December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Z-Mail
by Chris Claborne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I would be interested also. How about cc this list... > Can someone please email me with details about obtaining and > configuring Z-Mail for use with PGP? > Thanks, > John > >John L. Tocher THE CITY-a bounded infinity. A labyrinth where >JLTocher(a)ccgate.HAC.com you are never lost. Your private map where every >PGP: CE 72 1A 11 07 47 35 block bears exactly the same number. Even if you >35 9A C1 DE EA 64 21 BC 94 lose your way, you cannot go wrong. --Kobo Abe > > > > > ... __o .. -\<, Chris.Claborne(a)SanDiegoCA.ATTGIS.Com ...(*)/(*). CI$: 76340.2422 PGP Pub Key fingerprint = A8 FA 55 92 23 20 72 69 52 AB 64 CC C7 D9 4F CA Avail on Pub Key server. PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome!

1 0

CD-ROM [brief addition]
by sameer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I forgot to mention that the CD-ROM in development will be export restricted. It isn't going to be sold outside the united states and canada. -- sameer Voice: 510-841-2014 Network Administrator Pager: 510-321-1014 Community ConneXion: The NEXUS-Berkeley Dialin: 510-549-1383 http://www.c2.org (or login as "guest") sameer(a)c2.org

2 1

Re: Frothing remailers - an immodest proposal
by cactus＠seabsd.hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <9501312152.AA10208(a)toad.com>, <kevin(a)elvis.wicat.com> wrote: >It seems to me that the current remailer web suffers a fundamental flaw. >It is simply too static. Agreed, of course. I also don't really want to quote your entire article but want to throw some points into the discussion. In general, I think you've got a good approach but might be a little too tied to instant-gratification use of IP. I touched on some of this a while ago, in the thread "Broadcast and the rendezvous problem," and have thought about it a bit more after getting others' comments: 1. Broadcasting every couple of minutes isn't necessary and is undesirable due to the real limitations of the Internet. A remailer could broadcast its location with a time-out on the location without a constant stream of availability announcements. In your position for example, you'd broadcast a message at 5 pm with a 16 hour valid time. 2. This is actually unnecessary for your situation: All you need to do is advertise your location as a "real" remailer and then have a cron job that kill sendmail at 5pm on your remailer machine (assuming you have a spare machine that doesn't need to run sendmail). The mail network is flexible enough that things will Just Work. Mail won't go through instantly during the day, of course, but that just helps to muddy up the mix. 3. Broadcasting over live IP isn't all that great a model. Ideally, you'll use a mechanism that doesn't require instant communication among hosts. I favor USENET for this: messages have a naturally long life- time and the network is self-adjusting. If a direct route is temporarily unavailable, an indirect one will often manifest itself. I also favor using USENET store-and-forward for the messages themselves for the same reasons: traffic analysis is impossible inside the web and direct routes are not necessary. 4. Using a PGP-style web-of-trust is important. In the ideal situation, one human in an extended web can certify individual remailers and all other remailers close enough on the same web of trust would pick up the message immediately. Just some thoughts, - - -- Todd Masco | "life without caution/ the only worth living / love for a man/ cactus(a)hks.net | love for a woman/ love for the facts/ protectless" - A Rich Cactus' Homepage - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBLy6+ThNhgovrPB7dAQHoDQP/UDn2GV7Jq8C3nQyN9IhvGMUTGnBjcL+k zCPgTOLjANMrMN791VdeoNs9rR3QKFdFR9y0p39lka0p+9n1I3hDuEKyAX8Cicub h0/eyr54bEzC6Q2L06VlIzDac9K7kILUkIf2ypgeXTrFuMSZITy+z0ugDeq3NA7B W+gkl82hJZk= =69b2 - -----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 iQBFAwUBLy73lyoZzwIn1bdtAQG/8wGA1kS3RyqBsxOZgniuxZqGySeybSJQuVp4 3zsxH545MqhBXmh16Gh4LvBlkre+9JYT =Evbh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Z-Mail by Web
by jltocher＠earthlink.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> Can someone please email me with details about obtaining and >> configuring Z-Mail for use with PGP? >> Thanks, >> John >> >I would be interested also. How about cc this list... ... __o > .. -\<, >Chris.Claborne(a)SanDiegoCA.ATTGIS.Com ...(*)/(*). Z-Mail info available at: ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/be/berliner/readme.html http://www.kaiwan.com/~mckinnon/readme.html I called the company to get a demo key (unlocks the software for a trial period of 30 days), and inquired of the price. It's $165 for a single user license... ouch! I'll check it out, but can anybody suggest alternative windoze/PPP/PGP interfaces? John - John Tocher THE CITY-a bounded infinity. A labyrinth where JLTocher(a)Earthlink.net you are never lost. Your private map where every PGP: CE 72 1A 11 07 47 35 block bears exactly the same number. Even if you 35 9A C1 DE EA 64 21 BC 94 lose your way, you cannot go wrong. --Kobo Abe

1 0

remailers and multiple recipients
by jrochkin＠cs.oberlin.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Can the remailers handle multiple recipients? If I list several addresses in the "Request-Remailing-To:" line, seperated by commas, will the remailer do what I would think, and send off to all of them? Anyone who knows the answer (either from experience, or because they run a remailer, or wrote the software), please tell me. I've been trying experimentally, unsuccesfully so far, but I'm not sure if that's just because I'm using the wrong syntax, or the wrong remailers.

1 0

VoicePGP cracked in 10 minutes?...
by root 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi all, I heard a rumor hear in Ctl. Tx. that the VoicePGP project was cracked in the last couple of days in approx. 10 minutes. Anyone have any info on this other than one of those wild rumors that occur? Thanks and take care.

4 3

Re: remailers and multiple recipients
by Hal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: jrochkin(a)cs.oberlin.edu (Jonathan Rochkind) > Can the remailers handle multiple recipients? If I list several addresses > in the "Request-Remailing-To:" line, seperated by commas, will the remailer > do what I would think, and send off to all of them? We had some concerns here a while back that someone was trying to exploit such a feature to create an exponentially-growing message that would totally overload the remailers. A message of the form: :: Request-Remailing-To: <list of remailers here> :: Request-Remailing-To: <list of remailers here> <repeat about 20 times> was sent. If all remailers had observed and honored the multiple requests, there would have been uncounted trillions of messages flying about. So I would caution anyone considering implementing this feature. Hal

1 0

Re: CD-ROM [brief addition]
by danisch＠ira.uka.de 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I forgot to mention that the CD-ROM in development will be > export restricted. It isn't going to be sold outside the united states > and canada. :-(

1 0

Re: Frothing remailers - an immodest proposal
by Hal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I have some concerns about Kevin's frothing remailers. Like so many of the proposals we see to put more responsibility into the remailer net, this opens vulnerability to a single bad remailer. If I trust the first remailer in the net to choose my path for me, as I might be tempted to do with a froth, then if that remailer is corrupt my anonymity is lost. With user-supplied chaining I am secure unless all of the remailers on the chain are corrupt. I also do not like the kind of close-knit, cozy cooperation among the guild of remailer operators which seems to be envisioned in this and similar proposals. Do you like the idea of messages on the remailer operators list saying, I am getting objectionable messages from your remailer, would you mind dropping in a log so we can see who is sending these messages which violate the Politically Correct Speech Act? I do like Kevin's ideas about a dynamic remailer net, but I think another approach would put more smarts into the client program used by the originator. Granted, his information will be somewhat more out of date as the message makes its way through the network. But depending on thie time scale at which the froth, um, froths, this should still allow a lot more dynamism among the set of remailers. Using either IRC or, as Todd suggested, Usenet to maintain an active remailer list might work. We could also have a distributed set of sites which provide the information by finger like the pinging sites we have now. A few notes about Safe-TCL. I posted some ideas on using this as a basis for remailing some time back. Safe-TCL defines three times at which messages could be activated (scripts in them run). One is on message sending, one on message reading (so it can put up dialog boxes and interact with the recipient in other ways), and the third on receipt, which is when it enters the user's mailbox. The actual safe-tcl implementation does not include support for this third mode, but it would be pretty easy to add. If you had that, messages could come to your machine and activate to do various things that you allow them to do. If you allowed them to send mail as one of those things, this would be a start towards a remailer. What you need then is some way for various messages to interact with each other, so that, for examle, a message could wait until there were a certain number of other messages inside the machine before it sent itself out. You would also want a way for a message to suspend itself until some future event, such as having a certain amount of time passing, or waiting until some message with desired properties arrived. There has been intermittent discussion of similar topics on the safe-tcl mailing list. The motivation there is not supplying remailers, of course; rather there is a desire to have something with similar functionality to the much-ballyhooed Telescript, but less bound by proprietary constraints. Telescript scripts can move through the network and interact with other scripts (at least, they will supposedly be able to, but the exact manner is apparently secret for now). Providing the simple act of motion to mail agent scripts without stamping them with a record of everywhere they have been is really all a remailer would do. (I wonder if Telescript agents have to carry around with them a record of every path they've taken?) Sending a message through a safe-tcl based remail network might be more cumbersome than our current techniques. You might have to precede the message body with a safe-tcl program a few lines to a couple of pages in size depending on the complexity of remailing you want. But again with proper clients this can be hidden from the user. I think emphasis should be on smart mailer clients rather than more cooperation among nodes in the remailer network. Hal -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQBVAwUBLy8O8hnMLJtOy9MBAQHMjwIA40ZIvNtOvMN/mWtY4bSN0MYMravR9bNr zhZ519K+g6w5ZsW71c/kM7BFz15BjB9pIcTMjUQv/C8YJNGrdFEzhg== =1okU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Scientology Petition v2.1
by Homer Wilson Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Church of Scientology PETITION Version 2.1 I have undertaken on my own determinism to rewrite the petition according to criticisms that I have received. This version below is short and sweet. Since I have no authority whatsoever from those who wrote the original petition to do this, this is certainly not official. However if enough like it, perhaps we can talk the original petition writers into considering it. I will be posting this to news.admin.misc,alt.current-events.net-abuse,alt.privacy.anon-servers alt.censorship, alt.cyberpunks, and comp.org.eff.talk If you think it is worthwhile, please post it to other groups as well. Homer We the undersigned deplore 1.) The Church of Scientology's recent apparent (unproven) efforts to rmgroup alt.religion.scientology. 2.) The Church of Scientology's recent apparent (unproven) efforts to cancel non copyrighted postings. 3.) The Church of Scientology's overt and apparently covert plans to spam both alt.religion.scientology and the rest of usenet with 'success stories' and testimonials, in order to drown out the 'graffitti' and negative testimony and commentary. 4.) The Church of Scientology's legal efforts to shut off anonymous remailers to alt.religion.scientology and alt.clearing.technology, and their legal threats against the remailer operators for postings, copyrighted or not, coming through them. 5.) The Church of Scientology's legal efforts to clamp down on ANY copyrighted postings or quotations at all, even when clearly Fair Use. 6.) Any open or covert declaration by Church of Scientology Officials against anyone on the internet declaring them to be a Suppressive Person, and any open or covert declaration of anyone on the internet as Fair Game whether or not it is to be called that. We the undersigned eschew any efforts on the part of anyone to render alt.religion.scientology a moderated group. We the undersigned implore the Church of Scientology 1.) To work closely with the Electronic Freedom Frontier to solve what it perceives to be its problems with the internet, and to endeavor to join the internet community as a respected citizen in the forums of two way communication with anyone at any time on any subject. 2.) To help formulate guidelines for, and accept fair use excerption of the works of L. Ron Hubbard for the purpose of non commercial criticism and educational commentary. Homer Wilson Smith United Free Zone Alliance

1 0