December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Dangerous Web Site
by Robert A. Hayden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I was net-surfing and I came across the following site: http://www.satelnet.org/ They do credit checks of any person, SS# ID's, national database searches, etc of any person or business (for a small fee). Gee, don't I feel like little brother now. ____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden(a)krypton.mankato.msus.edu \ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=- \/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> I am Pentium of Borg \/ Finger for PGP Public Key <=> you will be approximated

2 1

voice pgp
by Loren Fleckenstein 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've heard mention that Phil Zimmermann was going to demonstrate Voice PGP at the January Cypherpunks meeting at Cygnus. Can anyone mail me a note about this? Has the meeting already taken place? How well did the demo perform?

2 1

Re: Jude Milhon in WIRED
by wcs＠anchor.ho.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Oh, come on, Perry - your memory must be decaying. I've met Jude 3-4 times in the last 1.5 years, including at Bay Area cypherpunks meetings (the long boring photo-shoot for the NY Times Magazine, for instance), and it's been referred to in the past that "cypherpunks" was her pun. She's also the one who put out requests for character contributions to a novel she's doing, which went to the list. Besides, if you're grumpy that you haven't met someone, you need to get out here to the left coast more often - New York winters must be getting to you :-) Bill

1 0

Re: C`punks slogan? - Pri
by jsled＠free.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- lmccarth(a)thor.cs.umass.ed wrote: > Lest we suffer a recurrence of the C'punks Logo thread, which generated a > whole raft of list traffic which would have been better kept private, please > reply directly to Joshua and not to the whole list. [He seems to imply that > he wants private replies ("testing procmail") anyway, but I want to encourage > this practice explicitly.] Thanks... actually, that's exactly what I wanted, but forgot to put it in... and my last post about "Slogan help": disregard that entirely... it's not needed (either part). But so far I've only gotten one reply about the slogan thing, so please give me help on that one, folks... Josh Sled <jsled@ctp.org/jsled@free.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLxf3kKTT29daLBKRAQGEWgQAhrKR/r/+mqXO63RN86c7hq3bsmid2KLU ct2zJAebaZBzVvltrF3WsBYoWmCSo1tWrYFjv3QsU1gnRJRyxSGVtzzkfOSq7b51 UlGRzUb+6AXvviWmqdBwHGWbT4M6/mxxH8X8gC/eeFWyHMpgEcFzhV9tWUHCqkC/ GMDvXoaKPa0= =i71M -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- þ KWQ/2 1.2g NR þ "MTV get off the air!" - DKs

1 0

Draft of editorial to SF Chronicle
by raph＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Chaos and Anonymity keep the Internet Vital I could not let Martha Siegel's editorial ("Anarchy, Chaos on the Internet Must End", 2 Jan 1995) go unchallenged. To the uninformed reader, her arguments may seem plausible. However, her distortions give a picture of the Internet quite at odds with the true nature of the Net. Her views are by no means representative of those who actually use the Net. Of the dozens of messages I saw in response to the editorial, not a single one was in favor of her proposals. As Ms. Siegel correctly points out, the Net is not governed by any one individual person or organization. Rather, it is collectively run by those who use it as part of their daily lives. The operation of each Internet node is subject to the individual judgement of the people who own it. Ms. Siegel is wrong, however, in believeing that such a state of affairs is intolerable. Rather, this state of affairs has brough us a remarkable flowering of discourse, ideas and culture, which is just now beginning to be recognized in the mainstream press. In a lawyer's dream world, there is a rule covering every action in every situation, along with a well-functioning system to enforce the rules. This is the exact opposite of the spirit of the Net, and of Usenet in particular. Rather, there has evolved an informal set of guidelines for promoting open, civil discourse, collectively known as "netiquette." These guidelines may seem arcane to newcomers, but basically they simply ask people who use the Net to be considerate of other people, their time and their resources. A violation of netiquette brings on not legal action, but responses pointing out why the action was inconsiderate. Continued violation brings on ridicule and scorn -- people who engage in this are considered to be either sociopathic or just obnoxiously self-promoting. The single most infamous breach of netiquette in Usenet history was almost certainly the "green card spam," in which thousands of advertisements for green card services were posted to completely unrelated message areas, or "newsgroups." Advertisements presented in a way considerate to others are tolerated and even welcomed on the Net. Posting thousands of copies, though, is just going too far. Negative response was immediate. The perpetrators were asked to stop, but they refused to. One Norwegian hacker took it upon himself to track down and "cancel" the offending messages. Most people on the Net considered this to be entirely appropriate. A number of other self-promoting hucksters have sensed an opportunity, and have performed similar spams. In response, the Net evolved a defense mechanism to counter these spams and minimize the damage. The person currently serving this role is known by the pseudonym "CancelMoose." Almost everyone on the Net supports this effort, and agrees that it improves the overall value of Usenet. Who was responsible for the original green card spam? Why, Ms. Siegel herself, the same one who is complaining about "chaos and anarchy." Chaos, anarchy, and anonymity are a large part of what keeps the Net so vital. Particularly galling is Ms. Siegel's appeal to free speech. Usenet in its present form is perhaps the most conducive forum for free speech in history. The threat to free speech is not from chaos or anonymity, but from the sorts of changes that Ms. Siegel proposes. Usenet is astonishingly effective in getting around the practical barriers to free speech. These barriers come in many forms, including libel, trademark, and copyright laws, fear of retribution, etc. Because of its decentralized, communal nature, Usenet resists direct attempts to censor. The main tool for circumventing more these more indirect barriers is anonymity. As an example of such barriers, take the t-shirt commemorating the green card incident. It was emblazoned with the words, "Green Card Lawyers - Spamming the Globe" and a fist clutching a green card. Shortly after the shirt was proposed, Canter & Siegel threatened to sue if the shirt was in fact produced. It was only after several outraged lawyers promised to defend against such a case pro bono that I and others could be proud owners. Or take one of the sexual abuse recovery newsgroups, where anonymity is the norm. If someone were to post a message asking for support, saying "my uncle did it" under their real name, they would be vulnerable to a libel suit from said uncle. On the other hand, if they used an anonymous service such as the one in Finland, they would not simply escape punishment for the libel, but prevent it from happening at all. In many countries (and even China is on the Net these days), writings critical of the government, such as exposure of human rights abuses, are illegal. The authors face imprisonment, torture and death. By posting anonymously to the Net, the information can be brought safely to the attention of the world. Not all anonymous messages are pleasant or popular. Unpopular speech is a necessary consequence of free speech. At least to the founders of this country, the benefits of free speech outweigh the discomfort. Our founding fathers were also comfortable with anonymity -- the Federalist papers were originally published under the pseudonym Publius, because the authors felt the ideas should be evaluated on their own. Judging from the materials already published by Ms. Siegel, an Internet built according to her vision would free of such disturbing ideas, but would readily support five hundred channels of green card ads, impassioned pleas to purchase American flag plaques, and, yes, anonymous testimonials for radial keratotomy specialists.

4 3

interesting problem with remailers
by jml＠wizard.synapse.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I need a good dependable cypherpunk style anomymous remailer. So I have been experimenting with a few. I have discovered a rather curious problem. I have sent test messages to homer(a)rahul.net. These test messages read as follows: :: Request-Remailing-To: myname@mydonain Subject: Test this is line1 this is line2 this is line3 this is line4 this is line5 this is line6 I have encrypted this message with the public key of homer(a)rahul.net using the pgp -ea command (for armour). This yields something like: -----BEGIN PGP MESSAGE---- version 2.6.2 blahblahblah blah blah blah blah etc..... ------END PGP MESSAGE--- I have then put :: Encrypted: PGP <blank line> at the beginning of the message and send it with Eudora PC 1.4. Now curiously enough the message that I received back from homer@rahul is the following: ************************************************************* To: myname@mysite From: nobody(a)rahul.net Subject: Test Remailed-By: A Free Zone Remailer V1.2 <homer(a)rahul.net> Complaints-To: Homer Wilson Smith <homer(a)rahul.net> X-Comments: X-Comments: finger homer(a)rahul.net for instructions. X-Comments: X-Comments: Unauthorized or illegal use of this remailer, especially X-Comments: for spamming the internet or posting copyright violations X-Comments: will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. X-Comments: Homer Wilson Smith (607) 277-0959, Fax: (607) 277-8913 X-Comments: FULL HEADER LOGGING IS: ON This is line1 this is line3 this is line5 ************************************************************* No this is line2 no this is line4 no this is line6 I am unable to explain this. Obviously the message must be recieved intact by the remailer because being encrypted with PGP if it were corrupt in anyway it would simply not decode properly and I would get no reply whatsoever. Now before somebody says that the trouble is at my site, I also have an account on CI$ (compuserve). The same thing happens to message I received there. So obviously it cannot be my site. Unless I am doing something that somehow tells the remailer to only remail one line out of two. (?????) And this problem is not only with homer@rahul. Other remailers do the same. I know that it most be something that I am doing but it escapes me what. Again it must receive the PGP message correctly. I am stumped.... If anybody can help explain this little mystery, it would be most appreciated. Please reply here at cypherpunks(a)toad.com and also forward to wizard(a)alpha.c2.org (to see if it works) Thanks all -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAy8X2ZIAAAEEALbeB9136vtAk/FOOb8a1rYv7OWAVJZMiWs/CI1Hla9iUxBj hv+KM1rK31cygbk2/y38cZFQupgP34/0HkLKXsl5bP7vifXi5JzyNpeOmYT3Cr/E FqyWRFUo6dyp7AVm23ryZGZAM2qfcdXaslEqWAD3PczAnQ34vKhVa3SvpHjhAAUR tAZ3aXphcmQ= =syn9 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

hiatus
by merriman＠metronet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just a short note to let folks know that I'll be unsubscribing for a while (probably a couple of months) while I get ready and then move to Amarillo to set up an ISP :-) The staging phase is taking up a large portion of my time, and I really don't have the slack to do more than give the subject lines in the CP list a cursory glance these days - just enough to see what the current flame war is about :-) Once I get the ISP set up, I'll be putting an anon remailer on it; I may also offer "Remailer-in-a-box" accounts for some relatively minor fee (if motivated, I may even take digicash as payment :-). I don't expect any problems about setting up accounts, since I'll be the MIS Manager, VP Engineering, etc, etc. Too, since the service will be commercial, I expect that I'll be able to do a pretty fair job of ignoring complaints of the kind that get .edu and on-the-left remailers shut down. I'll still be able to receive email at this account at least until the end of February; once I get set up in Amarillo, I'll resub and let everyone know where I am (just in case anyone cares :-) FYI, the tentative name for the ISP is panhandle.net..... Dave Merriman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Finger merriman(a)fohnix.metronet.com for PGP public key and fingerprint. PGP encrypted Email welcome, encouraged, and preferred. "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." John F. Kennedy

1 0

... and speaking of WiReD...
by paul＠hawksbill.sprintmrn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Given the recent discussion on WireD, I thought some of you might enjoy this editorial (read: rant) authored by Erik Bloodaxe. Enjoy. - paul Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 15 Jan 1995 20:34:00 CST > Reply-To: TK0JUT2(a)MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU > Sender: CU-DIGEST list <CUDIGEST(a)UIUCVMD.BITNET> > From: "Cu Digest (tk0jut2(a)mvs.cso.niu.edu)" <TK0JUT2(a)MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU> > Subject: Cu Digest, #7.03 > To: Multiple recipients of list CUDIGEST <CUDIGEST(a)UIUCVMD.BITNET> > > Computer underground Digest Sun Jan 15, 1995 Volume 7 : Issue 03 > ISSN 1004-042X > > Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2(a)NIU.BITNET) > Archivist: Brendan Kehoe > Retiring Shadow Archivist: Stanton McCandlish > Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth > Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala > Ian Dickinson > Copy Reader: Laslo Toth > > CONTENTS, #7.03 (Sun, Jan 15, 1995) > > File 1--Open Letter to Wired Magazine (fwd) > File 2--More Legal Analysis of Steve Jackson Games (Legal Bytes) > File 3--The Stupid Net.Coverage News Awards -- 1994 and 1995 > File 4--Alliance for Community Media -- Call for Workshops > File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 25 Nov 1994) > > CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN > THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 20:08:38 -0600 (CST) > From: David Smith <bladex(a)BGA.COM> > Subject: File 1--Open Letter to Wired Magazine (fwd) > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > >From--phrack(a)well.sf.ca.us (Chris Goggans) > >Subject--Open Letter to Wired Magazine > >Date--13 Jan 1995 00:51:09 GMT > > To Whom It May Concern: > > I am writing this under the assumption that the editorial staff at > Wired will "forget" to print it in the upcoming issue, so I am also > posting it on every relevant newsgroup and online discussion forum > that I can think of. > > When I first read your piece "Gang War In Cyberspace" I nearly choked > on my own stomach bile. The whole tone of this piece was so far > removed from reality that I found myself questioning what color the > sky must be in Wired's universe. Not that I've come to expect any > better from Wired. Your magazine, which could have had the potential > to actually do something, has become a parody...a politically correct > art-school project that consistently falls short of telling the whole > story or making a solid point. (Just another example of Kapor-Kash > that ends up letting everyone down.) > > I did however expect more from Josh Quittner. > > I find it interesting that so much emphasis can be placed on an issue > of supposed racial slurs as the focus of an imaginary "gang war," > especially so many years after the fact. > > It's also interesting to me that people keep overlooking the fact that > one of the first few members of our own little Legion of Doom was > black (Paul Muad'dib.) Maybe if he had not died a few years back that > wouldn't be so quickly forgotten. (Not that it makes a BIT of > difference what color a hacker is as long as he or she has a brain and > a modem, or these days at least a modem.) > > I also find it interesting that a magazine can so easily implicate > someone as the originator of the so-called "fighting words" that > allegedly sparked this online-battle, without even giving a second > thought as to the damage that this may do to the person so named. One > would think that a magazine would have more journalistic integrity > than that (but then again, this IS Wired, and political correctness > sells magazines and satisfies advertisers.) Thankfully, I'll only have > to endure one moth of the "Gee Chris, did you know you were a racist > redneck?" phone calls. > > It's further odd that someone characterized as so sensitive to insults > allegedly uttered on a party-line could have kept the company he did. > Strangely enough, Quittner left out all mention of the MOD member who > called himself "SuperNigger." Surely, John Lee must have taken > umbrage to an upper-middle class man of Hebrew descent so shamefully > mocking him and his entire race, wouldn't he? Certainly he wouldn't > associate in any way with someone like that...especially be in the > same group with, hang out with, and work on hacking projects with, > would he? > > Please, of course he would, and he did. (And perhaps he still > does...) > > The whole "racial issue" was a NON-ISSUE. However, such things make > exciting copy and garner many column inches so keep being rehashed. > In fact, several years back when the issue first came up, the > statement was cited as being either "Hang up, you nigger," or "Hey, > SuperNigger," but no one was sure which was actually said. Funny how > the wording changes to fit the slant of the "journalist" over time, > isn't it? > > I wish I could say for certain which was actually spoken, but alas, I > was not privy to such things. Despite the hobby I supposedly so > enjoyed according to Quittner, "doing conference bridges," I abhorred > the things. We used to refer to them as "Multi-Loser Youps" > (multi-user loops) and called their denizens "Bridge Bunnies." The > bridge referred to in the story was popularzed by the callers of the > 5A BBS in Houston, Texas. (A bulletin board, that I never even got > the chance to call, as I had recently been raided by the Secret > Service and had no computer.) Many people from Texas did call the > BBS, however, and subsequently used the bridge, but so did people from > Florida, Arizona, Michigan, New York and Louisiana. And as numbers do > in the underground, word of a new place to hang out caused it to > propagate rapidly. > > To make any implications that such things were strictly a New York > versus Texas issue is ludicrous, and again simply goes to show that a > "journalist" was looking for more points to add to his (or her) > particular angle. > > This is not to say that I did not have problems with any of the people > who were in MOD. At the time I still harbored strong feelings towards > Phiber Optik for the NYNEX-Infopath swindle, but that was about it. > And that was YEARS ago. (Even I don't harbor a grudge that long.) > Even the dozen or so annoying phone calls I receied in late 1990 and > early 1991 did little to evoke "a declaration of war." Like many > people, I know how to forward my calls, or unplug the phone. Amazing > how technology works, isn't it? > > Those prank calls also had about as much to do with the formation of > Comsec as bubble-gum had to do with the discovery of nuclear fission. > (I'm sure if you really put some brain power to it, and consulted > Robert Anton Wilson, you could find some relationships.) At the risk > of sounding glib, we could have cared less about hackers at Comsec. > If there were no hackers, or computer criminals, there would be no > need for computer security consultants. Besides, hackers account for > so little in the real picture of computer crime, that their existence > is more annoyance than something to actually fear. > > However, when those same hackers crossed the line and began tapping > our phone lines, we were more than glad to go after them. This is one > of my only rules of action: do whatever you want to anyone else, but > mess with me and my livelihood and I will devote every ounce of my > being to paying you back. That is exactly what we did. > > This is not to say that we were the only people from the computer > underground who went to various law enforcement agencies with > information about MOD and their antics. In fact, the number of > hackers who did was staggering, especially when you consider the usual > anarchy of the underground. None of these other people ever get > mentioned and those of us at Comsec always take the lead role as the > "narks," but we were far from alone. MOD managed to alienate the vast > majority of the computer underground, and people reacted. > > All in all, both in this piece, and in the book itself, "MOD, The Gang > That Ruled Cyberspace," Quittner has managed to paint a far too > apologetic piece about a group of people who cared so very little > about the networks they played in and the people who live there. In > the last 15 years that I've been skulking around online, people in the > community have always tended to treat each other and the computers > systems they voyeured with a great deal of care and respect. MOD was > one of the first true examples of a groupthink exercise in hacker > sociopathy. Selling long distance codes, selling credit card numbers, > destroying systems and harassing innocent people is not acceptable > behavior among ANY group, even the computer underground. > > There have always been ego flares and group rivalries in the > underground, and there always will be. The Legion of Doom itself was > FOUNDED because of a spat between its founder (Lex Luthor) and members > of a group called The Knights of Shadow. These rivalries keep things > interesting, and keep the community moving forward, always seeking the > newest bit of information in a series of healthy one-upsmanship. MOD > was different. They took things too far against everyone, not just > against two people in Texas. > > I certainly don't condemn everyone in the group. I don't even know a > number of them (electronically or otherwise.) I honestly believe that > Mark Abene (Phiber) and Paul Stira (Scorpion) got royally screwed > while the group's two biggest criminals, Julio Fernandez (Outlaw) and > Allen Wilson (Wing), rolled over on everyone else and walked away free > and clear. This is repulsive when you find out that Win in particular > has gone on to be implicated in more damage to the Internet (as Posse > and ILF) than anyone in the history of the computing. This I find > truly disgusting, and hope that the Secret Service are proud of > themselves. > > Imagine if I wrote a piece about the terrible treatment of a poor > prisoner in Wisconsin who was bludgeoned to death by other inmates > while guards looked away. Imagine if I tried to explain the fact that > poor Jeff Dahmer was provoked to murder and cannibalism by the mocking > of adolescent boys who teased and called him a faggot. How would you > feel if I tried to convince you that we should look upon him with pity > and think of him as a misunderstood political prisoner? You would > probably feel about how I do about Quittner's story. > > 'Hacker' can just as easily be applied to "journalists" too, and with > this piece Quittner has joined the Hack Journalist Hall of Fame, > taking his place right next to Richard Sandza. > > Quittner did get a few things right. I do have a big cat named Spud, > I do work at a computer company and I do sell fantastic t-shirts. Buy > some. > > With Love, > > Chris Goggans > aka Erik Bloodaxe > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > > http://fringeware.com/staff/jonl > -- _______________________________________________________________________________ Paul Ferguson US Sprint tel: 703.689.6828 Managed Network Engineering internet: paul(a)hawk.sprintmrn.com Reston, Virginia USA http://www.sprintmrn.com

1 0

Re: FAREWELL TO A.R.S. (fwd)
by pstemari＠erinet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Now the cypherpunks are going to get blamed for anything that happens to the "Church" of Scientology. Sigh: In article <3f86hh$6gj(a)ag.oro.net> smj(a)smudge.oro.net (Scott Jennings) writes: > ... >Homer Wilson Smith (homer(a)math.cornell.edu) wrote: >: ... is a joke. Their rmgroup message did exactly nothing except create >: 10 more newgroup message and a total war zone on alt.config. They are >: not only pissing off the cypherpunks, but also pissing off the people >: of alt.config. If they continue, this war may spread from the internet >: into the real world as cypherpunks start to hack Church accounts and >: communication lines everywhere, causing total disruption of Scientology. >: >: If all the cypherpunks and hackers and crackers and phone freaks >: and virus writers of the world unite and start to 'rmgroup Scientology', who >: do you think will win? ... Paul J. Ste. Marie, pstemari(a)well.sf.ca.us, pstemari(a)erinet.com

1 0

CP meeting lost&found
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Did anyone notice a left over coat at the CP meeting? My friend seems to be unable to locate his. It's a purple Timberland with white leather trims. The coat has very important mail in the inside pocket. Thanks, -- Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0