December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Opiated file systems
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:05 AM 7/18/96, jim bell wrote: >It has long occurred to me, considering the size and low power of the >typical 3.5" hard drive compared with the size of the typical house or >apartment, that it might be an interesting project to remotely connect such >a (hidden) drive to your computer using a reasonably surreptious link that >is difficult to trace. Say, an IR optical link, a single bare (unjacketed) >optical fiber, a LAN with hidden nodes, or a similar system. Maybe an >inductive pickup. In any raid, they'll have to decide what to take, and >chances are very good that they won't find every hidden item. I think the druggies call this a "rat line": two apartments next to each other, with the humans living in one and the drugs stored in the other. The drugs are gotten through a hole in the wall. (Hey, I'm not saying it works, or that it stops raids, prosecutions, convictions, etc. Just noting the existence.) Any multi-unit apartment can do this already, with data. The hard disk can be upstairs and two units away, connected with Ethernet (as many apartment buildings out here in California already are), or whatever. Any raid on Unit 3B, for example, finds that no files are stored locally. A separate investigation and/or search warrant for whereever the files actually are stored would be of course problematic and/or delayed. (Friends of mine have worked on "remote storage" ideas for exactly such applications. Clearly there are many options: storage in other local sites, storage in offshore sites, encrypted storage, even storage by a "priest" functionary ("Son, I am ready to receive your digitally transmitted confession.").) Lots of possibilities. For various reasons, few have been pursued. (Mostly because, I think, there have been relatively few raids on data, and when there have been raids, there were usually other HUMINT-type factors involved. E.g., few child porn rings are going to be broken only on the basis of seized disks. As this situation changes, expect more "data archival" services to evolve.) --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 3

Internet Through Radio
by Jerome Tan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know how to Internet through radio using packet modems? By next year, our telephone company will be implementing metered phones, this will be unfair to modem users since they do that to prevent people from talking to the phone for long hours.

2 1

RE: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids
by jbugden＠smtplink.alis.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:13 AM on 96/07/18 Timothy C. May wrote: >It's a mark of what has gone wrong with this country that >ordinary citizens actually fear the midnight raids, the no-knock >searches, the "threat suppression" by ninjas. I recommend an article sub-titled: Fourteen ways of looking at a blackshirt. I've excerpted particularily relevant pieces below. Eternal Fascism by Umberto Eco New York Review of Books (June 22, 1995) In spite of some fuziness regarding the difference between various historical forms of fascism, I think it is possible to outline a list of features that are typical of what I would like to call Ur-Fascism, or Eternal Fascism. These features cannot be organized into a system; any of them contradict each other, and are also typical of other kinds of despotism or fanaticism. But it is enough that one of them to be present to allow fascism to coagulate around it. [...] 3. Irrationalism also depends on the cult of action for action's sake. Action being beuatiful in itself, it must be taken before, or without, reflection. Thinking is a form of emasculation. [...] 4. The critical spirit makes distinctions, and to distinguish is a sign of modernism. In modern culture the scientific community praises disagreement as a way to improve knowledge. For Ur-Fascism, disagreement is treason. 5. Besides, disagreement is a sign of diversity. Ur-Fascism grows up and seeks consensus by exploiting and exacerbating the natural fear of difference. The first appeal of a fascist or prematurely fascist movement is an appeal against the intruders. Thus Ur-Fascism is racist by definition. 6. Ur-Fascism derive from individual or social frustration. [...] 11. In such a perspective everybody is educated to become a hero. In every mythology the hero is an exceptional being, but in Ur-Fascist ideology heroism is the norm. This cult of heroism is strictly linked with the cult of death. It is not by chance that a motto of the Spanish Falangists was Viva la Muerte ("Long Live Death!"). In nonfascist societies, the lay public is told that death is unpleasant but must be faced with dignity; believers are told that it is the painful way to reach a supernatural hapiness. By contrast, the Ur-Fascist hero craves heroic death, advertised as the best reward for a heroic life. The Ur-Fascist hero is impatient to die. In his impatience, he more frequently sends other people to death. [...] Franklin Roosevelt's words of November 4, 1938, are worth recalling: "If American democracy ceases to move forward as a living force, seeking day and night by *peaceful means* (emphasis mine) to better the lot of our citizens, fascism will grow in strength in our land." Freedom and liberation are an unending task. ---------------------- If you set out to defeat an enemy because you despise what they do or say, make sure that you are different - not just stronger. Ciao, James

1 0

Re: New Infowarfare Panel
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:14 PM 7/18/96, David Sternlight wrote: >At 8:30 PM -0700 7/17/96, Timothy C. May wrote: > >>Winn Schwartau is running conferences, is talking about the imminent danger >>of the nation's computer networks being knocked out (paraphrasing his >>latest "Wired" item: "imagine your ATM network being knocked out and people >>being unable to gain access to their money"). >> >>Schwartau is predicting/advocating a "fifth branch" of the military to deal >>with the this threat. A cyberforce, as it were. >> >>Color me skeptical, but I see this all as a lot of hype and fear-mongering. >>Folks in the Pentagon, FBI, and NSA probably see it as a way to get more >>funding, Folks in the consulting business probably see it as a way to crank >>up the seminar prices and increase the number and frequency of "Information >>Warfare" workshops and seminars. > >Haven't there been some worked examples of information warfare that make >this fear and the need to deal with it legitimate? I'm certainly not saying "information warfare" is impossible--for example, I did some work in the late 70s for DARPA on knocking out satellites with particle beam weapons. Specifically, I rebutted MIT Professor Kosta Tsipas' claim that directed energy weapons in orbit would require tens (or more) of Space Shuttle trips _per shot_. I showed the DARPA people how it could be done with 5 orders of magnitude less energy, and speculated that "ticklings" of satellites could be done with commercially available ion implanters--they got real concerned and I was not invited to the classified sessions where they discussed this threat model, as I lacked a clearance. However, the current wave of publicity about "information warfare" seems to focus on _possible_ scenarios, with Hollywoodesque overtones. (And I just learned that "infowar consultant" Schwartau is indeed "working on a movie." Not to ascribe impure motives to him--who's to say what's impure?--but it still sounds like hype to me.) >As I recall my background reading in the public press, wasn't the etiology >that we figured out how to do some pretty nasty things (the Gulf war was >one presenting occasion) to enemies' info infrastructures to threaten their >entire social system. Then, as I understand it, someone smart said >something like "If we can do this to them, then someone can do this to us." >and we were off to the races. Sure, we dropped conductive fibers on their power lines, we blew their dishes out with Special Ops sniper fire, and we did a lot of other such things. Could this destroy the nation's "infrastructure"? Hey, there have been scenarios for disrupting Wall Street, for all sorts of things. Bombs in power plants, knocking over high tension lines, etc. Some things never change. But destroying or even seriously damagaing the U.S. infrastructure would be _very_ hard to do. Sure, the government should think about such things. Utilities companies routinely plan for efforts to disrupt service. (I live a mile or two from where "Earth Action Now!" knocked over a power line about the time treehugger activist Judi Bari was partly blown up while apparently transporting a homemade bomb down here to Santa Cruz.) >It's the military and counterintel community's job to think like this and >act to protect us. I don't think imputing selfish motives is dispositive. I noted that there is a recent wave of hype: books, conferences, calls for action, even movie deals (:-}). Given that there is no real evidence that these mysterious "HERF guns" have ever been used, nor is there evidence that they would do much beyond knocking out the PCs in the office they were aimed at, this is why I said "color me skeptical." By the way, I was interviewed for the BBC programme "The I-Bomb," had discussions a while back with someone working on HERF guns, and have been in touch with Schwartau on this latest round (he contacted me). I'm still skeptical. "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: ABC News on internet telephony
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 18 Jul 96 at 9:41, Clay Olbon II wrote: > There was a pretty long piece on the evening news on using the internet for > long distance and how much money can be saved. Even had several demos of > intercontinental phone calls. The disappointing aspect was they didn't > mention PGPfone (although if they had, I'm sure child pornographers and > terrorists would have been mentioned as well :-) PGPfone isn't marketed very well. Other Internet phone software is advertised in magazines, promotions with ISPs, etc. Rob --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

1 0

RE: overseas PGPfone and Netscape
by Jean-Paul Kroepfli 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ian Goldberg wrote: >Could various people with various architectures post MD5 or SHA1 hashes >of the files they downloaded? (i) very good idea (ii) Do you know where I can find a MSWin or MSDOS executable of SHA? Jean-Paul ~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~- Jean-Paul et Micheline Kroepfli (our son: Nicolas and daughter: Celine) eMail: JeanPaul.Kroepfli(a)utopia.fnet.fr Also Compuserve and MSNetwork Phone: +33 81 55 52 59 (F) PostMail: F-25640 Breconchaux (France) or: +41 21 843 27 36 (CH) or: CP 138, CH-1337 Vallorbe Fax: +33 81 55 52 62 (Switzerland) Zephyr(r) : InterNet Communication and Commerce, Security and Cryptography consulting PGP Fingerprint : 19 FB 67 EA 20 70 53 89 AF B2 5C 7F 02 1F CA 8F "The InterNet is the most open standard since air for breathing"

1 0

Re: (fwd) Re: US versions of Netscape now available---NOT
by David Lesher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > Whatever YaKnow > > cybernut(a)nutcom.com > > 10401 Wilshire Blvd, Suite 805 > > Los Angeles, CA 90024-4628 > > (310) 475-3799 > > > > > > Isn't that nice. Some creep is proud enough of his skill at accessing the > trivially available InterNIC finger data that he posts it to invoke > harassment. And being a coward as well, he hides behind an anonymous > remailer. Of course, SternFUD himself advertised all the same material & much more hornblowing on http://www.switchboard.com; Check it out yourself. (I do note UnProfessor has removed the Panasana address that was there previously.) [IMAGE] DR. DAVID STERNLIGHT PROVIDES ECONOMIC AND STRATEGIC PLANNINGCONSULTING SERVICES FOR HIGH-TECHNOLOGY FIRMS. Strategic uncertainty is now the norm for the business environment. Wrenching events such as the fall of the Soviet Union, major shifts in technology and its location, and new directions in national and international policy strongly affect the medium and long-term business future...... -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

2 1

Re: Gorelick testifies before Senate, unveils new executive order
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:04 AM 7/18/96 -0700, David Sternlight wrote: >Serious studies have shown that the kinds of protections to make the >systems we depend on robust against determined and malicious attackers (say >a terrorist government, or one bent on doing a lot of damage in retaliation >for one of our policies they don't like) "Policies"? There you go again. A "policy," at least in regard to the US government, is not merely opinion, but is action. Action which may (legitimately) anger people. Action which may not genuinely be in the interests of American people, although you'd never get those government thugs to admit it. If somebody overseas doesn't like a US government "policy," maybe the best thing to do is to determine whether it's actually beneficial to the ordinary American citizen, or whether its benefits can be achieved simply by changing government behavior. So what's the best way to avoid "terrorism"? Maybe the fastest, more efficent, and overall best way to avoid it is to get the US government to stop doing things that foment it, rather than trying to protect against it after the fact. , have costs beyond the capability >of individual private sector actors. Your friendly neighborhood ISP, for >instance, probably can't affort the iron belt and steel suspenders needed >to make his system and its connectivity sabotage-proof, and so on. Even >cheap but clever solutions involving encryption in such systems require >standards and common practices across many institutions. None of which require government actions to achieve. If anything, what is required is that governments STOP doing things which discourage such implementations of encryption. Government is the problem, not the solution. >In such a case, where public benefits from government action greatly exceed >public (taxpayer) costs, This is the classic Sternlight misrepresentation. Chances are excellent that this public benefit you speak of is almost totally a benefit to government employees, not ordinary citizens. Government's "solutions" are predictably skewed to maintain government budgets, not actually designed to solve the underlying problem. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

RE: ABC news on Internet Telephony
by talon57＠well.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

David Sternlight writes: >There's something fundamental going on here beneath the surface. >Surprisingly, a recent item (maybe the one you reported) on this >suggests that the big phone companies are trying to use this >phenomenon rather than stop it. I think it was AT&T who announced >that they had web software that improved the quality of such >internet voice calls. Surprisingly constructive, in contrast to >the coalition of small phone companies screaming for the FCC to >"stop it". The FCC has wisely said they're not going to act right >now because it could kill an incipient new technology. There is something fundamental going on here, a lack of common sense, and/or critical reasoning. Lets try it again. Who is the most likely to be disintermediated by a global packet network? (how do you get to your ISP?) I assume by "big phone company" vs "little phone company" you are refering to long distance vs local service, tell me, if the RBOC's continue merging, at what level do they become a " big phone company." The RBOC's are not the only local service providers of course, here in Illinois alone there are more than 80 (at my last count) providers of local service, and soon there will be many more. The other "urban myth" you are helping to support is the notion that it is the local providers that are fighting deregulation. Ameritech filed for total unbundling in March of '93, and you don't see them insisting on having a percentage of the long distance market before the long distance companies are allowed to compete in the local loop. >This is the rankest speculation on my part, but could some of the >bigger, smarter phone company cum internet providers have done >some serious analysis and concluded that we're moving away from >distance-based rates for voice calls. Might they even have >examined where we'll be in the next ten years (with ADSL, etc.) >and decided that the network technology and simple market >economics makes fixed charges per "line" more profitable to them >than metered usage? Maybe this is wishful thinking on my part, but >some of the bigger actors are starting to behave in a surprisingly >counter-intuitive (based on the way we stereotype them) fashion on >this topic. point to point circuits are more efficiently handled by circuit switching rather than packet switching networks. Nicholas Negroponte wrote an interesting piece about asynchronous vs synchronous, I believe it is in his book "Being Digital." ADSL is an interesting attempt at digital telephony but expensive and basically would mean replacing existing central office switches. (backbone bandwidth) In a packet network you have to either dedicate a portion of the bandwidth for a synchronous circuit, or you have to have a very fast network and use very small packets (ATM), expensive either way. A single central office has many times the bandwidth of the widest part of the internet, and the average state has hundreds of CO's. If even a small portion of the Internets current users tried placing a call things would grind to a halt. A huge increase in the number of backbones and their bandwidth would solve this, but who will pay the bill? TANSTAAFL Sometime ago the discussion was on the cost of laying new fiber, may I suggest the realworld heuristic of "a million dollars a mile." Please note I am not trying to make fun of anyone personnally, I am in the words of Jubal Harshaw "heaping scorn upon an inexcuseably silly idea, a practice I shall always follow." Brian communicate globally, censor locally

2 1

Alternative Journalism
by enquirer＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

THE CYPHERPUNK ENQUIRER PRESENTS: "Adventures in Alternative Journalism" The Analysis Piece Alice stared at the two strange creatures. She was completely dumbfounded. "So let me see if I've got this right. You make really good wheels. But if the Queen of Hearts had wheels, her subjects who occasionally raid your borders would be able to get away faster, and you wouldn't catch as many of them. Is that right, Tweedledumb?" "I'm Tweedledumber. He's Tweedledumb. Yes, that's right. We have a technological lead over the Cards, and we have to maintain it." "So you won't sell them wheels?" "Well, it's more complex than that. A large part of our population is engaged in making wheels, and we make a lot of money selling them to the Cards. So we made a compromise. We only sell them SQUARE wheels." "But of course," Tweedledumb chimed in, "it's very expensive to make both square and round wheels. So most of our people only make square wheels, so they can sell them to both us and the Cards. Of course, our people are allowed to buy round wheels, IF they can find them." "AND," stated Tweedledumber, "since the wheel is patented here, we get to collect a hefty licensing fee for every wheel sold." "But the Cards DO have wheels!" Alice could see over the fence, and the Cards were happily zipping around all over the place. "And so do a lot of people over here. What happened?" "Well, we couldn't stop the Cards from building their OWN wheels ... " "And people like buying the Card wheels because they're faster than our wheels, and they're cheaper, because they don't have to pay us the licensing fee ..." "You see, we have a licensing treaty with the Cards for most things, so if they make something we have a patent on, they have to pay us, but the wheel can't be exported, so it can't EXIST over there, so our patents don't apply ... " "But I don't understand! You said you needed to catch people, but now you can hardly catch anyone!" Alice was totally astounded at what she was hearing. "It's only a stopgap measure anyway." Tweedledumber clasp his hands behind his back and started pacing. "We need to get an agreement with the Queen of Hearts that both of our people will only use, oh, say, pentagonal and maybe hexagonical wheels. That way, everyone can get around faster, but we'll still be able to catch them." "But who's WE?" "Anybody with a TLA on their shirt. WE get round wheels." "What's a TLA?" Alice almost felt relieved when she saw the familiar grin materialize. The rest of the Cheshire Cat soon followed. "A TLA, my dear, is a Three Letter Anachronism. When people start referring to you by your initials, you've overstayed your welcome. If everyone starts calling ME TCC, I'll know it's time to find another job." The caterpillar spoke up from its perch on the toadstool. "Wrong, tuna breath. TLA's are the only thing standing between society and total chaos." Alice turned to face the caterpillar, who responded by blowing a lungful of hookah smoke in her face. "THESE two goons only deal with the dangers of the Queen of Hearts and her soldiers, I have to worry about the domestic situation. So we came up with a solution. There are certain unscrupulous locals who engage in terrible things, terrorism, drug dealing, child molestation, money laundering ... we have to be able to catch them. If they had wheels, they could outrun us. But if we had ACCESS to those wheels when we needed it ... by the way, speaking of drug dealers, we know about that mushroom, and the pills. You might want to think really hard about playing ball with us, the Queen of Hearts is rather fond of cutting off dope addict's heads." "Access to wheels? Does that have anything to do with those ropes hanging off the back of those carts?" "Yup. We pull on that rope, the wheels fall off. And since we may have to stop a LOT of people at one time, we could have a riot, or another Butthole Surfers concert, we figure that we should be able to stop about ten percent of the population at once, a little less in the rural areas ... well, they've gotta be REALLY LONG ROPES ... and there have to be A WHOLE LOT of them ... course, the ones with the ropes we let have octagonal wheels ... " "But can't just anybody pull the rope? You'll have wheels falling off all over the place." "Price you have to pay for a safe society. Besides, we have trusted third parties holding to to the other end." "How will you get people to use it, when they can get regular wheels from the Cards?" "How else? We could pass a law. But it's easier just to threaten all the wheel dealers - put the rope on or we shut you down. Spread the word that only criminals don't use ropes - what are you afraid of? Got something to hide? Eventually we'll have to outlaw the round wheel, of course, but for the time being, some creative social engineering should do the trick." The caterpillar took another long drag on the hookah. "Good shit. Dole was right about this stuff." "But can't people get real wheels for free?" "Sure, we've pulled off enough they're lying around all over the place. But then you need an axle, bearings, steering - most people still just go down and buy the whole package. We get them, we're in - guy up in Seattle makes something like 90% of all carts sold here, you should see the shit we've got on HIM! No problemo. And those idiots at Netscape - we've got them doing a complete background check on anybody who wants a round wheel - come back in five days, and maybe you can have it." "So, Alice, are you learning anything?" Alice liked the Cheshire Cat, but it did have very sharp teeth, and very long claws, and it did have the habit of appearing out of nothing. Alice felt that it should be treated with respect. "Not really, your cattiness. It doesn't make any sense at all!" "It isn't supposed to. You have to look at it the right way. From their perspective, it makes perfect sense." "I'm confused." "Don't worry about it. It gets worse before it gets better. Come on, we're going to a party. Tim May and John Gilmore are throwing a Mad Tea Party." "Are they really mad?" "May's crazy as a loon. You'll like him. Gilmore, he's just still pissed at Shimamura for that stunt in the hot tub ... "

1 0

Re: Opiated file systems
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 16 Jul 96 at 19:21, Mark M. wrote: > > A problem with a c'punk-style encrypted fs with source code and wide > > distribution is, of course, that attackers will KNOW that there is a > > duress key. > > I don't see how this would effect the security of such a filesystem. There > is absolutely nothing that an attacker can do to get the real key. An attacker > would just ignore all computers that have duress key capability. 1. Confiscate computer (along with physical drive) with duress-capable encrypted file system; 2. back up the encrypted sectors; 3. reverse-engineer file system driver to figure out how the duress-key works, if there are multiple keys, where data is stored; 4. make sure you've rubber-hosed or subpeoned all passphrases or keys; 4a. if the system destroys data, you've got backups ("Very funny kiddo; now give us the real key...") 4b. even if there are two filesystems, the attacker will want access to both, just to make sure... Duress keys rely on a form of security through obscurity. They make sense for real-time situations where the attacker has to rush in, gain access quickly, and leave real fast (ie, bank robberies). If the attacker has plenty of time, he can prepare for that possibility. Rob --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

3 2

Re: 119_816
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:29 AM 7/17/96 GMT, you wrote: > 6-17-96. NYP: > > "11 Officers Are Accused of Failure to pay Taxes. Claims of > Sovereignty and 98 Dependents." > > At least 11 New York City police officers have been > accused of failing to pay any Federal taxes for several > years by declaring they each had 98 dependents and by > insisting that the Government had no right to tax them. > The officers relied on a package of instructions that > described how to avoid paying taxes by declaring that > they were sovereign citizens who did not have to pay > taxes. Anyone know which "package of instructions" they were using, and where they can be obtained online? //cerridwyn//

2 1

Re: Surf-filter lists
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:31 PM 7/17/96 -0500, you wrote: ><rant>A Private organization cannot "censor" anything. The fundamental >definition of the word require some agent of the government take action >to censor. To accuse Surf-Watch, net-nanny, AOL, MSU, AT&T, or whatever >of "censorship" accomplishes nothing except to make us look the >fool.</rant> I am not going to go into petty details about the actual definition of censor, and how private organizations do censor, but private citizens have the option of getting their information from an uncensored source, the same as when a government censors. The only difference is the government is allowed to use physical coercion, whereas on the surface corporations are not yet allowed to do so. I will, however, address your argument on a different level. Your view of this issue typifies one of the primary objections I have to many of the arguments amongst libertarians. The problem is NOT JUST GOVERNMENT. It is with any authority that has power over you. When a private entity becomes powerful enough that they have the ability to forcefully exert their influence over you, they are just as bad as Government. Granted, Surf-Watch and so forth haven't yet become that big, but there are some rather large Media companies who have, as well as institutions such as the Church. For example, I think our mainstream news IS censored, and not necessarily by the government, more by corporations intent on keeping us in the mindframe that will make them the most money and prolong and extend their power. I am not saying that a private entity doesn't or shouldn't have the Legal Right to censor, but I am saying that censorship of any form by any entity is a Bad Thing and the public (not the government, mind) should fight it on all fronts. This, in my mind, is the only reason to be dismayed by the decision on the CDA. It was found that the government shouldn't censor on the Internet because there were forms of Corporate censorship available. It would have truely been a great day if the decision had been that the government shouldn't censor on the Internet because censorship is wrong. >I agree that the problem with the "bait-and-switch" filtering of net >materials by these various filtering packages needs to be addressed. If I >want to protect my kids from seeing alt.naughty.pictures, I shoudl still >be able to unfilter political and health speech. The real problem isn't >censorship, it's disclosure by the makers of filtering packages about >what exactly their packages are going to filter for me and my family. That is another problem, not the Real Problem. The Real Problem is that parents are scared to have to explain to children why something they've seen is wrong or bad. They are afraid to teach their children their beliefs and values, so instead would rather just filter everything that conflicts with those beliefs, so that they believe it by default. This is a big problem when those children grow away from their parent's influence though, and creates bigotry and intolerance. (They don't know why they believe what they do, but believe it with fearful vengeance). //cerridwyn//

3 2

Home Made Telephone Voice Changer
by Jerome Tan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know how to make a home-made telephone voice changer?

2 1

Re: Telecom regulations - Reuters coverage
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 23:22 7/17/96, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: [...] >>FCC Chairman Hundt Sees Tax On Telecom Industry > >> FAJARDO, Puerto Rico - A small tax will probably be imposed on >> telecommunications companies' revenues to subsidize telephone access >> in rural areas and help wire classrooms for the Internet, Federal >> Communications Commission Chairman Reed Hundt told the nation's >> governors. > >[...] > >> But ensuring that residents in sparsely populated areas have access at >> affordable rates and meeting the administration's goal of wiring every >> classroom in the nation for Internet access will require annual >> subsidies of about $10 billion, Hundt said. Ten billion today will of course mean 100 billion tomorrow. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November. Vote Harry Browne for President.

1 0

Re: #E-CASH: PRODUCT OR SERVICE?
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 20:19 7/16/96, Stig wrote: >Perhaps this has already been voiced on the main list (I get a filtered >helping or two of cypherpunks), but *I'm* surprised that such a generic name >as 'Ecash' was granted trademark status anywhere. > >It's like giving Microsoft a trademark on the term 'Email'... It's nuts! >Was the term ecash not in use before DigiCash showed up on the scene? No that I am aware of. Furthermore, to the best of my knowledge, DigiCash's Ecash is the only ecash that I am aware of. The other "ecashs" lack various properties of cash, as previously explained by Bryce. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November. Vote Harry Browne for President.

2 1

Re: Opiated file systems
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>a (hidden) drive to your computer using a reasonably surreptious link that >is difficult to trace. Say, an IR optical link, a single bare (unjacketed) >optical fiber, a LAN with hidden nodes, or a similar system. Maybe an I find the idea of the optical fiber very interesting. Is there such a beast currently available? I really don't know anything about fiber, and therefore it would be very difficult for me to construct such a system myself...

1 0

Minneapolis radio on Netscape US Version
by roy＠sendai.scytale.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- KCFE has a brief and shallow "Business Report" in the afternoon. Yesterday, one of the items was Netscape's getting permission to make the US version available over the Internet. The bit mentioned a "strengthened method of scrambling data" and also mentioned the Gov't concern that it might be downloaded by terrorist groups. Some good, some bad. - -- Roy M. Silvernail [ ] roy(a)scytale.com PGP Public Key fingerprint = 31 86 EC B9 DB 76 A7 54 13 0B 6A 6B CC 09 18 B6 Key available from pubkey(a)scytale.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMe7JdBvikii9febJAQE28wP/eyvR1jfi5oU4sHwsnro6EwbHMr45Qptb wdX+0CDEtLCZv2eXQt+guWy4jIuEMrvd5obFiTGDJECkQ1aecYNiosQgdyJzqNgb 5xm98V7MlWBWGr7P5Ev4uOsC7mXbPvnPZ2BiCtlG5H+jnv4KKv7fr1ZtSngU+8Xl vDCp8MwQN9Q= =ZVdP -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Reverse Engineer
by Jerome Tan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What do you mean by "reverse engineer?" I have heard this word several times especially in the world of hacking, but... can someone tell me what it really meant?

4 3

Cookies etc...
by EVERHART＠Arisia.GCE.Com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On VMS, I have an applique which can be used to control completely what can be opened by apps you don't trust. It is perfectly capable of ensuring that nothing you haven't authorized is opened behind your back, mainly by telling you before the open proceeds what is being tried and giving you the ability to prevent it. Forcing use of some other disk (or scratch area) instead is of course also possible, selectively. The problem of things like cookies being left around without explicit permission (or other covert actions) would seem to be that there is no basis for assuming that the app is doing any of this as the agent of the person running the app. With EACF I can completely control this sort of thing; native out-of-the-box VMS has some facilities for partial control as well, which can be adequate. In doing so, they step outside the normal paradigm of assuming the "subject" is the user. I would contend that the "subject" should in fact be considered much more complex than user ID. At minimum, use of a tuple containing userid, program being run, location of user, privileges present, time of day, and identifiers ("group memberships") would seem to be needed for serious efforts, so that "subject" has some relation to what actually happens. The ability to treat certain actions as dynamically altering security or integrity levels is important too. Apps that leave files on your system without telling you are doing covert functions; these should be treated with great suspicion. So where are the critics of this? Does leaving such files constitute unauthorized computer use? I would say so. Anyone see the marshals coming to Netscape or Microsoft to haul anyone off to jail? Leaving files around would seem to deserve INFORMED consent. Do we get it? If your OS isn't as secure as VMS, maybe you want to think about this. ;-) Glenn Everhart(a)gce.com

1 0

Re: An interesting instance of poltical anonymnity, now
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:56 AM 7/18/96 EDT, you wrote: >Don't feel sorry for Klein - he's a fucking statist who opposes freedom of >speech. If CBS fires the creep for lying, it'll serve him just right. Than they should fire him on that basis (anti-free speech etc), not on the basis of preserving anonymity. //cerridwyn//

1 0

re: Opiated file systems
by EVERHART＠Arisia.GCE.Com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hmm... I can set up a cryptodisk on a not necessarily contiguous file on another cryptodisk; the software is free. The second cryptodisk would appear to be just a binary file on the first; would it not be an obscured filesystem? (The drivers have been given away for years public domain for vms, vax or alpha, in source. My old rsx11d driver was published similarly back in 1977 or 78.) In fact, though, the containing file of a cryptodisk does not have to have any specific name or location, and can be hidden away as though it were, say, a sound file or something else among the rest of the system store. Before someone comes demanding your keys, they first have to realize that something might in fact be encrypted. My approach would be to have lots of these obscured cryptodisks for the stuff I wanted private, if I wanted to hide a lot, and have the usual assortment of cleartext stuff of all sorts lying around. The default operation mode forgets the keys automatically once you log off...or even at dismount. If you're stuck with a whole partition being hidden, this is harder to do. When any file of over a few kb can be a separate filestructure when the proper magic is applied, locating the keys can be impossible. glenn

1 0

Netscrape download
by David Lesher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[From Phil Karn] Netscape's use of a CGI interface to download the US version (128-bit key) of Netscape Navigator raises the possibility that they are "serializing" or "personalizing" each copy they send out, perhaps in response to a DoS request that they do so in order to trace unauthorized redistribution. One way to test this theory without redistributing the actual code is to compare MD5 hashes of the distributions. After two days of unsuccessful attempts at obtaining the code from their overloaded server, I've just successfully downloaded the SunOS, BSDI and Windows 95 versions of Netscape Navigator. Here are the MD5 hashes of the files I received: BSDI version: 4ec4a705e2e4c6560475852fae807c8c SunOS version: e72ff352ca7c619cb31b8f8ef3651b28 Windows 95 version: 8e936813f12a1b3b77ed03d9239ebd5d Anybody care to compare these to the copies they obtain, assuming the logjam on the server breaks sometime soon? Phil -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close...........(v)301 56 LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead........vr vr vr vr.................20915-1433

5 4

Re: #E-CASH: PRODUCT OR SERVICE?
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:18 AM 7/17/96, Stig wrote: >Perhaps this has already been voiced on the main list (I get a filtered >helping or two of cypherpunks), but *I'm* surprised that such a generic name >as 'Ecash' was granted trademark status anywhere. > >It's like giving Microsoft a trademark on the term 'Email'... It's nuts! >Was the term ecash not in use before DigiCash showed up on the scene? I agree, but note that Microsoft has gone a long way toward getting the courts to give it full monopoly ownership of the term "windows," or "Windows." I guess that windows-based Symbolics machine I was using in 1984, or those Xerox PARC windows-based D-machine, were violating the standard Microsoft set years later. (I admit that I bought Windows 1.0 about six months before I bought my first Macintosh, but I also note that Windows 1.0 was a ludicrous joke, and did not become a serious product until Windows 3.0 was released in 1990. And Apple had their windows (Windows is a TM of The Microsoft Corporation, all rights reserved) based machine, the Lisa, out in 1982-3.) As for Digicash's claims on "digicash," "ecash," etc., it won't matter much. The whole legal knot (including the patents and claims on the algorithms) makes things more complicated, but I don't worry too much about Digicash claiming people can't use the term "ecash." (If anything, Digicash may have failed to protect the name aggressively enough, and it may have entered the English language as band-aid did.) --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Alternative Journalism
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:04 PM 7/18/96, enquirer(a)alpha.c2.org wrote: > THE CYPHERPUNK ENQUIRER PRESENTS: > ... >"Don't worry about it. It gets worse before it gets better. Come on, we're >going to a party. Tim May and John Gilmore are throwing a Mad Tea Party." > >"Are they really mad?" > >"May's crazy as a loon. You'll like him. Gilmore, he's just still pissed >at Shimamura for that stunt in the hot tub ... " Ssshhh! Don't let it out that I'm crazy as a loon. BTW, "loon" is now considered to be derogatory slur and has been replaced by the more PC term "differently outlooked." We differently outlooked persons are forbidden by U.S. and California law from owning firearms, a method used increasingly to seize the firearms of those who have ever come into contact with the mental health profession. (Hint: Never, ever, ever, ever have yourself admitted to any kind of psychiatric facility for any reason whatsoever! Never, ever, etc. let a family member have you admitted for treatment, observation, or analysis. You will likely find that your right to own a firearm has evaporated if you do any of these things.) Personally, whenever I fill out the forms to buy a gun, I have no compunctions about lying. (The checking procedures are primitive, fortunately, unless one is so stupid as to answer "Yes" to any of the questions the form asks.) That I am a felon has never stopped me from picking up a gun. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 2

Re: Opiated file systems
by JonWienk＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You had better make sure that you TEMPEST-shield any such hidden drive. Jonathan Wienke "1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future!" --Adolf Hitler "46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. ...Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government." --The 29 Palms Combat Arms Survey http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/Palms.htm 1935 Germany = 1996 U.S.? Key fingerprint = 30 F9 85 7F D2 75 4B C6 BC 79 87 3D 99 21 50 CB

1 0

Remailers & NYMs
by kpdarby＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know some good PGP encrypted remailers, that are secure and pretty fast? How about a few good NYMs? KPD ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere" --Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: #E-CASH: PRODUCT OR SERVICE?
by mccoy＠communities.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Lucky wrote: > At 20:19 7/16/96, Stig wrote: [regarding the "Ecash" trademark...] > >It's like giving Microsoft a trademark on the term 'Email'... It's nuts! > >Was the term ecash not in use before DigiCash showed up on the scene? > > No that I am aware of. Furthermore, to the best of my knowledge, DigiCash's > Ecash is the only ecash that I am aware of. The other "ecashs" lack various > properties of cash, as previously explained by Bryce. Digicash's ecash lacks various properties of real cash from the users point of view (offline transferability, large scale acceptance, etc.) and a great many from the issuers perspective (too many to list...), but we still seem to want to call it electronic cash when it isn't. It may be "Ecash" but it sure ain't digital cash... jim

1 0

Re: New Infowarfare Panel
by nobody＠zifi.genetics.utah.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

David Sternlight wrote: <snip> >I'm talking about some of the information that started slowly leaking out >later, not the prime-time TV pyrotechnics. It doesn't "slowly leak out" as if there were some regrettable lapse in the plumbing. Someone has to commit the federal crime of military espionage! <snicker>

2 1

Re: ABC News on internet telephony
by john (j.) brothers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In message "ABC News on internet telephony", you write: > > General topic of internet telephony > There's something fundamental going on here beneath the surface. > Surprisingly, a recent item (maybe the one you reported) on this suggests > that the big phone companies are trying to use this phenomenon rather than > stop it. I think it was AT&T Sprint has also come out in favor of the internet phone. > This is the rankest speculation on my part, but could some of the bigger, > smarter phone company cum internet providers have done some serious > analysis and concluded that we're moving away from distance-based rates for > voice calls. I will weigh in with my own stinky speculation: Sprint, MCI and AT&T (and possibly LDDS) own pretty much the entire commercial network physically. Every other long distance company leases lines from the big 3 (or 4,etc) and resells them, except for certain very specific points. And the Internet phone has pretty much given them the chance to drive their competitors out of business if it succeeds. After all, there is a constant demand for internet bandwidth. Every T3 they pull out of long distance services is a T3 they can throw into data services. It gives them a real cost savings compared to installing another high bandwidth backbone. They'll lose money from their customers who switch too, but those three are the ones with the lion's share of business lines, which won't be switching to Inet phone anytime soon. and they gain all the business customers who leave the dying small companies. And yes, fixed rate will be the way to go, especially for small bandwidth applications. Bandwidth is exploding - 1 Terabit optical networks have been created. A single phone line becomes miniscule. Now, if you want a much bigger pipe, they might charge you per hour for that. The thing I find second most interesting about this is how the large companies are fighting regulation, while the small ones are demanding it. That is a big change from yesteryear. And I know that AT&T has benefitted in a major way from gov't regulation in the past, but that doesn't make it right for it to be applied now.

1 0

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids [Noise]
by JonWienk＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I personally keep a Desert Eagle .44 Magnum (66 oz empty, 8+1 capacity, semi-auto,) with +P+ 240 grain FMJSP hunting loads. It's not just a gun, it's an adventure. :) Even if it doesn't penetrate body armor, the impact will knock anyone entering entering through your window at 0400 on their duff long enough for a follow-up shot or two to finish the job. This is in addition to a 12-gage pump shotgun and an M-1 carbine. Jonathan Wienke "1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future!" --Adolf Hitler "46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. ...Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government." --The 29 Palms Combat Arms Survey http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/Palms.htm 1935 Germany = 1996 U.S.? Key fingerprint = 30 F9 85 7F D2 75 4B C6 BC 79 87 3D 99 21 50 CB

1 0

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids
by Vinnie Moscaritolo 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim, I understand you are pissed about what's going on in society but this really isnt a great strategy; >Personally, I think all folks should be armed at all times in their homes. >Those who aren't are taking their chances. doesn't this make you a prisoner of sorts... it is not healthy to go through long periods of time in orange alert. this might sound macho but it's impracticle. > My personal choice is a Heckler >& Koch USP .45. loaded with Federal Golden Sabres, a hollowpoint round that >has a 92% one-shot stop rate, with adequate penetration through Kevlar >vests (typically worn by BATF raiders). >Fortunately, though KTW ammo is no longer available to "marks" (= >civilians), .45 ACP +P does a pretty good job. Certain +P .357 Magnum >rounds are even better penetrators, but recoil and muzzle blast is pretty >severe with these loads.) Your choice of weapon is admirable, but I would suggest that something more akin to Glaser safety slugs, SW.40 or .45 would be better. with proper training you can perform an upward stitch, legs first. the point is the Glaser won't pentrate the walls and nail your neighbors. The +P penetration is way to strong and most likely to pass through. A scatergun is generaly a better weapon for home defense. there is something about looking down a 12 guage that changes your mind, Ninja suit or not. Besides this kind of strategy is better used on gangsta types. >I may die, but I hope I can take at least two of them with me. pretty dumb attitude, I would also profess that One Live Tim May, even in Jail is worth more to the protection of freedom than one martyred nekid hippy. getting into a gunfight with an entry team that has had much more practice than you can only lead to one conclusion, really the only protection from these Ninja's is through some form of covenant community. All joking aside that what Bo Gritz was really trying to do in Idaho, build a place where your neighbor watches each others back. It doesnt mater whether your agree with his politics or not, the point is he has an workable idea, Now couple that with redundant instant communication..the kind that is hard to jam. hmm imagine what Waco would have been like if the Branch Davidians: 1) were not morons. 2) knew how to use the news media 3) had redundant, spread spectrum, satilite, and underground comms into the net. This equals instant net coverage, to rival CNN. It makes for a hard target.Armed with your Militia-Mailer(tm) the strong crypto edition and live video, these folks would never consider getting near you. In some ways we already have one now, there are quite a few Cypher-punks out there, and it's pretty easy to get the word out. Historicaly folks like BATF prefer softer targets, they are safer. Ever wonder why doesnt the Reno squad hit the crack houses..well thats kind of dangerous, these folks know what they are doing and the cost to raid them can be very expensive in lives. And what do you get when your done, another well payed judge simply lets em out again.. It's also clear that there is another manufactured arms race going on, this time instead of Communism it's the "war on some drugs" It is costing us an incredable amount of tax dollars, it fucks with our freedoms, and produces limited results. This war also has the side-effect of producing a general feeling of disenfrancisement among the very citizens it is designed to protect. Folks like Her Klinton, piss off the the American people, when on one hand they spout rhetoric about how drugs are bad, and on the other hand condone them. Fighting back through firepower is unlikely to acheive the goal you want, It endangers innocent (if there are any left) folks and leaves you looking like a HCI poster child. I can see it now, "Crazed Naked Hippy Dies in battle with Federal Officers, linked to ITAR regulated Munitions factory". A better approach is to disarm and expose these bozos for what they are, and for christ sakes get out there and VOTE... dammit... and get your friends to VOTE.. But what do I know.. I just play a lawyer in Bob's rants.. Vinnie Moscaritolo "Law - Samoan Style" http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/ Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A

2 1

MSNBC and cookies
by Joel McNamara 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In attempting to check out different Net media coverage of TWA 800, it appears the msnbc.com site won't let you in without a cookie. Repeated cookie cancels with Navigator 3.0 drop you into an indigestive loop of the server continuing to try to force feed you cookies. When you finally click OK, you get in. Am I spacing, or is this the first site anyone's stumbled on that requires a cookie for access? I've never been shut out of a site for canceling a cookie. The first cookie request does have a user ID field. If the server (or client) isn't misbehaving, this seems like a wee bit of a privacy issue. I tried accessing the page (http://www.msnbc.com) on 7/18/96 around 9:15 PM PDT. Anyone care to confirm this. Joel

6 5

Filtering out Queers is OK
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:29 PM 7/18/96, Cerridwyn Llewyellyn wrote: >I am not saying that a private entity doesn't or shouldn't have the Legal >Right to censor, but I am saying that censorship of any form by any >entity is a Bad Thing and the public (not the government, mind) should >fight it on all fronts. This, in my mind, is the only reason to be >dismayed by the decision on the CDA. It was found that the government >shouldn't censor on the Internet because there were forms of Corporate >censorship available. It would have truely been a great day if the >decision had been that the government shouldn't censor on the Internet >because censorship is wrong. Filtering is not "wrong," Cerridwyn, it is a rational response to garbage being spewed constantly. I filter lots of items. I read "Scientific American" and "The Economist" because they filter (or "censor," in the sense some are objecting to here) nonsense about "queer rights" and "peircing fashions," to name but a few things I have no interest in hearing about. If I had kids, I'd make sure that lots of negative memes were kept away from them until they reached an age where it no longer mattered, where there views are already basically set. I see nothing wrong in this. Anyone who disagrees is, of course, free to set his filters differently, but not to insist that my filters be changed. And the government is not free to pass any laws about what filter sites can and can't do. Unfortunately, I think many on this list are so taken by "liberalistic" notions that they think the State needs to intervene to stop me from filtering my son's access to "The Joys of Queer Sex." (As a libertarian, I really don't care what sexual practices others practice, so long as I am not forced to either fund or witness their practices. And so long as I am free to filter out their practices as I see fit, including for my minor children and/or members of my household.) >That is another problem, not the Real Problem. The Real Problem is that >parents are scared to have to explain to children why something they've >seen is wrong or bad. They are afraid to teach their children their >beliefs and values, so instead would rather just filter everything that >conflicts with those beliefs, so that they believe it by default. This is Some parents simply get tired of spending time each night trying to undo the propaganda taught in many public school, such as books like "I Have Two Mommies." Many of these parents eventually give up and put their kids in religious or private schools (even though they continue to pay taxes for schools their own children are no longer using). Queers are, as far as I'm concerned, perfectly free to practice their AIDS-spreading practices to any and all receptive anuses they can find, but I eschew this lifestyle and will fight to the death for this right to avoid their practices from being forced on me or my children (if I had any, which I don't). I think of AIDS as "evolution in action." Retroviruses which have existed for millenia now find new vectors for spreading in our population. I cry no tears for those dying of AIDS, and work to reduce to tax dollars spent on such things as "AIDS research." Let those who introduced the new vector pay for the research. What do you call ten million AIDS deaths? You figure it out. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

8 11

********Apology**********
by Charles Senescall 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To the dozens of people subject to a careless error on my part and who would have received bounced mail from me I apologise. I have fixed the error. Sorry.

1 0

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids
by Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Timothy C. May wrote: > I wonder when and how raids in the U.S. moved from the "Come out with your > hands up" verbal announcement (for the cases that needed more than a knock > on the door) to this blast-in-the-doors approach, where the raiders are > dressed in "tactical black" and are wearing black Nomex hoods and carrying > MP-5s and blast any "perp" who looks at them cross-eyed? If people decide that they are going to permit widespread ownership of guns then these tactics are inevitable. They are rare in the UK because gun ownership is relatively rare. I find this type of talk typical wishy washy libertarian twaddle. There are dangerous people arround besides the government and the government is the only agency that is going to protect society from them. If you don't like living in a country where the police are armed to the teeth then move to the UK where there are very few armed police. Of course you will find that the price of freedom of mind is a minor restriction on your personal freedom, you won't be allowed a weapon either but that is the tradeoff. If you want to own guns then you should accept the fact that you risk having your head blown off in the middle of the night by a SWAT team. Just as the car has introduced the risk of being killed in a trafic accident the gun has introduced new risks. If society dosen't like the risks then it can opt to ban the technology. If you want to own a gun because you have some kind of personality problem and you need to prop up your ego then Phill

8 14

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

17 Dec '03

Hello! Sorry for the off topic. I want to ask how to install Netscape3.0b5a under NT. I keep getting "Netscape is unable to locate the server: home.netscape.com. The server does not have a DNS entry." Thanks

1 0

Periodic Mix-to-DOS Port Inquiry
by kdf＠gigo.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(Please reply via netmail - I haven't regular list access.) Is Mixmaster ported to DOS yet? Thanks... -- : Fidonet: John Erland 1:203/8055.12 .. speaking for only myself. : Internet: kdf(a)gigo.com

1 0

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . >Nope, not true. Say what you will about California, but the one >thing it did right was pass a law that said anyone found in your >house at night is presumptively a threat to which you may respond >with deadly force. Shoot on sight, in other words. I find it hard to believe "anyone". If "anyone" happens to be law enforcement, as has been proven again and again: yer screwed no matter what (either dead or in jail forever). //cerridwyn//

2 1

Re: MSNBC and cookies
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:25 AM 7/19/96, Joel McNamara wrote: >In attempting to check out different Net media coverage of TWA 800, it >appears the msnbc.com site won't let you in without a cookie. Repeated >cookie cancels with Navigator 3.0 drop you into an indigestive loop of the >server continuing to try to force feed you cookies. When you finally click >OK, you get in. > >Am I spacing, or is this the first site anyone's stumbled on that requires a >cookie for access? I've never been shut out of a site for canceling a >cookie. The first cookie request does have a user ID field. If the server >(or client) isn't misbehaving, this seems like a wee bit of a privacy issue. > >I tried accessing the page (http://www.msnbc.com) on 7/18/96 around 9:15 PM >PDT. Anyone care to confirm this. Microsoft and GE, the parent corporation of NBC, are participants in the FBI's "Web Awareness Program." Like the FBI's "Library Awareness Program," which tracked which books were being checked out by which patrons, the Web Awareness Program tracks user interests at Web sites. The WAP has already allowed the FBI and other intelligence agencies to check up on several people who appeared to have an unusual interest in the TWA 800 case. (Don't spend too much time in certain sites, friends.) --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:27 AM 7/19/96, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: >Sandy Sandfort wrote: >> >> > If you had a metal door, you would have enough time to wake up >> > and assess the situation. >> >> This is good advice though. Ironically, the only person I know >> with such a door is an ex-cop. Who should know better? > >That was the essense of my letter. The problem of Tim's approach is that >he has no time to react to a situation. The intruders will kill him >faster than he will be able to shoot. Look, I took this discussion to private e-mail with Igor earlier today, figuring the rest of you had already gotten my basic point in my main article and did not need further explanations. However, as Igor is imputing motives and plans to me, I have to comment. First, as I explained to Igor in e-mail, my home has _multiple_ (7 or 8) windows on the ground floor, several (3) sliding glass doors, and a couple of outside doors. The expense of fortifying each to Igor-recommended, Ninja-resistant levels would be quite high. (And I have seen houses with bars on all the windows...not a pretty sight, and not something I moved to my hill to turn around and imprison myself with. Not only are such bars ugly, they are expensive. And a potential fire hazard, as several cases have shown; people have been trapped in burning homes, unable to unlock the bars.) Second, and in line with Sandy's comments, I am quite aware--and quite careful--when visitors or guests are staying in my home. The scenario of my not realizing a noisemaker is one of my guests is implausible. In any case, most of the time I have no guests. Those who train with guns understand the dangers, the risks, and the proper handling of situations. Third, there are no plausible scenarios for "someone peaceful who entered your home with good intentions." If someone is in my home, uninvited and without my knowledge, the law in California and in most other states says that I am justified in firing. Period. I don't have to read him his rights, I don't have to ask if his intentions are peaceful, I don't have to have proof that he plans to shoot me. All I have to have is reasonable fear that I or my family/guests could be in danger. (The exact legal wording is something like this, but may be slightly different.) I know of few if any cases where a prowler was shot in a darkened house--or even during daylight--and any successful prosecution or lawsuit resulted. Fourth, the huge increase in "home invasions" in recent years should cause anyone to stop and ponder self-protection. ("Home invasion" is the practice of a gang of robbers hitting a house hard and fast, tying up or shooting the occupants, and then ransacking the place for anything they can carry. Often the occupants are shot execution-style.) Cops are not likely to be of much help. Fifth, when intruders, robbers, wandering drunks, and home invaders think there is no chance of a homeowner defending himself, crime rates tend to be high. In communities of the West where large percentages of homeowners have shotguns and assorted handguns, the crime rate appears to be much lower than in "disarmed" places back East. (We could argue the statistics on this til the cows come home, and I don't plan to. Talk.politics.guns is the place.) >Also, do not forget that if you sleep at night, your eyes will not be >used to bright light. Thus, an intruder with a bright flashlight would >be able to make you almost blind (and yes, you can keep the flashlight >away from your body). Your point being? I have no idea if intruders are planning to use flashlights to blind victims, but I rather doubt it. The nature of the most common intruder-defender situation is that the intruder typically does not want to awaken the defender...indeed, he tries to strike when he thinks the defender is away. (And most cases of intruders killing the defenders is when the defenders surprise the intruders.) Obviously there are all kinds of scenarios, but I'm skeptical that flashlights are a useful strategem for either side to count on. (I am thinking about getting a ultra-bright flashlight, though.) >I of course have no idea about Tim's accommodations, but in my apartment >it takes about one second to break into my door if you have a heavy axe. >Then three seconds after you break into the door you are in my bedroom and >can shoot at me. Would a gun under my pillow help? I don't think so. The good news for we defenders, and this applies to both the gun case and the hypothesized "flashlight" case is that most intruders are poorly trained in gun-handling, are armed with fairly wimpy guns (e.g., .38s), have practiced very little, and rarely carry high-power flashlights (such as the extremely bright "Sure-Fire" tactical flashlights). Cops are, of course, another story. The point being that a citizen who practices at the range, firing at least 500 rounds a year or so at combat-range targets, is usually _much_ better-prepared to win a firefight with a street punk carrying a .38 or .25 he's never fired before. (Ninjas are another story, of course.) (However, to a person who is unarmed, a shot from a .38 or a .25, or even a .22, can result in death.) >Now if I had a good door, I would have tim to wake up, cock the gun, >maybe call for help, and so on. Quite a different situation. Yeah, fine, you've now made your "good door" point several times, here and in private mail to me. So get a "good door" already! (BTW, my door is a solid-core heavy door, with Schlage lock and deadbolt, so it ain't wimpy. Ninjas have special tools to zap even such doors, but, frankly, I'd expect them to come in through the windows. As I said, I don't plan to spend thousands of dollars installing Lexan windows and bars, for various reasons. And windows are almost always the point of entry for burglars, not crashing through the front door.) >If you do not believe me, refer to the rec.guns FAQ. It has all >been discussed there. Puh-leese! As Perry would say, don't teach Grandpa how to suck eggs. I've been shooting since 1974 (not counting childhood target practice) and am pretty well-versed in such things. >I am not asking Tim to get rid of his gun -- I am merely suggesting >how to _improve_ security. Yeah, but you have a one-track mind ("get a good door"). And bringing in all the nonsense about bad dreams and sleepwalkers and lawsuits by people strolling through living rooms for "peaceful purposes" (though not invited by the owner!) and the like...this set of nonsense can only be interpreted in the context of your thinking that having guns in a house is dangerous. Do as you wish, Igor. Please, by all means, replace your apartment door with a heavier one, even a steel-core one. But don't conflate this advice with nonsense about dreams, sleepwalkers, getting arrested for defending a home, and suchlike. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: New Infowarfare Panel
by Llywarch Hen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I'm certainly not saying "information warfare" is impossible--for example, >I did some work in the late 70s for DARPA on knocking out satellites with >particle beam weapons. Specifically ... There is an interesting document at http://www.rand.org/publications/electronic/. _Strategic Information Warfare: A New Face of War_, by Roger C. Molander, Andrew S. Riddile, and Peter A. Wilson. -- Llywarch Hen

1 0

Re: "address verification databases"? (was: Netscape download...)
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Personally, I don't mind being in a data base of people interested in products with strong crypto. (For another one, ask majordomo(a)toad.com.) BTW, I must be lucky, I down loaded it on the first try. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The Internet may fairly be | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | regarded as a never-ending | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | worldwide conversation. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

2 1

Re: "address verification databases"?
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:57 PM 7/17/96 -0700, Tim May wrote: >At 9:45 PM 7/17/96, Jeff Weinstein wrote: > >> Because we have not yet been able to obtain the address verification >>databases that we need for Canada. There is someone working on >>tracking this down right now. When we get the proper database we >>will add access to canada. >> >> --Jeff > >Jeff, can you tell us anything more about what these "address verification >databases" are? > >For example, are they derived from government sources? Census data? (Naw, >can't be, for at least two obvious reasons). Voting records? (Naw.) Credit >card purchases? (??) I followed the links and explored the web site of the "address verification" provider ( http://www.abii.com ). The data they have about me is outdated (by at least a year) and apparently derived from a phone book or directory assistance. I picked up a copy of "The Net" magazine at the store tonight because it's got an article listing several of these Web-accessible address/phone databases. The article doesn't say anything especially fascinating but it does list three such sites: http://www.abii.com/lookupusa/adp/peopsrch.htm http://www.searchamerica.com/ http://www.switchboard.com/ -- Greg Broiles |"Post-rotational nystagmus was the subject of gbroiles(a)netbox.com |an in-court demonstration by the People http://www.io.com/~gbroiles |wherein Sgt Page was spun around by Sgt |Studdard." People v. Quinn 580 NYS2d 818,825.

1 0

Re: Filtering out Queers is OK
by Bert-Jaap Koops 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'd rather say, filtering out TCM is OK. Bert-Jaap

1 0

Re: Netscape download requirements
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I realize you're probably overloaded with email/etc, but as you don't read c'punks, I'll take a chance with a personal note anyway... >> Well one 'ITAR gangsta' can alwas upload the linux version to a >> 'liberated ftp site'. >Great. Convince the government to withdraw our permission >and never to give it again while the current laws stand. >Please don't do this. Allow the government to think that we think it has the right to give us their permission and we've lost everything. The government should need OUR permission, not the other way 'round. To give the government the impression that we will bow to it's power on these matters may be financially beneficial for a corporation, but is unacceptable and humiliating for free individuals. >I'd bet on the first. Why screw with this? We worked hard >to make this possible and you want to ruin it. Sheesh. Because freedom doesn't come in degrees, it's all or nothing. >"I hate the government so I'll blow up a federal building >and then the FBI will get more money and attention and >power and, um, that'll show 'em, er, ah....." Exporting crypto-systems and killing people is comparing apples and hand grenades. Please come up with a relevant analogy. >For those of you who think some of our info requests go too far: well, >my position to the US was: I want to do a download. I'll do what it >takes. Given all the ITAR vagueness and total lack of case law, I >think both sides did very well. While I don't agree with the While I am one of those who believe your info requests do go too far, I also appreciate the fact that you wouldn't be able to "do a download" without it. I thank you for your efforts on these fronts, and have two things to say regarding: 1) Please don't chastise individuals who take direct action and use civil disobediance as a measure to change bad laws and policies (ie by making your companies software available internationally). When done on a mass scale, the long-term benefits FAR outweigh the short term consequences. While you as a corporation find it much more difficult to take such actions, as they would most likely ruin your corporation, individuals acting in this capacity cannot be ruined quite so readily. 2) Please don't misuse the information you gain by logging all your network traffic. I like using Navigator, and would hate to have to give up using it due to some breach of trust by Netscape regarding someone's personal info. >wrong place to wage battle. Rather than attack some odd piece >of enforcement, participate in the debate over the regulations >themselves. Strides are being made. This is a good time for >your voice to be heard. If you don't like this mechanism, don't >use it. It's your choice. I agree mostly. I would rephrase, however, to say: In addition to attacking odd pieces of enforcement, participate in the debate over the regulations themselves. Besides, contrary to your gist, this is probably one of the most prominent pieces of enforcement, and therefore a very logical candidate for attack. //cerridwyn//

8 18

GOPHERD FOR SOLARIS 2.5
by dani＠193.144.104.4 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi!, IŽm looking for a gopher server for Solaris 2.5, IŽve tried in the Sunsite, but succesless. Does anybody know where else may I find a gopher server for Solaris 2.4?. Thanks in advance. Danny. dani(a)gva.es _/_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ Daniel Díaz Luengo. dani(a)gva.es _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/ _/ _/ Consellerìa de Presidència _/ _/ _/_/_/ _/ _/_/ _/ C/Micalet nº5. _/_/_/_/ _/ _/ _/ _/ _/_/_/ Valencia-(Spain) (96)-386-38-57

1 0

Re: MSNBC and cookies
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Microsoft and GE, the parent corporation of NBC, are participants in the >FBI's "Web Awareness Program." Like the FBI's "Library Awareness Program," >which tracked which books were being checked out by which patrons, the Web >Awareness Program tracks user interests at Web sites. > >The WAP has already allowed the FBI and other intelligence agencies to >check up on several people who appeared to have an unusual interest in the >TWA 800 case. > >(Don't spend too much time in certain sites, friends.) This is interesting. Where can one find reliable sources to verify this information? (The existance of a WAP, and the use of it in the TWA 800 case). //cerridwyn//

1 0

Re: Reasonable validation of a software package
by David Sternlight 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:12 PM -0700 7/18/96, Carl Ellison wrote: > >The problem people overlook is that a CA binds a public key to a name but >the name is in the CA's name space. For me, a verifier, to derive any >value from a certificate binding (key,name), the name has to be in *my* >name space. > >If there were such a thing as a global namespace meaningful to everyone, >then we could both use it. That's the X.500 falacy/pipe-dream. Think of the common name on a certificate as if it were a first-come, first-served serial number of alphanumeric form. There's no reason to believe that John Smith is YOUR John Smith. Your John Smith might tell you he's John Smith 37. It's kinda like vanity license plates. The alternative is every privacy fan's nightmare--embedded SSNs or some such in certificates. Some of the problems, of course, will be of the users' own making and there they get to pay their money and take their choice. What I mean is that you can optionally include or suppress your e-mail address in Type I certificates, and real address in Type IIs. If you include it you improve the chances of being the "right" John Smith someone is after. If you prefer privacy you will also be less accessible. I see nothing unusual about that--after all, people with unlisted phone numbers are ultimately inaccessible except (pretty much) to those to whom they give the info. > >The fact is, no global name space could be held in one human's mind, so >there's no way a global name space could be meaningful to me. Nor is there any reason it should be. It isn't, now. > >So, to use a certificate from a CA, I need to map a name from its name >space (DN) into a name in my name space (nickname). Every time I've looked >at that process, I've had to have a secure channel over which to learn from >the person I call by that nickname what DN he goes by. Why does it have to be a secure channel? Why can't it be published (for instance by including the address in the certificate)? >If I have that >secure channel, then he could tell me his public key fingerprint ove that >cnnel -- and I wouldn't need the CA. Why wouldn't you use the certificate to bind the public key to the name and address? What need would there be for fingerprint communication? How is this different from 20 John Smiths in the phone book at 20 different street addresses? I'd better know the address of the John Smith I want if I'm to get his phone number from a directory. Note that I'm not attacking what you say. There's clearly something you're getting at that I don't understand--since you post sensible stuff (as far as I recall). Help me out here. David

1 0

Re: US versions of Netscape now available
by Alex de Joode 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In article <199607190709.IAA00119(a)server.test.net> you wrote: : Jeff Weinstein <jsw(a)netscape.com> writes: : > Adam Back wrote: : > > Presumably as this latest netscape beta is freely distributable, once : > > it's out it will be on ftp.unimi.dsi.it, ftp.ox.ac.uk, etc, etc. : > : > Just a minor nit. No netscape software is freely distributable. : > The license agreement does not allow people who download it : > to redistribute it. : Oh dear! So I am incorrect... but wait, what about people like : sunsite northern europe (Imperial College London: ftp.doc.ic.ac.uk) : who already have a license to be a Netscape mirror site. Would this : license allow them to distribute this latest 128 bit netscape beta : (were it to leak)? I would like to know what Netscape's position on the above mentioned scenario is .. (Uploading "possibly" received 128 bit binaries to official netscape mirrors outside the US, that is) (guess why ...) bEST Regards, -- -AJ-

2 1