December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Root Causes
by terrell＠sam.neosoft.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> >From: Michael Froomkin <Michael(a)umlaw.demon.co.uk> >Jim didn't take my Con Law I course. > >In message <199507161819.OAA06090(a)bb.hks.net> Jim Ray writes: >[cuts throughout] >> >> Amendment IX -- "The enumeration in the Constitution of certain rights >> shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." > ^^^^^^^ >> [The right to write code was among many rights NOT enumerated.] >> > >Very hard to argue that the right to write code (as opposed to, >say, the right to write in code) existed in the late 18th >century; hence it is hard to argue that it could be "retained" >today. What about Jacquard loom cards? Buford C. Terrell 1303 San Jacinto Street Professor of Law Houston, TX 77002 South Texas College of Law voice (713)646-1857 terrell(a)sam.neosoft.com fax (713)646-1766

1 0

Re: Automated Rant Generators and Letter Generators
by tcmay＠sensemedia.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:29 PM 7/17/95, Harry Bartholomew wrote: >> >> Cypherpunks could probably have an effect on hastening this "denial of >> service" attack on the efficacy of letter-writing by releasing an >> easy-to-use package that does all this letter writing at the click of a >> button....just type in some key words, for the topics, and it does the >> rest. >> >> An interesting project, actually. >> >> --Tim May >> > A final step might be to interface the output to old pen plotters > like my HP7470A with an ascii-to-handwriting program. Akin to > the White House souvenir signature generator, but with a set of > parameters to mimic different "hands". Knuth's Metafont tricks > come to mind. By the way, I should first say that I have nothing against letter writing, and my comments about "hastening" a "denial of service" attack on letter-writing are mostly just out of general interest. Bart's comments about using Knuth's typographic work are interesting, to the extent that letters need to look handwritten. In the Mac market, it's possible to send in some handwriting samples and get back a font that emulates the handwriting! I don't think the pen plotter is actually needed--and few people would use it--as most faxes can be emulated with laser printers (due of course to the limited dots per inch resulution). In fact, most fax modems can directly fax from any screen that can produce printed output. So, the combination of handwriting fonts, automated rant generators (of varying rabidities), and fax capabilities gives a pretty good start. Using lots of handwriting samples, various other fonts, and a mix of styles in the letters will help. Anyway, where this all gets interesting is the following: * Can a kind of Turing Test be tried here? That is, in this limited domain of "letters to the editor/Congressmen," can a letter generator be implemented which generates letters effectively indistinguishable from letters and faxes generated by actual human beings? ("Effectively indistinguishable" in the sense that a human reader could not sort a set of letters into human- and machine-generated subsets with statistically significant certainty better than guessing). Of course this is also similar to the "style detectors" we so often talk about. The crypto relevance has to do with detecting patterns in letters and rants, in emulating these patterns, and (perhaps) in speeding up lobbying. (Though I agree that widespread adoption of automated letter-writing, such as the direct mail folks are already doing, will eventually just kill off letter writing as a means of lobbying.) This may also hasten the adoption, someday, of digital signatures. Congressmen and their aides may check incoming letters against databases of their consituents who have "registered" with them (lots of issues here). Merely counting the "yes" and "no" letters has long been problematic, as the Republicans have been leading in direct mail campaigns since at least the mid-70s (recall Richard Viguerie...). Increased automation will just make it even more obvious. --Tim May .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)sensemedia.net | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-728-0152 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Corralitos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^756839 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: ECM list.
by bigdaddy＠ccnet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >I'm also considering other strategies for gaining e$-- offering a service >on the DigiCash "cybershops" page, or just going to all my e-mail using >friends, showing them how to get their free e$100.00, and then begging them >to give me half of it. (Finder's fee? Friendly gift?) Why not offer an anonymous proxy of some kind for e-cash? You can charge per connect or per unit of time, simply to demonstrate the concept. The techniques developed for remailers(breaking up messages...accepting PGP- encrypted destinations...varying times...so on) could find an application here. If a chain could be constructed, it would help protect the identity of the user(assuming no collusion between operators). The problem is, as always, to write the code. Not to mention the ethical/possibly legal question of selling anonymity... Another possible service: selling gems of wisdom in pieces. Find or write a gem of wisdom...taking into account copyright laws and so forth. Then set up a storefront via telnet or http...a sort of kiosk. Customers can then buy secrets or portions of secrets...or percentages. Use a secret splitting algorithm to allow people to 'split the cost' of a secret and then get in touch with each other through anonymous remailers set up for that purpose by your kiosk. Depending on the information you're selling(whether it be the secret key for BlackNet or simply the contents of your CD collection), you could earn some e-cash this way. An all-or-nothing-disclosure-of-secrets protocol might also come in handy. Again, the problem is sitting down and writing the code. Has anyone made any significant efforts toward either of these yet, with or without CD$? David Molnar -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMApx1+FDHpuTkgoVAQEo/Af/cmZPKI1Uk/hFbTwuQwcZbDagnAHpZkqZ WdJMUe/4RxOymB5mnfvM7bl4S4x5BrUJJ6mepQwq0/39PiJRWAJFJFnhuZoIin5o I5KCOTNQMVNdJLL7iTtZJEqrIEGhfq2lrRpbyc1wPGj+9l7tWlSfTXLl+E0z6MtZ OWEJ0mzP4eG5TQJEtObAqD5QYOhHngEN96NMYDUv6gYzZROx3zovYqrFFrJt8zr1 HkxZzpA/rGHdoCAeViLAqO42o18zRvu8j0i7VIXI/rx6rOQ6gCDs4tgjMH1BSQH4 3rMfxb0KB8Vlmd1AL1OzvhRSy9cbBvdX2D+iOC7sZQ755JBRwJKd2Q== =9YVg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- lo...look to the sig, for there will be no sign

1 0

Re: "Judgement Proof" and Putting Up or Shutting Up
by jgrubs＠voxbox.norden1.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- mpd(a)netcom.com (Mike Duvos) writes: > > > What's CFR? > Code of Federal Regulations? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: http://norden1.com/~jim/sylvania.html iQCVAwUBMAr8cN74r4kaz3mVAQFZUgP+K/tIieWM1meiSWMfveLeF/LTLc1oLTp/ IftfXZokadfbh9RMvSXfiJvCVHZS/mRa33KG+SCNjt+K0yLWi7JrYFEmepGxFlVn NjcrZdM+lFfNc03ksgOlccZg+o7GlzBNUW3s7yN2/Y2aRss22mfJkhtWvfaqDs7h mYT4tONtNSQ= =Zp8i -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- WebCasters(tm) James C. Grubs jgrubs(a)voxbox.norden1.com 6817 Maplewood Avenue Tel.: 419-882-2697 Sylvania, Oh 43560 Fax: 419-885-2814 Internet consulting, HTML programing, Information brokering

1 0

Is it legal for commercial companies to use PGP?
by jgrubs＠voxbox.norden1.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- tim werner <werner(a)mc.ab.com> writes: > Hi, > > I was reading in some Where to Get PGP Web page that "PGP2.6.2 is legal > to use in the U.S. for non-commercial purposes (i.e., you cannot sell it > or the functionality it provides)". Can anyone on the list say whether > this is true? That is, was the use of "i.e." correct, or should it have > been "e.g."? > > Or, to put it more succinctly, I was talking to one of the sys admins at > A-B, and he said that we weren't allowed to use PGP to encrypt our mail, > because Viacrypt owned the commercial rights. But, according to the bit > I quoted, it would only be a violation if A-B tried to put PGP into one > of their products. > > Has anyone heard a (hopefully legal, but I'll listen to anyone's > opinion) answer to this? As I recall, the following is a correct scenario: a customer can use PGP to send credit card numbers to a vendor he's making a personal purchase from, but the vendor must use Viacrypt. If the customer is buying something to use for business, BOTH must use Viacrypt. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: http://norden1.com/~jim/sylvania.html iQCVAwUBMAr+Ut74r4kaz3mVAQFMqwP8CgTKl3QetW+vn/A4TqJE2BrTEstM8fuw 2ZrmDZjHbZwISPtgbtwesup+wqknc9ECQwNKoyqbg5vYtK6Zd2tLVrD9gs7suA2F BEJeBNNMoGDPBh6Ep4alwtK6JpSt+e+AMTimRQCml+sf/md0GM6UovR1ZufQBTog +jLDu9KNRSg= =MCgA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- WebCasters(tm) James C. Grubs jgrubs(a)voxbox.norden1.com 6817 Maplewood Avenue Tel.: 419-882-2697 Sylvania, Oh 43560 Fax: 419-885-2814 Internet consulting, HTML programing, Information brokering

1 0

Re: Anti-Electronic Racketeering Act of 1995 (fwd)
by jgrubs＠voxbox.norden1.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Andrew.Spring(a)ping.be (Andrew Spring) writes: > So I'm wondering who this RICO stuff applies to. The guy who wrote it and > uploaded it to an FTP site? He's not profiting. The guy who uses it? He > didn't commit the predicate act. Who? It doesn't matter. Even if they say "Oops, sorry" later, the best you can hope for is to get your computer returned as a bushel basket full of junk parts. More likely it'll end up in some police station with "D.A.R.E." painted all over it. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: http://norden1.com/~jim/sylvania.html iQCVAwUBMAsAMt74r4kaz3mVAQHtygP+Ou3wJB68ECFzanKNO7l4AIqtZfApNA1z jZNatwmBZGOnQbC6LSQi5La5lws+U/yUs40hW8ZBVwG0/qUGH4RUra57Ubrtya+e B8vz9/Vnou8a5DkW4fSsL+eiNeJimKiFAguUQSdex3gJShjXIpVk/++3AKvEVy6h q43kUVG9irM= =VWRM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- WebCasters(tm) James C. Grubs jgrubs(a)voxbox.norden1.com 6817 Maplewood Avenue Tel.: 419-882-2697 Sylvania, Oh 43560 Fax: 419-885-2814 Internet consulting, HTML programing, Information brokering

1 0

Re: Is it legal for commercial companies to use PGP?
by tim werner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Date: Mon, 17 Jul 1995 16:15:10 -0400 >From: tim werner <werner(a)mc.ab.com> >... I was talking to one of the sys admins at >A-B, and he said that we weren't allowed to use PGP to encrypt our mail, >because Viacrypt owned the commercial rights. I should have mentioned that I have no problem with people trying to make money. However, it turns out that ViaCrypt is not selling site-licenses, or even floating licenses, so they actually want to sell a separate copy for every user that will use it. As it happens, the aforementioned sys admin had purchased 5 licenses, to take care of the 2 users he already knew about, and figuring that there would probably be a couple more wanting to jump on the bandwagon. He offered to let me use one of the licenses, but there's no way I can go and tell my users "we have PGP", if I can't tell everyone that they can do it. And, there's no way I can see convincing my boss that we need that many copies of ViaCrypt, just so everyone in my department can encrypt their email traffic. Of course, I realize that none of the above changes the legality. thanks, tw -- Well, Bust My Britches! Eggs Almondine and a Bottle of Beaujolais!

1 0

Re: RC4 crack
by dan＠milliways.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Mon, 17 Jul 95 21:36:45 +0100 you wrote: > >Yep a telnet port is it for both reporting and getting keys, also the >WWW interface to the same. > >> I'd basicly like to be able to start the program, nice it, slam it >> in the background, and forget about it. > >Adam > Is there an easy way to integrate machines who are not on-net 24-7 into this protocol? Not all of us have dedicated lines.:) Dan Bailey ****************************************************************************** Vote Speaker Newt Gingrich for President!! Dan Bailey Worcester Polytechnic Institute, class of 1997. merzbow(a)ibm.net ******************************************************************************

1 0

Cray Computer liquidating...
by Phil Fraering 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

According to a flier from an e-mail list I'm currently unwillingly subscribed to, Cray Computer is going out of business. Any comments and/or crypto relevance? Phil

1 0

Re: WSJ on remailers...
by hal9001＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 14:00 7/17/95, Peter Wayner wrote: >The WSJ has a article on anonymous remailers buried in the B section. It >is pretty straightforward and ends up quoting some Finnish police officer >saying that they're not going to go raiding remailers on any suspicion. >They'll need a real crime. That Finnish comment is probably due to the fall-out/flap from their raid on anon.penet.fi in the CoS case.

1 0