December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: The FV Problem = A Press Problem
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:05 AM 1/31/96, sameer wrote: > I agree with your points that the press should write real >articles, and not just swallow press releases. The fact of the matter >though, is that that's what they do, swallow press releases. It's a >said state of affairs, but that is the state of affairs. > I wouldn't say *all* news is PR controlled, but most of it >is. It's much less work for the reporter when an article just shows up >on their desk and all they have to do is call one or two people for >some fresh quotes. And I agree with your points, too, Sameer. Like I said, I mean no disrespect to you that you issue press releases in which you interview yourself...it's the form that press releases take, and it's the form that "slides down easily" into a newspaper story. (The form makes it look as though the journalist has conducted the interview and gotten the quotes.) And at least most of Community Connexion's press releases have been about new services being offered, or rewards, etc. And not given vastly more attention than they deserve (as was the case with the FV "discovery"). I really hope this media frenzy with all things related to the Internet will burn itself out. --Tim Boycott espionage-enabled software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

re: Netscape "secure E-Mail"
by A. Padgett Peterson, P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vince rites: >Anyway, it should be much easier to use than PGP. Can send PGP encrypted E-Mail from inside Netscape now - highlight/cut/punch Enclyptor "crypt" button/paste. This is difficult ? Read is same except punch "Dec" and notepad pops up with cleartext. Have even read encrypted mail on the VAX with Telnet that way (no, Virginia, the cleartext does not pass on the net). > * Integrated email - Netscape Navigator 2.0 offers full-featured and rich > email capabilities, allowing you to both read and send secure email > messages without launching an external email application. Could do that now with a commerce server - didn't say "encrypted" email, said "secure". Prolly just sends it to port 443 on the secure channel and the server does the SMTP to the internal net. Warmly, Padgett

2 1

gondolin.org services are back!
by Bryan Strawser 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- After a bout with InterNIC and multiple DNS problems, I am happy to announce that the remailer/nymserver services located at gondolin.org are back on-line and functioning. Type I/II Remailer: mix(a)remail.gondolin.org Nymserver: alias(a)nym.gondolin.org Keys are available via the correct commands and the keyservers. Please contact me with any questions you may have. Bryan - -- Bryan Strawser, System/Network Administrator & Postmaster feanor(a)gondolin.org Gondolin Technologies, Bloomington, Indiana USA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMRAR1fvQGgQ7UJMZAQHChwQAqdWdLsEN5++NwiR9dya6bBa6K4pISi5N y/8QQSCqFC21Rz1pq9hpvCiuhCHbuLOga1XM/SeGBCIn54nVfu/HYZP4VaFxUxI2 Fy0DAAKQhMlXT3wSMZdQJkkBX+My76sJP5k4PDouA6R/B1BQiOWa60oVfRM3Dbo9 upi27fcc4PU= =MDZQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: encrypted cellphones
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:18 PM 1/30/96 -0500, prmoyer(a)magpage.com (Philip R. Moyer) wrote: >Well, I'm discouraged. I'm looking for strongly encrypted cellular telephones, >but I can't seem to find many. Are you looking for cellphones, or cordless phones? There aren't a lot of strongly encrypted cordless phones out there, but there may be some. Digital spread spectrum is probably the best that's easy to find; other kinds of "digital" phones usually pick a not-too-busy frequency and transmit digitized voice, which is mildly secure against other people using your base unit to make their phone calls, but doesn't protect your privacy against anyone with digital-capable equipment. The middle ground between cordless phones and cellphones includes cordless phones with ranges of about a mile (AT&T and some other vendors have sold them); they're typically in the $300-500 range, and use spread spectrum to avoid interference to/from other phones. It also includes phone services that can handle portable phones that you have to stay in one place to use (i.e. once you start your phone call, if you go out of range your call gets dropped rather than handed off to another cell.) I'm not aware of commercial service like this in the US, but there are wireless PBXs that work this way (which can be cheaper than stringing phone wires around buildings.) Cellphones, of course, can only (usefully) use encryption if the cellular service provider uses it (i.e. if the end that's listening to your radio transmission can decode it :-) American cell-phone providers don't. The GSM phones used in much of the world have encryption, but it's apparently not very strong. >I would really like to avoid using a GAK enabled product, >if there's any way to avoid it (even if it means paying lots of extra $$$). I'm not aware of any GAKed cordless phones, though I supposed there could be such. US cellular phones don't need GAK because the government's strong-armed the standards committees into using appallingly trivial crypto - none of this strong 40-bit RC for you :-) #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # http://www.idiom.com/~wcs

5 4

Re:
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMQ+x2ioZzwIn1bdtAQFLvgGArC5EiVmF0J6VZSZnboc9yoTW3eiJXN1M 4L9v0f1tkuoJlC10gX6fRo3SW19vILT4 =LmRK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

RE: More FUD
by A. Padgett Peterson, P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>"real professionals?" You mean the kind that take meetings to avoid work and >leave the office by 5:00? No, those are managers. (Have better equipment at home anyway 8*). >As far as "virus writers" there are relatively few that I would lump >into that category, but the ones who do get there are worthy >of at least a little respect. The ones I know who could, don't. Is considerably harder to write an antivirus program that can account for Zenith ZDOS 3.21 or the original PC-AT BIOS than a virus that blows up if you run it under NW-DOS. >>True, in early '92 when [Mich] came out things were more difficult - not >>everyone had 640k in their machine so the user acurally had to have a clue >>how much memory was supposed to be there. Today is there anyone with 512k ? >If my memory serves me correctly, by '92 386's were rolling off the assembly >lines. You missed my point (and my canary trap). When a Pentium starts up it is in 8086 "real" mode and is limited to the same 1 Mb basic address space (know about the 64k - 16 bytes, is different from 8086/8). What I was referring to was the "640k limit" imposed by 1-2-3 waaaay back when - is stored in Bios data area (0:400) and CMOS. >Maybe you should use WordPerfect instead. Actually I prefer WordStar 7.0. Magazines and the gov like WordPerfect. >Solution: Get rid of Windows. Upgrade to '95, NT, or go to Linux, even OS/2. Have been warped. Have Liniux & FreeBSD. As for Win95, why would I want to degrade my system ? >>And you tell me that someone is going to spread a virus on the net that will >>capture keystrokes on any machine it hits without anyone noticing ? It is >>to laugh (and if they can, they are wasting their time with credit card >>numbers). > This sounds like a challange. Is it worth a T-Shirt? Wasn't a challenge (though getting something to work on a "strange" NCR notebook like mine might be 8*), never saw a BIOS leave dangling interrupts following POST before...) >Not if it is written properly. A lot of viruses become known only when they >drop their payload. Others are just poorly written, no different from a bad >software product. It is not that they are written badly, just that most virus writers lack experience and their worldview is narrow - the [Mich] we mentioned - is obvious not that the writer did not know how to handle floppies, rather that all he/she/it/other knew of were either 360k or 1.2 Mb. "Nightfall" writer had apparently bever seen a Zenith 248 kit 5 BIOS. Ludwig's LBB boot sector virus will only work under Dos 3.3 because DOS 4-up leaves different values in the registers. >>Fact is that the greatest protection the net has is that no two machines are >>alike, may even start that way but after six months, no way. >Ahhhhh.. but your wrong. Granted, the underlying strata may be radically >different, but I can run an MS-DOS program on an 300 Mhz DEC Alpha (under NT) >without any problems (except I couldn't get DOOM to run). No, you can get *some* programs to run and on your machine you may get *all* your programs to run. But they will not run on *any* machine. > There is already a >read-only Filesystem driver for Linux that will read NT. Like TCP/IP, the >operating systems are going towards interoperability. Type 7 ? Nothing magic, just different. >The big computer companies recognize that they have to compete to survive. No >longer can IBM design a machine and lock in their customers to IBM parts, IBM >service, and an IBM operating system. Strength from diversity 8*). Meanwhile, back at FV, if someone wants to break it badly enough, they'll buy one (or one of the FV employees) and take it apart at home. No "professional" would attack anything that she/he did not already know how to break. A *real* professional would buy two or three just to see if they were all the same. Is the same problem with the "Sidewinder Challenge" though it did get a lot of print. Warmly, Padgett

1 0

Call for Papers
by winn＠Infowar.Com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

January 31, 1996 Attention: Information Warriors: ***** CALL FOR PAPERS ***** Please feel free to distribute this widely. I first want to thank the thousands of people who have been so incredibly supportive of my work over the last several years, and who have helped the public debate on Information Warfare gain and sustain the momentum we have all created. As a result of the continued interest in the subject, my publisher has asked if I would create a 2nd. Edition with substantial updates to the original "Information Warfare" which was published in 1994. I told them that the new revised edition should include much of the thinking that has evolved on the topic in the last couple of years. Believe it or not, they agreed! So, I am asking (begging? :-) for a couple of things. 1. We want to include a comprehensive Appendix "D" to include references and bibliographic information for those already in and for those entering the field. We would greatly appreciate any and all types of references that you feel will be useful for students of Infowar today and in the future. The kinds of material we hope to include are: - Web sites, mailing lists, usenet, etc. - Monographs and their source - Published papers and their source - Books with publisher, author, date, ISDN (oops, ISBN) price and a one sentence commentary. - Global resources on the subject. - Courses (civilian, military, etc.) - Organizations, private and gov't. We will also add a credit/acknowledgments page for all of the Information Warriors who have assisted in this effort. Please supply name, title (or rank) contact info, and affiliation as you want it to appear in the book. (If you don't want your name or affiliation to appear, please so indicate and we will honor your request. (Honest . . . .) Ideally, we will need to have a hard copy of the materials that we reference. PLEASE RESPOND TO BETTY(a)INFOWAR.COM 2. In order to portray the current thinking of Infowar from its many facets, I am also looking for short commentaries on your particular take on Infowar - and heavens knows there are so many . . . perhaps googols! I would like to include a large number of 500-800 word overviews, or executive summaries of topics of interest to you, comments on my work, or perhaps on the efforts that you or your org are putting into the field. I am hoping to find a balance between the civilian viewpoints and military and international ones so that students and readers can see just how much work in occurring in the field. Organizations like AFIWC and DISA (and so on) are invited to submit a similar overview of their efforts in addition to individual submissions. It is not necessary to agree with me (that would be heresy in some cases :-)) but let's be civil about it, OK? The purpose is to get the neurons vibrating and moving the field forward. If you take issue with, or relate to specific items/topics/comments in "Information Warfare" please note page number so we can tie it all together thematically. There will be suffixes to each chapter, and I am hoping that many of the responses will comment on or add to each of the chapters. As for credit, we will list your name, contact info, affiliation etc., along with your particular contribution. With each submission, please just say something like, "I hereby give Winn Schwartau, Interpact, Inc., and Thunders Mouth Press non-exclusive permission to use this work." That keeps the publisher happy and still lets you own your own words. If it's a personal opinion, and not an official one of your organization, a simple disclaimer like, "these are the opinions of the author, and not necessarily those of my organization." We will provide a general suffix disclaimer to that effect anyway. If it is the official view of your org, then please indicate so clearly, so we may make an accurate distinction. If we decide to edit your piece substantively, we will run it back to you for approval before printing. All we will ask is a timely return. To get your brain thinking on the kinds of topics I am looking for: - Civilian Defense - "This is an act of War" - "This is not an act of War" - Infowar as an alternative to conventional conflict. - Non-lethal conventional warfare - Enhancing military efficiency with Infowar - PsyOps as Infowar - Hackers: A National Resource Please consider all three Classes of Infowar when deciding what you want to say. Since you only have 500-800 words to say it, I suggest that it be clear, concise and to the point. Controversy is good. But just as good is if your comments are thought provoking and stimulate additional discussion about your subject. For each contribution we accept, (and there will be a lot we will!) we will provide a free copy of the new revised "Information Warfare: Revised Edition" (or whatever they decide to call it.) PLEASE RESPOND TO: BETTY(a)INFOWAR.COM 3. We have already received a large number of short "pull quotes" of one or two sentences for the cover and inside covers where we give full attribution. If anyone is so inclined, we are looking for a few more that comment on the existing works. PLEASE RESPOND TO BETTY(a)INFOWAR.COM 4. Robert Steele at ceo(a)oss.net has agreed to help me pull together a "Who's Who" of Information Warfare. Please supply names, contact information and brief biographies to him at CEO(a)OSS.NET. Again, I want to thank everyone out there for their support, and I look forward to seeing what everyone has to say. Please send your input to BETTY(a)INFOWAR.COM no later than February 29, 1996. Feel free to distribute this widely and/or post as you see fit. Winn Schwartau Peace Winn Winn Schwartau - Interpact, Inc. Information Warfare and InfoSec V: 813.393.6600 / F: 813.393.6361 Winn(a)InfoWar.Com

1 0

RE: No FV supporters?
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> if people like Sameer and Rich Salz (e.g., who have reputations > as knowledgeable and aware) are going to trash FV Thanks for the compliment. I never trashed FV or its protocols, as I don't know anything about them. I did comment on some of the principles of their principals, however, as this whole brou-ha-ha strikes me as a continuing slide to technical-intellectual dishonesty. /r$

1 0

Re: [rant] A thought on filters and the V-Chip
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"frissell(a)panix.com" "Duncan Frissell" 29-JAN-1996 11:02:03.09 >What parents are attempting to do when they restrain their children's access to "sex and drugs and rock and roll" (or Republicanism for that matter) is to mediate their "spiritual" environment to keep them from becoming hardened. They know the kids will grow up, they just want them to grow up in a nice way. ------------------- From what I've seen, kids are better off when they don't see the world through blinders/rose-colored-glasses. For instance, benign neglect is a lot better for children than overprotectiveness... I wish my parents (as much as I love them) had applied it to me, I'd have turned out a lot better. (I am also getting information from multiple psychiatrists and psychologists, including ones who (unlike me) have raised children). ------------------- >Children who listen to Vera Lynn's singing and Cole Porter's songs will end up quite different from those who favor louder, less vocal music. Note that in spite of what liberals might think, fundamentalist christians are less likely to divorce, less likely to report spousal beatings, less likely to kill themselves, and more likely to measure high personal satisfaction ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ levels on standard psychological tests than are, say, readers of The Nation. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ------------------- Well, yes, someone with a blind conviction that they're going to someplace nice when they die, confidence that their intolerance is right, and other such ideas tends to have higher personal satisfaction levels. Also, this "personal satisfaction" is overrated... as Jack L. Chalker pointed out, a blade of grass is perfectly happy... even after it's picked. ------------------- >The cypherpunks relevance of all this is that it should soon be possible to create completely mediated environments for ourselves and our children. Through the use of implants and real-time VR processing, it will be possible to edit our "interface" with the Real World such that unpleasant aspects are edited out. We will be able to change the attire, hair, facial expressions, voice, and even smell of those around us to conform to our own esthetic desires. Likewise with our physical surroundings. Safety may discourage making a complete transformation in one's surroundings, but one can certainly soften the edges. --------------------- Sasha's enhanced reality or whatever it was called, yes. The cypherpunk relevance would appear to be more that there should be methods to get true information to kids (and those under repressive governments, which is about the same thing in most families) despite attempts to stop it. Anyone for posting (anonymously) some image viewers and pornographic site locations to one of the k12 groups? -Allen

1 0

Nautilus?
by jf_avon＠citenet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi. I was wondering if some of you ever used Nautilus, if it was good, if it has a backdoor, etc. I am not knowledgeable enough to inspect source by myself. Any comments? Since the topic was probably discussed extensively, feel free to reply to me directly. Regards to all cyphering punks! JFA Why, you might wonder, is it that civil servants never look out through the window in the morning? What would they otherwise occupy themselves with in the afternoon?

1 0