December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

A more sophisticated form of moderation.
by Michael James Gebis 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

With all the recent traffic about if moderation is the future of the net, it seems like an appropriate idea to get some brainstorming on some better forms of moderation. Specifically, I was thinking along the lines of a newsgroup where only selected individuals are able to post, but anybody who wants to can read the group. However, the "selected individuals" could fall into several categories. You could have one or very few "selected individuals" and the newsgroup would work almost exactly like the current moderated groups. You could have many "selected individuals" who may have been selected by proving that they read a FAQ or some other minimal criteria, which could theoretically cut down on newbie fever. You could have several dozen "selected individuals" who are selected by some means (a committee? a vote? a "trusted individual who selects more individuals") and have an unrestricted talk between these individuals. This way, you have a newsgroup where these experts can discuss topics in an unrestricted way. I'm thinking along the lines of the "boards" in _Ender's Game_, where a newsgroup is somewhat similar to a newspaper. Once the reporters get hired, they have a lot of freedom on what they can report about. There are a lot of details to be worked out, including: 1) Can such a system work? Are there protocols which can guarantee authentication on a large distributed system like news? I'm assuming that there would have to be some sort of cryptographic authentication to prevent wide-scale abuse. 2) Is such a system desirable? Is the current "anybody can post anywhere if they know how" system better? Which one promotes cypherpunk goals more? Can I anonymously prove that I am a "selected individual"? Remember, I'm considering this a brainstorming session, so I'd like to hear any comments you may have. -- Mike Gebis m-gebis(a)uiuc.edu Mean people suck. http://www.uiuc.edu/ph/www/m-gebis/

2 1

Moby ints [Re: Num Rat]
by Jim Gillogly 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> pjm(a)ionia.engr.sgi.com (Patrick May) writes: > This invocation of the name of the diety reminds me of a question > I've been meaning to ask. Is Knuth still a good source of algorithms > for implementing large integers or do more recent books exist that > contain superior methods? While Knuth is now and forever the algorithm deity in general, Arjen Lenstra is as close to godhood as one can get in moby ints these days. I'd look at the Lip package Lenstra wrote; it's used in his state of the art factoring programs. It's available with masses of PostScript documentation from ftp.ox.ac.uk. Studying the code and docs might remind you of some issues that aren't obvious... and, of course, you might decide you don't need to write a moby int package, but could just use his library. Jim Gillogly Hevensday, 18 Afterlithe S.R. 1995, 18:48

2 1

Re: FW: Edupage 7/9/95 (fwd)
by Lyle Seaman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

danisch(a)ira.uka.de (Hadmut Danisch) writes: > There are certain nazi pages in America. They were showing them in > a german tv magazine some time ago, but they didn't tell the URLs. > The URL field in the Mosaic window was painted over. Oh dear. There are certain smut pages in Germany. They were showing them on TV recently, but I couldn't quite catch the URL. I can see it now -- the US government censors the net to keep out the Germans (but the tourists can still come -- hey, at an average of $80K/year annual income, they're welcome to go shopping in New York, though if they want to change clothes on the beach they have to do *that* in California, Florida is right out, eh Lawton?) and the Germans censor the net to keep out the Americans. Oh dear. -- Lyle Transarc 707 Grant Street 412 338 4474 The Gulf Tower Pittsburgh 15219

1 0

Re: FW: Edupage 7/9/95 (fwd)
by Ed Carp [khijol Sysadmin] 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 11 Jul 1995, Al Thompson wrote: > At 10:44 AM 7/11/95 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote: > > > >Brad Dolan writes: > >> REGULATING THE INTERNET > >> Shortly after the Communications Decency Act came before the U.S. Senate., > >> Canada's Parliament passed a resolution unanimously committing legislators > >> to get tough with on-line hate-mongering. The Simon Weisenthal Centre in > >> Toronto sent a strongly worded report to federal regulator the CRTC calling > >> for strict regulation of the Internet. (Montreal Gazette 7/7/95 B3) > > > >I'm happy to see Nazism fought with fascism. > > > >.pm > > You mean alleged nazism fought with obvious facism. > > I've never seen any actual nazism on the net anywhere, but this "strict > regulation" tactic is obviously fascist in nature. > > In fact, the only religious-based hate speech I've ever seen on the net is from > someone named "windgate" or something who hates Christians and Christianity, > and > is more than happy to write about his hatred. He hangs out in some of the > 'alt.politics' groups. You oughta go out and borrow someone's shortwave radio or ham HF radio. Between 3900 and 3900 KHz every evening, a bunch of guys in the south (Texas, New Mexico, Arkansas, Louisiana) get on the air and talk about the "goddamn niggers, jews, and fags that are ruining this country." All kinds of folks (meaning non-WASPs, of course) are targeted for this kind of spew. Words like "motherfucker" are often used, especially against "niggers". The speakers rail against "white women with goddamn niggers", and any other non-WASP who happens to arouse their ire. Quite entertaining if you enjoy that sort of thing. Stomach-turning if you don't. Call signs, times and frequencies heard upon request. This sort of thing has been going on for years. A few years back, the FCC attempted to go after a couple of idiots on one of the local LA area 2m repeaters who were spewing all kinds of filth out onto the air waves. The district court said, naaah, that's free speech. So, if the idiots in Congress want to go after this sort of thing, they oughts go after the few hams that are ruining the hobby for the rest of us. -- Ed Carp, N7EKG Ed.Carp(a)linux.org, ecarp(a)netcom.com 801/534-8857 voicemail 801/460-1883 digital pager Finger ecarp(a)netcom.com for PGP 2.5 public key an88744(a)anon.penet.fi Q. What's the trouble with writing an MS-DOS program to emulate Clinton? A. Figuring out what to do with the other 639K of memory.

1 0

Down with ITAR - Have YOU exported PGP today? (fwd)
by aba＠dcs.exeter.ac.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is a forward of something I just cross-posted to alt.security.pgp, and talk.politics.crypto. Civil disobedience via illegal .sigs. Adam ====================================================================== From: aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk Newsgroups: alt.security.pgp,talk.politics.crypto Date: Tue, 11 Jul 95 21:03:53 +0100 Subject: Down with ITAR - Have YOU exported PGP today? Distribution: world You all know about the ridiculous US regulation called ITAR and how it applies to crypto software in the US, well here's a fun and relatively safe (YMMV) way for you to export PGP in protest. It is just a token effort, and of 0 practical significance, but the idea is that you just post 3 lines of the uuencoded zipped DOS PGP executable in place of your usual sig in protest. If they lock you up for 3 uuencoded lines which came off a European ftp site and European web page, then well they are stupid. More to the point it would make them (the US state department and the NSA) look stupid. Take a look at this web page: http://dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/export/ it will dole out uuencoded parts of PGP.EXE (the DOS binary for pgp2.6.2i, the international version of PGP, as is available from myriads of non-US ftp sites). See my sig for a sample, the first in a long stream hopefully, And remember, say NO to key escrow :-) Adam -- ------------------ PGP.ZIP Part [000/713] ------------------- begin 644 pgp.zip M4$L#!!0````(`">9ZQX3(*,_DG8!`-JF`P`'````4$=0+D581>S;=UQ3U__X M\9M!$E8,TT(a)PJ$10$1=*41%WW`KX$=Q[M5KK`&R%(HH+(T.M"S>NME8K=31N ------------------------------------------------------------- for next chunk to export --> http://dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/export/

2 1

Re: FW: Edupage 7/9/95 (fwd)
by alt＠iquest.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:45 PM 7/11/95 +0100, Ed Carp [khijol Sysadmin] wrote: >You oughta go out and borrow someone's shortwave radio or ham HF radio. >Between 3900 and 3900 KHz every evening, a bunch of guys in the south >(Texas, New Mexico, Arkansas, Louisiana) get on the air and talk about the >"goddamn niggers, jews, and fags that are ruining this country." All >kinds of folks (meaning non-WASPs, of course) are targeted for this kind >of spew. Words like "motherfucker" are often used, especially against >"niggers". The speakers rail against "white women with goddamn niggers", >and any other non-WASP who happens to arouse their ire. > >Quite entertaining if you enjoy that sort of thing. Stomach-turning if >you don't. Call signs, times and frequencies heard upon request. I don't enjoy it, and don't particularly care to hear it - HOWEVER, I don't see that they are harming anyone (I don't count "hurt feelings as "harm), any more than Malcolm X did when he called all white people "the devil," or when the militant Muslims do when they call all non-Muslims "heathens" or "the infidel" who should be killed. (or any more than wingate does when he says all non-Jews should be done away with). They are simply trying to "sell" their views by exposing their views. If they want to think that, and if they want to say that, then that is their business. I'm free to listen, or to avoid listening. I can avoid their newsgroups, or turn off my radio. That doesn't mean I have to like them, or be nice to them - I am just as free to ridicule their views, and I won't care if I hurt their feelings. If this sort of speech is regulated however, I will no longer have that choice. If I ask the government to prevent them from speaking their views, them only *I* am free to speak mine, so who is the victim?

1 0

Re: Num Rat
by hardin＠cyberspace.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

//--- forwarded letter ------------------------------------------------------- > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Date: Tue, 11 Jul 95 13:22:33 -0600 > From: "zinc" <zinc(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu> > To: hardin(a)cyberspace.com > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Subject: Re: Num Rat Pat Finerty <zinc(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu> wrote: > On Tue, 11 Jul 1995 hardin(a)cyberspace.com wrote: > > > John Young posted: > > > > > He's Got Their Number: Scholar Uses Math to Foil Financial > > > Fraud > > > [snip] > > I'd bet, that > > 5(five), 8(eight), & 9(nine) are significantly more represented across > > the board in prices (& thus in amounts for checks & tax write offs) than > > than their random distribution by Benford's Law or more well known tests > > for randomness would suggest. [snip] > > check amounts will also include any relevant sales tax thus skewing the > distribution in some fashion. > > > patrick finerty = zinc(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu = pfinerty(a)nyx.cs.du.edu > U of Utah biochem grad student in the Bass lab - zinc fingers + dsRNA! [snip] Yes, and some vendors will be in state (sales tax) & some out of state (no sales tax). Furthermore, if the vendor is in state but in a different locale, there will probably be some difference in sales tax rates as rates within states are usually based on vendor location. Also some types of purchases for some types of businesses/organizations/entities have various sales tax exemptions or surcharges, again all of which varies by state & locality. ALL of these factors will skew the distribution, eg. sales tax is usualy *.00% or *.25%, *.50%, *.75% etc. so a cursory look shows that 0 & 5 will be over represented due to this factor. tjh

1 0

PGP Anti- ITAR sig
by hardin＠cyberspace.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Great Idea, Adam! I am #5, who is #6 ;-) tjh "T. J. Hardin" <hardin(a)cyberspace.com> This is 1/713 of PGP262i DOS Executable Zipfile UUE'd Violate the Un-Constitutional ITAR Today! Get YOUR chunk @ web site below. ------------------ PGP.ZIP Part [005/713] ------------------- M@UIXP9EW\".^Q0XL1SO8"^*_O:U-=H(P&2,1A6YHB?KP@@H2/)$+P@-<PX_( MPTGLPBHDHSW<(,<O,D$XB'2TA`HQ4D'H@R#<)[Z3*D$P80%N*8D1:Q6"T`\J M/*/<G_$-/L9&%#L)P@HD82`ZHPG4$%#L*`A7D8M#F(/>"($GRAT$8246(Q:3 ------------------------------------------------------------- for next chunk to export --> http://dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/export/

1 0

Stormfront (was Re: FW: Edupage 7/9/95 (fwd))
by Allen Robinson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 11 Jul 1995, Perry E. Metzger wrote: > Mark Contois writes: > > > http://204.181.176.4/stormfront/ > > > > and some of the links provided therein. > > 204.181.176.4 is "stormfront.wat.com". > > I suspect that something is amiss (i.e. faked) about the following, > but wat.com shows up as > > Wongs Advanced Technologies (WAT-DOM) > 3221 Danny Pk > Metairie, LA 70002 > > Domain Name: WAT.COM <snip> I've seen the URL for the Stormfront White Nationalist Resource Page listed at least three different ways. I've never tried to visit the site, but here are the three variations with the most recent one I've seen listed last. http://www.accesscom.net/stormfront/ http://www.stormfront.wat.com/stormfront/ or http://stormfront.wat.com/stormfront/ (my notes are kind of scrambled) htttp://www.stormfront.org/stormfront/ AR _/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/ "They that can give up essential liberty to : purchase a little temporary safety, deserve : Allen Robinson neither liberty nor safety." : sebaygo(a)intellinet.com - Benjamin Franklin, 1759 : PGP public key AD022AA9 fingerprint 5A3BC05B2EC67724 F5664A20AEEAB07A available via major keyservers

2 1

Re: Don't trust the net too much
by rfreeman＠netaxs.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Adam Shostack <adam(a)bwh.harvard.edu> wrote: > I hate to join any thread which talks about blowing up rooms >and killing security guards, but I'll point out that for a few >hundered dollars worth of transmitter parts, you can cause transient >failures with EMF pulse weapons, and for a bit more, you can fry all >the electronics, then drive away before they have any idea that their >company has been destroyed. > > Killing people is a stupid way to accomplish things. I would have to agree, and since this whole thread seems to be one of those conspiracy things, it is completely unnecessary to cause much at all in the way of physical damage. No matter who rents the T1 lines and other forms of communication that unite an ISP with the rest of the world, sooner or later they have to enter some sort of communications node. This could be a satellite or some huge telephone routing center, or any number of things. If the government wanted you shut down, all they have to do is find one of these things for each redundant line to an ISP and cut them all simultaneously. I am sure a court order could be obtained very quickly to arrange such a thing, and even this may not be necessary. I read in some magazine about ten years ago that all US-launched communications satellites contain software that allows the government to ascertain direct control over their functioning. The purpose stated was that in the event of war the US is highly dependent on commercial satellites for non-military communications and can not afford to have the Soviets (or whatever foreign power) trying to reprogram our satellites utilizing security loopholes on the part of the owning company. In any case, unless the ISP is actually expecting some terrorist group to attack their center and has taken deliberate steps to protect themselves (an absurdly expensive proposition for just about anyone except the military), I doubt there is much that could prevent even a private citizen from taking them out, let alone a well-organized group. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Richard T. Freeman <rfreeman(a)netaxs.com> - finger for pgp key 3D CB AF BD FF E8 0B 10 4E 09 27 00 8D 27 E1 93 http://www.netaxs.com/~rfreeman - ftp.netaxs.com/people/rfreeman

1 0