December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Utah as a Religious Police State
by Ryan Russell/SYBASE 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I guess that depends on your definition of liberty. The Mormons originally moved there to have a place to practice their religion, and have freedom from persecution. I suppose one could extend that to wanting a place to have the freedom to have a set of rules consistant with their beliefs. Should that include freedom from interferance from folks such as yourself who want to change their rules, even though you're not presently effected? Ryan ---------- Previous Message ---------- To: cypherpunks cc: From: tcmay @ got.net ("Timothy C. May") @ smtp Date: 09/28/96 10:35:42 PM Subject: Utah as a Religious Police State Hey, Attila, let me know where you folks live...I may want to move there! At 2:56 AM +0000 9/29/96, attila wrote: > the population base is changing with an influx of non-Mormons > in town, so R rated are showing up at the theatres and video > rentals in town. Just so long as my DSS dish still works in Utah--hey, I'll invite all the jack Mormons over for tomorrow night's showing of "Inside Janine," on the "Playboy Channel." (The "Playboy Channel" is kind of tame by video rental standards, but more crotch shots than we used to see a couple of years ago.) > the police visible prescence is effective --a force of 50+ for > a population base < 25,000, plus the county sherrif cars and the > state police. Curfew is 10pm weekdays for minors --and they > enforce it, big time. midnight Fri/Sat. They enforce the "curfew" big time? Looks like some Mormon pigs need to be zapped. (My kids don't cotton to no cop telling them when they can be out in public and when they can't. Any cop who tries to stop my kids from being out has earned severe retaliation. Any councilmember or state legislator who voted for such a curfew needs to be hog-tied, covered with tar, then torched.) I guess this is why I wouldn't last very long in Mormon Country. A fascist encampment, it sounds like. (I have no problem with Mormons, or Catholics, or Muslims, or Satanists keeping _their own_ children indoors after 7, or 5, or whatever their Holy Hour or Curfew Hour is, but no fucking religious nuts are going to tell _me_ when _my_ children must be indoors. I determine where my children may be, and I don't need the State's permission for them to be out. I would think anyone with an iota of libertarian sentiment would understand this.) > ...idle hands are the devil's workshop. you want good solid > kids, you start from the gate and keep 'em busy: home, neighbors, > school, church, etc. Do Utah's cops also enforce this law, too? > they do not date until they are 16 --in groups. boys and > girls --the same rules. With the Utah State Police enforcing this "dating curfew"? (I may sound harsh here, but "curfew" means one and only one thing to me: somebody restricting my freedom of those of my children to be a public place. Should one of my children be picked up by cops for doing nothing illegal, save for being "out past curfew," I'd consider violent response to be justified. It sounds to me--not that I ever thought otherwise--that Utah is not a land that favors liberty.) --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 2

Internet 'terrorism' newsclips [CYPHER, but news]
by Donald Weightman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From today's PARADE magazine, that valuable source for insight into the popular heart and mind, "explaining" why "we" haven't been able to catch Iranian terrorists: >Thanks to the highly sophisticated surveillance capabilities, American >intelligence agencies have intercepted enough telephone messages from Iran, >ordering acts of terrorism, that Iran's terrorist network stopped using the >phone. Reportedly this has caused them to start using codes on the Internet >that are "practically" impossible to track and isolate. >"Just when we thought we had outsmarted them, they caught on and started >using codes on the Internet", an expert in international terrorrism tells >us. "There's so much crazy srewball stuff on the Internet that it's >practically impossible to track down and isolate the terrorists. No >government can analyze those millions and millions of messages." And from another piece of hard-hitting quote-the-official-source journalism in PARADE, "A New Worry: Terrorism in Cyberspace" >The danger of computer-based "cyper" attacks is second only to that posed by >nuclear arms and other weapons of mass destruction, says CIA's Director, John >Deutch. He expects the threat to grow as we rush to connect the world on the >Internet. <SNIP> >There were more than 250,000 attacks on Department of Defense computers last >year, and 65% were successful. Little is known about who launched them, why, or >what they found. In a recent test, Defense Department "red teams" admit to >intentionally hacking into 18,200 systems, with only 5% of the attacks >detected; only 27% of those attacks were reported. Wonder if the timing of these stories has anything to do with the end of term legislative push on wiretapping. Don Weightman dweightman(a)radix.net

1 0

Re: Utah as a Religious Police State
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(I received this message, with "cypherpunks(a)sybase.com" as well as "tcmay(a)sybase.com" (???) cc:ed, so I assume this message was intended for the Cypherpunks list, with some sybase domain name weirdness, or reflector, going on.) At 12:30 PM -0400 9/29/96, Ryan Russell/SYBASE wrote: >I guess that depends on your definition of liberty. The Mormons >originally moved there to have a place to practice their religion, >and have freedom from persecution. I suppose one could extend that >to wanting a place to have the freedom to have a set of rules consistant >with their beliefs. Should that include freedom from interferance from >folks such as yourself who want to change their rules, even though >you're not presently effected? Well, if Utah can rig a way to _secede_ from the Union, your arguments would make more sense. But so long as they are part of these United States, their religious beliefs about when children should be at home cannot supersede basic liberties. (There are some thorny issues about whether _minors_ have full civil rights. But I certainly know that _my_ civil rights are being affected when my children are not allowed on the streets after some hour. If my child is out, this is my problem. I neither want cops to stop-and-detain my children, nor do I want my tax monies to be used to control the behavior of other people's children. Providing no crimes are being committed, curfews for the sake of controlling the behavior of children are no more just than would be a bunch of related behavior control laws, e.g., a ban on comic books, a mandate that all children join after-school youth leagues, etc.) As for "changing their rules," you're missing the point. There are presumably many in Utah who believe as I do (maybe even some Mormons). Those who are living in Utah, as renters, owners, whatever, should not be bound by unconstitutional rules, no matter how many Mormon Elders favor them. Unless the Mormons own _all_ of the property (and maybe not even then, as renters have civil rights), they cannot impose their own notions of morality on the rest of the population, except in compelling cases (e.g., involving the well-known actual _crimes_). I don't mean to pick on Mormons, as other communities have also attempted to impose curfews and other restricitions on the children of others. My ire was raised by Attila's enthusiastic support for laws which no freedom-loving person should be enthusiastic about. Again, I have no problem with Attila restricting his own children's movements, or joining with other parents to control the behavior of their _own_ children, via religious camps, religious schools, youth leagues, etc. He can even make his own kids wear funny uniforms, funny religious hats, whatever. But, for example, tellling _me_ when _my_ children may be out on public streets (doing nothing illegal, neither robbing nor spray-painting nor committing any other real crimes) is unacceptable. I urge Attila (and others) to rethink enthusiastic support for curfews. --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

4 7

Re: Internet 'terrorism' newsclips [CYPHER, but news]
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>There were more than 250,000 attacks on Department of Defense computers last >>year, and 65% were successful. Little is known about who launched them, >why, or >>what they found. In a recent test, Defense Department "red teams" admit to >>intentionally hacking into 18,200 systems, with only 5% of the attacks >>detected; only 27% of those attacks were reported. > >Wonder if the timing of these stories has anything to do with the end of >term legislative push on wiretapping. Quite possibly. The message from this article is clear. Step up investigation and prosecution of illegal government Net activities :-) -- Steve

1 0

Chinese Censorship
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> _________________________________________________________________ > Cisco-Job Fair > _________________________________________________________________ > CHINA RELAXES CONTROLS ON INTERNET ACCOUNTS > __________________________________________________________________________ > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 Reuter Information Service > SHANGHAI (Sep 25, 1996 08:48 a.m. EDT) - China has removed limits on > the country's number of Internet accounts following the recent > installation of safety controls on the computer network, a senior > Shanghai telecommunications official said on Wednesday. Safety controls... nice euphemism, similar to "key recovery". > "Some time ago, our security arrangements were incomplete and there > was a problem with pornographic and politically unacceptable > material," said Zhang Weihua, vice-president of the Shanghai Post and > Telecommunications Administration. [...] > Zhang said access to sites on the Internet containing pornographic or > politically unacceptable material had been restricted, adding, "This > material is restricted all over the world." > He declined to give details of the security controls placed on the > servers, saying he was only responsible for the technical side of the > service. > But Zhang did say he was unaware of any restrictions on access to > major international news sites through China's Internet servers. > Foreign reports have suggested that China has cut off access to such > news sites. Analysts say that China is concerned over development of > public computer networks and their use by people opposed to communist > rule or communist policies. [...] > Zhang said for "security" reasons there was a need to control > information and discussion on the Internet and related bulletin board > services. > "But surveys done on the usage and interests of people in China with > Internet access indicate that virtually all the material they wanted > to look at is domestic," he said. Due to language differences, I would guess. > China's key Internet Service Provider (ISP) selling access accounts is > Chinanet, controlled by the Post and Telecommunications Bureau. > Zhang said the bureau took measures earlier this year to control > unauthorised activities of other access providers, including > Shanghai's Fudan University, in order to handle the security issue. > China currently has access points to the Internet in Beijing and > Shanghai. It has no plans to add more, Zhang said. > He said his department was being assisted in building its computer > network by several American-Chinese originally from mainland China who > spent time working with the U.S. space agency NASA. I see.... (grimace) > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

1 0

Does any body know anything about this?
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is this just more snakeoil or is this real? <<<<<<<< FORWARDED MESSAGE >>>>>>>> From: Ross Anderson <Ross.Anderson(a)cl.cam.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 20 Sep 1996 09:05:28 +0100 Subject: Seminar in Cryptology and Computer Security *** *** *** *** *** University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory EXTRA SEMINAR SPEAKER: Matt Blaze AT&T Research DATE: Monday 23rd September 1996 at 11.30 am PLACE: Room TP4, Computer Laboratory TITLE: SYMMETRIC-KEY CIPHERS BASED ON HARD PROBLEMS A useful principle in cipher design is to reduce or at least relate closely the cryptanalysis of the cipher to some long-studied problem that is believed to be difficult. Most public-key ciphers follow this principle fairly closely (e.g., RSA is at least similar to factoring). Modern symmetric-key ciphers, on the other hand, can rarely be reduced in this way and so are frequently designed specifically to resist the various known cryptanalytic attacks. In this informal talk, we examine a simple cipher primitive, based on Feistel networks, for which recovery of its internal state given its inputs and outputs is NP-complete. We outline simple and efficient block- and stream- cipher constructions based on this primitive. * * * The regular Michaelmas term seminar series will resume on the 8th October with a series of talks on Tuesday afternoons at 4.15 PM in room TP4, Computer Laboratory, Pembroke Street, Cambridge. A list of speakers will be circulated shortly. * * *

4 3

earthlink's image
by Allen Robinson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 28 Sep 96 at 16:09, Back Draft wrote: > Date: Sat, 28 Sep 1996 16:09:20 -0800 > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > From: backdraft(a)earthlink.net (Back Draft) > desubscribe > <sigh> Please do not assume that all earthlink users are alike. I've just mailed instructions on how to unsubscribe to "Back Draft." AR #%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#%#% "In the end, more than they wanted freedom, they wanted security. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to society but for society to give to them, when the freedom they wished for was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free." - Edward Gibbon ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Allen Robinson.........................sebago(a)earthlink.net PGP public key FE4A0A75 fingerprint 170FBC1F7609B76F 967F1CC8FCA7A41F

1 0

newsgoup gateways
by Lurker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I was wondering if anyone could point me to some servers that will allow me to post to newsgoupes. I have seen some aroud that use the format: newsgroup@domain and forward the mail to the chosen newsgroup. Thanks

1 0

British Censorship
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The actions they claim they will do will, of course, lead to no results whatsoever in many cases... as it should be. The hotline in question sounds like a number as opposed to an email address... pity, we could just bounce all spam to it and ask them to deal with it. > _________________________________________________________________ > Cisco-Job Fair > _________________________________________________________________ > BRITISH GOVERNMENT SETS UP NET PORN FILTER > __________________________________________________________________________ > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 Reuter Information Service > LONDON (Sep 23, 1996 3:48 p.m. EDT) - The British government Monday > set up a watchdog to try to get pornography off the Internet. > Safety-Net, which is being financed by the industry, will have a > hotline to which callers can report suspected illegal material and > will contact police if necessary. Being financed by the industry = if you're going through a British ISP, you're paying for it whether you like it or not. > It will publish a "legality indicator" or rating for each public > access area on the Internet known as a Usenet news group. The rating > will indicate whether the group normally contains illegal or > pornographic material and what kind. > Internet users can contact the hotline to complain about material > received from anyone via an automatic telephone, mail, e-mail or > facsimile. > Safety-Net operators will try to see where the material came from, > contact the authors and ask them to remove it. They can ask the > relevant service provider to take action and pass details to the > British Police National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS). > "We at the Home Office (interior ministry) made it clear to the > Internet providers some time ago that action was needed to deal with > obscene material on the Internet," Home Office Minister Tom Sackville > said. [...] > Science and technology minister Ian Taylor said Safety-Net would act > as a warning system to alert the public. > "As this is an international network, we have to do something to try > to eliminate illegal use of it -- the abuse of the Internet by a few > perverts," he told BBC radio. As this is an international network, this is completely impossible. > "Government and the Internet industry have been working hard to come > up with proposals that can offer real protection to net users while > preserving free speech and recgonizing the value of the net for work, > education and leisure," Taylor added in a statement. Usual government doubletalk.... preserving free speech means no such actions. [...] > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

1 0

Cancelbots in the news
by E. Allen Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> _________________________________________________________________ > Centura > _________________________________________________________________ > HATE HACKERS: KILLING DIALOGUE ON THE INTERNET > __________________________________________________________________________ > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net > Copyright &copy 1996 San Francisco Examiner Note the usual misuse of the term "hacker." > (Sep 28, 1996 02:18 a.m. EDT) -- One or more hackers using racist and > other hate terms have erased tens of thousands of messages used by a > wide variety of political discussion groups on the Internet, exposing > new concerns about the security of the worldwide computer system. > At least one Internet customer -- in Oklahoma -- has been blamed for > some of the more than 30,000 killed messages and has been cut off by > his service provider. > "Obviously, the individual responsible is no longer around here," said > William Brunton, president of Internet Connection of Tulsa, one of > several service providers of Usenet news groups that were victimized > during the weekend. "You can be assured it's not going to happen again > from here." The author really doesn't understand USENET, does he (or she)? Evidently, one of the persons posting the cancels was doing so out of this company. > He said he had turned information over to federal authorities and > could not comment further. > In Washington, D.C., an FBI spokesman declined to confirm whether the > matter was being investigated although it was unclear what, if any, > laws may have been violated. > The messages were deleted from system discussion sites used by gays, > Jewish groups, Muslims, feminists and other politically oriented > groups. > The perpetrator or perpetrators used so-called "cancelbot" software > programs labeled with such phrases as "fagcancel" and "kikecancel." > Besides Brunton's small Oklahoma firm, Internet service providers > whose discussion groups were victimized included industry giants > Netcom Inc. of San Jose, and UU Net Technologies of Falls Church, Va. > Officials of those firms were not available for comment. And operating out of these? Or is it simply that the groups in question are carried by these firms? > While some believed such attacks pose a serious threat to the sanctity > of the Internet -- which is virtually unregulated save for a generally > adhered-to protocol known as "netiquette" -- others were less alarmed. Usual mixup between USENET and the Internet, of course. > "There actually are no laws against that sort of thing," said Jonah > Seiger, policy analyst for the Center for Democracy and Technology in > Washington, D.C. "Obviously, it's sort of annoying." > He said a cancelbot, or a forged cancel message, is "a malicious > vehicle and not good netiquette." [...] > Two years ago, when some immigration lawyers "spammed the net" -- > electronically plastering news groups throughout the Internet with a > single message, an advertisement telling how to get a green card -- > "it was the first time someone figured out you could cancel those > messages," Seiger said. > Since then, phony cancelbots have appeared with some frequency. In one > of the better-known cases, the Church of Scientology used cancelbots > to erase messages from news groups used by some of its members with > whom the church was engaged in a legal battle. > The security of the Internet has also been brought into question > recently after hackers altered home pages operated by the CIA and the > Justice Department. [...] > Copyright &copy 1996 Nando.net

1 0