December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Add-in encryption module to Netscape
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

runner(a)asiapac.net > Hi, > > Lurking here for quite some time until now a real problem has come up and I > need help here. > > I'm not in the US of A and the Netscape commerce server that my employer > recently purchased has only 48bit key (as told by the salesman). My question is > whether it is possible to add-in my own security module (RSA) and secondly, how > difficult is it? The salesman cannot answer me. > > Thanks a lot. Funny, this looks an awful lot like a query (with an apparently real name attached) which appeared in www-security last week from Malaysia. I'm aware of the following servers, available outside the US, which claim to offer 128 bit SSL encryption: Apache-SSL Unix see http://www.algroup.co.uk/Apache-SSL free, commercial support available. supports client authentication Available from British sites Sioux Unix (solaris) see ftp://ftp.inect.co.za/pub/products/sioux/ANNOUNCE support client authentication Based on Apache 2500 Rand Available from South Africa Alibaba NT/Win95 see http://alibaba.austria.eu.net/ Available from Austria US $599 Zeus Very nice website at http://www.zeus.co.uk/ Unix 999 UK # Available from Britain COSMOS Unix Nice site at http://www.ristech.com/SOMMAIRE/B_PRODUITS/INTERNET/ WebCompare claims this has SSL2, but I can't find a mention of their Website. US $2000 and up. Available from France. For a survey of web servers, I strongly recommend WebCompare: http://www.webcompare.com Peter Trei

1 0

Micro$oft Crypto API
by Eric Anderson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Has anyone heard anything about the crypto API M$ is working on? Will it work W/ RSA? and will it support GAK? Sorry if this ?? is redundant, I havent' read my mail for a week.

1 0

Entropy
by Jed Liu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've heard a lot of discussion here about "entropy tests" and "tests for randomness". Could somebody please explain to me one of these tests (or would that take too long?) ? Thanks. -=[###########################]=- -=[## Jed Liu ##]=- -=[## ljt(a)fs3.ucc.on.ca ##]=- -=[###########################]=- Things are entirely what they appear to be--and behind them...there is nothing. --Jean-Paul Sartre, "Nausea" SignaQuote v1.00 by Jed Liu

1 0

Re: Wiretapping v warrants
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:42 AM 4/20/96 -0500, Bruce Marshall wrote: >On Fri, 19 Apr 1996, jim bell wrote: > >> Here's a question, however: What, exactly, stands between the way it is >> supposedly done, today, and wiretapping with none of these "protections." > > First and foremost Congress, But were these "protections" the product of a law passed by Congress? > then the Judicial system I'm feeling much better....NOT! >and finally the people themselves. It's called "Right to Keep and Bear Arms." >> And another question I've never seen a satisfactory answer for: Why is >> there not an automatic policy to inform the person tapped, at least after >> the tap is removed, analogous to the level of information the victim of a >> search warrant normally gets? > > Since I'm not exactly sure whether the targets of a wiretap are ever >informed that their conversations were monitored if they aren't later >prosecuted using the info gained through the wiretap, I couldn't really >comment on why if that is the case. The reason you don't know is simply that there is no _Constitutional_ reason. There is merely a practical one: The act of wiretapping does not automatically inform those tapped, in the same way that service of a search warrant does, so the government CONVEEEENIENTLY forgets to tell them. Most government suck-ups don't even want to address this issue; they have no explanation. Unlike them, you acknowledged that you weren't away of the reason why. > Personally, I think a better example could be used. When a person is >placed under visual surveilance they also are uninformed that their >actions are being scrutinized. Their conversations can be picked up >using high powered microphones and they can be plainly seen with >binoculars or even night vision goggles. I would assume that they >probably aren't informed after the fact either unless the surveilance is >used against them in court. I seem to recall a news item from Washington state within the last couple of years in which a conviction was thrown out because evidence was obtained with thermal-IR imagers. You know, look for the hot house and it's being used to grow pot. Problem is, that kind of viewing is not normally publicly apparent, so a citizen has a reasonable belief that it can't be used against him. In another case, in Oregon, the use of night-vision goggles to observe people (at least in collecting evidence) was thrown out, for the same reason: Even if, arguably, people were out "in public," they had a reasonable expectation that they would not be observed if they were careful to remain in the dark. One more thing: Until about 1968, the private use of tiny recording microphones, in public, was essentially unlimited. About that year, in many states, it was restricted. (In some states it's illegal to record conversations by surreptitious means, EVEN IF you're a party to that conversation. How bizarre!) My theory is that politicians recognized, correctly, that they would be the ones most subject to such recording, and since they engaged in incriminating (bribery) conversations fairly regularly, they didn't want lobbyists to be able to collect a series of recorded conversations that could later be used against the politician if they later fell out of favor. > Regardless, I think that if people aren't informed that they were the >subject of an investigation after they are cleared, they should be. >Bruce Marshall The reason I consider "the system" to be so crooked is that it tries to get away with things like this whenever it can. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

List of reliable remailers
by Raph Levien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I operate a remailer pinging service which collects detailed information about remailer features and reliability. To use it, just finger remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu There is also a Web version of the same information, plus lots of interesting links to remailer-related resources, at: http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~raph/remailer-list.html This information is used by premail, a remailer chaining and PGP encrypting client for outgoing mail. For more information, see: http://www.c2.org/~raph/premail.html For the PGP public keys of the remailers, finger pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu This is the current info: REMAILER LIST This is an automatically generated listing of remailers. The first part of the listing shows the remailers along with configuration options and special features for each of the remailers. The second part shows the 12-day history, and average latency and uptime for each remailer. You can also get this list by fingering remailer-list(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu. $remailer{"extropia"} = "<remail(a)miron.vip.best.com> cpunk pgp special"; $remailer{"portal"} = "<hfinney(a)shell.portal.com> cpunk pgp hash"; $remailer{"alumni"} = "<hal(a)alumni.caltech.edu> cpunk pgp hash"; $remailer{"bsu-cs"} = "<nowhere(a)bsu-cs.bsu.edu> cpunk hash ksub"; $remailer{"c2"} = "<remail(a)c2.org> eric pgp hash reord"; $remailer{"penet"} = "<anon(a)anon.penet.fi> penet post"; $remailer{"hacktic"} = "<remailer(a)utopia.hacktic.nl> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"flame"} = "<remailer(a)flame.alias.net> cpunk mix pgp. hash latent cut post reord"; $remailer{"rahul"} = "<homer(a)rahul.net> cpunk pgp hash filter"; $remailer{"mix"} = "<mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek ksub reord ?"; $remailer{"ford"} = "<remailer(a)bi-node.zerberus.de> cpunk pgp hash ksub ek"; $remailer{"robo"} = "<robo(a)c2.org> cpunk hash mix"; $remailer{"replay"} = "<remailer(a)replay.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut post ek"; $remailer{"rmadillo"} = "<remailer(a)armadillo.com> mix cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"ecafe"} = "<cpunk(a)remail.ecafe.org> cpunk mix"; $remailer{"wmono"} = "<wmono(a)valhalla.phoenix.net> cpunk mix pgp. hash latent cut"; $remailer{"shinobi"} = "<remailer(a)shinobi.alias.net> cpunk mix hash latent cut ek reord"; $remailer{"amnesia"} = "<amnesia(a)chardos.connix.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ksub"; $remailer{"gondolin"} = "<mix(a)remail.gondolin.org> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut ek reord"; $remailer{"tjava"} = "<remailer(a)tjava.com> cpunk mix pgp hash latent cut"; $remailer{"pamphlet"} = "<pamphlet(a)idiom.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ?"; $remailer{'alpha'} = '<alias(a)alpha.c2.org> alpha pgp'; $remailer{'gondonym'} = '<alias(a)nym.gondolin.org> alpha pgp'; $remailer{"lead"} = "<mix(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"treehole"} = "<remailer(a)mockingbird.alias.net> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"nemesis"} = "<remailer(a)meaning.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut"; $remailer{"exon"} = "<remailer(a)remailer.nl.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"vegas"} = "<remailer(a)vegas.gateway.com> cpunk pgp hash latent cut"; $remailer{"haystack"} = "<haystack(a)holy.cow.net> cpunk pgp hash latent cut ek"; $remailer{"ncognito"} = "<ncognito(a)gate.net> mix cpunk latent"; catalyst(a)netcom.com is _not_ a remailer. lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu is _not_ a remailer. usura(a)replay.com is _not_ a remailer. Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: (c2 robo alpha) (gondolin gondonym) (flame hacktic replay) (alumni portal) Use "premail -getkeys pgpkeys(a)kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu" to get PGP keys for the remailers. Fingering this address works too. Note: The remailer list now includes information for the alpha nymserver. Last update: Mon 22 Apr 96 6:46:30 PDT remailer email address history latency uptime ----------------------------------------------------------------------- exon remailer(a)remailer.nl.com ++****+****# 3:56 99.98% shinobi remailer(a)shinobi.alias.net +*#-+-*+*--* 1:21:52 99.97% alpha alias(a)alpha.c2.org + *+*+++-*++ 44:07 99.88% portal hfinney(a)shell.portal.com ###*#-# *### 2:35 99.80% hacktic remailer(a)utopia.hacktic.nl *+* +*****+* 9:33 99.73% amnesia amnesia(a)chardos.connix.com -+---+----- 2:41:12 99.60% treehole remailer(a)mockingbird.alias.net --+-+ --.--+ 5:09:41 99.40% alumni hal(a)alumni.caltech.edu ## * * *### 3:58 99.38% replay remailer(a)replay.com *+* ****** 6:37 99.36% extropia remail(a)miron.vip.best.com --- --.---- 6:42:44 99.09% haystack haystack(a)holy.cow.net #*#++#*#*#++ 4:30 99.08% lead mix(a)zifi.genetics.utah.edu ++++++++++++ 42:08 98.55% c2 remail(a)c2.org ++++++ +-*** 36:14 98.49% ecafe cpunk(a)remail.ecafe.org *+---+*-#*+ 22:24 98.25% flame remailer(a)flame.alias.net --- _.----- 7:26:44 97.13% penet anon(a)anon.penet.fi -__...__ -- 32:56:37 96.98% vegas remailer(a)vegas.gateway.com +*##*+*+ 1:03:31 57.66% ncognito ncognito(a)gate.net *## :58 24.27% mix mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com ----+ 2:24:40 22.82% History key * # response in less than 5 minutes. * * response in less than 1 hour. * + response in less than 4 hours. * - response in less than 24 hours. * . response in more than 1 day. * _ response came back too late (more than 2 days). cpunk A major class of remailers. Supports Request-Remailing-To: field. eric A variant of the cpunk style. Uses Anon-Send-To: instead. penet The third class of remailers (at least for right now). Uses X-Anon-To: in the header. pgp Remailer supports encryption with PGP. A period after the keyword means that the short name, rather than the full email address, should be used as the encryption key ID. hash Supports ## pasting, so anything can be put into the headers of outgoing messages. ksub Remailer always kills subject header, even in non-pgp mode. nsub Remailer always preserves subject header, even in pgp mode. latent Supports Matt Ghio's Latent-Time: option. cut Supports Matt Ghio's Cutmarks: option. post Post to Usenet using Post-To: or Anon-Post-To: header. ek Encrypt responses in reply blocks using Encrypt-Key: header. special Accepts only pgp encrypted messages. mix Can accept messages in Mixmaster format. reord Attempts to foil traffic analysis by reordering messages. Note: I'm relying on the word of the remailer operator here, and haven't verified the reord info myself. mon Remailer has been known to monitor contents of private email. filter Remailer has been known to filter messages based on content. If not listed in conjunction with mon, then only messages destined for public forums are subject to filtering. Raph Levien

1 0

Re: Nazis on the Net
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Apr 21, 1996 17:23:00, '"E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH(a)ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>' wrote: > In view of the Zundelsite business, I thought people might find the >following of interest. Unfortunately, the author is either leaving >some critical information out or is misinformed. Specifically, the actual >history on the Zundelsite business, and the actual circumstances at Ruby Ridge; > >on the latter, Randy Weaver was neither a neo-Nazi nor a racist. He was (and, >so far as I know, still is) a white separatist. (One would think liberals >would >tolerate this - they tolerate the equally offensive black separatists, after >all...). The Zundelsite reference is incomplete in that it fails to describe >the motivations of the mirrorsites. > -Allen Since E.A. Smith wants completeness re the Zundelsite issue, I am curious about his assertion about Weaver. Might we know the source of his complete info on Weaver's political and racial beliefs. I see, in essence, three hypothesis: 1) Cover the ass of a potential neo-Nazi or racist (or both) without any reference to what is really true; 2) Get information from outer space; 3) Base the conclusion on hard evidence. If the answer is 3) I'd like to get a real pointer to the real evidence. By real evidence I mean just that, not wishful thinking or advertising jingles for points 1) or 2). --tallpaul PS: Cypherpunks seems to be getting very wiggy these days.

1 0

OFF Topic: MS-Exchange bug (winmail.dat)
by Sentiono Leowinata 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I need help to disable the long-trailer from MS-Exchange. Everytime my friend sends me an e-mail, the "trailer" (winmail.dat) always there. How to disable it or turn it off? I believe someone mention about this "feature" in this mailing list long time ago, but I can't find it in my archive. Thank you. Sent. ps. can Winmail.Dat be considered as cryto-useless? <grin>

1 0

Nazis on the Net
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In view of the Zundelsite business, I thought people might find the following of interest. Unfortunately, the author is either leaving some critical information out or is misinformed. Specifically, the actual history on the Zundelsite business, and the actual circumstances at Ruby Ridge; on the latter, Randy Weaver was neither a neo-Nazi nor a racist. He was (and, so far as I know, still is) a white separatist. (One would think liberals would tolerate this - they tolerate the equally offensive black separatists, after all...). The Zundelsite reference is incomplete in that it fails to describe the motivations of the mirrorsites. -Allen From: IN%"rre(a)weber.ucsd.edu" 20-APR-1996 22:29:19.43 From: Phil Agre <pagre(a)weber.ucsd.edu> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= This message was forwarded through the Red Rock Eater News Service (RRE). Send any replies to the original author, listed in the From: field below. You are welcome to send the message along to others but please do not use the "redirect" command. For information on RRE, including instructions for (un)subscribing, send an empty message to rre-help(a)weber.ucsd.edu =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Wed, 17 Apr 1996 08:27:22 GMT From: Crawford Kilian <ckilian(a)hubcap.mlnet.com> Subject: Nazis on the Net I published the following rather long article in the Georgia Straight, a Vancouver weekly paper, on April 11. It may be of interest for the issues of free speech and Internet access that it deals with. You may, however, find some passages disturbing or offensive; I certainly do. Nazis on the Net by Crawford Kilian The far right has become very visible lately. New groups and movements have sprung up here, in the US, and in Europe; old groups have revived. They go under many names: neo-Nazis, Holocaust deniers, racist skinheads, militias, white nationalists. They often seem to disagree with one another as intensely as they disagree with the status quo, and their ideology ranges from the sophisticated to the incoherent. Psychologically they seem to bear a striking resemblance to many of the North American communists of the 1930s and 40s. Like the Reds, they see themselves as the persecuted vanguard of a morally superior group (whites instead of workers) which unaccountably fails to recognize its own interests. Politically, though, they are very far indeed from the Reds--all the way over on the far end of the spectrum. So let's call these groups the "Ultra-violets," or Ultras for short. Whatever we may think of their views, they deserve attention as a phenomenon--especially as a phenomenon that tests other people's genuine commitment to democratic values like freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and open debate. But the Ultras would be far less significant if they were not exploiting a technology designed to defend just those democratic values: the Internet. The creators of the original Internet --back in the '60s, during the Cold War--built it to survive multiple nuclear strikes. Even if Soviet H-bombs vaporized scores of cities and military bases, information would still flow between surviving computers to sustain a defence and counterattack. Democracy would withstand nuclear war, even if most of its supporters would not. Whether democracy can withstand the rigorous application of its own values is now in question. Designed to be unkillable, today's Internet looks uncontrollable. We now possess a communications system in which anyone can say anything to anyone else. People can be obscene, scurrilous, malevolent--and no one can silence them. Other nations, democratic and otherwise, are alarmed about the political and cultural consequences of free Internet discourse. Singapore wants its three million citizens to live on an "intelligent island" wired into the Net--but it doesn't want pornography or political dissidence leaking in. China is equally cool to the idea, given its memories of the fax invasion it suffered in 1989, when overseas Chinese students bombarded campuses at home with news and pictures of the Tiananmen Square massacre. The Ultras pose a complex challenge. They've taken to the Internet eagerly and effectively. They have their own newsgroups, discussion areas available to almost anyone with access to the Internet. They also run listservs, discussions open only to subscribers (and subscribing is usually quite easy). The Ultras have their own websites, locations holding extensive texts and graphics which computer users can view and copy onto their own machines. Along with the pornographers, the Ultras provoke repeated calls for limits on Net freedom of speech, calls that are sometimes answered: those who supply the Ultras with Net access often cancel their accounts. Because their views are so unpopular, the Ultras make themselves a litmus test for the rest of us: Does freedom of speech mean tolerating racism and anti-Semitism? And if it does, should we respond with contemptuous silence? Or should we devote time and energy to detailed rebuttal of Ultra views? To answer those questions, it helps to know what--and whom--we're talking about. Look at the live Ultras on the Net and you find few who match the stereotype of the halfwitted skinhead or the paranoid pretend-soldier of the militia. For one thing, most are far from illiterate. The texts on Don Black's Stormfront website, for example, are generally clear and articulate. While I can't judge his German-language materials, his texts in Spanish are also well-written. Running a trilingual website reflects a cosmopolitan outlook--another challenge to stereotype. Many Ultras try to make an academically documented case for their views. Marc Lemire of the Digital Freedom BBS in Toronto posts long reviews of books questioning the Holocaust or documenting the firestorm that destroyed Dresden. Greg Raven of the Institute for Historical Review (a Holocaust-denying group in California) says revisionism has no connection with neo-Nazism, white nationalism, or other Ultra positions: "Historical revisionism is supposed to be a part of writing history (historiography). As time passes, we gain new information and new insights, which allow us to better perceive not only the facts of events but also their context. Furthermore, the IHR is neither ideological nor political." For a time last year, Raven offered a link to the home page of the North Shore News, which carries Doug Collins's columns supporting Holocaust revisionism and other Ultra positions. When the News discovered the link, it asked Raven to close it; he promptly did so. Raven's home page explicitly denies carrying anything racist or hateful and promises to withdraw anything criticized as such. Nevertheless, Raven doesn't ask Stormfront to close its links to his own home page. And Stormfront is avowedly White Nationalist. Based in West Palm Beach, Florida, Stormfront features Nazi-style Gothic lettering, numerous links to sympathetic groups elsewhere in the US and Canada, and extensive texts and graphics. According to Milton John Kleim, Jr., who calls himself "Net Nazi Number One," Stormfront "lists just about every important individual and group that should be noted." Indeed, the Net itself is the common denominator of the Ultras. They may disagree with one another, even quarrel bitterly, but they keep the lines of communication open to one another. That's because without the Net, the Ultras are scattered and isolated. Marc Lemire describes his own progress in Ontario (via e-mail, as is the case with most quoted material here): "On April 1, 1995 I started up Digital Freedom BBS (416) 462-3327. I also got two Internet sites and began forging a lot of contacts with likeminded people on the Internet. Within four months I had an E-mailing list of around 400+ and contacts with all the Sysops and leaders throughout the United States and Canada. We are also working quite closely with European leaders. We have our address on two Web sites and I post to Usenet almost every day." Milton Kleim, in Minnesota, has found a similar community forming through the Net: "All of my comrades and I, none of whom I have ever met face-to-face, share a unique camaraderie, feeling as though we have been friends for a long time. Selfless cooperation occurs regularly amongst my comrades for a variety of endeavors. This feeling of comradeship is irrespective of national identity or State borders." Is the Net a useful means of recruiting sympathizers? "Absolutely," says Kleim. "There are millions of people who agree with us, but feel isolated and helpless because they don't know who to contact to network with others who feel similarly... Usenet, in combination with the Web, offers unparalleled opportunity for our Movement to get our views and more importantly our facts across to the general public." He's even created a manual, "Tactics and Strategy for Usenet," advising Ultras on how to use the medium to attract and hold sympathetic "newbies." And Lemire says a little publicity goes a long way: "Digital Freedom has been listed in over 5 different publications in the Toronto area, which has brought us over 1800 users." What else do Ultras share besides a sense of camaraderie? Stormfront currently offers several major documents: three long articles about the US government's attacks on the Branch Davidians in Waco and on an Ultra family in Ruby Ridge, Idaho; an article about a Canadian rabbi who wants Net censorship and another about the Chretien government's "gun grab" legislation. Other articles deal with racial issues. In one, ex-Klansman David Duke finds much to admire in the Indian caste system. Stormfront also offers links to like-minded pages. The Aryan Nations page, for example, after describing Jews as a "virus," rejects the label of "hate group": "It is not hate that makes the average White man look upon a mixed racial couple with a scowl on his face and loathing in his heart. It is not hate that makes the White housewife throw down the daily jewspaper [sic] in repulsion and anger after reading of yet another child-molester or rapist sentenced by corrupt courts to a couple short years in prison or on parole. It is not hate that makes the White workingman curse over his beer about the latest boatload of mud-creatures dumped upon our shores to be given job preference over the White citizens who build this land.* No, it is not hate, IT'S LOVE." Other links offer Net surfers access to Resistance Records, producers of skinhead music; the British National Party; the Independent White Racialists ("Your skin is your uniform."); and a collection of Canadian groups known as Freedom Site: the Heritage Front, the Canadian Patriots Network, Citizens for Foreign Aid Reform, and others. Another recent link is the Pat Buchanan for President home page. Although Stormfront's Black doesn't consider Buchanan adequately "racialist," he feels the candidate is worth supporting. Fellow-Ultras like Milton Kleim strongly disagree, and advocate voting for the "Bolshevik" Bill Clinton instead. This, they say, will ensure that life will become more rapidly intolerable for exploited whites, rousing them from their apathy to join the Ultra cause. Kleim argues: "Boobus Americanus does NOT operate rationally; he has no opinion, and cannot form an opinion independent of the Jewsmedia. The ONLY thing that can 'convert' Boobus Americanus is more and more Negro crime, less and less jobs, greater and greater hardships of all kinds. Joe Sixpack will do absolutely nothing until the flow of his beer ends. The average American moron must be FORCED to think, and no amount of racist propaganda concealed Buchanan-style in patriotic wrappers will make the masses consider 'the Truth.'" A "White Nationalism FAQ" (frequently asked questions) on Stormfront proposes creating separate nations for whites and non-whites, to spare whites from continuing exploitation through racial-preference schemes in hiring, university admissions, and government contracting. The FAQ's author, using the Norse-mythology pen name Yggdrasil, suggests ceding land already occupied by non-whites. Whites-only areas, however, would still welcome Asians. (The only ones with much to fear, evidently, would be white liberals: "Those who are guilty of 'integrationism' should do the sensible thing and flee. It will spare us all a lot of pain.") Milton Kleim, by contrast, sees a different future: "The United States of America, the Confederate States of America, Canada, and Quebec would be unified into one Nation-State, perhaps known as the Aryan Confederation." Local government would operate with elected officials, "but the present ridiculous parliamentary game in national politics would be replaced with frequent referenda for important issues." Kleim would follow a "live and let live" policy with nations like Japan and Iraq. "Belligerent actions of those governments violently opposed to us, such as the criminal State of Israel, or the menace to the world called China, would be countered with equal force, up to and including total utilization of America's strategic forces." The Ultras have suffered everything from jail sentences to e-mailed death threats, but appear determined to carry on. Critics may damn their anti-Semitism, mock their paranoia (one Ultra wondered whether Stormfront were a government-run trap), and dismiss their "facts" as exploded fantasies. Outsiders may wonder why Ultras are going to so much trouble for "Boobus Americanus" whites who are mere "sheeple" even if they are, technically, Aryans. Nevertheless, half a century after the defeat of Nazism, something in its worldview appeals to them. And just as the Nazis used the new media of radio and film, their spiritual descendants are using the Net to spread their message. The case of Toronto's Ernst Zundel shows how technically hard it is to suppress that message. Spreading neo-Nazi views is illegal in Germany, so when Zundel set up his own website recently, the German government tried to close German Netters off from access to it. Several other Net servers (computers directly linked to the Internet) promptly established "mirror" sites that Berlin would find it much more awkward to close off--such as university campuses. Like the hydra, unpopular propaganda can grow more heads each time one is cut off. This is not to say that mirror sites at American and Canadian universities portend a neo-Nazi trend on campus--only that the logic of free speech means supporting it especially in the cases of those we may not only oppose but detest. It also means considering whether Canadian laws against "hate speech" and "false news" may be intrinsically oppressive, however well-intended. (Even when such cases fail, the prospect of court action, like "libel chill," may keep some people from expressing unpopular views.) One response strategy, adopted by the Simon Wiesenthal Center, is to promote an "acceptable use" code for persons and organizations providing Net access. This amounts to a refusal to take the money of Ultras wanting to purchase such access. It could also include refusing to provide access to Ultra-oriented newsgroups like alt-skinheads and alt.revisionism. Such boycotts may make it harder for Ultras, but only until they set up their own servers--as they have already done in several cases. Others echo the German government's desire simply to ban Ultras from the Net altogether. Twenty years ago, Graham Forst founded the Vancouver Standing Committee on the Holocaust. Since then the Committee has brought together survivors of the Holocaust with 40,000 high school students from B.C., Washington state, and Alberta--including some of Jim Keegstra's students.[Until he was fired in the 1980s from his job as a high-school teacher in Eckville, Alberta, Keegstra had taught anti-Semitism to his students.] Forst rejects the idea that Holocaust denial deserves the same right to expression enjoyed by those who debate details of the Holocaust. "Holocaust denial is not a 'position' of any kind," he says, "but is simply and unequivocally an expression of anti-Semitism." Forst argues that deniers are no more exercising "freedom of speech" than they would be if they disrupted a meeting by speaking in imaginary tongues, or by screaming. "Why," he asks, "should such a person be allowed a place at the table?" In Forst's view, "The Holocaust is denied for one reason only: to cause pain to those vicitmized by the worst eruption of racial hatred in history, not to contribute to any free exchange of ideas. Deniers are anti-Semites hiding behind high principles to sanitize Nazism and prepare for its return; in my opinion, such a nefarious intention requires the 'discussant' to be quickly and unceremoniously thrown out of the room." But as experience has shown, it's impossible to throw anyone permanently off the Internet. The Ultras, of course, consider all the attacks as just a cost of doing business--and their business is recruiting. They know their potential supporters are few and scattered. The Net brings them together, encourages them, and provides them with a community. Yet they seem to have no program for acquiring power. Milton Kleim says: "Since we have no idea what the future holds, there has been little speculation about what will transpire to bring about an 'Aryan Confederation.' It will certainly be via 'unconventional' means, but it is impossible to assume a certain course of action will be followed when inevitable chaos ensues." Kleim's strategy for recruitment through Usenet newsgroups is clear and frank: "Except on 'our' groups, avoid the Race Issue. Side-step it as much as possible. We don't have the time to defend our stance on this issue against the comments of hundreds of fools, liars, and degenerates who, spouting the Jewish line, will slaughter our message with half-truths, slander, and the ever-used sophistry. Avoid engaging in non-productive debates with enemy activists. It is often difficult to distinguish between the Enemy's dedicated lackeys, and the misguided who are merely parroting what the Jewsmedia has taught them." Kleim is keenly aware of being monitored: "WARNING: Be aware that EVERYTHING you post will be seen by the Enemy. All of your posts may be catalogued and archived for future use by the Enemy, either by self-appointed 'Net police' like the notorious Ken McVay, or by lurkers from the so-called 'Anti-Defamation League' and the 'Simon Wisenthal Center.' The above-mentioned McVay is doing a great deal to earn his notoriety among the Ultras and to keep their community from growing. McVay, a 55-year-old transplanted American (now holding dual US-Canadian citizenship)lives on Vancouver Island. He'd been a World War II buff when he was younger, and when he began to run across Ultra propaganda on the Internet--especially Holocaust denial--he went back to his books to try to refute the Ultras' version of history. Out of the "flame wars" he fought online during the early 1990s emerged the information equivalent of a gigantic weapons dump: The Nizkor Project. Created by McVay and his supporters, Nizkor is a Web site that is also an immense archive. It includes detailed refutations of common Ultra assertions (for example, that the concentration-camp gas chambers were nothing of the sort), and much more. McVay has included detailed dossiers on many Ultras, storing the messages they have sent to various newsgroups over a period of years. Also included are such documents as the complete judgement in Jim Keegstra's original hate-crime trial. The first of Nizkor's goals is to forestall the Ultras' efforts to discredit democratic government--as they do, for example, in speculating that the Oklahoma City bombing was actually a US government plot. Second, by tracking and responding to Ultra posts, Nizkor sustains a documented debate rather than allowing Ultra assertions to go unchallenged. The third goal is probably the most important: "To foster a critical frame of mind which will help to protect the unwary from the deceit of hate propaganda." Although he once supported the idea of suppressing Ultra propaganda on the Net, McVay now sees documented argument as the best response to it. "It was a gradual change," he says, "over perhaps a year... and it was UseNet, and the Internet, that changed my mind. I came to understand that the key to dealing with insidious racism is through education. Suppression does not provide a cure,although it may be satisfying for a short time -- all it serves to do is drive the problem underground." Graham Forst doesn't agree with McVay's new attitude, but feels Nizkor is the only practicable way to counter Ultra propaganda. And while McVay is on the Ultras' side of the free-speech issue, they don't seem especially grateful. Don Black says he feels "amused and flattered" by the attention he gets from Nizkor, and Digital Freedom's Marc Lemire says the project helps propagate his viewpoint. "McVay does, to a certain degree, advance our cause," Lemire says. "He offers all our messages on one site. An inquisitive person can log in and read what we have said over the past years. Which, of course, helps us. I personally consider McVay as a childish reactionary. In one of the first messages I ever received from him, he claimed I wear diapers and was an idiot. His information is generally inaccurate and outdated." Kleim echoes Lemire's claims and also soft-pedals Nizkor's effect: "Actually, we consider McVay a nuisance, like the common house fly, rather than a real problem. He has done us more good than harm. Many sympathetic people have 'discovered' us by perusing his archives. * Most people don't care about what McVay is peddling. Only certain segments of society, Jews, political agitators of the ultra-left like 'Anti-Racist Action,' and allied groups, give a hoot about what McVay and his friends are doing." McVay, in turn, doesn't care what Lemire and Kleim say: "I am not doing this to change Milton Kleim's mind. I am doing this because millions of people know next to nothing about the Holocaust, and the ugly racism which denies it. It is all, sadly, ancient history to most of the population. They are not, however, indifferent - - they read, they query, and they learn to determine the truth for themselves." On the evidence of some posts, not all Ultras are as dedicated to free speech and legal action as they claim. In "Stormfront-L," a listserv run by Don Black, a Canadian sympathizer recently proposed a scenario "in which we assume power democratically, but then keep it. The only problem with this would be the necessity to combat opposing ideas to prevent an uprising. This would impinge on our right to 'Free Speech' that we hold so dear." Another Ultra responded: "Yes, I believe that certain 'rights' that are now available would probably not be so in a fascist state. However, I am not interested in preserving 'Free Speech' as it is defined today, I am interested in preserving the Aryan race." McVay recently reported an attempt by an Ultra supporter to "mail-bomb" his Internet server, swamping the computer with unwanted messages. (The mail-bombing failed and the Ultra lost his own computer account.) He also argues that Ultras like Ernst Zundel support free speech only when it suits them. McVay says he does not intend to abandon his efforts against the Ultras. "Me? I'm in this for life. These guys offend me deeply. The public needs to understand that the Internet is borderless and near-indestructible. It is the one place on earth where you can educate tens of millions --billions, in years to come -- it is a tool for the racists, yes, but I have seen ample evidence that it is a far more powerful tool for those dedicated to fighting racism." Journalists reporting on this issue face an ethical issue also. No doubt such articles would stir some interest in Ultra organizations and views, increasing the 200,000-plus Stormfront "hits" (log-ins to its web pages and files) already counted in the past year. Some may join Ultra groups as a result. But readers will also look in on Nizkor, which is not exactly neglected. Last June Nizkor was counting 33 visitors a day but this February it recorded 532 daily visitors--117,768 hits on its various files in that month alone. Neither side is going to go away, and many people are going to continue to push for the silencing of the Ultras. Some will argue that the best way to fight them would be to ignore them. They might invoke the German poet Friedrich von Schiller's famous line: "Mit der Dummheit kampfen Gotter selbst vergebens." ("Against stupidity, the gods themselves struggle in vain.") The most dangerous ideas, though, are those that go unchallenged. The Ultras do everyone a favour, however unwelcome and unasked-for, by questioning the very premises of democracy and equality. If nothing else, they should make us reconsider our dependence on hate laws which suppress debate rather than promote it--and which actually promote Ultra goals by publicizing people like Ernst Zundel and Jim Keegstra. John Dixon, a philosophy instructor at Capilano College and a member of the executive of the B.C. Civil Liberties Association, says all hate-propaganda laws should be repealed. "Immigration policies, race relations, the Holocaust -- these are all legitimate topics for discussion and debate by a democratic citizenry; that is, if you believe, as civil libertarians do, that a genuinely democratic citizenry must have the freedom to communicate with one another about any and all matters of political consequence." McVay and the Nizkor Project, in turn, challenge the Ultras to document their assertions or lose the debate; significantly, the Ultras prefer to make personal attacks on McVay as a hireling of the Jews who is in the anti-Ultra business only for money from sympathetic Jewish organizations. Some may wish Ken McVay would shut up and quit giving the Ultras the attention they desire. But "Nizkor" is Hebrew for "We will remember." Remembrance is brief if not shared. And as Santayana observed: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." -30- Sidebar: Web Addresses Stormfront: http://stormfront.wat.com/stormfront/ This provides access to a great many other Ultra pages in the US, Canada and Britain. Nizkor Project: http://www.almanac.bc.ca Nizkor also provides links to some Ultra sites as well as anti-Ultra groups. Vancouver Progressive Home Page: http://www2.portal.ca/~comprev/ This site links with many anti-racist groups.

2 1

Re: Smartcards are coming to the US
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:06 PM 4/21/96, Lucky Green wrote: >At 15:15 4/21/96, Brad Dolan wrote: >>Saw a CNN story Friday about an interesting special debit card >>application in Mexico. They're being issued to poor Mexicans, who can >>use them to buy tortillas and a few other foodstuffs. The cards are tied to >>a behavior-control database and failure to send kids to school, get >>mandatory medical exams/treatments/vaccinations, etc. results in card >>deactivation. > >My first response was: he is making this up. But it shoudn't come as a >surprise to any reader of this list. Expect to see more of it. Why should this surprise you? In the U.S. there are _already_ several programs which are similar to this Mexican example. For example, "food stamps." Not valid for expenditures on alchohol, tobacco, and various other disapproved-of consumables. One hand takes away the tax monies (albeit not from those getting food stamps, as their income is typically exempt from taxation) and the other hand doles out a special form of scrip that can theoretically only be spent on approved-of substances. Someday--maybe when Perry is out of the country at an IETF meeting--I'll forward my article about the scandalous plan to privatize the nation's food stores, thus making food only available to the rich and denying the poor of their access to the foodstuffs deemed nutricious by the Parent-Grocer Associations (PGAs) and available at their local People's Public Food Distribution Centers. (This was a piece I did in the late 1980s, critiquing the critics of schools vouchers and private schools by imagining a world in which food distribution was done at "public stores" and run much the way our public education is run.) --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" 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

Re: 5th protect password?
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:22 AM 4/21/96 +0000, Jonathon Blake wrote: > Jim: > >On Sat, 20 Apr 1996, jim bell wrote: > >> > DOE v. United States, 487 U.S. 201; 108 S. Ct. 2341 (1988) > >> > A defendant can be compelled to produce material evidence that >> > is incriminating. Fingerprints, blood samples, voice >> > exemplars, handwriting specimens, or other items of physical >> > evidence may be extracted from a defendant against his will. >> >> As you might expect, I see a problem (and a pattern!) with even these > > The pattern is that you are again ignoring legal realities. No, I am not "ignoring legal realities." I am NOTING them, and noting that they form a suspicious pattern. I do not deny that these items are currently demanded regularly in certain cases; what I challenge is the appropriateness of that demand by historical and Constitutional standards. >> examples. Notice that with the possible exception of "handwriting >> specimens", the examples above all represent pieces of evidence whose > > Handwriting as a tool used by most people, dates back to > Eighteenth Century. Before that, it was a trade practiced > by scribes, and priests. In Europe, outside of the Clergy, > illiteracy was the standard, till the begining of the Industrial > Revolution. << Remember that John Dee had an incredibly large > library of 200 volumes. >> Yikes! You REALLY need to learn to read! I wasn't referring to handwriting itself , or for that matter to graphology ( the study of handwriting; which goes back perhaps 2000 years) but in fact the _forensic_ use of graphology. The point is that the demanding of handwriting samples is a fairly new concept, at least compared with the writing of the Constitution and the 5th amendment. I'm sure a REAL LAWYER (TM) reading this note will cite the first known example of a handwriting example being demanded by a court. What do you want to bet that it first occurred in this century? > >> or so, etc. I think even graphology (handwriting analysis) for legal >> purposes is likewise comparatively recent, although there is no obvious >> technological reason which this should have been so. The last category, > > Courts have yet to rule that an individual can be forced > to provide a sample of their handwriting, if the purpose > of obtaining such a script is for a graphological profile. Which simply means that they have to have more justification than a shotgun-approach inquiry. > More to the point, courts -- or at least US Courts -- don't > accept graphological profiles, as proof of anything. If that were the case, there there would be no justification for demanding a handwriting sample. Nevertheless, it is apparently done. And while a handwriting sample, ALONE, may not be "proof" of something, like most evidence it is used in conjunction with other evidence to support a conclusion. In any case, the initial reference to handwriting samples came from the Supreme Court, as quoted above, not me. Pay more attention. I was using the commentary of the SC to show that most if not all of the kinds of evidence demanded of defendants were NOT demande until well over a century after the 5th amendment was written. > > I suspect you confusing graphology with questioned document > examination. No, that's a larger issue. Graphology is a tool which can be used, but there are plenty of other technologies which are also useful on questioned documents. Paper analysis, ink analysis, electron microscopy, text analysis, to name just a few. That wasn't the point, however. > Courts have ruled that a person may be forced > to provide a sample of writing, for use in questioned document > examination, without violating the fifth amendment. << You ought > to read the case law, to see why providing such a sample is > not a fifth amendment violation ---- it might help you be a > better armchair lawyer, who spends to much time watching > Perry Mason reruns. >> Question: Let's suppose, for the purposes of argument, the policy was diametrically opposite, and no such samples were taken, ostensibly because that would be in violation of the 5th amendment. Please explain the arguments you would use to convince everybody that this opinion was in error. Remember, you couldn't cite precedent, because all the precedent would come to the opposite conclusion. You would have to explain to people why the precedents were all wrong. See the problem? Lawyers are full of "appeal to authority" arguments, which is what a precedent really is. But precedents can be wrong, are wrong, and are occasionally changed. I pointed out (correctly, I think) that since well over 100+ years after the writing of the 5th amendment, there has been a pattern of allowing prosecutors to demand evidence of a defendant whenever that evidence is considered useful to incriminate that defendant. I pointed out that all of the examples listed in the quotation above represented types of evidence that would not have been collected in 1783, or for that matter 1883, or even a few decades after this. As such, there is a reasonable doubt that the people who wrote the constitution actually intended to allow this sort of thing. After all, the fact that a given technique is, arguably, useful cannot be automatically used to justify its "reasonableness." After all, confessions can be useful to the cops, but that does not automatically grant the cops the right to beat confessions out of their prisoners, does it? Clearly not. And remember, there were a number of examples listed, so I think there is a suspicious pattern. Your response does not address this issue. >> Anyone who denies this should be required to make a list of the kinds of > > Questined Document Examination, which you alluded to, was > first accepted by courts in the United States, at the turn > of the century. And it was only after World War One, that > it was accepted in all courts in the US. I don't think that challeges anything I've already said. And you cut off the part where I challenged people to show the kinds of evidence regularly demanded of a defendant in 1783, which was about when the 5th amendment was written. > jonathon > grafolog(a)netcom.com > > Owner: Graphology-L@Bolis-com Aha! Yet another person who benefits from current government policy! Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

5 5