December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Online Zakat Payment: Religious tithe.
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 07:13 PM 2/17/96 +0000, Ed Carp wrote: >On Sat, 17 Feb 1996, jim bell wrote: > >> BTW, I think I've already solved the problem of producing a few dozen >> absolutely simultaneous trigger explosions (+/- 100 nanoseconds) around the >> periphery at the lens foci, without using multiple electronic detonators. >> (in fact, a single blasting cap would do nicely.) "But the margins of this >> book are too small to contain it" Heh heh! > >Actually, it's a quite simple problem to solve. Tom Clancy used a rather >more complicated method, but the idea was correct. >-- >Ed Carp, N7EKG Ed.Carp(a)linux.org, ecarp(a)netcom.com You might be surprised: I have never read anything by Clancy. Tell me, what method did HE use? Jim Bell, N7IJS jimbell(a)pacifier.com Klaatu Burada Nikto -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMSayU/qHVDBboB2dAQF6rQP9F3LRvxn5bSu4MQqlyfy8AjgEkef5csyV kwRIYSJn4A0LmMJSzb+lfuAG5wyOQ26HsTXChmojfpjaY5cdXnPSmYhfwxUPqFPX 33Ymjm/Nd+AROIrd/nqlc8Vib9aqtaJP6oXdN9m30xwVXCok3HwPYWVac24aqh5R +gDvMsxrAWE= =MMYU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Denying Entrance Visas to Troublemakers
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:08 AM 2/18/96, Ed Carp wrote: >Another problem - if you ever want to get into the US, you can kiss that >chance goodbye. They might not even let you into the country as a >visitor. Stupid. A fair number of Western countries have laws that say, >in effect, that if you do something in your country that isn't illegal in >your country but is in country X, then country X can bar you entry or PR >status or citizenship based on the fact that is *is* a crome in country X. > >Never mind that you may not even be aware that it *is* a crime in another >country, etc. I suspect that it's intended to bar war criminals and such, >but it could just as easily be used against the common immigrant. Oh, but it is done very, very often. That is, it is not something reserved for "war criminals" (not that war criminals are excluded, as shown by the Dayton Accords, and other visits.) "Denied entry" and "undesirable" are the operative words. The offense may be writing materials critical of the U.S. (poetry, novels, etc....so far, not Net stuff). Various flavors of activists, writers, critics, etc. are often denied visas to enter the U.S. I don't believe the Net has yet registered on the Richter scale of visa grantings, but I suspect it will within a couple of years, both because the Net will become a more important media channel and because it will be so easy to compile lists of folks who will be denied entrance visas. (And the same applies in reverse. I have no doubt that I will be denied visas to enter various countries, including the freedom-loving countries of the mullahs and sheiks, and that country which sent Pollard to spy on the U.S. Good thing I don't want to visit any of them, except Iraq.) --Tim May 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: Legal status of Indian Reservations and CDA
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:03 PM 2/17/96 +0000, you wrote: >If I remember correctly, are not American Indian reservations considered >qusi-sovergin states under the law? Indian tribes no longer function as sovereigns - they're considered domestic dependent nations. The lack of *state* (CA, OR, WA, etc) jurisdiction over Indian country comes from federal preemption. Tribes retain some civil regulatory jurisdiction, but it does not function to exclude federal regulation. (see http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~gbroiles/torres.html for more re tribal regulatory jurisdiction) >If this is true, what would stop me from negotiating with some tribe to >establish an ISP on the reservation and then placing whatever material I >wanted on that site without fear of reprisals from the US goverment. The problem with this is that the feds have jurisdiction over crimes occurring within Indian country. Tribes may also exercise jurisdiction over tribal members who violate tribal law. ( * Modulo PL-280, modulo the civil rights act of 1968, which gave and took away and gave back (sort of) criminal jurisdiction to the states in 5 states - CA, OR, WA, MN, NE (?), and other states/tribes who choose to opt into PL-280's framework. Yow.) Doing business within Indian country won't help you escape Federal law; Federal law enforcement is often the local law enforcement. (State jurisdiction over gambling, jurisdiction over taxation of economic transactions, and criminal jurisdiction should be considered independently; they are all created or extinguished by different Federal statutes, sometimes state-by-state, sometimes tribe-by-tribe. Also, the Pueblos of New Mexico and Arizona(?) may have a different status because they gained their land from the government of Mexico.) Jurisdictional questions under Federal Indian law are always messy. If it was as easy as "do it on a reservation", people would've been doing it for years with drugs & alcohol. But the Feds thought of that already. -- "The anchored mind screwed into me by the psycho- | Greg Broiles lubricious thrust of heaven is the one that thinks | gbroiles(a)netbox.com every temptation, every desire, every inhibition." | -- Antonin Artaud |

1 0

MIT Keyserver (at pgp@pgp.mit.edu) Mostly Operational
by jis＠mit.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups: alt.security.pgp) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The keyserver running at pgp(a)pgp.mit.edu is once again operational. It is using new keyserver software. The old keyserver software was a collection of perl scripts that invoked PGP to do its key management. The new server is written in "C" and does its own key management, complete with appropriate indices. Not all email commands are implemented. However "GET", "ADD" and "INDEX" (when given an argument to look for) do work. Response is immediate (plus or minus e-mail delays). The best on-line way to use the keyserver is via the World Wide Web at: http://bs.mit.edu:8001/pks-toplev.html Enjoy. -Jeff -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMSaaCcUtR20Nv5BtAQF76wQAmsuF4t43zIaNjW1lZS9fhYr/3UjIHqVT V3jMSJ5W3gsEWkHzigP2VY5tfduiC4oQJOaGaHFSSI6jkhEFTpjOvVMIe6ye/GKh pqiXNm/wBef4EFQ+NqKjPc/TW28odVGR50A5kneI/tyOjAYrFzetakOUlBeq+Qrv 1e4OamD65fo= =FyXc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: Nyms with keys
by an5877＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Perhaps while you're lurking, you should consider downloading and installing a more recent version of PGP than version 2.4 which you're still using. WHat advantage is there to the more recent versions? I'll tell you what I like most about this version, it is paid for. DEADBEAT <na5877(a)anon.penet.fi> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQBFAgUBMSYqT/FZTpBW/B35AQHlvQF8CULa2WkotQ29t7OaVduq8geDybE+PAcT icDe5Ho59EWS+t3OqjsHJc/ECv+bthJY =PNsK -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--***ATTENTION*** Your e-mail reply to this message WILL be *automatically* ANONYMIZED. Please, report inappropriate use to abuse(a)anon.penet.fi For information (incl. non-anon reply) write to help(a)anon.penet.fi If you have any problems, address them to admin(a)anon.penet.fi

1 0

Re: Legal status of Indian Reservations and CDA
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:03 PM 2/17/96, Michael Peponis wrote: >If I remember correctly, are not American Indian reservations considered >qusi-sovergin states under the law? > >If this is true, what would stop me from negotiating with some tribe to >establish an ISP on the reservation and then placing whatever material I >wanted >on that site without fear of reprisals from the US goverment. > >After all, if they are a soveign state, decency is covered by whatever laws >they have, if any, not the CDA. > >If this is true, the Indians get the benift of having state-of-the-art >telecommunications in thier communities, plus residual job creation, and >everyone else gets freedom of speech. "Bingo." Actually, not. Despite the Indian bingo parlors, look at what is lacking in this model: brothels, money-laundering banks, hash parlors, etc. (Not that there aren't whorehouses operating semi-openly on Indian lands, as elsewhere, just that the fiction that Indian reservations are quasi-sovereign is just that, a fiction. Recall the case of Native American uses of peyote.) Of course, this fiction of sovereignty has been useful for the intelligence community when they wanted it: Wackenhut and related CIA companies used the Cabazon Band of Indians lands near Indio, California to develop products that are illegal to develop in the nominal United States...despite being less than a mile from the main freeway linking LA and Palm Springs. And I was told that certain microwave (Long Lines?) lines were deliberately routed through Indian reservations, allowing NSA-GCHQ monitoring without violating the "no domestic interception" fiction. So, it might be possible to eventually push through an exemption to the CDA that is somewhat analogous to the way some Indian reservations can have gambling facilities that are otherwise forbidden, but I expect the court battle would be a long one, and would need big money to pursue. (Gambling got pushed through for obvious financial reasons, and perhaps because of some judicious payoffs to local officials, courts, etc. Yet another convenient fiction.) --Tim May 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."

2 1

DOG_lyz
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

2-17-96. TWP: "CIA to Retain Right to Use Journalistic Cover." DCI John M. Deutch told a forum yesterday that the agency maintained the right to use U.S. journalists or their organizations as cover for intelligence activities but only under restrictive regulations. The staff director of the Senate intelligence committee, said the panel considers questions about non-official cover to be "a great problem" and expects members will want to take "a hard look at what extraordinary circumstances led to the use of journalistic cover." "Ethics On-Line..." [Editorial] DOG_lyz

2 1

Re: credential "borrowing"
by A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Did anybody see the movie Demolition Man? Biometrics were "hacked" >there. I guess it's hard to be sure, but it seems something in your >brain is tougher to extract than a finger or an eyeball. The texts say a >combination is a good idea. Well, for a well funded adversary, the first step is to buy a duplicate to the system to be subverted and analyze it. Usually is nnot difficult. Problem with biometrics is the cost/speed. To do it right is going to be slow/expensive. Few are. However the traditional rule has been "something you have/something you know" two factors are good, three are better. In that line, along with one of my primary tasks (securing of notebooks) have been warning people that if the information is valuable enough to require that level of protection then the user is put at added risk the same way that better automobile locks spawned carjackings. Duress codes are not difficult to impliment. BTW voted for Ed Clark once since "none of the above" was not an option. Spent the next year getting beg letters from various libertarian groups. Warmly, Padgett

1 0

Re: China -- the fragile glimmer of freedom
by Bruce Baugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:46 AM 2/17/96 -0800, Timothy May wrote: >Well, where are the posts from outraged Cypherpunks living in the People's >Republic of China? In many cases, exercising the prudence appropriate to people whose friends have been run over by tanks in recent years. In other cases, doing things in venues that happen not to cross this list. In much of China the central government is already a dead letter, with effective power being wielded at the municipial and provincial level. Friends of my family who do business in China report that the major question at this point is making sure that local military authorities don't decide to confiscate all the assets of prospering businesses. Part of this is very strong security for sensitive transactions. I can't know for sure, obviously, but I'd be unsurprised to find as many copies of PGP running in regions like Shanghai, Shenzen, and Guangzhou as there are in the United States. A lot of these folks don't have good net connectively, and won't for a long time. Some of them have it but are leery of posting critical stuff that will attract hostile attention. Others are, for all I know, protesting in relevant soc.culture groups and such places. It's very easy to develop an inflated sense of the importance of the forums one happens to belong to - Cypherpunks isn't all that widely known, and even though it is, or at least has been, an outstanding gathering of folks making crypto happen, there are other vectors for these things. >are in the so-called "Western world." We have a chance to deploy strong >crypto, the residents of Nepal and Singapore do not. As it happens, I _do_ know for a fact of at least one copy of PGP running in Nepal, in the hands of a agricultural broker. Tim, you're beyond your knowledge here. -- Bruce Baugh bruce(a)aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~bruce

1 0

Monthly Remailer Perfs, Prelims
by Bruce Baugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm in the process of running what I guess will be my monthly series of remailer tests, where I send posts through a given remailer to a nym at c2 and then back through the remailer to me. While it'll be most of a week before I'm done, some preliminary observations. - armadillo and hroller are sorely missed. - remailer(a)valhalla.phoenix.net is, so I'm told, not a valid address. And I get a failure to find the host name at wmono(a)spook.alias.net. Anyone want to shed light on this? - performance is noticeably slower throughout. In January I routinely got messages back in five to ten minutes. Now the shortest round trip is about fifty minutes. Is the load on the remailers that much higher, or are other factors at work? -- Bruce Baugh bruce(a)aracnet.com http://www.aracnet.com/~bruce

1 0