December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: PICS is not censorship
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:15 PM 12/7/96 -0800, Thaddeus J. Beier wrote: >I don't think that PICS will be mandated any more than those two standards >are mandated, perhaps I'm naive, but I think that the social conventions >will work in this case. Let's put the question if something like PICS will be mandated aside for the moment. Do you agree that sites that deliberately mislabel their content, will eventually face legal action? If so, then PICS should not be considered truly voluntary. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/justforfun/prime.htm

3 2

take me off the list
by Bryondp＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

take me off the list

1 0

Re: The Science Generations
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bill Frantz wrote: > At 10:10 AM -0800 12/8/96, Dale Thorn wrote: > >The phrase "your beloved HPs" gives your hand away. > What hand? You appeared by your statements to be a lover of HP stuff. > I now find it was only from that era. > My of my hand is only to say that people DID use them other things for > real business uses. Your posts appeared to say that was impossible. > However, as Bob Hettinger says, "Reality is not optional." First, let me apologize for something I try never to do. When someone sends private email, if I put it to the list I should remove the sender's name (if no permission given). I still use HP personal computers, since (despite their problems) they are still the most effective at running for a long time and processing a lot of data. As far as showing your hand, I find it interesting how many erstwhile serious users will nonetheless wave away any discussion of the specific problems computers have (particularly the early ones), which I can only relate to denial. In the words of Consumer Reports back in the early-mid 1980s, "These electronic items are the least reliable and most problematic things we've ever tested" (quote approximate). I never said it was impossible to use an Apple (or early IBM) for serious work of *some* kind, i.e., simple spreadsheet work. What I said and I hope it came through is this: If you were using an IBM mainframe in the period 1980-1982 or thereabouts, you would have what I call unreliable equipment, but, you would probably also have IBM person(s) on site to keep the stuff running. On the other hand, IBM PC users (outside of large corporate sites) didn't necessarily have that luxury, therefore, if they tried to do what I could easily do with HP personal computer equipment, their IBM PCs would die and have to be fixed "by the dealer", with more consequent unreliability added. How many people have you heard of who could run databases on an IBM or Apple II floppy system, entering data with fairly large files and several indexes, and searching and printing the data almost continuously? Those people who know what I'm talking about should have a good laugh on that one.

1 0

Re: PICS is not censorship
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:52 PM 12/8/96 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >Let's put the question if something like PICS will be mandated aside for >the moment. Do you agree that sites that deliberately mislabel their >content, will eventually face legal action? If so, then PICS should not be >considered truly voluntary. Self-labeling is useless without regulation and punishment - there's too much incentive to treat the label like a marketing tool. My hunch is that courts will never allow compulsory labeling at the level that most people would want - my bet is that labeling re visual depictions of nudity/sex can be mandated, but that labeling re editorial/political content can't be. (I'm not saying I think a fair reading of the Constitution says that, I'm saying I think that's the compromise that judges will come up with.) And labeling that keeps kids from seeing female breasts but lets them find out about where to get abortions, or how to do their own at home*, or that lets kids see home pages about how it's OK to be gay or a nazi or a nerd or a creationist or a Republican or whatever isn't going to serve the needs of the people who want to impose a strict content-control regime on their kids, or on the net. And while my faith in the judiciary is pretty weak, I just don't think they'll go so far as to say that the Constitution allows the government to force people to put subject labels on their web pages. *(circa 1991, there was a videotape circulating in keep-abortion-legal activist circles which described and showed how to perform an early-term abortion using relatively simple technology (e.g., suction) - I can't seem to remember the medical term for the procedure, but the tape was intended, a la PGP, to make the technology available while it was still legal to discuss it. Someone must have ported this video to Quicktime by now.) Third party labeling/rating is a much superior solution because it allows the labelers to examine data with a mindset compatible with the mindset of the customer, which source-labeling, nor automated filtering, will never do. Here's to hoping that regulators/legislators won't get around to imposing a source-labeling scheme before experience is able to show them that it's neither necessary nor sufficient to reach their goals. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. |

1 0

Mykotronx update
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Remember Mykotronx, makers of the Clipper Chip? Apparently, they were bought in 1995 by Rainbow Technologies, http://www.rnbo.com/, who make dongles and crypto accelerator boards. Some quotes from their web page: http://www.rnbo.com/mykoweb/geninfo.htm Headquarted in Torrance, California, Mykotronx employs approximately 110 people. The company was founded in 1979 as Myko Enterprises; it incorporated and became Mykotronx, Inc. in 1987. In 1995, Mykotronx became a part of Rainbow Technologies Inc. (NASDAQ: RNBO), a world leader for intellectual property protection. .... Anticipating higher production volumes, in October 1995, Mykotronx opened a new facility that has dramatically enhanced its capacity for testing and programming cryptographic microprocessors. The facility expands annual programming and test capability to more than 1.2 million devices, with potential expansion to 5 million units. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk # (If this is posted to cypherpunks, I'm currently lurking from fcpunx, # so please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

2 1

To all IETF attendees
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Any Cypherpunks attending this weeks IETF meeting in San Jose are encouraged to send me some email if you want to get together. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/justforfun/prime.htm

1 0

Re: PICS is not censorship
by thad＠hammerhead.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.netcom.com> says: > ..Do you agree that sites that deliberately mislabel their > content, will eventually face legal action? If so, then PICS should not be > considered truly voluntary. I think that most of the PICS labels that are on web pages will be those generated by scripts from groups like RSACi. (http://www.rsac.org) These groups have contracts that require you to not lie when you fill out their questionnaires, and if you do lie, you are in breach of contract and should expect to be sued by them. These companies should create a cryptographic signature for their labels, I'm really surprised that RSACi doesn't do that yet; I don't know if other PICS labelers do. If you just make up your own PICS label, then I can't believe that you would have any problems saying whatever you want. Of course, it's likely that most of the Surfwatch type programs will have options to block all pages without a well-known label attached to it, and this will probably be the default in a couple of years. If this is the way it works out, then I'd consider this voluntary. I think that this is the way it will work out, too. thad -- Thaddeus Beier thad(a)hammerhead.com Visual Effects Supervisor 408) 287-6770 Hammerhead Productions http://www.got.net/people/thad

1 0

Re: PICS is not censorship
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:18 PM 12/8/96 -0800, Thaddeus J. Beier wrote: >I think that most of the PICS labels that are on web pages will be those >generated by scripts from groups like RSACi. (http://www.rsac.org) >These groups have contracts that require you to not lie when you fill out their >questionnaires, and if you do lie, you are in breach of contract and should expect >to be sued by them. So what is going to happen if I generate one of their tags from scratch without filling out their questionnaire? Are they going to sue me, claiming that they own an html tag? Can one own an html tag? -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred Make your mark in the history of mathematics. Use the spare cycles of your PC/PPC/UNIX box to help find a new prime. http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/justforfun/prime.htm

1 0

Re: PICS is not censorship
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:37 PM 12/8/96 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >>>> At 07:18 PM 12/8/96 -0800, Thaddeus J. Beier wrote: >I think that most of the PICS labels that are on web pages will be those >generated by scripts from groups like RSACi. (http://www.rsac.org) >These groups have contracts that require you to not lie when you fill out their >questionnaires, and if you do lie, you are in breach of contract and should expect >to be sued by them. So what is going to happen if I generate one of their tags from scratch without filling out their questionnaire? Are they going to sue me, claiming that they own an html tag? Can one own an html tag? "Owning" an html tag is oversimplifying things; but claiming that you've been rated a certain way by a certain group (if you haven't) could potentially create fraud, trademark, and (maybe) copyright problems - an easy analogy is to the "UL" and "Good Housekeeping" symbols displayed on some consumer goods. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. |

1 0

Protect against physical theft of the harddisk ??
by Pavel Korensky 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello, I have one problem which I would like to consult with you. I need to protect the data on the computer harddisk against physical theft. Current situation: Computer with several harddisks - approx. 9 GB. On this computer, the following OS are used: Linux, DOS, Windows NT. The data on this computer must be accessible from all operating systems. Encryption of files must be transparent to user and encryption algorithm must be "strong". Because I am not able to find any disk encryption software which is able to run on all these platforms, I decided to use the following temporary solution: Add one more computer with Linux OS. On this computer, there will be only a small root partition with necessary Linux components. All other disk space will be encrypted with IDEA, using the /dev/loop. This machine will be some kind of secure file server. On the second machine, where the user works, there will be partitions with operating systems, necessary utilities and the TCP/IP stack for DOS/Windows, NT and Linux. The data and application disks will be mounted via NFS and user will work with files from file server. The computers will be interconnected with Fast Ethernet. This mini-network is NOT connected to the Internet, so the NFS (in)security should not be a problem. Also, both computers will be placed in the same room (distance approx. 3 m), so there should be no problem with tapping/data capturing on the Fast Ethernet connection. I have the following questions. Can anybody see some major security hole in this system ? How fast will be this system ? Anybody has any idea if there is some more sophisticated solution for this problem ? Anybody heard about some strong disk encryption which is able to rund under Windows NT, Linux and DOS ? It seems that the Win NT are the major problem. I am not able to find any disk encryption for NT. Anybody is able to port Secure File System to Windows NT ? I am trying to port this program under Linux, but I am not the NT system programmer. Thanx for any comments, help, ideas etc. Best regards PavelK -- **************************************************************************** * Pavel Korensky (pavelk(a)dator3.anet.cz) * * DATOR3 Ltd., Modranska 1895/17, 143 00 Prague 4, Czech Republic * * PGP key fingerprint: 00 65 5A B3 70 20 F1 54 D3 B3 E4 3E F8 A3 5E 7C * ****************************************************************************

1 0

A Message From Sue
by sue1968＠ix17.ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Please excuse this intrusion into your mailbox, but I would like to tell you about something which will be of interest to you. About a year ago, I purchased two personalized children's books for my kids and they have been such an incredible hit with them that the parents of several of their friends have gone out and purchased the books for their own kids. I've also ended up buying several more as gifts. This gave me the idea of becoming a distributor for these great books. The books are all made with highly durable, hard cover bindings and have tons of full color illustrations. Your child's name and the names of their friends are woven into the story and appear on every page. They not only hear the story, they're actually a part of it and no other book has inspired my children to want to read more than these books have. Whether it's for your own child or for another child you care about, these books make the perfect gift, especially with the holiday season approaching. It's impossible for me to describe these books well enough to do them justice, so instead, I would like to invite you to visit my web site at: http://www.steppingstones.com <A HREF="http://www.steppingstones.com">Click here to go to the website www.steppingstones.com</A> There you will find pictures of each of the books I offer and a more complete description. I'm so sure you'll love these books as much as I do, that I'm offering a 100% money back guarantee if you're not completely satisfied. We are currently offering a Holiday Special: For every book you order at the regular price of only $12.95 you can order another for 1/2 price!!! In order to claim this special offer, you must include Invitation # 192 on your order form. Note: All orders for Christmas must be placed by Wednesday December 18th in order to ensure on time delivery!!!!!!!!!! Thanks for taking the time to read this. If you are not interested, please pass it on to a friend who might be, or simply hit delete. Have a great day!!! Sue :-)

4 3

Re: Please post Eudora PGP plugin URL
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:52 PM 12/8/96 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >>If you want to be automatically notified of new versions, send e-mail to >>gt6525c(a)prism.gatech.edu with the subject of "eppi news", and the following >>message body: > >Just FYI, while the plugin is still available, email to this address has >been bouncing for weeks. It is therefore impossible to submit bug reports >or subscribe to the EPPI mailing list. If somebody on this list knows the >current address of the EPPI author, please post it. The current address of the author of the Eudora plug-in is Damon Gallaty <dgal(a)cad.gatech.edu>. I have been coorisponding with him on a couple of odd problems with the software. (Implemenation issues more than bugs.) He has been very responsive. (In fact, I need to send him another bug report tonight about failing to deal with line wrap in signatures.) So far the set of plug-ins have been very useful. I have been pretty happy with it so far. (It does have the problem of not word wrapping before applying the PGP sig and defaulting to the last key if you do not set one in config.txt.) All in all, worth the download. --- | "Spam is the Devil's toothpaste!" - stuart(a)teleport.com | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com|

1 0

List of reliable remailers
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = "<remail(a)miron.vip.best.com> cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"mix"} = "<mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"replay"} = "<remailer(a)replay.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{'alpha'} = '<alias(a)alpha.c2.org> alpha pgp'; $remailer{'nymrod'} = '<nymrod(a)nym.jpunix.com> alpha pgp'; $remailer{"lead"} = "<mix(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"exon"} = "<remailer(a)remailer.nl.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"haystack"} = "<haystack(a)holy.cow.net> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"lucifer"} = "<lucifer(a)dhp.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"jam"} = "<remailer(a)cypherpunks.ca> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"winsock"} = "<winsock(a)rigel.cyberpass.net> cpunk pgp pgponly hash cut ksub reord"; $remailer{'nym'} = '<config(a)nym.alias.net> newnym pgp'; $remailer{"balls"} = "<remailer(a)huge.cajones.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"squirrel"} = "<mix(a)squirrel.owl.de> cpunk mix pgp pgponly hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"middle"} = "<middleman(a)jpunix.com> cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; $remailer{'cyber'} = '<alias(a)alias.cyberpass.net> alpha pgp'; $remailer{"dustbin"} = "<dustman(a)athensnet.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek mix reord middle ?"; $remailer{'weasel'} = '<config(a)weasel.owl.de> newnym pgp'; $remailer{"death"} = "<x(a)deathsdoor.com> cpunk pgp hash latent post"; $remailer{"reno"} = "<middleman(a)cyberpass.net> cpunk mix pgp hash middle latent cut ek reord ?"; catalyst(a)netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura(a)replay.com is _not_ a remailer. remailer(a)crynwr.com is _not_ a remailer. There is no remailer at relay.com. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (cyber mix) (weasel squirrel) The alpha and nymrod nymservers are down due to abuse. However, you can use the nym or weasel (newnym style) nymservers. The cyber nymserver is quite reliable for outgoing mail (which is what's measured here), but is exhibiting serious reliability problems for incoming mail. The squirrel and winsock remailers accept PGP encrypted mail only. 403 Permission denied errors have been caused by a flaky disk on the Berkeley WWW server. This seems to be fixed now. The penet remailer is closed. Last update: Mon 9 Dec 96 6:45:04 PST remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- cyber alias(a)alias.cyberpass.net +***+**+*+** 32:58 99.98% jam remailer(a)cypherpunks.ca ************ 14:36 99.97% nym config(a)nym.alias.net ####***#*### :48 99.97% lucifer lucifer(a)dhp.com ++++++++++++ 38:32 99.96% lead mix(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu +++*+++-++-+ 1:00:18 99.93% middle middleman(a)jpunix.com -.---------- 4:01:26 99.93% reno middleman(a)cyberpass.net -.--------- 3:15:16 99.74% squirrel mix(a)squirrel.owl.de --+++-+++++ 1:40:17 99.68% dustbin dustman(a)athensnet.com __.-+++-++++ 7:14:49 99.66% weasel config(a)weasel.owl.de --+++-+++-+ 1:39:24 99.50% haystack haystack(a)holy.cow.net #** **#*#**+ 4:58 99.42% replay remailer(a)replay.com +**** *-- -* 1:22:47 99.41% exon remailer(a)remailer.nl.com #*#***#+#### 6:25 99.29% extropia remail(a)miron.vip.best.com -- -- .. -- 9:05:48 94.66% winsock winsock(a)rigel.cyberpass.net - - ----- 3:43:35 93.66% balls remailer(a)huge.cajones.com #**** 1:37:33 74.17% mix mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com ._.--++-. 8:37:03 71.73% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien

1 0

OECD crypto policy draft guidelines
by Robin Whittle 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There is an ad-hoc group of government representatives (called an "expert group" actually) working on an OECD set of cryptography policy guidelines. They have a big five day meeting coming up starting 12 December in Paris. A September draft of their guidelines was leaked and put on a WWW site in Austria: http://www.quintessenz.at/Netzteil/OECD/index.html as a Word 6 file. I got it, turned it into HTML and put it on my site with comments. http://www.ozemail.com.au/~firstpr Recently, someone from the OECD crypto secretariat emailed me indicating they had read my comments and found them reasonably constructive. I have since added more comments, which I emailed to the secretariate person. If anyone has something constructive to convey to them, email me and I will put you in touch with them. I understand there will be an article on the debate in the next weekly edition of The European newspaper. The people at Quintessenz apparently have a later draft which they are scanning and will put up on their site ASAP. - Robin . Robin Whittle . . http://www.ozemail.com.au/~firstpr firstpr(a)ozemail.com.au . . 11 Miller St. Heidelberg Heights 3081 Melbourne Australia . . Ph +61-3-9459-2889 Fax +61-3-9458-1736 . . Consumer advocacy in telecommunications, especially privacy . . . . First Principles - Research and expression - music, . . music industry, telecommunications . . human factors in technology adoption. . . . Real World Interfaces - Hardware and software, especially . . for music .

1 0

[Fwd: take me off the list]
by Rosario Family 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

me too samiam(a)coqui.net To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: take me off the list From: Bryondp(a)aol.com Date: Sun, 8 Dec 1996 19:47:48 -0500 Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com take me off the list

1 0

Malaysian Netropolis and Net-regs, from The Netly News
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1996 09:15:12 -0800 (PST) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Malaysian Netropolis and Net-regs, from The Netly News The Netly News December 9, 1996 http://netlynews.com/ The Malaysian Solution By Declan McCullagh (declan(a)well.com) My first thought when I arrived in Kuala Lumpur was that it was dirty, at least compared to whisper-clean Singapore, where I had just been. Yet the city was fully alive -- not just with hawker stalls but with a newfound sense of optimism. That's because Malaysia, long a sleepy jungle backwater, is carefully preparing an area just south of the capital to be the Asian technology center, a no-taxes-here free trade zone, the place to be for all things cyber. It will be patterned after Penang, an island off Malaysia's northwest coast that's home to one of the largest collections of chip manufacturers in the world. The way Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad describes it, fiber will line the streets of the $8 billion "Multimedia Super Corridor" and dollars will flow into the coffers of Western businesses that settle here. Malaysia is busy crafting a Netropolis. Dr. Tommi Chen, the CEO of asiapac.net, explains the government's plan to me over satay and bowls of chee cheong fun. We're waiting out the monsoon rain in one of the countless Malay-Chinese eateries in Petaling Jaya, a town about 15 miles from the capital, Kuala Lumpur. "This region is exploding," he says. "Everyone is competing to be the information-technology hub. The government is trying to attract the best to create another Silicon Valley." Sun Microsystems, Ernst & Young and Microsoft have already announced plans to shift Asian operations to this tropical city. That influx will doubtless be hastened in February when intellectual property and digital signature laws are set to be introduced. To attract firms, the government is unabashedly pro-business. "I think Malaysia will leapfrog other countries in the region as a business center," Chen says. "The prime minister and the deputy prime minister championed the Internet themselves." Yet just like everywhere else that embraces rapid datafication, a Net connection brings with it overseas ideas and values that alarm authorities in this strict Islamic state, which still refuses to sign the International Declaration of Human Rights and has a police force that can indefinitely detain individuals deemed a threat to national security. In a country where chaste kisses -- a tepid buss on the cheek! -- are chopped out of television broadcasts, what's a poor government censor to do when images from alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.pornstar flow through Malaysian cyberspace? The answer may lie in the history books. North of Singapore, south of Thailand, straddling the South China Sea, Malaysia was settled by the British in 1795. The country won its independence in 1957, but an internal Communist uprising quickly destablized the young government. Then, on May 13, 1969, members of a Chinese political party took to the streets of Kuala Lumpur to celebrate a strong showing in a parliamentary election. Malay-Chinese riots flared for four days and hundreds died. The government responded by taking extreme measures to reduce ethnic friction, echoes of which exist today in draconian laws punishing people (such as newspaper editors) who "incite" racial tension. In this atmosphere, Prime Minister Mahathir prospered. Once a critic of autocratic government, he dismantled the formerly independent judiciary after a court threatened his grip on power in 1987. His other censor-happy feats include once banning the Wall Street Journal and the Far East Economic Review. No viable opposition party exists. Lim Guan Eng, an opposition leader, is being tried for sedition. Local newspapers are uniformly pro-government. Issues of Western magazines with articles critical of Mahathir somehow never make it to newsstands. Malaysian netizens have a ready answer for these criticisms of their country. To them, Malaysia may not be ready for the kind of freedoms the West enjoys. "Most Asians see Westerners as being too liberal with too many things," a Chinese manager at a technology firm told me. The country's perception of liberty, I begin to understand, is seen through the lens of communist threats and the May 13 racial riots. With freedom, perhaps, comes instability, uncertainty... chaos. That's why Mahathir is faced with an exquisitely delicate balancing act: providing enough freedom to attract Western companies and American-educated workers accustomed to it, while meeting the demands of powerful Islamic fundamentalists who would put Senator Exon to shame. "The pornography laws exist. They will just extend these laws to the Net," says Chen. The rain has slowed to a light patter. We're almost ready to return to his office, across the street, where a score of 20-somethings work late into the night. He concludes: "Malaysia is Muslim. They have to do it -- they have no choice. They know there is no foolproof control, but they have to do it anyway." My next visit is to the office of Dr. Mohamed Awang Lah, the head of Jaring, the only other licensed and government-approved Internet provider in Malaysia. Like asiapac.net, Jaring is owned by the state. (Three illicit providers, however, apparently exist.) "We block about a hundred web sites, otherwise people complain," Awang Lah tells me. This, then, is the balancing act: "If we are too open, people complain. If we are too closed, people complain." This is an epiphany for me: the Notorious 100, presumably the same web sites blocked by the government of Singapore! It's a token gesture, not too much, not too little. In a lot of ways, it's a far better solution than the U.S. Congress's ham-handed Communications Decency Act, now on the Supreme Court's calendar. "The government will not regulate the Internet," Awang Lah says. "The only part we don't like, that is not acceptable to the culture, to the religion, is pornography... There are also some restrictions on religious content. But there is no intention to regulate the free flow of discussion." (Except for anti-Islam or anti-Mahathir criticisms, I'd wager.) Still, Malaysia seems to follow a pattern of strict laws and lax enforcement. Sure, sexually explicit materials may be banned by law. But just a block from my hotel in downtown Kuala Lumpur, I was able to buy three porn videos -- two American, one Japanese -- for 50 ringgit, or U.S. $7 each, from a sidewalk vendor. Perhaps there's some hope for the Net after all. ###

1 0

Re: The Science Generations
by Ryan Russell/SYBASE 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If I may offer another opinion... I ran a BBS for about three years straight off of floppies on an Apple ][+, without any hardware failures or disk problems. Ryan ---------- Previous Message ---------- To: frantz cc: cypherpunks From: dthorn @ gte.net (Dale Thorn) @ smtp Date: 12/06/96 07:48:16 PM Subject: Re: The Science Generations Bill Frantz wrote: > At 1:12 AM 12/6/96 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: > >I would guess that those who became and remained successful technically > >(as opposed to becoming "business people") were using HP computers and > >such in the 1970s. I for one was a heavy user then, and PETs, Apples, > >Radio Shack, etc. computers weren't reliable enough for serious work. > I guess those people using VisiCalc on the Apple ][ weren't doing serious > work :-). (Also the many small businesses using these early machines for > AR, Accounting etc.) Me, I was doing OS programming on IBM 370s. Let's talk about some real data processing. dBase II on CP/M computers (or certain proprietary hardware with adaptor cards), circa 1980-1982, would be a good example. If you had the right stuff, say, an HP-120 or HP-125, or even an 80 series with the adaptor, and HP floppy drives, you could process all day long for (years?) with scarcely a hitch. You try to put something like that on an Apple II with Apple floppies (using whatever software was available), and you couldn't do the job. The machine and/or drives would quit in a few days, if not the first day, and might even erase your diskettes in the process (a common occurrence in those days). In early 1985, just for fun, I had an HP-71 pocket computer hooked up to a LaserJet printer and a couple of HP portable floppies, and printed my store's databases on it. Multiple indexes, thousands of records, each index printed complete every day in separate copies for each salesman. I wouldn't dream of trying that with an IBM or Apple floppy system. Hard disks? I *never* heard of an HP microcomputer hard disk crash in those days, short of dropping the computer onto the floor while writing a file. We used to pull the wall plugs on our HP's while writing to a file, with no bad effect. Try that on an IBM or Apple circa <= 1985. Computer hardware? One thing I enjoyed doing for customers was pulling a RAM card out of an HP-86 while it was running a program, then forcing the card back into the slot. Usually pulling the card had no effect, then, putting it back in would generally reset the program. Surge protectors? Never sold one. Not needed with HP's then. An Apple II (like the other toy computers from 1975 to 1982) was a hobbyist computer, which required frequent cleaning and scrubbing internally to keep it running. A pencil eraser was a common tool... And let's not forget Apple and IBM attitudes: When I had HP's, if I ever needed service, HP did it themselves, professionally (using static mats etc.) and promptly. You wouldn't find Apple or IBM offering to repair their own microcomputers in those days (or ever). For good reason! Cost of service? HP's contracts were usually 3% to 5% of the item cost per year, compared to the "industry standard" of 15%. Not a bad deal.

1 0

Baran on Net Security
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

RAND has put on it Web site eleven "classics" on distributed communications, most of them by Paul Baran. They offer good background to current debate on secrecy, security and cryptography. Here are the contents of No. 9 on security. http://www.rand.org/publications/RM/RM3765/ Memorandum RM-3765-PR August 1964 On Distributed Communications: IX Security, Secrecy, and Tamper-Free Considerations Paul Baran Contents, Preface, Summary, Foreword I. Introduction II. The Paradox of the Secrecy About Secrecy The Assumption of a Clear Dichotomy Between Classified and Unclassified Subject Matter Cost and Result of Present-Day Cryptographic Equipment On Secrecy of Secrecy III. Some Fundamentals of Cryptography Digital Transmission Layers of Encryption IV. Implications for the Distributed Network System Link-by-Link Cryptography in the Distributed Network End-to-End Cryptography in the Distributed Network Genealogy of the Keys Generation and Distribution of Keys Protection Offered by Semi-Random Path Choice V. A "Devil's Advocate" Examination Appendix Use of a Function of N-Boolean Variables as a Second-Order Modifier for "Next-Key" Generation

1 0

The Advent of Netwar
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A RAND publication relates to the administration's focus on borderless crime and/or dissent as national security threats: The Advent of Netwar. J. Arquilla, D.F. Ronfeldt 118 pp, 1996. $15.00 ISBN: 0833024140 Key concepts: Cybernetics -- Military aspects; Electronic intelligence; Military art and science -- Technological innovations; Communications, Military -- Technological aspects; Electronic countermeasures Abstract: The information revolution is leading to the rise of network forms of organization, with unusual implications for how societies are organized and conflicts are conducted. "Netwar" is an emerging consequence. The term refers to societal conflict and crime, short of war, in which the protagonists are organized more as sprawling "leaderless" networks than as tight-knit hierarchies. Many terrorists, criminals, fundamentalists, and ethno-nationalists are developing netwar capabilities. A new generation of revolutionaries and militant radicals is also emerging, with new doctrines, strategies, and technologies that support their reliance on network forms of organization. Netwar may be the dominant mode of societal conflict in the 21st century. These conclusions are implied by the evolution of societies, according to a framework presented in this RAND study. The emergence of netwar raises the need to rethink strategy and doctrine to conduct counternetwar. Traditional notions of war and low-intensity conflict as a sequential process based on massing, maneuvering, and fighting will likely prove inadequate to cope with nonlinear, swarm-like, information-age conflicts in which societal and military elements are closely intermingled. ----- There is a summary of this document and ordering info at: http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR789.html

2 1

Chaum to Step Aside
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.msnbc.com/news/45558.asp According to knowledgeable sources, Digicash b.v., the Dutch-based privately held Internet payment company that was founded and is chaired by Chaum, is in the market for a new top executive. The 6-year-old company plans to make Chaum, the ponytailed inventor of Digicash's innovative payment system, chief technology officer and to hire a new CEO to run the company.

2 1

[ADMINISTRATIVIUM] One-time pads
by nobody＠zifi.genetics.utah.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Many forgeries are traceable with mathematical certainty to feebleminded Timmy C[ocksucker] Mayflower's poison keyboard. /\ /..\ Timmy C[ocksucker] Mayflower /_\/_\

1 0

What OS/2 software?
by Jean-Francois Avon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi! I am off from the list nowadays so please reply directly. Can anybody point me to the most accepted crypto softwares running under OS/2? I already have PGP 2.6.3i Here is my shopping list: - - file encryption utility other than PGP, *if advisable* - - GUI shell (Aegis Shell style, if possible) - - hard drive on-the-fly encryption (I used CryptDisk in DOS) - - swap deleter - - file wiper - - any other program that would take care of a security issue the I still ignore about OS/2 (I'm absolutely new to it) - - any must-read OS/2 specific security-related document(s) I am looking for software that has been peer-reviewed and that is widely accepted among Cypher/Coder Punks. As a result of thoses replies, I will create a web page dedicated to OS/2 security applications. Regards jfa - -- Jean-Francois Avon, Pierrefonds(Montreal) QC Canada DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee: Fine Limoges porcelain and Crystal JFA Technologies: R&D Physicists, Eng, Techies, LabView stuff, etc PGP encryption keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon and: http://bs.mit.edu:8001/pks-toplev.html ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891 ID# 5B51964D : 152ACCBCD4A481B0 254011193237822C -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2i iQEVAgUBMqv/bciycyXFit0NAQFqcAgAh2e3qveaBXyAhAwm4P35cM8Ho6PnW2i8 pfqpHOzKtYyoACgWT40Q/L9Rv7Zq2S7YTY07+Ges56nwczKQdCFigH8PTUas5TOJ WC+sddxZCWT57XxEA2NGW/DBH90lrRJ+0Yq2e42So1KzQ/5RWcpZPIL60fEusrc0 I1E+qCcGkxFtm/1ISwIHwtpx3E7u4l8jMZy71dX+/Wp1LfSinbudjkTWYkCYTifW XL5q/wHTQ3/+UetoczQL7k6o1teOBJA1NIjZ5BRlvDfAYwhz1W1f8IbV8l/2tP0q r3sNaDN0hBdMzvz4tWXdMYObkr5tE7XSl5EJLUkRb3O15+8UK4XB6g== =lzne -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Secure Erase for PCs?
by foodie＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi all - I know this has been discussed multiple times, but archive searching has turned up nothing. What freely available tools are there for securely erasing a disk under DOS and Windows? Ideally I'd like a tool for each, but pointers to either are much appreciated. Thanks, -j

2 1

Re:
by Matthew J. Miszewski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:14 PM 12/4/96 EST, Bovine Remailer wrote: >At 11:26 AM 12/4/1996, Matthew J. Miszewski wrote: [snippo] >If I earned my very own money honestly and I choose to lend it only to >Albanians, you believe that this would be inefficient and, therefore, >forbidden. Actually I didnt say anything about private lending. But as this thread goes on you seem to assume much. >In other words, you do not believe that I should be able >to lend money to anybody I please. You can call it "equal access to >capital" or "denial of opportunity", but the clearest and simplest >description is that you believe I should not be able to lend my money >to whomever I please. Instead of pretending otherwise, just say "I >believe you should not be able to lend your own money which you earned >honestly to anybody you please. I believe you should be allowed only >to lend money in these circumstances..." I dont assume that anyone (or any corporation) has earned their money honestly. Quite often that is not the case. I have said a few times already that I *do* believe in limited regulation. And apparently you believe that ad hominem is cool. >Of course, non-discrimination is a vague term. Actually it is not. I am an employment law attroney. I know the definition. I know also what I need to do to prove it. I also know that many times the definition (legal) fails to meet the reality of the situation. But as I said before, we do not live in a perfect society. >Let's say I lend money >only to people I know. I only know Albanians. Am I therefore a >racist in my lending practices? That is unclear. See above. > >Am I racist in my choice of friends? Perhaps we should make that >illegal. > Perhaps we should argue irrelevant things. >>I have never suggested that provably bad credit risks should be given money. > >What is irksome is that you are talking about Other People's Money and >not your own. The perspective tends to change when it's your own >savings on the line. > Actually, in my case, it absolutely does not. But as I said above, you appear to continually assume things. My perspective doesnt change, maybe yours does. >>It does if my argument is that this part of the system *is* just. I >>realize you disagree, but I am sure you are not dismissing my argument >>out-of-hand. If you disagree, as you say, then disagree. > >Actually, I have trouble following your argument. Please forgive me >for my limited intelligence. You were forgiven long ago ;-) [snipped] >>I agree. I am not arguing that we need to withdraw Title VII. Aparently >>you are? > >I do not know what is in Title VII. Perhaps it would be better to ask >me about particular policies. > It is all becoming clear to me now. Perhaps you should understand what laws you are rallying against before you attempt to defeat them. I have no need to ask *you* about policies. Considering you have recently popped up, you have not even a small collection of reputation built up. [snip] >In fact, I am open to the possibility that poor people really are >disenfranchised. No you are not. You show your stripes below. >But, if I am to believe that I must hear an >explanation that makes sense to me. If poor people are poor because >absolutely nobody will do business with them for completely irrational >reasons, that seems extremely unlikely. Even if most rich people are >able to control their greed just to punish poor people of the wrong >race, which is already hard to believe, you actually have to claim >that they are all this way. > Actually, I dont. Not all rich people utilize their wealth. Dont believe it? Ask Bill Gates and the latest Slate. >Just like anybody else does. You watch every penny. You don't eat >meat. When you buy food, you buy inexpensive healthy food like >lentils instead of expensive unhealthy food like Coca-Cola and potato >chips. You do not go to McDonald's. You walk when you can instead of >taking the bus or you ride a (used) bicycle. You don't smoke >cigarettes. You do not buy alcohol. You do not buy other >recreational drugs. You buy your clothing used. You economize on >your living arrangements, perhaps by having a large number of >roomates. (Note that this is illegal in most cities. That is a form >of disenfranchisment.) You do not make long distance calls. If you >can, you share a phone with other people. etc. etc. etc. > >If you know poor people, you will know that few of them do these >things. My vocation is intimately involved with poor people. I have been there myself. I do not defend my beliefs on those grounds. If I did I could easily just state the opposite. But hey, Ill bet you arent racist either 'cause you have Black friends. The poor people that I help are nothing like the media productions you believe in. I realized after reading this last paragraph what kind of person I am dealing with. Poor people, in your eyes, remain poor because they apparently have no will of their own to get out. If you *actually* understood utter poverty you would also understand the idiocy of the statement. Many of personal friends have 'escaped from the killing fields' and have opened my eyes to the reality of the situation. I will no longer try to open yours. You are not interested in learning anything. >Also, you work hard to increase your earnings. You show up at work on >time every time. You develop a good work ethic. You wear clean >professional clothing at work. You treat your employer and coworkers >with respect. etc. etc. etc. That's right. I forgot. Poor people dont come to work on time. They dont develop a work ethic. They wear dirty clothes. And they are disrespectful. And when they dont do these things they are not passed up for promotion, never meet a glass ceiling and are never discriminated against. Now I get it. What was I thinking? >Read "Your Money or Your Life" by Joe Dominguez and Vicki Robin. It >outlines a workable program that all poor people - and quite a few >others - will be able to use to their benefit. I live in reality not theory. >If you are going through prospective leads and the number of qualified >people is, say, 10 in 1000, you will make a lot more money than going >through a pool of leads that only has 1 qualified person per 1000. Redlining occurs when people from these neighborhoods *go to the bank*. Banks do not target these people. When approached by them, the banks look at the lines and decide. They are not weighing whether to do business there. They simply dont. >But why isn't that good news? If it's really market inefficiency, why >not exploit it? > Because I personally carry to high a debt burden to qualify for the loan. I also suffer from doing something with my life that I both enjoy and feel makes a difference. I advocate for others that would like opportunity. >>I am glad that you admit that racism is irrational. > >A lot of human activity is irrational. > >In the case of racism, it is difficult to even define what it is for >the purpose of writing a law under which people are to be prosecuted. >This undermines the rule of law in the United States and opens the way >to abuse and political corruption. Probably that was the idea. Yep, that was it. We all got together in 1964 to try to find a way that we could increase political corruption. Read the law. >But, even if it were possible to define precisely what racism is, I >would still believe it should be legal. There is no accounting for >taste and it is wrong to dictate it to other people when they are >causing no harm to others. Try defining harm. Try defining taste. People like you have argued that slavery caused no harm. Disallowing women to vote caused no harm. And of course that discrimination in the workplace causes no harm. You may believe that in all of these cases the legislature should not have acted. This just makes me glad that you are clearly in a minority, unable to withstand the wheels of change. You and Tim could start your own country. >>That is the core as to why the problem doesnt go away. It is an >>infinite loop. Current interests wont go there. > >Not one? Absolutely no one? That's pretty hard to believe. Irrationality is always hard to believe. >>Generally, people who understand the problem are without access to >>capital. They would like to go there. They cant get capital. When >>they approach current interests, they wont go there. > >Maybe there's something funny about the deal. That's it. All those lawyers involved with putting together deals (something they succesfully do for a living) put together a funny deal. That's it. It's a conspiracy. Be careful everyone, the poor people are planning something. Run, run. >>There are a few examples of people who actually realize this as a >>problem/opportunity. Oddly enough, this point reinforces mine. >>Redlining did exist. Bank of America realized it and made a lot of >>money. But it still exists elsewhere. Why dont business plans >>around the country spring up on venture capitalists desks with an >>approved stamp on them? > >More to the point, why isn't Matthew J. Miszewski drooling in >anticipation of all the money he is going to make by recognizing this >glorious opportunity? Giannini made a tremendous amount of money. Just because a market exists that is far from stating that barriers to entry arent enormous and that a market segment is sufficient to make 'tremendous amounts of money'. Money is also far from my prime motivator. This will be hard for you to understand, but apparently you have no interest in expanding your horizons. >Hmmm? Maybe it was lousy investment in spite of a good ROI number. >Nobody? Not one person was willing to buy in? Hardly an endorsement. What are you talking about? Good ROI, good investment. How do you define 'lousy investment'? Maybe you work for a bank? What do you do? Oh yeah, you are Red Rackham. >>Compare this now to people whom banks would generally consider a good risk. >>College Graduates. Generally, these folks live outside of the red line. >>Good risks right? What about those nasty student loan default rates? The >>red lines dont make business sense. > >I'm hearing that cash register ringing. Go for it! > Whenever a good point is made, you go to that nifty "ring, ring" crap. Do you deny that the default rate on student loans is outrageous. Do you deny that these people generally live out of the redlines? >That's easy. Once a month get ten families together to go to the >nearest warehouse store in the suburbs and stock up on provisions. Have you carried that much home on a bus lately? I mean, you were poor, no? Or do we all forget little things like that? >Or, one poor family could buy a bunch of stuff every month and sell it >out of their house and save everybody the trip. Making the original capital in their basement of course. How many microloan programs do you know of Red? >Discussions regarding "the cycle of poverty" are usually little more >than litanies of excuses. I keep forgetting that poor people want to remain poor. When will I learn. They use up all their energy thinking up excuses. Oil Company execs never treat blacks differently. Glass ceilings dont exist. Hey if I keep saying it maybe I will learn. >>Again, business plans have been presented to no avail. Even private >>foundation subsidized events were tried. To no avail. > >Gee, you would almost think there was something wrong with the >investment. See above. >I challenge you to put your own money into this venture. You don't >even have to quit your job to get into the microlending business until >you've built it up to the point where it can support you. This sounds like advice from someone who has never tried. Not you, red. >>I once believed much like you. I saw an "opportunity" the existance of >>which I could not explain. It seemed irrational. And it was. > >What I don't understand is why you are not excited by this >opportunity. You claim there is this gaping hole in the banking >business. If that is true, whoever exploits it is going to be >unbelievably rich in addition to being a great human being. See above. >My point is not that there is a great opportunity so "somebody >somewhere" will solve the racism problem. My point is that you >yourself do not believe there is a great opportunity if it involves >money you really care about, i.e. your own. Actually, my largest investment is in a minority owned business. Funny thing. My money. How odd. >>Racism is irrational. As you seem aware (BTW, I applaud you on what >>seems to be an honest degree of care)... > >Don't get your hopes up. I've been poor and I've known many poor >people. The unpleasant truth is that there are usually reasons why >people are poor. I keep forgeting. What was it stupid, lazy, smelly, discourteous? I have to watch the news more closely. >You are claiming that there are ZERO investors who will invest in this >great opportunity because they are racists. Contrary to popular >belief, most African-Americans are not poor or even gang members. Where the hell did this come from? I *never* asserted it. Red must be watching too much TV. >There are large numbers of middle class African-Americans and a >smaller number of quite successful African-American businesspeople. > I know some of them. They work very hard. Funny thing is, Red, they sound nothing like you. Go read your book. >If you are claiming that even African-American investors are >irrationally racist about lending to poor people, you should be >forewarned that I and many other people are going to find that a >little hard to believe. Racism is a dynamic of Power Red. There are, unfortunately, successful Blacks that do not help out the neighborhoods they came from. They do not credit Affirmative Action for its help. Consider me 'forewarned'. >>>Banks have practiced discrimination, and not just against black >>>people. They have been able to get away with it. How? Because the >>>government has protected the banking guild from competition. I never mentioned that blacks were the only poor in this country. That was one of Red's assumptions. Much like the ones about poor people being lazy, dirty, blah, blah. >>We agree. But I feel that a legal elimination of redlining would decrease >>costs to the industry. > >Wrong. Redlining is devilishly difficult to define. What's so difficult. God, I hope you arent an attorney. >That hurts a >small bank more than any other because they have to figure out how to >comply with the law and defend themselves against the regulators >instead of just borrowing and lending money. It raises the costs of >banking. That means it is harder for people to borrow and lend money. >And that, if you care about efficiency, is inefficient. > It costs money *to practice* redlining. Not to eliminate the practice. If decisions are based on merit alone, where do costs increase. Redlining adds a layer of investigation to a loan analysis. Eliminating it eliminates one. >>If they never did we would still have slavery and only white, adult, male, >>land-owners would vote. While success is rare, it has prevailed when the >>cause is just. > >I hate to admit it, but you do have a point here. > And yet you assert that the government should not tell you what to do. Make up your mind Red. >However, the way privacy will be permanently eroded is through laws >called "The Privacy Protection Act" which have clauses allowing the >government to do whatever it wants. It is disconcerting to have the >government dictating what information you may or may not keep on your >computer or who you may give it to. While this is totally of the point of the post, at least we can agree on something. > >Red Rackham [Excuse the tone of the post. Dealing daily with some of the effects of racism, one gets sick of the same arguments and assumptions made by most. I thought you were interested in differing points of view, but the tone of your post suggested otherwise.]

1 0

[ANNOUNCEMENT] Secure envelopes
by mixmaster＠remail.obscura.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here, Timmy Mayflower descends into total inanity. He should have a cold shower and/or a Turkish coffee. |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ __ | \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ | O~-_ Timmy Mayflower | >----|-|-|-|-|-|-|--| __/ | / / / / / / / / |__\ |/ / / / / / / /

2 1

FIPS key recovery meeting (long)
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forward from: cyberia-l(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM Date: Mon, 9 Dec 1996 15:03:27 -0800 From: "John A. Thomas" <jathomas(a)NETCOM.COM> Subject: FIPS key recovery meeting (long) John Taber and I attended the first meeting of the technical advisory committee to develop a Federal Information Processing Standard (FIP) for the federal "key management infrastructure." The meeting was held December 5 and 6, 1996 near the Dallas/Fort Worth Airport. Although the official documents referred only to "key recovery" instead of "key escrow", representatives used both terms interchangeably. The committee is an advisory body to the Dept. of Commerce. Its recommendations pass through the National Institute of Technical Standards (NIST). The charter states membership will be no more than 24, so the ten "federal liaisons" present are apparently not considered members of the committee. The chairman is Stephen Kent, chief scientist for information security at BBN Systems. The other members of the committee were employees of various computer and computer-security firms, including Sun Microsystems, Microsoft, Intel, Lucent Technologies, Cisco Systems, Digital Equipment, IBM and Motorola. Some security related firms were Trusted Systems, GlobalKey, and CygnaCom. Officials from Chase Manhattan Bank and Visa were also present. The only academic member was Dorothy Denning of Georgetown University. The government liaisons included Michael Gilmore of the FBI, Jan Manning of NSA, and representatives of NIST, the Federal Reserve Bank, and the Defense Information Systems Agency. Some representatives were from agencies having no apparent need for cryptography, and therefore key recovery, such as the Small Business Administration and the Social Security Administration. Kent later questioned why the SBA would need key recovery when it had no need to store encrypted data. SSA needs encryption only when it receives confidential information over insecure systems. Mary Good of the Commerce Department opened the meeting with a speech charging the committee to develop a federal key-recovery standard that can be extended to "public policy". Good urged the committee to confine itself to technical issues only, and arrive at a standard that could be implemented and would not be merely theoretical. Good also asked for "transparency" in key recovery, and a couple of the government liaisons mentioned this as well. Kent's opening remarks included the comment that the FIPS would only deal with crypto key recovery, not recovery of digital signatures, or with public key certification. Most of the rest of the first day was taken up with introductions and comments by the members and liaisons. The general tenor of comments from corporate representatives was that key recovery had not been important to their customers, and while they did not oppose a key recovery standard for the government, they did oppose any effort to make it mandatory or make it a requirement for export. Some differed on whether an export requirement would be a problem. Some typical comments follow. GlobalKey (which runs a private encrypted mail system) said using key escrow would be against is policy, and its customers would not accept it. Oracle stated it had had no requirement for key escrow from customers and saw no need for key escrow from its customers. It supported software-only solutions, and emphasized they must have no classified content. Motorola stated it was important not to impact the performance of wireless systems. Motorola advocated an open system supporting multiple algorithms and opposed the trusted third-party concept. Microsoft said it was pragmatic, willing to provide key recovery if customers want it, but it definitely does not want it mandated, nor tied in with export licensing. The Digicom member assumed the committee was not concerned with individual privacy rights vis-a-vis the corporate employer's power to recover an employee's encrypted message. Jan Manning of NSA and Patricia Edfors of Treasury said the government had a corporate interest in key recovery like any other business, as well as for national security or law enforcement purposes. Manning agreed there was no place in the FIPS for concern over individual privacy rights and urged the committee to avoid privacy issues. Kent said another issue the committee would face was the timeliness of any response required to a key-recovery request. Gilmore of FBI says the FBI's need for timeliness would vary, depending on the investigation. Denning said that data other than law-enforcement related messages could need timely recovery, citing encrypted medical data, or encrypted data from some kind of sensor. Another parameter for timeliness would be the number of requests made in a given time. Although the issue was not explicitly debated, the commercial members seemed to feel that key recovery should be directed to stored data, while the government representatives were clearly using the term to cover both stored data and communications. Someone asked how session keys in a communication system were archived, and Denning remarked she didn't know of any system which archived session keys. The following morning, Kent said the issues included key recovery for storage, key recovery for communications, and key recovery for staged delivery (email). This seemed to remove the doubts some members had about the scope of the proposal. We were left wondering how key archiving could possibly work in communications networks. Consider a system where encrypted packets arrive in any order, with different keys and different key expirations. After a commenter asked for clarification of who the users of the new standard were assumed to be, Kent stated: "The government wants the FIPS so that industry will produce products that government can use, and others will use as well." When another commenter pointed out that a user could defeat a key-recovery system with superencryption or other means, Kent said "...we have to be willing to let [that case] slip through the cracks." Some participants attempted to distinguish between key backup and key recovery, the latter being the case where the parties to the communication are themselves unwilling to give up keys. Denning responded that "key recovery _is_ backup." The distinction seems to be about who is a party to the communication--the corporation whose employee has lost his keys, or the employee himself. Confusion on this point may exist because the members didn't distinguish the case where an entity using key recovery doesn't care about it in particular cases, but another entity, government, very well might. Kent asked if the new standard should require a data recovery field in encrypted messages or files, and if so, should there be check for integrity of this field. Requiring a recipient to check this would encourage senders to use the standard. Someone asked how a recipient could check if a sender were, in fact, escrowing data, even if the field were present. Others said requiring a data-recovery field would make compatibility difficult for older systems, or "...those choosing not to use key recovery." Some expressed concern for the impact on system performance of sending extra bits. Miles Smid of NIST once referred to the data-recovery field as a "LEAF," invoking some laughter from those recalling Clipper's "law-enforcement access field." Following a question on interoperability with systems not using the standard, Manning of NSA said the new export law required products to interoperate only with products using key recovery. This brought some irritated responses from the commercial members. One asked if the government had some bottom line the committee would have to accept if there were to be a FIPS. Manning said NSA had some requirements, and he assumed the FBI did as will. Kent suggested the government side put together a position paper. A member then asked who the customers of FIPS were supposed to be; given the government's special requirements, why was industry input even needed? Smid of NIST said industry input was needed, or no one would build systems for the government to use; also, the government may be involved in key recovery in commercial systems where "...public safety is involved." (It seemed plain that "public safety" in this committee is a code word for "law enforcement"). Kent suggested that if private parties want to operate key-recovery services (apparently meaning escrow services), they would have some negligence defense if they used a federal standard. On the following day, December 6, Dorothy Denning presented a high-level schematic of key recovery associated with key fields and encrypted data. The schematic was thrown together the night before. She promised to make it available on her web page (www.georgetown.edu/~denning/) Patricia Edfors of Treasury spoke about federal public key infrastructure pilot projects. She also described an "Emergency Access Demonstration Project," which was to "demonstrate the viability of key recovery, as a security service, for federal business applications." The project is to last 9-15 months, beginning August 1996. There will apparently be participation between certain government agencies and some private firm. Edfors said no attempt would be made to recover digital signature keys, create a key management infrastructure, or mandate which cryptography is used. However, "export requirements" will apply to all plans. Kent wondered why the government would need key recovery for itself. He seemed to feel that key recovery for an individual's worksation is a data protection issue (backups) rather than true key recovery. Members mentioned a few cases where an employee was unable to decrypt his files, but no one knew of a case where an organization was unable to obtain shared data (e.g., a database), because it was encrypted. Other members seemed reluctant to accept his distinction. They seem to view key recovery as a way to audit proper use of organization assets by employees, or to protect the organization from malicious acts of employees, or to recover data if a custodian is run over by a bus. Discussions continued to frame the issues for the project and assign functional tasks for sub-committees. Gilmore of the FBI said most key-recover issues would arise (for law enforcement) in the context of search warrants, not wiretaps, although the latter could be very important. In a question as to how long escrowed or archived keys should be kept, Gilmore said as long as the data existed, which might be indefinitely. When pressed, Gilmore said this was because some crimes have no statute of limitation. We thought some members might be mentally calculating storage requirements for session keys in a large communications system, if key storage and indexing was to be indefinite. Manning of NSA said the National Archives, for example, would have to have access to recovery keys forever. No one asked why the National Archives might be archiving encrypted data. Boland of GlobalKey also asked about keys to encrypted voice or video. No one seemed to have thought of this before. Kent wrapped things up with a list of issues for discussion at the next meeting. These included: --the threat model --interoperability --key recovery agents --performance issues, computation and bandwidth --algorithm independence --enforcement measures The next meeting will be held in the San Francisco area on February 19 and 20, 1996. Before then the members will confer by email and attempt to set up working groups to present papers on particular topics. The meeting ended with an opportunity for public comment. None was offered. Our opinion was that the only reason for the existence of this project was the insistence of the government, primarily the law enforcement and state security agencies. Private industry seems to feel there is little demand for a key-recovery standard, since those needing it can implement it themselves. Industry representatives were obviously worried about export restrictions requiring key escrow, and possible attempts to make it mandatory in some way. As corporations use encryption more and more, there will obviously be a need to develop key recovery systems inside the firm. The justification for a federal standard, however, seems weak. We felt that this project would probably end in failure, through inability of the industry and government parties to compromise, or if a standard did issue, few private firms would use it. It's even doubtful a standard could be completed and adopted before private systems are firmly in place. Is the whole thing just more of the government's increasingly delusional effort to control private cryptography, or does someone besides the security agencies really want a standard? The committee will post information at www.crsc.nist.gov. We can fax a copy of the materials handed out. We'll try to answer any questions by email (or phone, if you're really in a hurry). --------------------------------------------------------------------- John A. Thomas | (972) 263-4351 | jathomas(a)netcom.com Bowles & Thomas, L.L.P. | Voice | CompuServe 75236,3536 410 N.W Eleventh St. | (972) 262-6520 | Grand Prairie, Tx 75050 | Fax | PGP public key available --------------------------------------------------------------------- =======> After January 1, 1997: --------------------------------------------------------------------- John A. Thomas | (972) 387-8880 | jathomas(a)netcom.com Dolce & Thomas, L.L.P. | Voice | CompuServe 75236,3536 5720 LBJ Fwy., Suite 470| (972) 387-8881 | Dallas, Texas 75240 | Fax | PGP public key available ---------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

nyc internet world party schedule and survival tips
by Andrew K. Bressen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Folks, an internet world nyc party schedule is at http://www.webcinema.org/party/ There's a mondo party at the Tunnel Club on thursday night, 220 12th Ave (West Side Highway and 27th Street), 18:30-20:30 one of the groups I'm affiliated with (WWWeb Artists Consortium) is one of the hosts. I believe that thursday night is also the PGP Inc party. This makes wednesday the logical night for a get-together, unless folks tell me otherwise. People who are around and interested in dinner after the show and before the vendor parties, send me mail. I live about 15 blocks from Javits, so if folks have problems (stolen luggage, need crash space, etc.) or just want to swing by to say hi, gimme a ring. home number: 212-489-6913. I don't have a pager just now. I'll probably be at the exhibit hall wandering during the afternoons. At least one person asked for directions: the front door of the javits convention center is at about 36th street and 11th avenue. http://www.metrobeat.com/nyc/loc/Javits-Center.html has pictures and directions. For good food, hike (1/2 - 1 mile; do not try to take a taxi this way during rush hours) over to 9th avenue from 42nd to 55th streets. There is very little food anywhere near javits; one diner across the street, the concessions inside, and the street vendors are about it. Thus, eat before or after, but don't expect to pop out for 10 minutes and find something you'd want. See recommendations at bottom. Saturday I plan to drive to ~Boston, so folks wanting a lift can also drop me a line. Some recommendations (North-South): Mee Noodle Shop 795 Ninth Avenue, at 53rd Street. 212-765-2929 very cheap, pretty fast, and yummy chinese. Afghan Kebab House 764 Ninth Avenue, between 51st and 52nd Streets. authentic and yummy kebobs and rice there are one or two other afghan places within spitting distance, all are closet sized (DON'T try to bring in more than 4 people at once) The Lemon Tree middle eastern; falafal, humous, kebabs served at glacial speeds. cheap, and they have lamayjan (middle eastern spicy cold meat pizza) El Azteca ninth ave new york mexican, with the nicest restaurant owner I know Uncle Nick's ninth ave greek food that many of my greek friends rave about J West ninth ave ok chinese. lobster tank, and you can draw on the placemats. sometimes not spicy enough. Pongsri Thai 244 W. 48th Street, between Broadway and Eighth Avenue. a long hike from javits, and too close to the theaters, but there just isn't much good thai around here these days. Avanti 700 Ninth Avenue, at 48th Street. 212-586-7410 expense account italian; fireplace and you might want reservations Pietrasanta Ninth ave, ~47th street _very_ good italian, though portions aren't humungous. upscale enough that you might want reservations. Meskerem 47 st near 10th avenue home-style (teff-based injera) ethiopian Asia Caribe ninth ave chino-latino (chinese with a latin american influence). Zen Palate 663 Ninth Avenue, at 46th Street. 212-582-1669 height of elegant, sophisticated vegetarian dining Bali Nusa Indah 651 Ninth Avenue, between 45th and 46th Streets Indonesian. Features Rijstaafl (a little bit of everything). Turkish Cuisine 631 Ninth Avenue, between 44th and 45th Streets perfectly reasonable turkish food all the sushi joints lining ninth ave along this stretch are ok, but not exemplery. avoid the thai places on the east side of ninth avenue; they just aren't too good anymore. there's also a german place and a few fern bars; these are mostly ok. the block of 46th street labeled "restaurant row" is a tourist trap. --cheers --andy

1 0

Re: Secure Erase for PCs?
by Mark Rosen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I know this has been discussed multiple times, but > archive searching has turned up nothing. > > What freely available tools are there for securely > erasing a disk under DOS and Windows? > > Ideally I'd like a tool for each, but pointers > to either are much appreciated. > > Thanks, > Though, technically, no disk can be securely erased, my program, Very Good Privacy, can securely delete files after they have been encrypted. I don't know if this is what you're looking for, but if it is, check out the VGP home page at: http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/2690

1 0

Re: Secure Erase for PCs?
by foodie＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Though, technically, no disk can be securely erased, my program, Very Good > Privacy, can securely delete files after they have been encrypted. I don't > know if this is what you're looking for, but if it is, check out the VGP > home page at: http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Pines/2690 > > Ideally, I'm looking for a free space wiper, along the lines of what Burn 2.4 on the Mac can do. As in, create a file the size of available free space, and then write garbage repeatedly to that file. I've found "Real Deal", a TSR that intercepts the DEL command, but that's a poor substitute, at least for my needs. Anyway, thanks. -j

7 6

No Subject
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM blathered: >More fan mail from John Gilmore and his friends: ... Kook, must you post all the private mail you dislike to the list, while at the same time whining and bitching about the crypto-relevance of anyone and everyone else. Many folks you critique do post off topic shit from time to time, but nowhere near the percentage (much less the volume) that you do. I can't killfile your ass from this machine, but I've decided to provide a cypherpunks public service to those who can. It will be low-volume. I am going to anonymously repost everything you post that is actually crypto-relevant. It will be REALLY low volume. Now, quit posting shit about "Timmy" anonymously, with your stupid ascii drawings, and start taking your medications so you'll behave nice at the get together, where I'll see you and try not to vomit.

2 1

FIPS Meeting Material
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

John Thomas has provided copies of printed material handed out at the Dallas meeting on FIPS for the Federal Key Management Infrastructure (KMI) on December 5-6. It consists of lists of particpants, charts, diagrams and outlines of the government's prayerful intentions for KMI which Mr. Thomas admirably assessed in his post earlier today. We've digitized and put it with his post on the meeting at: http://jya.com/fipsmeet.htm Thanks to Mr. Thomas and Bowles & Thomas, L.L.P.

1 0

Security problems in recent list spam
by Lou Poppler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I was irritated enough by a recent Commercial spam to the list, (a message from Sue) that I researched the web pages it points us to. I note 2 very interesting features in the order form page (www.steppingstones.com/ordercab.htm) This form collects various info, and returns a POST request invoking ACTION="/cgi-bin/mailto.exe" It appears that these folks leave themselves open to some abuse, from anyone creative enough to modify the form slightly! Also, in the ObSnakeOil department, the form contains this claim: > You are ordering via a secure server which scrambles your credit card > information to prevent it from being intercepted. If, however, you are > still not comfortable sending your credit card number on line, please > fill out the above order form without any payment information and either > call us toll free at 1-800-585-1118 (outside the US, call (203) 730-2220) ... Now, it appears that this form returns a non-encrypted POST request to their server, and furthermore the action taken by the server is to email all the data to the ultimate business recipient. Thus the credit card info would be sent through the net TWICE as plaintext.

1 0

Re: The Science Generations
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ryan Russell/SYBASE wrote: > If I may offer another opinion... > I ran a BBS for about three years straight off > of floppies on an Apple ][+, without any > hardware failures or disk problems. [snip] I can't argue against someone else's personal experience, but, if you are asking me to believe that the rather cheaply made Apple II would perform nearly as long and reliably as an HP-86/87 (for example), when making hundreds of thousands (millions?) of accesses to floppies over a period of weeks or months, without a disk drive tuneup or alignment, then I must be living in the wrong reality, i.e., everything performs the same, regardless of its construction design. SHOCK TIME: I'm going to shock you now, by telling you that of all the HP computer gear I have bought, the failure rate of new computers and major peripherals was approximately 40%, within the initial one-year warranty period. Actually, the failure rate within 90 days was well over 30%. When I wrote out the detailed list and sent it to corp. HQ, they must have peed their pants, judging by the reaction I got. Surprised? So how do I justify this? All I really know for sure, besides what I've told you, is when the initial fixes are made, I can run heavy- duty operations for many times longer without interruption than I possibly could with most other brands. Wanna know who the worst offenders are in consumer electronics, not only when it comes to warranty-period failures, but failures soon after, due to shoddy failure-proofing? Sony and Toshiba. I haven't had a lot of Toshiba equipment, but the experiences I've had, and the attitude of the company for not fixing them, are convincing for me (just my opinion). I have had a *lot* of Sony stuff, mostly small (but fairly expensive) items, and their product quality is abysmal, excepting large items such as TVs, or a couple of small "professional" items such as the Walkman D6C cassette recorder (Stereophile's favorite) and their pilot's radios S??-70 and -80.

1 0

RE: Secure Erase for PCs?
by John Fricker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Mark Rosen (mrosen(a)peganet.com) said something about Re: Secure Erase for PCs? on or about 12/9/96 6:19 PM >> I know this has been discussed multiple times, but >> archive searching has turned up nothing. >> >> What freely available tools are there for securely >> erasing a disk under DOS and Windows? >> >> Ideally I'd like a tool for each, but pointers >> to either are much appreciated. >> >> Thanks, >> > Though, technically, no disk can be securely erased, my program, Sure it can. Ten overwrites will rendered remnant data obscure. So says the electron microscope waving data recovery experts anyway. > Very Good Privacy, can securely delete files after they have been encrypted. Thought you said "no disk...". So how does VGP do it? --j ----------------------------------- | John Fricker (jfricker(a)vertexgroup.com) | -random notes- | My PGP public key is available by sending me mail with subject "send pgp key". | www.Program.com is a good programmer web site. -----------------------------------

2 1

RE: FIPS key recovery meeting
by Internaut 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Members mentioned a few cases where an employee was unable to decrypt >his files, but no one knew of a case where an organization was unable to >obtain shared data (e.g., a database), because it was encrypted. Other >members seemed reluctant to accept his distinction. They seem to view key >recovery as a way to audit proper use of organization assets by employees, >or to protect the organization from malicious acts of employees, or to >recover data if a custodian is run over by a bus. pretty funny! think of all the loss of unrecoverable encrypted data from a custodian run over by a bus!

1 0

Re: Redlining
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I seem to have upset you, Matt Miszewski, and I am sorry for that. It appears to me that the problem we have is that we have different ideas about what is right and different perceptions of the nature of the world. It may appear that I intentionally put words in your mouth. This is not the case. We have different ideas about what is obvious. I have made assumptions, but they seemed clear to me. Apparently, they were not. We may still have a fruitful discussion. At 4:17 PM 12/9/1996, Matthew J. Miszewski wrote: >At 03:14 PM 12/4/96 EST, Bovine Remailer wrote: >>At 11:26 AM 12/4/1996, Matthew J. Miszewski wrote: >[snippo] >>If I earned my very own money honestly and I choose to lend it only to >>Albanians, you believe that this would be inefficient and, therefore, >>forbidden. > >Actually I didnt say anything about private lending. But as this thread >goes on you seem to assume much. I am assuming that you agree that somebody who has earned their money honestly should be able to lend it to whomever they please for whatever reason they like. You call this private lending. (Please correct me if I am wrong.) I believe that five friends should be able to get together, pool their resources, and lend their money to whomever they like. I believe that ten, or a hundred, or a thousand people should be able to pool their money and lend it to whomever they please for whatever reason they like. That, essentially, is what a bank is. I do not believe the government should dictate which people you, or your bank, are allowed to lend to. >>In other words, you do not believe that I should be able >>to lend money to anybody I please. You can call it "equal access to >>capital" or "denial of opportunity", but the clearest and simplest >>description is that you believe I should not be able to lend my money >>to whomever I please. Instead of pretending otherwise, just say "I >>believe you should not be able to lend your own money which you earned >>honestly to anybody you please. I believe you should be allowed only >>to lend money in these circumstances..." > >I dont assume that anyone (or any corporation) has earned their money >honestly. Quite often that is not the case. It does not seem reasonable to me to tell people who they may lend money to on the grounds that some people might have obtained their money dishonestly. What would be reasonable would be to charge the dishonest people with their crimes and return the property to the rightful owners. >I have said a few times already that I *do* believe in limited >regulation. However, we disagree about which regulations are just. >And apparently you believe that ad hominem is cool. >>Of course, non-discrimination is a vague term. > >Actually it is not. I am an employment law attroney. I know the >definition. I know also what I need to do to prove it. I also know that >many times the definition (legal) fails to meet the reality of the >situation. But as I said before, we do not live in a perfect society. I do not believe that in practice discrimination is clear at all. If I put up a sign in my store saying "Irish need not apply", then there is a case. Usually, it is not so clear. It is difficult to prove discrimination because merit is so hard to determine. Many factors go into a hiring decision. In the end, it is usually made on the gut level. There is really no way to prove that the decision was discriminatory. Consider the computer industry. For whatever reasons, right now there are very few African-American software engineers who are amongst the very best. They exist, but you don't see them very often. What this means is that you can't look at the percentage of African-Americans working for a software company to decide whether the company makes discriminatory hiring decisions. >>>I agree. I am not arguing that we need to withdraw Title VII. >>>Aparently you are? >> >>I do not know what is in Title VII. Perhaps it would be better to >>ask me about particular policies. > >It is all becoming clear to me now. Perhaps you should understand >what laws you are rallying against before you attempt to defeat them. >I have no need to ask *you* about policies. Considering you have >recently popped up, you have not even a small collection of >reputation built up. We can certainly discuss policy without delving into Title VII and its repeal. One advantage of discussing the policy in general is that we can make statements about entire classes of legislation, rather than specific laws which should be added or repealed. >>In fact, I am open to the possibility that poor people really are >>disenfranchised. > >No you are not. You show your stripes below. No, I told you my opinion. So far nobody has demonstrated in a persuasive manner how the poor are disenfranchised. Consequently, I believe that disenfranchisement is a small part of the explanation. >>But, if I am to believe that I must hear an explanation that makes >>sense to me. If poor people are poor because absolutely nobody will >>do business with them for completely irrational reasons, that seems >>extremely unlikely. Even if most rich people are able to control >>their greed just to punish poor people of the wrong race, which is >>already hard to believe, you actually have to claim that they are >>all this way. > >Actually, I dont. Not all rich people utilize their wealth. Dont >believe it? Ask Bill Gates and the latest Slate. It is true that not all rich people use their wealth to their own best advantage. I am not claiming that all rich people are greedy and smart. What I am claiming is that many rich people are greedy and will certainly seize opportunities that are presented to them. Let's say one in a thousand rich people is willing to exploit the inefficiencies of the home mortgage market. This represents a vast pool of capital which we are not seeing in "redlined" areas, if what you say is true. When people with capital so universally avoid an investment, my first thought is not that every last one of them is a racist. My first thought is that it is not a good investment. (My next thought is "Gee, if they're wrong, I could make a lot of money!") >>Just like anybody else does. You watch every penny. You don't eat >>meat. When you buy food, you buy inexpensive healthy food like >>lentils instead of expensive unhealthy food like Coca-Cola and potato >>chips. You do not go to McDonald's. You walk when you can instead of >>taking the bus or you ride a (used) bicycle. You don't smoke >>cigarettes. You do not buy alcohol. You do not buy other >>recreational drugs. You buy your clothing used. You economize on >>your living arrangements, perhaps by having a large number of >>roomates. (Note that this is illegal in most cities. That is a form >>of disenfranchisment.) You do not make long distance calls. If you >>can, you share a phone with other people. etc. etc. etc. >> >>If you know poor people, you will know that few of them do these >>things. > >My vocation is intimately involved with poor people. I have been there >myself. I do not defend my beliefs on those grounds. You asked me how poor people could save money. I believe I have answered the question. I am sorry if I have pursued an irrelevant line of inquiry. >If I did I could easily just state the opposite. But hey, Ill bet >you arent racist either 'cause you have Black friends. You have no idea of my race or my friends. Yet, it appears that you are making some assumptions based on a few thousand bytes of text. Interesting. >The poor people that I help are nothing like the media productions >you believe in. Actually, I believe my own experience of being poor and living with poor people. I am prepared to believe that my experience was unusual, but you will have to provide some evidence, anecdotal at the very least. >I realized after reading this last paragraph what kind of person I am >dealing with. I may be the most terrible person in the world. It is not relevant to this discussion, is it? >Poor people, in your eyes, remain poor because they apparently have >no will of their own to get out. If you *actually* understood utter >poverty you would also understand the idiocy of the statement. I like to think I am not an idiot. Fortunately, you say little here that makes me think I am. You might find it more effective to explain in what way I am an idiot. Remember, I and the thousands of other people who read this list may not necessarily know what you know. It may be that some of us only lack a little explanation or a little helping hand to start us on the road from idiocy. >Many of personal friends have 'escaped from the killing fields' and >have opened my eyes to the reality of the situation. I will no >longer try to open yours. You are not interested in learning >anything. How will I learn if you call me an idiot instead of explaining your other views? That may be effective in convincing people who already agree with you, but it is not a way to win converts. When you mention escaping from the killing fields, I simply have no idea what you are talking about. (I do not say this to be insulting.) >>Also, you work hard to increase your earnings. You show up at work on >>time every time. You develop a good work ethic. You wear clean >>professional clothing at work. You treat your employer and coworkers >>with respect. etc. etc. etc. > >That's right. I forgot. Poor people dont come to work on time. They >dont develop a work ethic. They wear dirty clothes. And they are >disrespectful. And when they dont do these things they are not >passed up for promotion, never meet a glass ceiling and are never >discriminated against. Now I get it. What was I thinking? I can only tell you what I have seen. >>Read "Your Money or Your Life" by Joe Dominguez and Vicki Robin. It >>outlines a workable program that all poor people - and quite a few >>others - will be able to use to their benefit. > >I live in reality not theory. If a theory does not work out in reality it is not of much use. Next time you are in the bookstore, flip through the book. It's not what you think it is. You'll like it. Really. >>But why isn't that good news? If it's really market inefficiency, >>why not exploit it? > >Because I personally carry to high a debt burden to qualify for the >loan. I outlined a plan which would not require you to put up any money of your own. As an attorney, you have a tremendous advantage because you don't have to pay legal fees. Your own debt burden doesn't matter much if the holding company borrows the money. You can give your investors control of the company and just take commissions on every mortgage you create. >I also suffer from doing something with my life that I both enjoy and >feel makes a difference. That's nice. I mean that. But, if the inefficiency you are pointing at is as large as you say, there should be an opportunity to make many millions of dollars. Surely, you could do some good with all that money. And, imagine what effect you would have if you did make yourself rich lending to poor people who are subjected to irrational discrimination. Maybe some other rich people would get the good idea. >>But, even if it were possible to define precisely what racism is, I >>would still believe it should be legal. There is no accounting for >>taste and it is wrong to dictate it to other people when they are >>causing no harm to others. > >Try defining harm. Try defining taste. People like you have argued that >slavery caused no harm. Now who is making an ad hominem attack? In this discussion I am arguing for greater human freedom and you are not. You have more in common with the slaver than I do, sir. >Disallowing women to vote caused no harm. What are you talking about? >And of course that discrimination in the workplace causes no harm. It causes harm if you believe people have an obligation to work with everybody. I don't believe this. Let's say somebody likes only Albanians and hates everybody else. I would rather that person spent his or her time with Albanians and not with me. No harm done. What is more, I believe I have no moral right to demand that person spend time with me if they don't want to do so, for whatever reason, including discrimination. >This just makes me glad that you are clearly in a minority, unable to >withstand the wheels of change. Change is not in and of itself a blessing or a curse. Positive change is a blessing. Redlining laws are nothing new. Cryptoanarchy is. >>>Generally, people who understand the problem are without access to >>>capital. They would like to go there. They cant get capital. When >>>they approach current interests, they wont go there. >> >>Maybe there's something funny about the deal. > >That's it. All those lawyers involved with putting together deals >(something they succesfully do for a living) put together a funny deal. >That's it. It's a conspiracy. Be careful everyone, the poor people are >planning something. Run, run. The "funny" I had in mind was that it wasn't such a good investment, not that lawyers are universally corrupt. The fear that potential investors have is not that the "poor people are planning something", but that they are not planning anything and will be unable to pay back the money they borrow. >>>There are a few examples of people who actually realize this as a >>>problem/opportunity. Oddly enough, this point reinforces mine. >>>Redlining did exist. Bank of America realized it and made a lot of >>>money. But it still exists elsewhere. Why dont business plans >>>around the country spring up on venture capitalists desks with an >>>approved stamp on them? >> >>More to the point, why isn't Matthew J. Miszewski drooling in >>anticipation of all the money he is going to make by recognizing this >>glorious opportunity? Giannini made a tremendous amount of money. > >Just because a market exists that is far from stating that barriers to >entry arent enormous and that a market segment is sufficient to make >'tremendous amounts of money'. But the mortgage market is huge. And, we have inner cities all over the U.S. If you there are large areas which are completely unserviced by lending institutions, this is a huge opportunity. I am prepared to hear that there are barriers to entry. What are they? >This will be hard for you to understand, but apparently you have no >interest in expanding your horizons. Could this be considered an ad hominem attack? >>Hmmm? Maybe it was lousy investment in spite of a good ROI number. >>Nobody? Not one person was willing to buy in? Hardly an >>endorsement. > >What are you talking about? Good ROI, good investment. How do you >define 'lousy investment'? Maybe you work for a bank? What do you >do? Oh yeah, you are Red Rackham. If you knew where Red Rackham got his name, you would find it amusing. No, good ROI does not mean good investment. "Past performance does not guarantee future results." An investor cares about future results. What happens to mortgages in poor areas during the next recession? BTW, what reasons did your prospective investors give for declining? >>>Compare this now to people whom banks would generally consider a >>>good risk. College Graduates. Generally, these folks live outside >>>of the red line. Good risks right? What about those nasty student >>>loan default rates? The red lines dont make business sense. >> >>I'm hearing that cash register ringing. Go for it! >> > >Whenever a good point is made, you go to that nifty "ring, ring" >crap. Do you deny that the default rate on student loans is >outrageous. Do you deny that these people generally live out of the >redlines? This wouldn't surprise me much. But, aren't student loans typically cosigned, often by the government? I hope the problem is obvious. If people (e.g., banks) want to lend their money to high default rate groups, I won't object unless it's my money. >>That's easy. Once a month get ten families together to go to the >>nearest warehouse store in the suburbs and stock up on provisions. > >Have you carried that much home on a bus lately? I mean, you were >poor, no? Or do we all forget little things like that? Incidentally, I do see poor people taking their groceries on the bus. Smart. Usually, poor people know somebody with a car. But, let's say they don't. There are all sorts of delivery and shipping services available. Taxi services, for instance, usually have a few vans around for hauling things. And, there are grocery delivery services. You could probably find a store which would throw in delivery if enough goods were moving. Say it costs $20 (you take the bus there), that's not much when spread over a thousand dollars of food. >>Or, one poor family could buy a bunch of stuff every month and sell it >>out of their house and save everybody the trip. > >Making the original capital in their basement of course. How many >microloan programs do you know of Red? It doesn't require a microloan. The other families could give their friends the money and save the trip. >>Discussions regarding "the cycle of poverty" are usually little more >>than litanies of excuses. > >I keep forgetting that poor people want to remain poor. When will I >learn. They use up all their energy thinking up excuses. Oil >Company execs never treat blacks differently. Glass ceilings dont >exist. Hey if I keep saying it maybe I will learn. I don't believe I have said anything about the management of oil companies or glass ceilings. The reason most people are poor is because they are not functioning well in their environment. I am prepared to hear otherwise, but this has been my experience. >>I challenge you to put your own money into this venture. You don't >>even have to quit your job to get into the microlending business until >>you've built it up to the point where it can support you. > >This sounds like advice from someone who has never tried. Not you, red. Would it make a lot of sense for me to try this? I'm the one arguing that investors probably know what they are doing. >>My point is not that there is a great opportunity so "somebody >>somewhere" will solve the racism problem. My point is that you >>yourself do not believe there is a great opportunity if it involves >>money you really care about, i.e. your own. > >Actually, my largest investment is in a minority owned business. Funny >thing. My money. How odd. Well, good for you. I mean that sincerely. Doing well, I trust? >>You are claiming that there are ZERO investors who will invest in this >>great opportunity because they are racists. Contrary to popular >>belief, most African-Americans are not poor or even gang members. > >Where the hell did this come from? I *never* asserted it. Red must be >watching too much TV. Perhaps I misunderstood. Didn't you say that you were involved with a mortgage program for poor people and were unable to find any investors? >>If you are claiming that even African-American investors are >>irrationally racist about lending to poor people, you should be >>forewarned that I and many other people are going to find that a >>little hard to believe. > >Racism is a dynamic of Power Red. There are, unfortunately, >successful Blacks that do not help out the neighborhoods they came >from. They do not credit Affirmative Action for its help. Consider >me 'forewarned'. Please explain in greater detail how the dynamic of power works in this situation. I am truly interested, but your one line sentence gives me little to go on. I was not proposing that successful African-Americans "help out" their old neighborhoods. Rather, I was proposing that they would be able to see the opportunity and exploit it to the benefit of all parties. "Greed is good." >>>>Banks have practiced discrimination, and not just against black >>>>people. They have been able to get away with it. How? Because >>>>the government has protected the banking guild from competition. > >I never mentioned that blacks were the only poor in this country. >That was one of Red's assumptions. Much like the ones about poor >people being lazy, dirty, blah, blah. Yes, it appears I did make an assumption. Every redlining discussion I have seen in the past concerned African-Americans and this caused me to make a careless statement. My apologies. Getting back to the point, you have failed to explain how banks get away with their discriminatory practices. I think the markets see redlining as damage and route around it. Why do you believe this is not happening? (Astute observers will notice that this thread really does concern the cypherpunk list. Summary: Cryptoanarchy will loosen or even eliminate controls on the flow of capital. This benefits anybody who is otherwise shut out of the system, including poor people.) >>>We agree. But I feel that a legal elimination of redlining would >>>decrease costs to the industry. >> >>Wrong. Redlining is devilishly difficult to define. > >What's so difficult. God, I hope you arent an attorney. Let's consider some laws we could make to stop redlining. "You will not draw red lines on maps around neighborhoods where you will not make loans." In practice, you will not find the maps and it will be hard to prove the case. The banks will make a few loans in the areas they have redlined just to comply with the law. The next law will be more complicated. The government has to dictate how many loans in what amounts are to be made where. This is known in other countries as "central planning". It has a poor track record. You may counter, "But you said it would be hard to define and then you said it could be defined." I believe that this sort of "law" stretches the meaning of the phrase the "rule of law" because the government is not constrained in any way. It dictates the bank's actions. In practice, I think the way it works is that a bank has to make loans to the same area where it received deposits. It is unclear whether this benefits poor people who are good credit risks, but it definitely punishes poor people who want to deposit money because it makes it a less attractive market in which to offer banking services. The consequence is that many poor people keep their cash around the house. Naturally, this leads to increased theft and greater difficulty in saving. The law has the effect of saying "Poor people can only lend their money to other poor people." I find it hard to believe that his benefits the poor or was intended to do so. >>That hurts a small bank more than any other because they have to >>figure out how to comply with the law and defend themselves against >>the regulators instead of just borrowing and lending money. It >>raises the costs of banking. That means it is harder for people to >>borrow and lend money. And that, if you care about efficiency, is >>inefficient. > >It costs money *to practice* redlining. Not to eliminate the >practice. If decisions are based on merit alone, where do costs >increase. Redlining adds a layer of investigation to a loan >analysis. Eliminating it eliminates one. It's a pretty easy investigation. I doubt it costs much. You've already heard what I have to say about opportunities. >>>If they never did we would still have slavery and only white, >>>adult, male, land-owners would vote. While success is rare, it has >>>prevailed when the cause is just. >> >>I hate to admit it, but you do have a point here. > >And yet you assert that the government should not tell you what to do. >Make up your mind Red. Maybe you can help me with some history. Didn't the government have something to do with enforcing slavery laws? Perhaps I missed something. Usually, we want the government to tell other people what to do and to leave ourselves alone. Since I respect the desire other people have to make decisions about their lives, I oppose most governmental interference. >>However, the way privacy will be permanently eroded is through laws >>called "The Privacy Protection Act" which have clauses allowing the >>government to do whatever it wants. It is disconcerting to have the >>government dictating what information you may or may not keep on your >>computer or who you may give it to. > >While this is totally of the point of the post, at least we can agree on >something. You did not give the appearance of agreeing with me. For instance: At 10:50 AM 12/3/1996, Matthew J. Miszewski wrote: >(snip) >>(Just for the record, what the hypothetical insurance companies and >>employers are doing by using data they have obtained should not, in >>a free society, be illegal in any way. All information contributes >>to decision-making, about loans, credit, insurance, employment, etc. >>In a free society, it is up to people to not disclose that which >>they do not wish remembered.) > >While the libertarians on the list have affected my way of looking at >regulation I, and others, do not subscribe (suscribe ;)) to Tim's >absolute theory. Unless, of course, by free society Tim is refering >to one where corporations hold themselves to a level of "personal" >responsibility, which in many realms is part of any definition of >"free". > >Take, for example, the practice of redlining. How are people who live in >"bad" neighborhoods supposed to not reveal that information. While you did not state it explicitly, in the context above I interpreted this to mean that you supported laws which restricted the use banks make of information they obtain from their clients. In other words, people are not allowed to tell each other what they know. That does not seem like a good idea. >[Excuse the tone of the post. Dealing daily with some of the effects of >racism, one gets sick of the same arguments and assumptions made by most. >I thought you were interested in differing points of view, but the tone of >your post suggested otherwise.] What you discovered was that I strongly disagree with your point of view. That does not mean that I am not interested in what you have to say. But let's assume the worst: I am terrible person and I am only using you to disseminate my own political ideas. You may find that patiently demonstrating the flaws in my thinking or how my beliefs are unfounded in reality is more effective at persuading other people. As it is, it appears that you are evading the questions I raise. The views I hold are not uncommon in the United States. I have to think that you would do the world a service by exposing their flaws, if there are any. Red Rackham

5 5

[URGENT] Forgery detection
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The only `culture' Timmy May possesses is that cultivated from his foreskin scrapings. ,,, -ooO(o o)Ooo- Timmy May v

1 0

Re: PGP 3 Beta testers needed
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Here, Timmy Mayflower descends into total > inanity. He should have a cold shower and/or a > Turkish coffee. > > |\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ __ > | \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ | O~-_ Timmy Mayflower > | >----|-|-|-|-|-|-|--| __/ > | / / / / / / / / |__\ > |/ / / / / / / / > All joking aside, is there any reason I shouldn't trust Tim May (assuming I don't care about his personal details like sexual preference, etc.)? Thanks.

6 8

Re: Codebreakers on the shelves!
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Tue Dec 10 10:16:58 1996 >> Warning: The book is $65.00 hardbound! (It is also *NOT* a small >> book. It is large. About 2000 pages by my guess. > 1181 actually, not including the table of contents and preface. It's available in swiss bookstores for $49. I'm about to get one :) - ------< fate favors the prepared mind >------ Remo Pini rp(a)rpini.com PGP: http://www.rpini.com/crypto/crypto.html - ----< words are what reality is made of >---- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv Comment: http://www.rpini.com/crypto/crypto.html iQEVAwUBMq0qjRFhy5sz+bTpAQER8Af8DviUdSvXhR1Ue7mMJY5/RndZjrTTEdU3 aMEkm7+Xly4ChN62CvKfiBwPjU/eYaEWPiC7YTYGJxe1tSnUoA4K0SHShPAmGI0M vj0/YlaST2/eSwm0m9bu9pcQLEGqX0w/ZsVHPliqTfjcA2k4c6feQg0ku0Ddfija x5y3MfkKoSGohbF96LQ6+KTJkKJuxnHZnRYPFUiXZCS5+CQHqK1I9VAGzeyF+7th Wj0vNif7oUBWH7Qssib380FQj5GtVN0IH/Z/vdcFBrxlXMPRqHWDVmPuIB2BTd2p 6aF4ioF4IUPKTydxJ4ZIVIyh9mV3QHQeJE1hbBb4AoDpxBp0Mrn7Cg== =Ek6e -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

6 5

Re: PICS is not censorship
by jbaber＠mi.leeds.ac.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May <tcmay(a)mail.got.net> writes: > At 3:52 PM -0800 12/8/96, Lucky Green wrote: > >Let's put the question if something like PICS will be mandated aside for > >the moment. Do you agree that sites that deliberately mislabel their > >content, will eventually face legal action? If so, then PICS should not be > >considered truly voluntary. I disagree, mandating labeling is a completely separate thing from deliberately mislabeling. No one could force me into entering into a contract with them, but if I chose to then it would, and very probably should, be enforceable. > If I believe pictures of people having sex should be marked "Suitable for > all ages" (or whatever the Official PICS Status Code is) will I be > criminally or civilly in danger? If so, then PICS is a ratings system which > individuals are likely to be unable to interpret themselves. What if the PICS classifications were worded so as to describe the factual content of a page rather than the writers opinion of its suitability? This, if correctly implemented, could remove the problem of interpretation. > (This takes the element of intent to deliberately defeat PICS out of the > equation, and asks if "innocent mislabeling" or "philosophical disagreement > alternate labeling" will expose the mislabeller to charges. Factual classifications should completely remove the problems of innocent mislabeling and philosophical disagreement (if you disagree don't label but if you use our labels follow our rules). I would never claim to be a lawyer but from my naive point of view I would say that putting false labels on a page would be misrepresenting it and could possibly constitute fraud? Take for example a page labeled with the <Topless> factual tag, that charged for access. Surely a user could, at the very least claim that false advertising got him to (pay to) view the page if he was searching for Topless pictures? > What I see with any such enforcement of PICS standards is yet another Full > Employment Act for Lawyers, and the Lawyer's Guild will be oh so happy to > see PICS essentially made part of the bureacratic morass: > > "Due to the complexities of the PICS ratings system, and varying community > interpretations of the elements of PICS, we advise that no person post > anything to the Net with a PICS rating without seeking competent legal > advice from a PICS-licensed legal professional." Unfortunately this may be the case, however I would suspect that this may go the other way with people thinking that if they can be sued for mislabeling their pages they just will not label them at all. Jon Baber jbaber(a)mi.leeds.ac.uk http://chem.leeds.ac.uk/ICAMS/people/jon/

5 5

Diffie-Hellman Mayonnaise
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim Mayonnaise is just a poor excuse for an unschooled, retarded thug. ___ <*,*> Tim Mayonnaise [`-'] ' - '

1 0

Puzzle Palace 2nd edition (1983) Info
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I remember that there was some confusion as to the second edition of _The Puzzle Palace_ by Bamford. (Sorry if this info has been posted before. I did not see a resolution to it. I may have missed it if it was.) "I found a copy of _The Puzzle Palace_ 2nd edition!", he said crypticly. In the Penguin Press printing of _The Puzzle Palace_, it notes that there is the 1982 edition (published by Houghton Mifflin) and one in 1983 (published by Penguin) with a new afterward. Since the afterward contains a fair amount of new information (it looks like a number of FOIA requests came in after going to press), it is probibly the "Second Edition" of which Schneier speaks... Hope that clears things up... (I am going to see if the dealer I got the book from will give me the info on where he ordered it. It was in stock, whereever he got it...) --- | "Spam is the Devil's toothpaste!" - stuart(a)teleport.com | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com|

2 1

Review of the EPP plug-in 0.2 for Eudora
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[Note: this is CCed to the developer for two reasons. First, I wanted him to know of the review. Second, I have another two bugs at the bottom that I have not reported.] I have been putting the Eudora PGP plug-in through its paces. My findings have been interesting... The instalation was quick and painless. All of the defaults were pulled from the mail information upon first running the Eudora after installing. It provides some basic functions for using PGP. The functions provided are: -- Clearsign Message -- Decrypt Message -- Encrypt Message -- Verify Signature -- Add Key -- Paste (Insert) Key These appear under the Edit menu in the plug-ins submenu. (It would be nice for these to be in their own seperate menu, but that may be beyond the scope of the plug-in developers kit.) I have not seen any glaring errors (GPFs and the like.) There are some functional problems I have discovered. These should be cleaned up in a future version. (What do you expect for a 0.2 release?) These are the problems/bugs I have found so far: -- If you do not define a default ID in the PGP config.txt, it will take the last ID generated on the secret key ring. (This is a common problem. This is not the only app that has it.) -- The program does not word wrap before sending the message to get signed. This breaks the signature when Eudora word wraps it opon sending the message. (Another common problem. I remember a bunch of apps fixing this one at one time a few months ago...) -- If you decrypt a message, the mail headers are destroyed. (I just discovered this one last night. It makes replying a bit of a challenge...) -- The plug-in does not deal with "personalities". (This is not a bug, but something that would be *REAL* helpful. Now if you could get personalities that connected to nym servers.) All in all, this is a useful plug-in. It has a few rough spots, but that is to be expected. (This is a 0.2 release.) Having this functionality in Eudora makes PGP encrypted lists *MUCH* more usable. (Cut and paste for each message and/or firing up a seperate e-mail app to scan for messages becomes more trouble than it is worth in a real hurry...) BTW, this is the original information as to where to get the plug-in. How much of this is current, i am not certain... (The mailing list was broken according to Lucky Green.) > Eudora/PGP Plug-In > >Download version 0.20 from the Web: > * http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~gt6525c/eppi/epp16_02.zip > (for 16-bit version of Eudora 3.0 for Windows 3.1) > * http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~gt6525c/eppi/epp32_02.zip > (for 32-bit version of Eudora 3.0 for Windows NT/95) > >If you don't have Web access, but have FTP access, try the following sites. >Note that if the version you are trying to get was released today or just a few days ago, it may not have shown up at the sites below yet, so give it a few days: > >papa.indstate.edu: /pub/winsock-l/mail/epp16_02.zip > /pub/winsock-l/Windows95/mail/epp32_02.zip > /pub/winsock-l/WindowsNT/mail/epp32_02.zip > >ftp.winsite.com: /pub/pc/win3/winsock/epp16_02.zip > /pub/pc/win95/winsock/epp32_02.zip > >If you want to be automatically notified of new versions, send e-mail to gt6525c(a)prism.gatech.edu with the subject of "eppi news", and the following message body: > >join >stop > > --- | "Spam is the Devil's toothpaste!" - stuart(a)teleport.com | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com|

1 0

Re: PICS is not censorship
by jbaber＠mi.leeds.ac.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Tim May <tcmay(a)mail.got.net> writes: > If it's only a contract, and forever only a contract, then I am less > worried. But my point is that I fear the purely contractual status will not > last. This point is something that we can agree on completely. But the question is should be approach it from a 'compromising' point of view encouraging completely volentary contracts or wait for the government to attempt to mandate a system. Although ideal we should fight against any form of censorship I think that the public are generally ignorant enough to say 'well it works with films so why not with web pages' when faced with the four horsemen. > (And, as I think it was Lucky Green who pointed out, what is to stop people > who have _not_ entered into any contract with one of the (several?) PICS > agencies from simply claiming a rating? If the PICS folks want to set up a > system for digital signatures, compliance testing, etc., fine...so long as > non-customers don't have to pay for it. Let the Hallelujah Brigade and the > Dervishes subsidize their systems.) Again I was thinking more along the lines of having the PICS system similar to british standards where claiming to have something that you do not is illegal. However I think that your idea, although put forward facetiously, is actually ideal. People currently pay for web-blockers so why should they not buy web browsers that allow restricting (for their own children of course) which web sites etc they can reach from digitally signed ratings on pages. Initially browser sales could pay for web ratings (much as they currently pay for researching which sites should and should not be allowed into things like surfwatch), once the browsers themselves become widespread, and view per page (or even site) automatic charging comes into use then such an organisation could even charge to review your web pages - if you do not like their evaluation then just do not use them. > >> If I believe pictures of people having sex should be marked "Suitable for > >> all ages" (or whatever the Official PICS Status Code is) will I be > >> criminally or civilly in danger? If so, then PICS is a ratings system which > >> individuals are likely to be unable to interpret themselves. > > > >What if the PICS classifications were worded so as to describe the factual > >content of a page rather than the writers opinion of its suitability? This, > >if correctly implemented, could remove the problem of interpretation. > > Doubful. I contend that any such approach is bound to fail. > > Suppose I describe a picture of adults having sex as "A joyful experience," > or "Children need to look at this!"? > > There simply is no "factual" description of a page. Every person will have > their own descriptions. Mandating that words be "true" is the end of free > speech as we know it. I was starting from the point that there were a number of officially (by the PICS organisation) recognised PICS labels each of which had specific definations in a similar manner to existing HTML tage.. Nothing would stop anyone from making up their own new tags but browsers could only assume that the official ones would be strictly defined. > (For starters, religions--all of them--will have to be shut down.) This is a bad thing? (;->) > >> (This takes the element of intent to deliberately defeat PICS out of the > >> equation, and asks if "innocent mislabeling" or "philosophical disagreement > >> alternate labeling" will expose the mislabeller to charges. > > > >Factual classifications should completely remove the problems of innocent > >mislabeling and philosophical disagreement (if you disagree don't label but > >if you use our labels follow our rules). I would never claim to be a lawyer > >but from my naive point of view I would say that putting false labels on a > >page would be misrepresenting it and could possibly constitute fraud? > > Fraud? What happened to free speech? The assumption that there even exist > "factual descriptions" (and presumably "false descriptions") is an > incredibly pernicious idea, at least as regards free speech. Not having a detailed knowledge of the American right to free speach I can only go on my opinions, but lieing with the intent to defraud would almost certainly be illegal over here. The solution for this of course goes right back to reputations and digital signatures. > If I wish to describe two people having sex as "Two happy persons engaged > in a happy pursuit," this is not "fraud." True, many parents will dislike > it, as will many Mennonites, etc. So? But these would not be 'Officially Recognised tags' so would essentially mean nothing. How to inforce the Official Recognition is another matter and I believe that your sugestion of digital signatures would fit the bill (although it does introduce the problem of another person rating your work - you must either accept their 'Official' rating or do without (or find another company that rates your work in the way that you wish)). > >> What I see with any such enforcement of PICS standards is yet another Full > >> Employment Act for Lawyers, and the Lawyer's Guild will be oh so happy to > >> see PICS essentially made part of the bureacratic morass: > >> > >> "Due to the complexities of the PICS ratings system, and varying community > >> interpretations of the elements of PICS, we advise that no person post > >> anything to the Net with a PICS rating without seeking competent legal > >> advice from a PICS-licensed legal professional." > > > >Unfortunately this may be the case, however I would suspect that this may go > >the other way with people thinking that if they can be sued for mislabeling > >their pages they just will not label them at all. > > Of course, the most correct and consistent view is to just leave it for a > market solution: some label, some don't, some label carelessly, some label > anally [no content is implied! :-}), some label deceptively, some label > clearly, and so on. A market solution with a number of different labeling organisations, and labels validated by digital signatures would be idea.... if you want what your child sees to be decided by ratings assigned by the "good mothers of america' or the 'porn hunters of the UK' then it is up to you. > Again, my concern is not that some bunch of folks initiate a PICS or SICS > or LIKS system, but that it the legal system gets involved...I surmise that > many lawmakers are already talking about this--this came up in connection > with the CDA case, that a labelling system such as PICS could resolve some > of the issues....I hardly expect that a fully voluntary system would meet > the demands of the censors. I agree, the censors will at an absolute minimum want everything labeled in such a way that they can get rid of anything that they deam 'inappropriate'. This means a centralised authority and everyone getting all of their pages labeled. Thankfully, given the size, complexity and multi-jurisdictional nature of the web (and internet in general) this is simply not practical, and I believe that it should be possible to persuade them so. The only way for them to achieve anything near their ends would be a widely deployed rating system backed by digital signatures and browsers capable of recognising these signatures and labels and descrimingating based on them. The only disadvantage that I can see to such a system would be that it would make it easier for goverments, corporations and other organisation from passing through their servers and routers allowing wide scale sensorship. This should be prevented by having a number of rating organisations slowly gaining popularity (overall they must be popular or parents blocking unrated would be unacceptably restrictive). There would be nothing to stop a page having ratings from a number of organisations or infact from none at all. Jon Baber jbaber(a)mi.leeds.ac.uk http://chem.leeds.ac.uk/ICAMS/people/jon

8 8

Patriots should use PGP
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Re: PICS is not censorship
by Ryan Russell/SYBASE 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Are you people trying to bait us Mormons again? :) Ryan ---------- Previous Message ---------- To: cypherpunks cc: jbaber From: jbaber @ mi.leeds.ac.uk @ smtp Date: 12/10/96 03:29:34 PM Subject: Re: PICS is not censorship Mike McNally <m5(a)vail.tivoli.com> writes: > jbaber(a)mi.leeds.ac.uk wrote: > > > > Not having a detailed knowledge of the American right to free > > speach I can only go on my opinions, but lieing with the intent > > to defraud would almost certainly be illegal over here. > > So where lies intent to defraud in the act of deliberately > mislabeling a web page? Why is that any different from me > standing on the street corner (or at Hyde Park Corner) announcing > that I'm the Messiah? I seem to have edited the previous message badly and left out the context which was false labeling on pages for which there was a charge to view. More along the lines of false advertising to be sure but still fraud in my opinion. Also, of course, it would be very hard to show that you were not, in fact, the Messiah (;->). Jon Baber jbaber(a)mi.leeds.ac.uk http://chem.leeds.ac.uk/ICAMS/people/jon

1 0

[CRYPTO] E-Cash
by nobody＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim C[reep] May uses an Adolf Hitler action figure as a dildo. ____ \ _/__ Tim C[reep] May \\ / \/

1 0

A new memetic message
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've never seen this one before: >Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 08:28:10 +0100 (MET) >From: Ahsan Yousaf Durrani <c948148(a)student.dtu.dk> >To: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com >Subject: *splat* (fwd) >Message-Id: <Pine.HPP.3.95.961210082806.19729V-100000(a)lorenz.gbar.dtu.dk> >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > > > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Fri, 6 Dec 1996 14:02:10 +0100 (MET) >From: Ahsan Yousaf Durrani <c948148(a)student.dtu.dk> >To: c948148(a)student.dtu.dk >Subject: *splat* > > > > > salaaaam, you've been hit! > > > **** * * *** * * > * * ** * * * * * > * * * * * * * * > * * * * * * * * > * * * * * * * * * > * * * * * * * * * * > * * * * * * * * * * > * * * * * * * * * * * > **** * ** *** * * > > *** * * * > * * * * * * > * * * * * * > * * * * * * > ***** ******* * * > * * * * * * > * * * * * * > * * * * * * > ***** * * ****** ****** > > > Consider yourself hit by a snowball !! > >Send this message to as many people as possible, in the first > *E-MAIL SNOWBALL FIGHT!* > >Send it back or to people already listed above. Send it to your >parents, siblings, politicians, teachers, bullies or anyone else >you've wanted to hit with a snowball. have fun. but don't blame me if >you're hit back !! > >Remember: e-mail snowballs don't hurt, don't get you soaked and >don't melt away. Throw one today ! > > > >

1 0

Re: Codebreakers on the shelves!
by Xenu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Subject: Re: Codebreakers on the shelves! > Date: Tue, 10 Dec 1996 02:36:11 -0800 > From: "Timothy C. May" <tcmay(a)got.net> [snip] > I took a look at it a few days ago, and am disappointed. [snip] > However, the public key cryptography revolution is covered in about two or > three pages (or at least this is my recollection). Brief mention is made of > Diffie, Hellman, etc., but nothing surprising or new. 2 or 3 pages for public key crypto? That's disgusting! > So, it seems a better deal is to get one of the many used copies of the > original, for $20 or less, and then read any of the many good articles on > modern cryptography. I was considering getting a copy of the new edition, but now I think I'll look for a used 1st edition. > I'm hoping the new edition of Bamford is handled better. Let's hope... > --Tim May Xenu <Xenu(a)nym.alias.net> 1024/0C436F8D 1996/07/14 PGP KEY Fingerprint 06 94 31 1F 96 EF C9 ED E9 86 6A AF 6E 10 E2 86 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3ia Charset: cp850 iQCVAgUBMq3wDV4LyFQMQ2+NAQEbcAP9FIj8LxwQB2Jq5MivyRp0Nj1Lo25BnSqk 6phIL7jSNiwZGDa735zD8cIJz+Rh8Fq42MEBX3NczCae3nBr8BBPXLR6k4XKH7wR u1eWMaqM2Dl5h9w7XwA/Edd1miw/f85gxKIiF7tYE/whkD/bMK8+Ry9Sh9bMDGKm DowxFvOMwAU= =wTVs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: PICS is not censorship
by jbaber＠mi.leeds.ac.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mike McNally <m5(a)vail.tivoli.com> writes: > jbaber(a)mi.leeds.ac.uk wrote: > > > > Not having a detailed knowledge of the American right to free > > speach I can only go on my opinions, but lieing with the intent > > to defraud would almost certainly be illegal over here. > > So where lies intent to defraud in the act of deliberately > mislabeling a web page? Why is that any different from me > standing on the street corner (or at Hyde Park Corner) announcing > that I'm the Messiah? I seem to have edited the previous message badly and left out the context which was false labeling on pages for which there was a charge to view. More along the lines of false advertising to be sure but still fraud in my opinion. Also, of course, it would be very hard to show that you were not, in fact, the Messiah (;->). Jon Baber jbaber(a)mi.leeds.ac.uk http://chem.leeds.ac.uk/ICAMS/people/jon

2 1