December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Real issue of crypto controls: security or taxation loss?
by jf_avon＠citenet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 13 Sep 97 at 9:19, Tim May wrote: > (JF won't see this, unless Bob H. chooses to pass it on, Sandy-style. This > on unedited, undelayed lists, not on digests and delayed condensations.) AFAIK, e$pam is not edited and not a digest. But there might be parental control ... :-) > At 9:57 AM -0700 9/13/97, jf_avon(a)citenet.net wrote: > >Hi. > > > >I've been lazily following the crypto-control issue through e$pam > >list. > > Read the real list. Tim, there are a lot of important issues in life, and crypto is only one of them. I value your opinion a lot and find most of your comments to be not only valid but even often wise. But of course, as a CP highness, you seems to sometimes forget :-) that: 1) CP is carrier to so much things that I don't find interesting 2) every second wasted never comes back 3) some of my other interests requires as much time as CP, mostly Canadian Firearms Digest where locally, we Canucks, are fighting a battle you are no stranger with, only we got it worse than you Yankees. 4) IMO, crypto has to be a useful tool to be interesting. I am more interested in improving life than in building aesthetic mathematical algorithms. And the most direct way to achieve this is anonymous e-$, not guns. 5) fighting for privacy rights will be irrelevant when govt will have been starved to extinction by e-$. 6) If I subtract from my awake time my working time, my eating time, my washing time, my ****ing time and my domestic chores time, it leaves me with time I can do whatever I want. This remaining time is always too short. 7) After several weeks of being on CP and e$pam and e$ simultaneously, I found that I can read most of you posts on CP via e$pam, great thanks to RAH. RAH seems to forward everything that is even remotely related to e-$. Unless RAH has a Machielavelous plan to induce everybody in error, for the time being, he does a great job. I subscribe from times to times to CP for random durations at random moments just to cross-check theses things. My last year long absence from CP was caused by entirely other things. I had no time for any net stuff at all. > As a comment, sometimes when I try to "reply to all" to these messages from > folks reading digests, I get "you are not a member of this list" or "this > is a private list" messages. Why don't you try jf_avon(a)citenet.net? :-) Get a decent mailer and you'll find it's easy... :-) > Fine, but it's why I won't waste time on folks who may not even see what I > write unless I address it to them personally. So now, do you propose mandatory voluntary subscription to some mailing lists? :-) Never thought about telepathy? Or becoming a prominent TV figure so that *everybody* (well, almost...) would be force-fed to TM-Stuff (tm) ? :-) OK, OK, I push it a bit but why should I have to suffer the intelligent and down to the point discussions on CP if I consider that I have other better things to do? The issue comes down to the respect of the Individual. Could I, pe-lease, have my own interests? Pe-lease? As for your perception of "loosing time on folks [snip]", I opinate that it is an error from you. Although I am off from CP, I recently ordered Applied Crypto (at last, I found the money...), and I plan to give a small introduction talk to various persons and groups. I make *every* *damn* *efforts* to spread PGP with everybody I know, distributing software and keys. But you see, if you say to somebody : this will encrypt your communications" they don't give a shit. If you explain to them the digital telephony bill, the current tapping capability, the various moves that the govt is currently doing, *and* crypto through the e-$ applications *and* political consequences of e-$, *then* they *really* do get interested. In my own experience, introducing the topic by the e-$/govt-intrusion door is what gets them the motivation to learn text-based plain-vanilla PGP. And as I said in an earlier post, the more they get their money confiscated in the name of the Great Unwashed Happiness, the more they get interested. So, "that folk" is one it is unwise to neglect, he just gets overwhelmed by the sheer volume of stuff on CP. Most of the discouraged just unsubscribe and a few rare stick to it in diverse, indirect ways. The ones who stick to it might just be the most persistent of them all. > JF, get a decent mailer and get on the real list if you want to participate. I use Pegasus Mail V2.53 with a kill file verging on the terabyte thank you. And I don't want to "participate", I want to exchange ideas. Peoples who want to do so with me will do so. If it is too much work to include me in your replies, just don't bother. > Oh, and "cypherpunks(a)toad.com" Please send me a valid name so I can keep posting to CP without suffering the irrelevant-to-my-interests stuff, in full confidence that RAH will keep doing it's fantastic job of forwarding your most-of-the-time-interesting-to-me posts. Ciao Tim Ciao all jfa -- Jean-Francois Avon, Pierrefonds(Montreal) QC Canada DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee Finest of Limoges porcelain and crystal JFA Technologies, R&D consultants physicists and engineers, LabView programing. PGP encryption keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon http://bs.mit.edu:8001/pks-toplev.html ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891 ID# 5B51964D : 152ACCBCD4A481B0 254011193237822C

1 0

Netscape giving away T-shirts?
by sameer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

My ex-gf just told me on the phone that her boss mentioned that Netscape was giving away T-shirts to people who found holes. Apparently her boss saw this on the news. Interesting. ;-) (For the over-stressed and/or humor-impaired: I'm not implying that netscape is giving away t-shirts, just commenting on the accuracy of the media.) -- sameer Voice: 510-601-9777 Community ConneXion FAX: 510-601-9734 An Internet Privacy Provider Dialin: 510-658-6376 http://www.c2.org (or login as "guest") sameer(a)c2.org

1 0

Re: Real issue of crypto controls: security or taxation loss?
by jf_avon＠citenet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 13 Sep 97 at 21:02, Fred Hapgood wrote: > > >I think that *this* debate should be injected in the population and > >the *bogus* "national security" debate should be dismissed as, > >just that : bogus. > > Never underestimate how weirded out people can get about "security". > You don't know about this, living in Canada, but nobody in America can > use a mailbox to mail a package now, just because one guy mailed a few > bombs. FUD. There is quite a difference between what Joe and Jane Average are and what the Lie-Box with 500 channels and most Lie-Leaflets will tell you. Sorry for my idealism, but I still believe that there is a quantum of Reason in the population. But you may be right here. > What are you saying here? That we should be arguing that encryption > should be permitted because it will allow people to avoid paying > taxes? Duhhh, duhhhh, fucking duhhhh... Why do you make me spend my resources (time, efforts) on having me defend myself on something I never said? Just read my fucking text and this *is* what I said. Go read Hettinga's rants on his web site about how e-$ will impose itself and why and consider that I agree with him on it. [and here, I disregard the less-than-illuminated contradiction in terms] And if you want to get emotionnal :-) , just as I also agreed and defended Jim Bell's opinion that AP was "not-possible-to-prevent-from-happening", [unless they ban crypto, for legitimate e-$ scheme need authorities's tolerance of crypto] and backed my opinion with rational arguments. Thank you very much. Just like anybody describing and saying that the Ebola virus is mortal doesn't mean one loves to kill... So, DUHHHH squared. Another time-wasting, word-twisting, fanatic-attracting, emotional-debate-inducing idiocy like that and [not a menace but simply a description of my quality-of-life enhancing measures] I will have one of my file past the terabyte mark... Ciao jfa -- Jean-Francois Avon, Pierrefonds(Montreal) QC Canada DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee Finest of Limoges porcelain and crystal JFA Technologies, R&D consultants physicists and engineers, LabView programing. PGP encryption keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon http://bs.mit.edu:8001/pks-toplev.html ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891 ID# 5B51964D : 152ACCBCD4A481B0 254011193237822C

1 0

No Subject
by Freedom Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Post: Spy Agency Hoards Secret $1 Billion WASHINGTON (AP) - The super secret agency that manages the nation's spy satellite program has built up unspent funds totaling more than $1 billion without informing Congress or even its supervisors at the Pentagon and CIA, according to a published report. The Washington Post cited unidentified Capitol Hill sources in Sunday editions as saying the ability of the National Reconnaissance Organization to put away so much money from its classified multibillion-dollar budget reaffirmed concerns that intelligence agencies sometimes use their secret status to avoid accountability. The Post said the funds, called a "pot of gold" by one Senate aide, were discovered after the Senate intelligence committee raised questions more than a year ago about a $300 million new headquarters building the agency was building in suburban Virginia. The committee determined that the agency, not generally known to Congress, was using base operating funds it already had without seeking a specific appropriation for the building. The pool of unspent money accumulated as a result of NRO's practice of having Congress pay in advance for multiyear, billion-dollar-plus satellite programs, the Post quoted CIA Director John Deutch as saying in an interview. Agency managers let incoming funds pile up when spending on contracts took place at a slower pace than planned. Although he said a CIA inquiry found nothing illegal about how the NRO handled the money, Deutch told the Post he put a new chief financial officer in at the agency and ordered a "separate budget scrub" of all its programs. NRO's funding is part of the Pentagon budget, but many of the agency's intelligence programs are under CIA supervision. The Post said one congressional aide put the total of unspent funds as high as $1.7 billion, but that others said it could turn out to be less than $1 billion. It said Deutch declined to put a figure on the unspent money. Story Number: 00598 Story Date: 9/23/95 This material may not be redistributed. Copyright 1995. The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

1 0

Re: "Going after Netscape"
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In article <199509231914.MAA01326(a)infinity.c2.org>, sameer(a)c2.org (sameer) wrote: >> So, keep on "attacking" Netscape (kudos to Ray, by the way, though I've >> seen Netscape bomb on certain sites, as with the Cypherpunks archive site, >> as several of us noted a few months ago...probably a different problem, but >> indicative that Netscape can be corrupted). But let's be careful not to >> convey any flavor of this being a vendetta. > > I agree. The goal is not to kill Netscape but to make the net >secure. Absolutely. We aren't on a vendetta. We want to make the net secure for privacy. If hacking a Netscape server will help that goal, surely Netsape's own would be the most appropriate server to try, since it will generate the largest exposure in the press and thereby the strongest motivation for Netscape to fix the hole. - -- - -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMGRoHyoZzwIn1bdtAQHJCgF9FbuTP1VBbzGJANFX48hvje4V7pzhyEaQ ItXGdXHCPbxjKbQ0bLApkt4yTtHJREMk =wEyv -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

Re: Crypto in Wired
by stevenw＠iglou.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Good issue of Wired this month (10/95) > >Vic Sussman has a half page on PGPfone. Asked why he's giving away PGPfone >with an inditement hanging over his head Zimmermann says "... I am a >cryptographer. This is what I do". You need the full quote to get the real effect: <<Why is Zimmermann giving away voice-crypto when the feds are still dangling an indictment over his head? "Because it's still legal for Americans to hold a private conversation," he says. "And because I'm a crypographer. This is what I do.">> That is a remarkably concise, intelligent, informative, unequivocal, savvy, and personal statement. Hats off to PZ (or whoever told him to say that). ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steven Weller | "The Internet, of course, is more +1 415 390 9732 | than just a place to find pictures | of people having sex with dogs." stevenw(a)iglou.com | -- Time Magazine, 3 July 1995

1 0

Anti-GAK Software Release
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Convert your GAKware to CRAKware! ** http://www.antigak.com.ai/ Available Jan. 1, 1999 Ecash Preferred (Double-blinded, FinCEN Resistance Rating 3 or higher) "Browser Booster is a cypherpunk's wet dream!" - Anonymous "More powerful than C2Net's StrongArm plug-in." - Also Anonymous "My line was tapped, but I didn't care. They thought I was chatting about roller derby, but I was really transferring US $100,000. to safe accounts beyond their reach." - L.D. Another fine product from Anti-GAK Software "Making the Net safe for privacy and commerce ... again." --- ** CRAK = Cryptographically Resistant Access to Keys

1 0

Re: Real issue of crypto controls: security or taxation loss?
by jf_avon＠citenet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 13 Sep 97 at 23:58, iang(a)systemics.com wrote: > That's right, there is a section of the population that is extremely > interested in holding onto their e$. Let's call them the rich, because > they have e$ to think of. Let's get into modelization! So, let's put first things first. First, you shouldn't say e$ but $, because it is what thoses you call "the rich" have. Now, does e-$ would permit govt to behave the same way as they do now? > Then there is a section of the population that is not that so > interested, because they fundamentally have very little e$ to > protect. Let's call them the poor; nothing to think about except > lack of e$. > The problem is that the rich win in the system known as the > capitalist economy, but the poor win in the system known as the > democracy. There is a balance between the capitalist economy and > democracy that runs like this: How do they win? By the use of coercion (and this is why guns should not get registered). > 1. a democracy is the best protector of an open economy. Out of what hat did you got that one? Who said so and why? :-) My opinion is that your remark is falling into the same category as the the old fallacy saying "everything is uncertain but death and taxes". > 2. an open economy generates a small group of rich, > and a large group of poor (relatively speaking). Statistically, yes. But it doesn't intrinsically generates *envious* poors. But that is a discussion about Values and Ethics and their link to emotions and nobody who's not an Ayn Rand fanatic or who doesn't have a few more terabytes of disk space to spare doesn't want to get into it... :-) > 3. a large group of poor will vote within a democracy > to tax the rich. It depends on which moral code the legislative authorities base their actions. But the sentence "a large group of poor will always try, within a democracy, to justify the muscling-in on the rich transactually-acquired wealth" would be true. > It's the difference between politics and economics: Are you going > to tell the voters that the rich can hide their e$ or are you going > to tell them that the Feds will spy on them? As the voters are > mostly poor, I'd be sticking with the second option. True > Remember, everybody gets one vote, but only the smart get lots of e$. This one for-the-time-being reason why crypto should be deployed. The true answers will be found in the nature of the data exchange system, it's robustness and reliability, and the impact of dropping the govt out of the money loop. Sometimes, an invention can change the face of the world. Mathematics did, gun powder did, the printing press did, the microprocessor did, so why not crypto? And what is the most Joe Everybody consumer-oriented use of crypto? Ciao jfa P.S. Anybody who has a clue about modelizing the effects of a behaviour/entity (use of e$) that hamper the survival of another one (govt) in a complex system, please drop me a line (any micro-biologists online?) -- Jean-Francois Avon, Pierrefonds(Montreal) QC Canada DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee Finest of Limoges porcelain and crystal JFA Technologies, R&D consultants physicists and engineers, LabView programing. PGP encryption keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon http://bs.mit.edu:8001/pks-toplev.html ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891 ID# 5B51964D : 152ACCBCD4A481B0 254011193237822C

1 0

Foreign language traffic on the CDR?...
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, I was wondering if there was a large objection to carrying non-English crypto traffic... ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

3 2

No Subject
by Freedom Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Newsgroups: alt.privacy.anon-server > From: shamrock(a)netcom.com (Lucky Green) > Subject: The subtle danger of using Mixmaster > Message-ID: <shamrock-2409951151310001(a)192.0.2.1> > Sender: shamrock(a)netcom19.netcom.com > Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) > X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.0 > Date: Sun, 24 Sep 1995 19:51:30 GMT > Lines: 19 > > There are about twenty Mixmaster remailers. Reason to celebrate? Hardly. > Though we have more remailers than ever, I doubt that the twenty or so > Mixmasters are operated my more than six or seven people. I would not be > surprised to find out that some folks are running several Mixmasters on > the _same_ machine, using different IP addresses. > > While the enthusiasm for increasing the number of remailers is > understandable, the operation of more than one Mixmaster by the same > person is downright dangerous, because it reduces the effective lenght of > the remailer chain. The message that you sent through five remailers may > have only been handled by two operators. When you thought that five people > had to colaborate to trace your email, only two are in fact required to do > so. > > Comments? > > -- > -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> > PGP encrypted mail preferred. >

1 0