December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

A survey on online privacy to skew[er] (WhoWhere?)
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.whowhere.com/survey.html The "Stanford" in the title is obviously just a typo. Be aware that they've been known to aggressively finger, etc. sites that contact their site. I especially like this question, which I swear I am not making up: 30. Search by Affiliation - for example "Working Women", "Lawyers", "Gay and Lesbian", "Hispanics", etc. [Must add] [Nice to add] [Don't care] WhoWhere originally built their database by writing a script to aggressively extract email addresses from the web server of OKRA, a research computer at UC Riverside that had been culling addresses from Usenet and other sources, making them freely available to the Internet community. Two wrongs don't make a right, of course. OKRA has since taken steps to ensure that noone else can extract mass quantities of addresses in the same way. -rich

1 0

[RANT] Mr. Scruffy versus Mr. Neat
by mpd＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH(a)ocelot.Rutgers.EDU> writes: > One interesting phenomenon is the in-migration of neats > into formerly scruffy-only domains. For instance, take a > look at the third, fourth, and fifth international > conference proceedings on genetic algorithms. You've got > scruffies who are just doing what feels right and seeing if > it works (my viewpoint) and mathematicians/neats who are > trying to derive what _should_ work the best. The scruffy/neat competition has been around for a long time in the hard sciences as well. Good examples are the competing notions used by mathematicians and physicists for doing differential geometry, calculus of variations, and field theory, and the physicists who think physicists can do chemistry better than chemists can. Ultimately, there tends to be a merger of notations and approaches. The big Misner, Wheeler, Thorne book on Gravitation, for instance, presented everything both from the view of the physicists, who like to write everything as algebraic equations in terms of components of geometric objects with respect to a basis, and the view of mathematicians, who like abstract maps between abstract geometric objects, and terms like tangent spaces, exterior products, and germs. Usually the scruffies get great results using formal manipulation that horifies the neats, and then the neats come in and do the rigorous proofs that demonstrate that everything the scruffies did was valid. This was certainly the case in quantum mechanics as well, where questionable formal manipulation got the right answers for many years before a rigorous theory of unbounded linear transformations on Hilbert spaces was developed. Indeed, physicists happily computed commutators and anti-commutators of such operators blithely unaware of their domains and ranges long before the equivalent definitions in terms of one parameter Lie groups or projection valued measures were known. While Java is currently a scruffy invention and has yet to recieve the official blessing of the neats, there are a number of things that speak in its favor. First, object-oriented runtime structures such as those used by Java have pretty much been researched to death in various other venues, such as APL, APL2, Smalltalk, and the MIT Lisp Machine project. It is not likely that we will discover some previously unknown mode of corruption in such systems, and defensively coding interpreters for these kinds of languages and verifying them to prove that they contain no errors which could result in the violation of container boundaries is a well-developed art. This doesn't mean that such systems are free of bugs, of course, but it does mean that they are free of the type of really cute bugs that allow users to trick the machine into executing arbitrary machine instructions, or into making disingenuous requests to the kernel. Second, there is quite a bit of experience on the part of OS designers in meeting various levels of MIL Specs for security, and with the standard techniques, such as audit trails, authentication, and ACLs, which are commonly employed to implement the features required. So although the neats have not yet given Java their blessing, it is extremely unlikely we won't manage to create an environment which can safely run untrusted Java code, and filter the program's requests for system services in a way which will block and log any attempts to do nasty things, both for the Applet model, and for more general applications. A prior poster suggested that in the absence of formal proofs of correctness, flaws permitting the exploitation of covert channels and other such things in a language such as Java were "a certainty." I think the situation is more complicated than this suggests, and while I probably wouldn't want an artificial heart with Java software today, I think a lot of the worries will resolve themselves as time passes, and the things we are all discussing are implemented.

2 1

"Colby was my FRIEND how dare you say he wasn't just a nice old guy"
by alanh＠widomaker.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Path: news.widomaker.com!Grouper.Exis.Net!news.cais.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!in2.uu.net!news.accessone.com!not-for-mail >From: rivero(a)accessone.com (Michael Rivero) >Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy,alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater,alt.journalism >Subject: Re: CIA DIRECTOR KILLED BY U.S. GOVERNMENT >Date: 1 May 1996 10:46:05 -0700 >Organization: Accessone >Lines: 32 >Message-ID: <4m880t$ecf(a)pulm1.accessone.com> >References: <4m2i4o$eou(a)tribune.concentric.net> <Dqn829.Dtp(a)iglou.com> <3185b042.26181571(a)news.i-d.com> <4m5jme$1gqo(a)mule2.mindspring.com> >NNTP-Posting-Host: pulm1.accessone.com >Xref: news.widomaker.com alt.conspiracy:121455 alt.current-events.clinton.whitewater:42258 alt.journalism:40308 In article <4m5jme$1gqo(a)mule2.mindspring.com>, Charles Held <cheld(a)mindspring.com> wrote: >In article <3185b042.26181571(a)news.i-d.com>, sdgrant(a)i-d.com (Steven Grant) wrote: > >=Of course, there are peculiarities about the Colby disappearance: he >=left dirty dishes in the sink, his radio and computer were still on, > >Also his dinner was on the table. > And the door was unlocked. One thing about spooks. They love locks. I mean, they REALLY love locks. Let's see if I have this streight. Colby got up from a working dinner, left the computer on, walked out the door without locking it, got into his canoe without wearing his usual life jacket and vanished from the middle of a placid stream. That about it? You know, maybe just having him vanish WASN'T the best way to deal with internet questions after all. -- PIXELODEON PRODUCTIONS | Hand Hammered Special Effects Mike & Claire - The Rancho Runnamukka http://www.accessone.com/~rivero Will Host A Talk Radio Show For Food.

1 0

Fire and Forget
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:26 PM 5/1/96, Black Unicorn wrote: >On Wed, 1 May 1996, Steven Weller wrote: > >> >Jim Ray wrote >> >> I haven't bothered reading this particular thread up until now, but in my >> opinion, based on this drivel, you're getting dangerously close to being >> certified officially by the Cabal as an ignorant kook. >> >> >Nor does freedom increase through less laws or no laws. >> >> Of course it does. However, to maintain community resposibility must also >> increase. > > >Watch your attributation, Jim Ray did not write this. What!!!! Now you tell me, after I spent all that money on a "fire and forget" contract! Well, Jim, all I can say is keep your head down. Sorry! (Seriously, I knew the "Jim Ray wrote" must've been a misattribution, as that is not the kind of stuff Jim writes.) (Oh, and the "fire and forget" contract assassins were well-described by William Gibson in, I believe, "Count Zero.") --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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Burns bill?
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It has been over a month since we first heard that Burns was going to introduce a bill to free up encryption software exports. It isn't here, yet, as you may have noticed. However, I don't think that's the real problem. The real problem is that we have seen essentially no information on it, and we (by we, I mean the entire Internet community) have not had an opportunity to study it and comment BEFORE it is introduced in Congress. See, the usual practice of introducing it in Congress first and only then letting the public see the bill is, by my way of thinking, an example of extreme rudeness on the part of the politicians. Bills are far easier to change before they've been officially filed, which I suppose is the point. We're not getting the opportunity to fix minor mistakes, or at least make Burns (or any other supporter) aware of them. This is a glaring "take it or leave it" philosophy, one that we should reject. Does he really intend to insult us? I see no reason to believe that Burns should be able to produce an adequate bill with the assistance of only industry lobbyists, but not the help of other citizens of varying degrees of expertise. Burns should immediately release the text of the bill developed up until now, and then wait at least a few weeks before introducing it formally, after changes are proposed, considered, and accepted. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: If the Net were an industrial city... (nee: Freedom and security)
by rick hoselton 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:11 PM 5/1/96 +0200, you wrote: > >> >It's now a major industrial city and will >> >> It's industry being? > >It's a service industry. An information service industry. >Journalists, phone-sex whores, business consultants, >bankers, brokers and barkers are moving into town, setting >up their virtual shops, and catering to the hordes of >readers, sightseers, sex-seekers, game-players, businessmen, >professionals and amateurs of all stripes that are pouring >into town in wave after wave. Its also a college town. And a publishing center. Then there's the warehouse district, and the post office. There's also a thriving import-export business. No wonder the political big-shots back in Atomland wish they could annex Cyberspace. I predict that these attempts will succeed about as well as the European colonization of the Americas. (ambiguity intended) >Granted most of these virtual shops consist of a single >ticket-taker's booth and a 10-meter tall neon facade. That's how boom-towns start, allright. >Granted that the shops occasionally collapse on visitors, Yes. >that there are no streets, We have streets all over the place. From here theres a 56Kb lane road that's even fairly well paved. But they mostly lead to "Atomland expatriot hobbyists" and a few service subsistance farms. >that you can't tell the sellers from the buyers It always starts with a barter economy. >... few people are able to accept cash. It will be a while, but someday folks will say: "Save your greenbacks, Atomland will rise again!" and they will be wrong. >Still, it's a service industry. Coming soon.... Virtual Food! Okay, maybe I got a little carried away....

1 0

Re: Freedom and security
by angels＠wavenet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>You will pardon my asking this, but, security from what? Who are the >evil Network Terrorists throwing Bit Bombs or whatever? The only >security you need on the internet is keeping your site from being >broken in to, which is mostly a matter of setting it up >properly. What, exactly, is the "Security" that you are offering us? > >Perry I am not offering "you" anything unless you have a problem and are looking for some assistance. Just because you feel safe / immune from becoming a victim of internet crime does not mean that there are no victims at all. Site security is not at all the only problem. Are you not aware of spams and scams going on all the time? Are you not aware that sexual predators operate in IRC? Or that child pornography is a world wide trading game? Have you never heard of email forgeries or impersonation? What about tthe victims of harassment and hatred who don't know how to deal with it? What about all the people who have never heard of killfiles? Who don't know how to report a problem nor who to report it to? Haven't you ever been mail bombed and wished you could find out who did it? Maybe you feel like a veterano and can afford to look condesendingly at all the thousands of fresh-faced netizens just arriving online and say "well if they can't take the heat they should stay out of the fire" - but if we are to call ourselves an emerging "community" then we must take responsibility for our city, and that means caring about other people's problems. The internet is not just a collection of bits and bytes - it's real people doing real things to each other. When your address is forged and you get flamed and bombed, or if you start receiving anonymous death threats, your freedom is under threat. It's not enough to say "Well I just turn off my monitor" The Internet is a city - it needs 911 services and it needs Neighborhood Watches. And neither professional law enforcement nor neighborhood watch are by definition a threat to anyone's freedom. Freedom within the context of Community does not and never has meant the freedom to kill your neighbor, or rob someone, or rape someone, or harm someone. In the context of the internet Community too, freedom is not the individual's right to do whatever he or she likes - because then the Community is no longer free. Freedom is under threat from two directions - from selfish individuals who care little for the Community, and from the over zealousness of governments who seek greater and greater control over individual thought and action. The first step is to acknowledge that we have a problem within the Internet Community - because if we don't address it responsibly then we have only ourselves to blame when the governments try to take it over. We can face our problems or we can deny that they exist. By asking me the question: "What crime?" you are indicating to me that you prefer denial. ********************************************************* Colin Gabriel Hatcher - CyberAngels Director angels(a)wavenet.com "Two people may disagree, but that does not mean that one of them is evil" *********************************************************

5 4

Re: Lolitas and Cyber Angels
by Will French 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mike Duvos wrote: > Someone who has an encrypted file on their hard drive from > some motheaten child porn magazine published 20 years ago is > no more guilty of the exploitation of the models portrayed > than someone who downloads the Simpson crime scene photos from > alt.binaries.pictures.tasteless is guilty of killing Nicole > and Ron. I disagree. If (quite hypothetically) I were one of the "models" in such a magazine (I'm 27 now, so I would have been 7 at the time it was published), I would certainly consider anyone posessing a copy, today or 20 years ago, to be exploiting me. However, that doesn't mean I would want them criminalized for it. In fact, my "anyone possessing a copy" above includes the Government (and third parties such as the Guardian Angels) in the course of a kiddie-porn investigation/prosecution. It's a very hard question. And yes, people who download Simpson crime scene photos are exploiting (not killing) Nicole and Ron. When I have been shown these photos, I have quickly averted my eyes. This is simple human decency, not to mention respect for the dead. Will French <wfrench(a)interport.net>

2 1

CFA: a million geeks?
by Rich Burroughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is an interview I did with Keith Glass about the changes with the Electronic Freedom March. He mentions making crypto an issue there. Rich -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [This is an article from the may96 issue of the web zine _cause for alarm_, http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause. It may be redistributed electronically with this header included.] I contacted Keith Glass about an interview shortly after finding out that he had taken over as head of the Electronic Freedom March. The March, an attempt to influence Washington with a critical mass of geeks, was originally scheduled for June. In his response to my email, Keith said that the March was being rescheduled for late September and that he would make a public announcement soon. His subsequent press release said that, "With the current state of the case against the CDA, ACLU vs. Reno, and several organizational factors, it's been concluded that it would be far more effective to focus the political power of the citizens of the Net closer to the November elections." Keith joined me at Club Wired, after a hard day at work. --- CFA: Thanks for coming, Keith :) Keith G: And thus ends another thrilling day, standing for Truth, Justice, and/or the American Way <g> CFA: Heh. Keith G: Hey, a day at the Pentagon is like... a day in hell, only the cooking is worse. CFA: What do you do there BTW? If it's not classified? ;) Keith G: Nope: I work Pollution Preventions and Standardization issues for the Secretary of the Air Force. I'm a contractor, better known as one of the legendary "Beltway Bandits", although **I** prefer the term "Parkway Patriot"...;-) CFA: :) So, let's talk about the March. The new date is Sept. 29, tentatively? Keith G: Tentatively. I'm checking with the Park Service and the Majority Leaders' office in the next few days, to insure we can get a place... CFA: Where will the speakers be at, if you know? I mean human speakers :) Keith G: That depends on where we can locate. Since I'm trying to combine it with some congressional lobbying, I'd LIKE it to be on the west stairs of the Capitol. But the Ellipse, which we had reserved for the original date, would put us in shouting distance of the White House... CFA: *nod* Keith G: Of course, this thing has grown beyond JUST the CDA. In my opinion, it'll be wastepaper by mid-June. . . but we have to fight for crypto rights, and the ill-informed types who foisted the CDA on us will be back next year. This isn't just one battle... this is the start of a whole new political front. CFA: You're going to involve crypto issues? Keith G: Free speech is free speech. If they ban crypto, then they'd better make damned sure that envelopes are banned, too. Encrypted or clear, free speech is an absolute. CFA: *nod* Keith G: We also need to let the Congress know a few things about the Net: according to a pal of mine at CDT, your average Net user makes over $40K, and votes SIGNIFICANTLY more than not-Net-users. We have money, we have votes... it's time to turn that into power. CFA: So, you're in charge of the whole shebang now? Keith G: Yep. John Wash, who started this, got way too bogged down in work, realized it, and handed it off to me last Monday, April 15th... CFA: For those who missed your announcement, why the new date? Keith G: Well, to be honest, when I looked at what we had set up, AND what the Park Service required of us (i.e. portatpotties, medics, security), I saw we needed a LOT more money and organization than was possible for a bunch of part-time activists to get in the time remaining. Secondly, the CDA trial is going FAR faster than anything we had expected: the verdict will be out by mid-June, and from all reports, the Feds have been unusually incompetent in their arguments. So, I thought we should move as close as we can to the election, to (1) maximize our power, politically, (2) get a MUCH better organization in place, and (3) get out of the summer DC sun. This place is AWFUL in the summer... ;) CFA: :) Keith G: We need to let the Congress know that the Net is NOT all porno fiends, militia types exchanging bomb recipes, and all the other net.myths that seem to abound on Capitol Hill. Also, I'd like to work towards a declaration by Congresscritters that Email will be taken just as seriously as snailmail. Right now, most of the time your Congressional Email gets answered by a Bot... and that's the end of it. My friends on the Hill tell me they read email when all else is done... CFA: What about folks who can't make it to DC? Are you encouraging local events? Keith G: Locally, we'd LIKE to get all the people who CAN'T make it, visit their local Congressman and Senators offices' on the Friday before, or Monday after. And lobby, in person... CFA: Right. Keith G: I've gotten word today of a possible parallel EFM in Seattle. If we can get simultaneous marches in several cities, that'd be great. CFA: What can people do to help? It sounds like there's a lot of work to be done. Keith G: What do we need?? I've got webmasters, organizers, publicity types: I need a financial type, and some fund-raisers. We also need sponsors. We have NONE. We've been given a lot of "Sure we'll support you," but when we ask for $$, all of a sudden it gets real quiet. CFA: *nod* Have you had any reports of folks raising funds on the local level? Keith G: Not as yet. We're attempting to formalize a relationship with an existing non-profit, to use as a tax-deductible funding vehicle. We're also looking at selling T-shirts, and I've been approached with several business offers... CFA: Would you encourage local fund-raising for the March? Keith G: Absolutely. CFA: How did you get involved in net.activism? Keith G: How?? I went to the February 10th protest in Lafayette Park (behind the White House) that Tom Edwards put on. My first protest. The rest, well, it just sort of happened... CFA: :) The Feb. 10 protest was about the CDA? Keith G: Yep. Clinton signed it on Black Thursday, the 8th of February. Tom started the whole thing a few days earlier, and we got several hundred to turn out on fairly short notice. CFA: Are there other things that I, as an average net guy, can do to help? Keith G: Average net.guy... hmm... Well, when we get set up, buy a T-shirt, wear it to your Congresscritter's office. Also one or two particularly crafty ideas that I'm working on, but not ready to unveil yet (legal, non-violent, but potentially VERY politically effective...) CFA: Okay :) Keep us posted. Keith G: Oh, it will be on the web site... which I'm getting re-written... HTML 3.0, frames, Java, hot-and-cold running ASCII. <g> CFA: What's the turnout projected for the March? Keith G: Honestly, I don't know. **MY** original projections for the June rally were between 1 and 10K: John Wash kept saying 20K. If we can set up an organization of college students during the summer and have them recruit aggressively when school starts, we could hit 20K. We're also organizing amongst other communities that are more heavily wired than most: my first appointments were a Gay/Lesbian/Bi coordinator... I hope to get some help from the Pagan community as well... I already have plenty of hookups in Fandom... CFA: Cool :) Getting the word out seems very important now, with the changes... Keith G: Exactly. The Web site is among the top 5% hit, I have done my best to get the word out without overly spamming USENET. I know I'm going to about 15 or so lists... CFA: Jon Lebkowsky said you're doing the Club Wired EF forum? May 30? Keith G: Yep. Jon and I finalized that yesterday. CFA: Great. Keith G: Now, to beat that darned cyber-stagefright <g> CFA: :) What about multimedia stuff? Are there plans for video and/or audio from the March? Keith G: We're talking with NetRadio about a simulcast, one gent also is looking into a video feed, on the level of the Fish-cam. CFA: What about the roster of speakers? Any changes? Keith G: Not as yet.... but we're trying to get some bigger names. If anyone has an, ER, PIPELINE to Bill Gates or Mark Andreessen of Netscape, I'd be glad to chat. I'd like to get Barlow of EFF, maybe even Newt... CFA: Yes, a politician would be good. Maybe Leahy... Keith G: Leahy comes to mind. NOT Gore... unless we could boo him offstage... CFA: Heh. Keith G: I am NOT pleased with the two-facedness of the politicos over this whole thing... ESPECIALLY Clinton's, "It's unconstitutional but..." followed by his letter to Exon. Even if I WASN'T Republican, I couldn't vote for Clinton/Gore due to their utter fecklessness over the CDA CFA: The letter to Exon had me fuming, too. I'm getting tired of settling for the lesser evil... Keith G: Right: vote for the GREATER evil... dread Chthulu in 96 !!! <g> CFA: :) Well, anything else you want to add before I let you get some rest? Keith G: Nothing I can think of... our website is http://www.efm.org, and I'll post announcements to alt.censorship, comp.org.eff.talk, alt.activism, alt.wired, at minimum. CFA: Okay. Thanks for coming to talk :) Keith G: Anytime... --- rich burroughs <richieb(a)teleport.com> (april 26, 1996) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMYgTA4T0GKfZRA/9AQH8OwP+NjWJAuYHWRbMdDCVt6Wj6Nh3ZxJIj0lU DUXM8eJKEzI/CdOVGCUHYB7w3cQlCT6q1oNgiuiMGrWsd66WLR12Xmm/Zx1/pme4 egB5SB4Wuc96ZJ89q2qwuHG8V9FBzD2HJxFYLdHdadWMNpj5cM/DV1G1vCvFREz1 cSA5AsbCnuI= =SXzn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb(a)teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb See my Blue Ribbon Page at http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/blueribbon New EF zine "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause

1 0

Re: [LONG] Churchill Club: 20th Anniversary PK Crypto
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:14 AM 5/1/96 -0700, Dave Del Torto wrote: >Nice summary, Bill. Now I don't have to do it. ;) I hope this is OK with you... > > <http://www.well.com/user/ddt/crypto/pkc-daddies.html> > Nice web page. I should have added to the post that people should feel free to re-post within the bounds of good netiquette. Regards - Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

2 1