "Foreign Affairs" magazine, Jamie M. Metzl, a former United Nations human rights officer, proposes the creation of what would officially be called an "independent information intervention unit" at the U.N. Its goal, he writes, would be "countering dangerous messages that incite people to violence." A U.N. unit could monitor local news media to see where crises might erupt, air its own messages of peace and, where necessary, prevent other radio or TV broadcasts from being heard. The idea for the U.N. jam squad originated in the genocidal horrors of Rwanda. In 1994, the country's main radio station, the Radio-Television Libre des Milles Collines, then controlled by Hutu extremists, began broadcasting hate messages targeting members of the rival tribe, the Tutsis, and moderate Hutus. The Rwanda station even broadcast lists of enemies to be hunted down. "Take your spears, clubs, guns, swords, stones, everything, sharpen them, jack them, those enemies, those cockroaches," the station urged listeners. The result was one of the world's worst blood baths, in which more than 500,000 unarmed Tutsis and moderate Hutus were slaughtered. This was, certainly, as compelling a case for jamming as you can get. And Metzl has one cogent argument on behalf of his proposal: When there's an ethnic conflict in a place like Rwanda, sending in a United Nations jamming team would be considerably easier and less costly than sending in troops. "I think it's a worthy idea," says Rep. Edward R. Royce (R-Fullerton), chairman of the House International Relations subcommittee on Africa. "I'm sure we would try to go out and jam in Rwanda if those circumstances came up again." Indeed, the United States and its allies are conducting a somewhat similar operation in Bosnia. Two months ago, NATO troops seized and effectively shut down a station run by hard-line Bosnian Serb forces after the station broadcast inflammatory attacks on NATO forces trying to keep the peace there. But it's a long step to go from these situations to the creation of a permanent, formal unit run by the United Nations and scouring the world in search of radio broadcasts to jam. Who would determine exactly what kinds of radio programs should be blocked and which programs could be aired? What would ensure that the jamming decisions were not motivated by politics? Wouldn't the creation of such a United Nations operation strengthen the hand of governments that want to jam radio transmissions for much less noble reasons? "This opens up a Pandora's box, really," says Richard Richter, the director of Radio Free Asia, the federally funded station that broadcasts into Asian countries with repressive governments. "You'd have China claiming that we American broadcasts should be jammed by the United Nations." Ultimately, a U.N. jamming squad would give official sanction to restrictions on the free flow of information. Metzl's article has a response to this problem, but it's a weak one. "During the Cold War, when the United States faced a Soviet adversary intent on jamming the Voice of America and Radio Free Europe . . . , it made sense for the United States to promote an absolute standard for the free flow of information," he wrote. "Now, a more nuanced view should be possible." But that's precisely backward: The free flow of information wasn't merely a temporary means to winning the Cold War, but one of the goals of the endeavor. Although the problem of hate-filled radio broadcasts is a serious one, there are ways of dealing with it that don't involve creating some huge, supranational censorship unit. One alternative is simply to provide other, competing radio broadcasts. In Rwanda, for example, the United Nations set up its own radio stations, both in the capital of Kigali and in radio camps. Royce's subcommittee has been exploring the possibility of creating a Radio Free Africa, similar to Radio Free Europe, Radio Free Asia and Radio Marti, which broadcasts to Cuba. There are serious questions about whether such a new organization is necessary, when VOA, the official U.S. government station, already broadcasts intensively into Africa. But the underlying idea makes sense: to transmit better, more accurate information to Africa, rather than focusing on jamming or censorship. There are other ways of combating hate radio too. Those who directly incite violence over the airwaves can be brought to justice. At the moment, a war-crimes tribunal, set up under U.N. auspices, is prosecuting those responsible for the massacres in Rwanda. Among the suspects in custody are some of those responsible for the Milles Collines radio broadcasts. But a worldwide, U.N.-run jamming team? As a Hollywood script, maybe the idea has possibilities. As foreign policy, it's a loser. Jim Mann's column appears in this space every Wednesday. PHOTO: U.S. member of NATO peace force guards television transmitter in Udrigovo, Bosnia. PHOTOGRAPHER: Associated Press -- ======================================================================== = ************************************************** "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Ben Franklin, ~1784 ************************************************** Received: from speedy1.bns.att.com by casnfc01.bns.att.com with ESMTP (1.40.112.8/16.3) id AA273649564; Thu, 4 Dec 1997 15:52:44 -0800 Received: from attrh2.attrh.att.com (attrh2.attrh.att.com [135.38.12.15]) by speedy1.bns.att.com (8.7.3/2.5) with SMTP id SAA01642 for <Stewart_William_C(a)bns.att.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 1997 18:58:44 -0500 (EST) Received: by attrh2.attrh.att.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-1.2 sol2) id SAA21574 for Stewart_William_C(a)bns.att.com; Thu, 4 Dec 1997 18:53:29 -0500 Received: from kcig2.att.att.com by attrh2.attrh.att.com (SMI-8.6/EMS-1.2 sol2) id SAA21547 for <billstewart(a)att.com>; Thu, 4 Dec 1997 18:53:26 -0500 Received: (from nuucp@localhost) by kcig2.att.att.com (AT&T/GW-1.0) id RAA25810 for att.com!billstewart; Thu, 4 Dec 1997 17:43:55 -0600 (CST) >Received: by kcgw2.att.com; Thu Dec 4 17:38 CST 1997 Received: by kcgw2.att.com; Thu Dec 4 17:38 CST 1997 Received: (qmail 850 invoked by alias); 4 Dec 1997 23:47:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 818 invoked by uid 516); 4 Dec 1997 23:47:49 -0000 Delivered-To: ip-sub-1-outgoing(a)majordomo.pobox.com Message-Id: <199712042347.SAA23465(a)home.seas.upenn.edu> X-Sender: farber(a)linc.cis.upenn.edu X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.0 Release Candidate 3 Date: Thu, 04 Dec 1997 18:47:09 -0500 To: ip-sub-1(a)majordomo.pobox.com Subject: IP: U.N. Hate-Radio Jamming Would Send Wrong Signal Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-ip-sub-1(a)majordomo.pobox.com Precedence: list Reply-To: farber(a)cis.upenn.edu Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

1 0

Heidegger on Cypherpunks -- give me a break
by Mark Hedges 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In previous thread "FCPUNX:Tim plans to kill a federal judge", Neva Remailer wrote: > >James Donald wrote: >>At 06:10 PM 11/14/97 -0700, Tim May wrote: >>> By the way, the same can be said about the work of Heidegger, a thinker who >>> has had some influence on me. Whenever I cite anything Heidegger ever said, >>> I can count on some numbskull to parrot the "Heidegger was a Nazi" shtick. >> >>Probably because Heidegger *was* a Nazi, who pranced around in full drag >>Nazi uniform and sent certain of his colleagues to the concentration camps. >> >>To very crudely oversimplify the relationship between Heideggers >>philosophy and Nazism, it goes like this. >> >>No objective, only the intersubjective, therefore the community >>defines reality, therefore truth is merely relative to the community. Introduction to Metaphysics and Sein und Zeit do concern the relationship between what is real (what exists) and subjective, perceptual reality, but Heidegger makes clear that although what we know is only perception, perception is not the essent of what is real and exists. Actions must rely on perception of reality, but he lends not absolute validity to the perceptions. Heidegger was on the right track, though quantum and cosmological physics and cognitive sciences reach beyond his philosophical circles of contra- diction and paradox inside a flawed and entirely limited language into an expanding and increasingly accurate scientific and mathematical system of discourse. His basic mistake was to admit that verbal and written language contains contradictions and then to draw what he supposed were valid conclusions -- from false premesis and a false universe of discourse. >(Although, if one were interested in Heideggar, his biography would >probably be interesting, too.) Yup. Mark Hedges Anonymizer, Inc.

1 0

Please Beta test my communications cryptography product.
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-- I have produced a program that, like PGP, provides digital signatures and communications encryption. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/Kong/Kong.htm This is the first beta. Please beta test this product. The important difference between it and other products that provide digital signatures and encryption is that it is not certificate based. Instead it is signature based. This eliminates the steep initial learning and management curves of existing products. The user does not need use and manage specialized certificates except for specialized purposes The big complexity and user hostility in existing products is creating and managing certificates. Perhaps more importantly, it also eliminates the threat we saw in England, the threat of the government giving itself a monopoly in certificate distribution, potentially creating the Number-Of-The-Beast system, where you need a government certificate to log on to dirty picture sites, to buy, to sell, to put up web pages. The key feature of the proposed product is that any digitally signed document can be stored in the database, and itself performs the functions of a certificate, just as a normal handwritten signature does. The user usually does not need to check a document against a certificate to see if it was signed by the "real" John Doe. Instead he normally checks one document against another to see if they were both signed by the same John Doe. And similarly when he encrypts a document, he does not need to use a certificate to encrypt a message to the one real John Doe, he merely encrypts a message to the same John Doe who signed the letter he is replying to. At present people have to deal with certificate management problems regardless of whether they really need certificates. For example the most common usage of PGP is to check that two signatures that purport to be by the same person are in fact by the same person. Unfortunately you cannot check one signature against another directly using PGP or any of the other existing products. Instead you have to check both signatures against a public key certificate, even if the authentication information in that certificate is irrelevant to your purpose, which it usually is, which means that you have to download the certificate from somewhere, and the person signing it had to upload it somewhere. As PGP always checks a document against the certificate, rather than against any other document the user happens to feel is relevant to the question, the person signing the document needs to get his certificate properly signed by some widely trusted third party, which is too much trouble or too complicated for many people. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG z8/j/L3kF7oCmOp/iF2oh/pwgP/mATjOTUdv1uGy DlPh9Op11Z1CtFuByebVsk8yJo4WuUMuFk4S/TMp --------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the state. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/

6 5

Re: Superdistribution development/release
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text X-Sender: hutchinson(a)click.ncri.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 09:41:30 -0500 To: dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu From: hutchinson(a)ncri.com (Art Hutchinson) Subject: Re: Superdistribution development/release Cc: brian(a)smarter.than.nu Sender: bounce-dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: hutchinson(a)ncri.com (Art Hutchinson) >On Wed, 3 Dec 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >> >> Here an incentive: if anyone breaks this, I'll write an article about it >> and another profiling the person who does. >> >> When you have this kind of "encryption" scheme running on untrusted >> hardware to which the user has access, it's doomed to fail. Even if it's >> custom hardware, it'll probably be broken, but it'll just take longer. To which Brian Buchanan replied: >Should be relatively trivial to break the encryption, since it can't be >over 40-bit (or 56-bit if the company joined the kiss-ass alliance). Uh, its a Canadian company. That John Candy movie about the U.S. invasion didn't really happen. ;-) - Art Art Hutchinson hutchinson(a)ncri.com Northeast Consulting Resources, Inc. phone: (617) 654-0635 One Liberty Square fax: (617) 654-0654 Boston, MA 02160 www.ncri.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Working at the intersection of business and IT strategy to help organizations embrace electronic commerce opportunities" For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "dcsb-request(a)ai.mit.edu" with one line of text: "help". --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/ Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: <http://www.fc98.ai/>

1 0