December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: The Thread That Wouldn't Die (Was: Re: McCoy is Right!)
by L. McCarthy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [Please don't cc: me on messages to the list. Thanks.] Jim McCoy writes: > Actually this "dump flamewar" has produced some good discussion regarding > actual implementation issues. I beg to differ. If you think that was a good discussion, I'd hate to see what you'd classify as a bad discussion. Crypto relevance was minimal, too. > Everything that has happened with MIME will happen again when people try to > add cryptography to the structure of the net. It seems to me that people are *already* trying to add cryptography to the structure of the net, and that would actually be worth discussing. > Maybe there are some lessons to be learned here. _Maybe_, but I don't think anyone's learning them. - - -L. Futplex McCarthy - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBLvFDrGf7YYibNzjpAQFjXgP/QrsprjIVwZvAmkx8GAySAiEn7/VLtbuL HfvPXaEBvq1iDr5Jax7p95ctWA6Qjo4H13LkUJIHkoMK+Hh5ofO6bG1g2ZBKWz8b oX/S90pPhDDDc4yt6DPQXeaz57yA3IYYhUQzWrh9dH/LtAC5agsyqcJTGTWWrQ1/ pO7d7VQhFnQ= =uE/d - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLvFE0yoZzwIn1bdtAQFQKwF/ROSbeuwJYgPTq8WJz3FQLVR9PEA99bBF xxz4ISjLTvZKPPX8OQo2vE6cYgt3mChU =Ahuo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

mime ad naseum
by anonymous-remailer＠replay.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Many people don't have mime mailers, and if you want to talk to them, you can't use mime features. You can tell them that they're stupid not to have better software or accounts, but until getting PPP running is as easy as installing the aol client, you'll just be pissing in the wind. <neil.young.mode>You don't know it but you are.<neil.young.mode/> Is this list supposed to convey ideas or demonstrate the latest email standards? I'm not sure the two goals are compatible.

1 0

Re: MIME acceptance test--where's the break-even point?
by L. McCarthy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- If you can't beat `em, join `em -- hence I wade into the fray.... Amanda Walker writes: >To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Subject: MIME acceptance test--where's the break-even point? >Content-Disposition: Inline > > >This message contains 'text/enriched'-format data. >Do you want to view it using the 'cat' command (y/n) [y] ? Yeah, I'm sure that'll help a lot.... [...] > This message, for example, is formatted as <fixed>text/enriched</ > fixed> instead of <fixed>text/plain</fixed>. It's still readable on > 80-column <smaller>ASCII</smaller> terminals. It's got some extra > stuff, but so does every <smaller>PGP</smaller>-signed message, or > worse yet a <smaller>PEM</smaller>-signed message, and I would argue > that the <smaller>MIME</smaller> formatting itself is no more > objectionable than these, just as I would argue that <fixed>base64</ > fixed> encoding (the format that graphics generally appear in when > <smaller>MIME</smaller> encapsulated) BTW, is that what that piece of obscura from Peter Cassidy the other day was supposed to be ? > is no more objectionable than > other mechanisms that serve the same purpose, such as <smaller>PGP</ > smaller> "<smaller>ASCII</smaller> armor", uuencoding, etc. [...] > Do you find this message to be "out of bounds" the way you found > my (intentionally excessive) <smaller>GIF</smaller> signature from a > while back to be? Yes and no. The .GIF you sent before caused my copy of elm to dump core, which was disconcerting but easy to remedy. I doubted that the picture you'd sent was worth viewing, so I didn't bother trying to view it with xv on my own. This message didn't prompt any error messages from elm, but it was a nightmare to read, thanks to the plethora of angle-bracketed font instructions embedded throughout the text. > If so, where's the boundary between this message and > the innumerable <smaller>PGP</smaller> formatted messages we see come by > on this list? The PGP-formatted messages don't cause my mailer to dump core, and don't have any embedded command sequences in their bodies, so I don't go cross-eyed trying to read them. That's a pretty clear line for me. YMMV. > How far are we willing to inconvenience the least common denominator > in order to provide the services we want (whether those services > be authentication & encryption, multimedia content, or anything > else)? Where to the cost and benefit curves cross? Actually, I wish you'd send a full test suite of MIME messages to the list, so I could compile a comprehensive list of the things I have to ask the tech support people here to fix. My copy of elm proclaims itself to be MIME-aware but hasn't done very well in practice. Another GIF enclosure would be handy, because I didn't keep the previous one. - - -L. Futplex McCarthy - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBLvE9zGf7YYibNzjpAQHUHwP/UAyrTWjxiZDQBeSOL8cTCQ8xjM+lpsCN doALb8TtJCrypS0ihZzCZ6VpDi9E/JxKPF9lnLXqzCH0LVua3j0eiNXz7TCVfFP6 clziWY9RExiTRfREC8aphNw2XRVetjfhRIOsiBj7lSqNodKnN5GS2sUEDtIBNMdL EMfHAGIWTnU= =LxLk - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLvE+8SoZzwIn1bdtAQErRQF+OLFnCDXeznWHQws8LkxatRgaf6+F1ZuK N5e9/i52pI1gNQ4MQL5kEyWzXdH0XmMM =LceU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

re: Amanda and MIME
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Amanda wrote an interesting post. I think if we only use MIME, the quality of discussion on the list would skyrocket. Eric, you should block all non-MIME posts to the list. How could we have been so blind? <bold>I've <bold>come <bold>to <bold>rethink <bold>my <bold>position <bold>on <bold>MIME. <bold>It <bold>is <bold>definitely <bold>the <bold>savior. <bold>After <bold>all, <bold>this <bold>formatting <bold>just <bold>has <bold>some <bold>extra <bold>stuff <bold>which <bold>should <bold>be <bold>to <bold>hard <bold>to <bold>read <bold>around. <bold>Heck, <bold>I'm <bold>sure <bold>this <bold>is <bold>so <bold>legible <bold>to <bold>everybody <bold>I <bold>may <bold>launch <bold>into <bold>a <bold>mathematical <bold>explanation <bold>of <bold>various <bold>public <bold>key <bold>cryptography <bold>protocols. <bold>Maybe <bold>even <bold>a <bold>few <bold>dining <bold>cryptographers <bold>diagrams. I think the MIME backers should do something that makes me want MIME. Start posting such crucial diagrams and interesting formatted documents, so that I feel like I'm losing something by not going to MIME immediately. I haven't really seen how MIME will enrich the discussion (and I use that term loosely) here. Crap like including a gif/jpeg of myself with each post isn't exactly compelling.

2 1

Re: Remailers and Keyservers, active ones?
by L. McCarthy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Derek Atkins writes: > The active remailers get periodically posted. I forget the site > where you can request the current list. http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html is the best source I know. For the WWW-deprived: finger remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu I'm not aware of a way to obtain the list purely via email; maybe I should establish a way to do that if it's not out there.... - - -L. Futplex McCarthy - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBLvFFv2f7YYibNzjpAQFE3AP/blHKIhZTLOOEV+flzL/WFGXMsdTmO2xV GuAZ9P/WCfkMM3x46D+glH7GaLGuGvIMIV09XrvEsvppJ2H4PCMAF1ZhCkLyCDJW VZZTytM4Ws4ffHZzEJ6eyPYqoaKUTgqImj/hRTXIxVRETSlliwWfOJAE6rEAL+Pk RY2vAHoUG2o= =y1dI - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLvFG6yoZzwIn1bdtAQHu3QF+JhyYgYqqxBKuGiJA0iDTingK6MZutyHw N89rv2C28/9M0lGc21PJJbW1V5yadOgM =4gy2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Tim May the Luddite--His Last Message for A While
by blancw＠pylon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by Timothy C. May: Whatever, I'm fed up. . . . . As they say, you know what a Cypherpunks firing squad is? A circle. ............................................................. Cheap parting shot: " The record shows I took the blows and did it MYYYYYYYYYYYYYY Waaaaaaaaaaaaay." Blanc (I just had to say that) :>)

2 1

Re: "Any of the mailers that you can use on a shell are oxen"
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

L. Futplex McCarthy wrote: >Lucky Green writes: >> Any of the mailers that you can use on a shell are oxen. > >So after my dept. tosses all its DECstations in the dumpster tomorrow, >following your advice, what OS should the new machines support ? System 7 ? >AmigaDOS ? VMS ? Windows 95 ? What's the fabulous alternative to Unix about >which I've inexplicably missed hearing ? I was afraid of this... I _love_ UNIX. I do not want to see it replaced. What I claim is that 7bit terminals and terminal emulators are a piece of history. My message is that the use of non-ASCII displayable data on the net is growing and that character based terminals are unable to handle the way information will (is) be(ing) presented. UNIX can handle graphics just fine, just VT100 can't. There can be no other lasting solution but to abandon VTwhatever in favor of bitmaped output devices. Since running X over a dial-up connection is rather inefficient, and considering the significant computing power of the PC's that are now being underused as dumb terminals, processing the data locally seems to be a sensible solution. -- Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

2 1

Re: Tim May the Luddite--His Last Message for A While
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim wrote: >It may be time for me to move on. More than 2 years on this list, >since the B.C. period, may be too long. > >I'm fed up with fighting these battles, and no doubt many of you are >fed up with seeing contentious pitched battles. Cypherpunks is >increasingly a forum of strutting and posturing about who has the most >powerful tools, who is spending more of their lives staying at the >bleeding edge of technology. Depressing. Nobody is posturing or bragging. Perhaps I should have learned more programming, to help advance the cause, but everybody has their talent and programming isn't mine. Nonetheless, even if you don't like the messagers, listen to the message with an open mind. This is not a flame war. No insults. No critisism of a person. >The consensus of the active posters in this latest thread (Perry, >Amanda, Lucky, Jim, others) is that I am a hopeless fuddy-duddy, >unwilling to begin posting in the latest modality. > >(Funny, Netnews is still 99.999983% plain ASCII, by message count, and >nobody advocating a more advanced scheme is actually _using_ such ne >plus ultra formats here on this list. If it's so easy, and so 'punkly >correct, why not?) If I thought that your were a hopless case and beyond learning, I wouldn't spend so much time posting on this topic. It would be uncalled for to post messages here in MIME. This list is about thought exchange and the type of thought exchange that we do here can be done just fine in ASCII. The same is true for most of netnews. That doesn't mean that a different newsreader wouldn't make it easier on you. Have you ever tried Newswatcher? Have you noticed that the latest software updates posted to USNET are just a mouse click away? Can you honestly say that you don't like Newswatcher better than tin? >Jim McCoy wrote: > >> If you are truly interested in making strong encryption easy and >> transparent to the vast majority of the users of future communications >> systems you should be leading the MIME charge, not holding everyone back... > >I don't care for this imputation that my views on communicating with >the list are somehow holding others back. Or that discussing these >issues is inconsistent with being "truly interested in making strong >encryption easy and transparent." Just different ways of trying to make you see the light. >Bluntly, I'm fucking sick and tired of these cheap shots and personal >innuendos. Maybe it's the "young guns" syndrome, with a codger like me >whose first Net account was in 1972 being a ripe target for the newest >pistoleros with their .486-caliber Linux boxes in their holsters. > >Whatever, I'm fed up. I don't see any cheap shots or personal inuendos. All I see are a lot of folks who like you and wish to help you as you helped them. You have said that you don't want any help. That is your right, but understand that unless you adopt some of the new tools the world will leave you behind. We all have learned a lot from you (at least I have) and we know that the sooner you start seriously using the new stuff the sooner you will help improving it by your _constructive_ criticism. Enjoy your vaccation <I mean it>. -- Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

Re: Question for remailer operators
by lcottrell＠popmail.ucsd.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I see about 200 messages a day through my remailer, sizes averaging a >couple of K. I had the impression at one point that the VAST majority of >this was "cover" traffic that someone is generating just to keep the >network busy. I don't know if this is still the case. It might be >possible to opt out of the cover traffic generator to reduce your load >to a politically manageable level. Maybe people generating cover traffic >could estimate how many messages they are generating. > <SNIP> > >Hal I have a script generating covering traffic. It creates a message at random intervals between 1 and 20 min. The messages are encrypted, and padded with cutmarks for all remailers which support that. The messages are sent through six hops. The remailers are chosen from all reasonably reliable remailers on Raph Levine's list (except for those which have asked to be excluded). -------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell who does not speak for CASS/UCSD loki(a)nately.ucsd.edu PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. Encrypted mail welcome. Home page http://nately.ucsd.edu/~loki/ Home of "chain" the remailer chaining script. For anon remailer info, mail remailer(a)nately.ucsd.edu Subject: remailer-help "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche

2 1

Re: Remailers and Keyservers, active ones?
by lcottrell＠popmail.ucsd.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Is there a list of the currently active remailers and key servers? > > >-uni- (Dark) > While I do not remember the URL of the remailer list, it is on my home page. -------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell who does not speak for CASS/UCSD loki(a)nately.ucsd.edu PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. Encrypted mail welcome. Home page http://nately.ucsd.edu/~loki/ Home of "chain" the remailer chaining script. For anon remailer info, mail remailer(a)nately.ucsd.edu Subject: remailer-help "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche

1 0