December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer
by Mark Krell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 14:22 EDT >From: "E. Allen Smith" <EALLENSMITH(a)ocelot.Rutgers.EDU> >To: ravage(a)EINSTEIN.ssz.com >Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com, list-managers(a)greatcircle.com >Subject: Re: Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com > >From: IN%"ravage(a)EINSTEIN.ssz.com" "Jim Choate" 12-FEB-1997 11:59:08.20 > >>> Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 19:18:46 -0600 (CST) >>> From: ichudov(a)algebra.com >>> Subject: Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up" > >>> John Gilmore wrote: >>> > A pentium is definitely up to this task. I've been running it the >>> > whole time on a slower 40MB SPARCstation-2 (that also runs netnews and >>> > general computing). Give it a big /var/spool partition (mine is 60MB) >>> > because every message will sit in the queue for days (*somebody* on >>> > the list will have an unreachable name server or MX server until the >>> > msg times out). Give it lots of RAM and paging space, since each >>> > sendmail process takes about 2MB virtual, 1.4MB physical, and you will >>> > have dozens running at the same time. > >>My approach to this problem has been to use a 1G drive and mount the entire >>file system on it. Swap and MS-Dos each get their own partitions. This >>allows the use of the entire drive as a buffer. I am in the process of >>adding another 1G in approx. two weeks with the intent of moving /home off >>the main drive. This not only gives the system more space but the users as >>well. I set swap to 4x main ram. I use Linux and have it as one giant >>partition even though suggested is blocks of 16M, works for me (YMMV). Would >>be minor to monitor df and alarm when it gets to 200M or something. > >>I must admit however that I am looking at a faster mbrd. and a bigger hard >>drive in the immediate future to make up for the extra load I expect. Had >>not really planned on the remailer project however... > >>> > You'll need a BIG mailbox for the bounce messages, and someone (or >>> > some unwritten software) to scan it every day or two and delete the >>> > lusers whose mailboxes are full or who dumped their account without >>> > unsubscribing. The bounce mailbox on toad gets between 1 and 4MB of >>> > email a day; more when the list is under attack. > >>How about dumping the bounces to /dev/null? I shure don't care if some >>bozo's (other than mine that is) mailbox goes away. > > Umm... because you'll eventually accumulate _lots_ of addresses >that don't work, which will slow things down tremendously in sending >mail out? > >>> > The real issue is how willing you are to put your own time into >>> > dealing with problems. Not only do things go wrong by themselves, but >>> > there are malicious assholes in the world who will deliberately make >>> > trouble for you just because they like to. Spending a day or two >>> > cleaning up the mess is just part of the job. Check your level of >>> > committment two or three times before taking on the task -- so you >>> > won't end up getting disgusted after a month or two and putting the >>> > list's existence into crisis again. It's not a "set it up and forget >>> > it" kind of operation. > >>I can verify this. If I was not already having to deal with these problem >>as a current mailing list operator I certainly would not take on the >>job. It is one of the reasons I STRONGLY suggest anyone serious about this >>should use the resources to make money as well. Anyone capable of setting up >>and operating such a remailer system is at least capable of basic skills. > > Well, loki(a)cyberpass.net has made the offer to host the entire >list... and Lance is certainly making money at it. While this would have >some problems in comparison with the distributed list idea (namely more of >a choke point), it would decidedly help. > >>> Another suggestion may be to set sendmail expire option to one day >>> instead of five so that messages that cannot be delivered would bounce >>> faster and not clog the queue. > >>I like this idea very much. Myself I would set it for like 4 hours or so and >>if it couldn't be delivered then bye bye. Another motivation for selective >>sites to operate as archives without themselves being remailers. > >>Another issue related to this is at what point to unsubscribe accounts. It >>seems to me that if the address times out some number of times it should be >>deleted. > >>Is anyone interested in acting as a mail-to-news gateway? > > >

1 0

Re: your mail
by Mark Krell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Subject: Re: your mail >To: markk(a)randomc.com (Mark Krell) >Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 20:59:32 -0600 (CST) >Reply-To: ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov) >From: ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) >X-No-Archive: yes >Organization: Bool Sheet Software > >I do not think that you are on one of my mailing list. > >If you think that you are, please send me one of the sample messages >WITH FULL HEADERS that came to you frm my list. > >I am willing to help you. > > - Igor. > >

1 0

Re: List for discussing many majordomos
by Tim Bray 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

some idiot subscribed me. I know how to use majordomo I know how to read mail headers Majordomo says that the address that it is sending this shit to is not on the list Much & all as I sympathize with the ethos and practice of cypherpunkery, please stop. I have asked in the proper approved way many times, and am still deluged. GET ME OFF THIS LIST! Thank you.

1 0

How to make majordomo request confirmations of subscriptions?
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi All, I would like to set up my majordomo to request subscription confirmations from users, by sending them a cookie. Looking at the majordomo config files, I have not found such option. Ideally I would like to have a system that a) requires the new users confirm new subscriptions and b) once in a while as users to confirm their existing subscriptions. Is there any way to do it? Thank you. - Igor.

2 1

Re :Re?
by Alec 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:02 PM 2/12/97 -0500, you nastily wrote in the form of : : :Attachment Converted: "c:\remove1.txt" : How, do you imagine, did you get on this God-forsaken list? Anger abounds. Is this Kismet that you are here now at this crucial moment of the list's evolution? Perhaps you have something to offer of which you are not aware. Avail yourself of our hospitality as we implode. Flee not. There is meaning to this. So our savants have told us. Speak the words to Majordomo(a)toad.com in the message panel (no quotes): "unsubscribe cypherpunks" Speak only thus. Bother us no more at our moment of transfiguration. Hail and farewell, Bro.

1 0

Re: Network of majordomos (fwd)
by Bryan Reece 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 14:33:03 -0800 From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles(a)netbox.com> Yes, I installed INN and ran a few hundred test messages through it last night. My machine will be on the net full-time Thursday or Friday. Will yours be ready then, too? We've got INN here. I created a cpunks.general group (as well as alt.cypherpunks) on taz.nceye.net and made both world-accessible. Our feed hasn't got alt.cypherpunks yet; is someone who has got it willing to feed it? (also, is there a consensus on what group names to use: new top-level hierarchy? cpunks or cypherpunks? or just the alt group, with the usual propagation and spam problems?)

1 0

Re: your mail
by Mark Krell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Subject: Re: your mail >To: markk(a)randomc.com (Mark Krell) >Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 20:59:32 -0600 (CST) >Reply-To: ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov) >From: ichudov(a)algebra.com (Igor Chudov @ home) >X-No-Archive: yes >Organization: Bool Sheet Software > >I do not think that you are on one of my mailing list. > >If you think that you are, please send me one of the sample messages >WITH FULL HEADERS that came to you frm my list. > >I am willing to help you. > > - Igor. > >

1 0

Re: Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer (fwd)
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate wrote: | | Forwarded message: | | > Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 14:22 EDT | > From: "E. Allen Smith" <EALLENSMITH(a)ocelot.rutgers.edu> | | > Umm... because you'll eventually accumulate _lots_ of addresses | > that don't work, which will slow things down tremendously in sending | > mail out? | | The current subscription is between 1,000 and 2,000 I don't think that is | _lots_. All we need to do is count the number of bounces per address in | a given period, the SSZ end is trying to decide between weekly or | monthly cleanings, and then clear that address. At no point would I need | to archive the original bounce. qmail has bounce management software for its list management tools. (bounceman) "Russell Nelson has a bounce manager which <b>totally</b> eliminates any need to deal with bounces." www.qmail.org -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Re: New group
by Jeremiah A Blatz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk writes: <snip> > > I pressed the URL alt.cypherpunks and my Netscape server said > > "no such thing" or words to that effect. > > The control message may take a few more hours to propogate, either > that or your newsadmin has rmgrouped it. The charter was clear and > concise and explained the issues so I don`t see why it should have > been rmgrouped. Can you mail me if it hasn`t been created by the time > you get this email and I`ll re-issue the cmsg. However, I`m sure it > was OK as Robert Hettinga (sp?) found it on his news server today... Yet another "me too," alt.cypherpunks is alive (dunno about well, time shall tell) on my news server. Jer "standing on top of the world/ never knew how you never could/ never knew why you never could live/ innocent life that everyone did" -Wormhole -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMwKe2Mkz/YzIV3P5AQGQYQMAkwiuqAV/PsdcCscHVbsT6rxoKMv63UQh ebBIUh9QnXxVqjxcv3dvoanYGrP1Ldyvza9GXgLlTBIwtAuC+Od026mcV0NljUT/ 9WSg3iaHdUBReHpXbTsOVF+a9lQp4fzP =Hfgq -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Private property rights on cypherpunks (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:58:42 -0500 (EST) > From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)pathfinder.com> > Subject: Private property rights on cypherpunks > I forward articles to cypherpunks that are copyrighted by my employers, or > magazines like Playboy and Wired for which I write freelance pieces. > > I like to think these articles have some value. I will not forward any of > them, nor would I be able to, if they magically became "public domain." > > "De facto public domain" is an idea that deserves to die. Now. Really? Do you have a priori permission from your publisher, who owns those stories, to distribute them elsewhere? If not please explain why I or any other person should be a willing acomplice? You could also still post them anonymously. You could also simply include a 'fair use' proviso somewhere. In such a case it would be in your publishers best interest to require a copyright notice. In that case there is no confusion about who owns those rights. Especialy when you consider the traffic is global which means your 'implied copyright' here don't mean squat there. I suspect just about every place that recognizes a copyright recognizes an explicit one. Instead of "De facto public domain should die" how about, "Implied a priori contracts should die now" Lord a mighty, haven't you heard? Information wants to be free. Let the thing go. If you really think your words are something that will someday win a Nobel or make Mr. Bill look like a pauper note it explicitly. However, it would seem to me that implicit copyright works against the axiomatic crypto-icon. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

1 0