December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Former CIA Director and *Strategic Investment* Editor
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:03 PM 4/30/96 -0400, Black Unicorn wrote: >On Tue, 30 Apr 1996, jim bell wrote: >> Notice that I said "comparatively" non-suspicious. Can you think of any >> LESS suspicious way to appear to die and still explain no body being found? > >Many. You lack imagination. You lack specifics. And how applicable are these to a person like Colby? >> He might very well be alive. But it's almost certain he won't be found... > >Your conspiracy nut side is showing. Who said "conspiracy"? If Colby wanted to disappear, are you trying to suggest that he wouldn't have been able to engineer this himself? The word "conspiracy" requires the actions of more than one person, or have you forgotten? If anything, your misuse of the word "conspiracy" reveals your knee-jerk thought processes. >> Not days and days too long, >> just a few hours? Or were Colby's habits so precise and predictable (and >> known to be so!) that his neighbor would call the cops just because he, >> ONCE, stayed a little longer than normal? > >Yes, they were. He ran an active consulting business in D.C. and returned >to the city on a regular schedule. In addition, he was very prudent about >letting people know when he was about to go out on the river. The man was >in his 70s, of course he generated a good deal of concern amongst his >neighbors. If the guy went out, alone, in a canoe in (reportedly) 2-foot waves without a life vest, the term "intelligence" is doubly wasted on him. >> What's wrong with this picture? > >It's not hard to see. As usual you are theorizing and speculating about >issues and persons you have no connection to. Even in the face of someone >with personal experience as to the matter at hand you persist in asserting >that you are more 'in the know.' What a brainless statement! Quite the opposite, I didn't claim to be "in the know." Rather, I merely pointed out that what was being said by others about the incident was without appreciable support and rather inconsistent and not believeable, and very much inadequate. I can do this very effectively without knowing, for certain, what really did happen. >In this particular case you are discussing someone I know personally. > >Given the circumstances, your rumor mongering is both classless and >distasteful. I'm starting no rumors. Rather, if anything, I'm ATTACKING a rumor being portrayed as fact: The rumor that he died in a canoeing accident. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 06:00 PM 4/20/96 -0700, Lucky Green wrote: >Years after smartcards have become ubiquitous in such countries as Pakistan >and Nepal, not to mention Europe, I just saw my first smartcard commercial >ever on US television. > >Way to go :-) > > > >Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer, DigiCash, Inc. > >-- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> > PGP encrypted mail preferred. Hummm... Did you ever wonder *why* this was introduced to the "third-world" countries first? If you've been following the progress of the so called "smart- card," you will have noticed it was first introduced to areas that are extremely "low-tech" and well off the beaten path. Also the areas it was *first* introduced were generally marked by a high population density. Notice, "low-tech," high population density and in locations that are definitely out of the loop when it comes to news coverage. There was obviously a strategy involved and I think it would be prudent to wonder why. The U.S. is one of the most technologically advanced nations on the face of the earth. The citizenry are very familiar with technology and are quite adept in it's uses. Not to mention the fact that some of the worlds pivotal financial markets are located here, it makes one wonder why they didn't introduce the card here. I for one am not nearly so intrigued with the benefits of these "smart cards." I see too much room for mischief. Already, where I live, there are Insurance com- panies that have access to the data bases of grocery stores in this area. If one uses one's "debit card" to purchase groceries... and say, purchases a carton of cigarettes for a loved one or friend, the insurance company has access to that information. There is a growing collection of information being gathered on every- one in this country. Although it appears to be harmless, using sophisticated collation and analysis techniques, the accuracy of the inferences *I* believe constitute an invasion of privacy and a clear and present danger. Consider a scheme used by local law enforcement here several years ago. They set up an operation with the several horticulture stores. Anyone purchasing "grow lights" was noted, their license plates were copied and later... based on the fact, a person purchased a "grow light" a search warrant was issued for the search of their homes. Although grow lights are used all the time for legitimate purposes it was assumed that anyone purchasing one was growing marijuana. Imagine being awakened at 6:00 am by a team of narcotics officers with dogs and a warrant allowing them to search your premises. Given the current asset forfeiture laws, and given that well over 75% of the money supply by government studies has been contaminated with cocaine, you could lose your home if the dogs happen to "hit" on any money in your home. Never mind you're not one who grows or deals in narcotics, this is extremely dangerous! In the new anti-terrorism bill recently signed, the FBI has been given the ability to tap 1 out of 10 phone lines without the need to actually come out and set up a tap on your line. This will now be handled automatically for them by your friendly phone company. I see "smart cards" as one more twist in the ever tightening noose around our necks and the Bill of Rights. Not only will the cards be able to keep your complete history from cradle to the grave on them, but what's to prevent them from being used in the future as an internal passport of sorts? We are rapidly approaching the point where we will be stopped and required to produce our papers. This information will be readily available to any government agency... and not a few corporations to exploit at will. No I'm not at all enthused with the advent of the smart card. Currently there is much discussion regarding various banking institutions charging excessive amounts for transaction fees at your local "ATM." Wonder how much they will be looking to charge for this service? Something to think about. Benjamin T. Moore, Jr. (btmoore(a)iquest.net) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMYT0c4SAJOVFNaChAQG6kAf/SF/cMlbkj+0FQCBjHe29wJR93UMBqykf Fz0N9dUB+TLksddhcEMWzwY0oDGjT87DOjYmimzvDQgwinxQEemxe4pS2ph2ydJZ 3iELOWRcyKdD4Hi+RB2O9gjKNR6M1O2I/cvdnxjV6r+L9Ysd1ea35jJ2R7LhVVMf MRQQuMs3zx5zJafp2LNI43JCGvWweHy0ZEzHex65Ee9FdRTLNT5KIbl/QHaFP6Ij gMWysxBnj3bBCoBx0l511GMmPN0W/tycec45EvRFhJOUPR+H0bKhzoYs46tSQAkr NPPTFCdvFae539xgWlvVpIffp/mGigsjaKv7WJRu4hEpQeRV9lNGmA== =GGwf -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "When they came for the Fourth Amendment I didn't say anything because I had nothing to hide. When they came for the Second Amendment I didn't say anything because I wasn't a gun owner. When they came for the Fifth and Sixth Amendments I didn't say anything because I had committed no crimes. When they came for the First Amendment I couldn't say anything." -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- PGP Key available from key servers, or on request. Key Fingerprint = 3D 90 0C 58 EE 65 AE 89 28 C5 58 A2 D5 F4 A8 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5 4

Re: no-cost DH?
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:06 PM 4/30/96 -0700, Wei Dai wrote: >On Tue, 30 Apr 1996, Bill Frantz wrote: > >> Morris (Cylink): Cylink owns the DH patents. We are opening the >> technology with no-cost licenses. Patents should not be used to block >> the technology. > >Does anyone know more about these no-cost licenses? I wouldn't mind >getting free DH a year early... I was just reporting (I hope correctly). You will need to contact Cylink directly. The person speaking was David Morris, Vice President. 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

1 0

Re: WhoWhere.com v. that stanford.edu loon
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Monday night, I wrote: >I am confident that the Parsec folks are now acting in good faith, and >that they are now sensitive to the relevant privacy and ethical issues. [parsec.com = whowhere.com] I may have spoken too soon. I might be interested in talking, privately, with their venture capitalists and allies, which include Netscape and InfoSeek. I think if you want a service of this kind, those four11.com guys, who started out with the SLED PGP key certification service, are absolutely terrific. - -rich [not on cypherpunks -- no, not just because I'm throwing a tantrum; I'm honestly embarrassed at my own behavior, and need a break.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMYbSd43DXUbM57SdAQGLGQP/WL/IWBM2rjpChUtn20T+iylKgtvqE3GT nqs45S1M4YAV/0sQcbhjCr9ZDkyH60ei4VpORLaXy+J3EHkEFMO9j0KKGEU9nWAQ T2R7YIIziWkQXDO92M08ezfXlT6hwRKCqf9VhfLl+PGEdBgVfAE2oS8exmQtEkF1 Td89ZQD+VT0= =ddQ0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Calling other code in Java applications and applets
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"shamrock(a)netcom.com" 30-APR-1996 08:43:38.24 >Presumably, such packages would have to be signed by Sun. Needless to say, >these certificates would cost money. A potentially lucrative source of >revenue for Sun. Nothing wrong with that. Nothing wrong with that, no... as long as Sun isn't (as TCMay speculated indirectly) pressured into not signing such packages if they were crypto-usable. Does Sun currently do much business with the US Government, particularly sections (e.g., the military, law enforcement and intelligence ones) susceptible to being influenced by the NSA? -Allen

1 0

Re: Former CIA Director and *Strategic Investment* Editor
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:49 PM 4/30/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: > >Looking for conspiracies in the almost certainly accidental drowning of >Colby is an even bigger waste of time than spending vast efforts trying to >show that Vince Foster was killed by the O.T.O. Why are you the second person to use the term "conspiracy" when I didn't mention such a thing? Got "conspiracies" on your brain, Tim? Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: Former CIA Director and *Strategic Investment* Editor
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:15 PM 4/30/96 -0400, Black Unicorn wrote: > > >I typoed. > >Virginia should read "Maryland" in my last post. That's okay; it was only a small slip. Small. Maybe the same magnitude as that secretary who said that Vincent Foster's body was first found in "the parking lot" rather than "the park." Right? (I don't really even care about Vincent Foster, BTW.) Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

Re: Freedom and security[noise]
by liberty＠gate.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Uni wrote: >On Wed, 1 May 1996, Steven Weller wrote: > >> >Jim Ray wrote >> [...] >Watch your attributation, Jim Ray did not write this. > Now three people, counting me, have corrected him. I feel flattered knowing folks are actually watching what I say so careully. If I'd only known, I would have kept my mouth shut. I had a typospasm earlier today during my pre-coffee jury-nullification rant this AM, so I guess I should also try harder to do my best to take care before hitting the ol' button. Regards, Jim Ray <liberty(a)gate.net> "The FAA, FBI, Customs, CIA, Justice, DEA and the IRS were all involved in Mena. They won't say how they were involved, but they will tell you there is nothing there." -- Bill Plante, CBS News Correspondent, & Michael Singer, Producer, CBS News, New York. in Tuesday, May 3, 1994's Wall Street Journal letters to the editor section. [OK, OK, I know, we aren't Menapunks!] :) JMR _______________________________________________________________________ PGP key Fingerprint 51 5D A2 C3 92 2C 56 BE 53 2D 9C A1 B3 50 C9 C8 Public Key id. # E9BD6D35 -- http://www.shopmiami.com/prs/jimray _______________________________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Freedom isn't Freeh. iQCVAwUBMYgACm1lp8bpvW01AQF/SQQAivRbyRfl6mMwq73voOfCX+BrQhGEQU6l ZHozejbwpYlWYxJsb/ncFSi5S5DZM7LjpVcY88QFRbGnGRZP1FmaWaktmBSGA/4d XJ8Cr9tnXxlWuvt6j0Gx840NwV5WIGoY88Z+UFyz2RTFYceLqVg4zuiouOri/WEs 17EwaQZcxKE= =RnJd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Update II/113- Election Hoax (fwd)
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 30 Apr 96 13:38 CDT From: sns(a)borealis.com To: shomronnews(a)felix.dircon.co.uk Subject: Update II/113- Election Hoax SNS News Service "Election Hoax" April 30, 1996.. 11 Iyar 5756..Volume II, Number 113 ..Update from Israel [snip] Election Hoax According to a report released by the prestigious Jane's Defense Weekly, the new missile agreement between Israel and the United States is politically motivated and does not hold water. Mr. Christopher Fosi, an Editor of the Jane's Defense Weekly, and Mr. Douglas Barry, Aviation and Defense Editor of Flight International Weekly Magazine, stated the Nautilus Anti-Missile System is at least 4 years from being ready. The report states the system is "a poor fit or just does not meet Israel's needs". The report explains that since the Katusha rockets are launched from mobile sites, they can be moved around in a pick-up truck and this is just one reason the system is ineffective. Fosi discounts tests that were carried out in Mexico as not accurate and stated the reasons behind the ceremony surrounding the new missile deal appear to be political in nature, rather than a military-defensive move to protect Israel from Hizbullah rockets. The report also explains that Israel's Arrow Anti-Missile System is also not designed for Katusha rockets and is not an effective deterrent. Despite promises by President Clinton to supply Israel with an operational Nautilus system by late 1997, the two experts state it is not reality. (UPI..4/30, Ma'ariv Newspaper..4/30..Page 2). ****

1 0

Re: Freedom and security
by stevenw＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>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. >Freedom increases >as respect and care for one another increases. Hogwash. That's community again. As respect and care for my neighbor's peace and quiet I lose the freedom to blow leaves on a Sunday morning. This is independent of what the law says. >Meanwhile, since we do not >live in utopia, all societies at a certain level of economic development >and of a certain size of population require law and law enforcement to >protect citizens from predators. Hogwash again. Law and law enforcement only exists due to the failing of such societies. Prisons and executions are the ultimate failure of a society. Their existence (like hierarchical structure) is not a given. But if it is all you know, then of course it's what you assume. And don't forget that it is fundamental that law and law enforcement also protects predators from citizens. Your analysis is rather one-sided. >The Internet is beyond the stage of small communities exercising informal >social controls (peer pressure). How so? >It's now a major industrial city and will It's industry being? >develop law, law enforcement and government, whether anyone likes it or >not, not least because the Community will always respond to crime by trying >to protect itself. True, but there are individuals before community. > And the crime is already here. The idea that the >Internet is not controlled is IMHO one of the biggest myths around. It's >like a large group of people are still living in some far-off utopian rural >paradise. Wait a minute. A large number of people living in a utopian paradise? Surely this is ideal. If there were the crime and activity you describe, then it would not be utopian and would not be paradise. But maybe this is paradise, but only to a criminal. And interesting that you use the world "still". You obviously equate "unorganized" with "backward". You even say "rural". You a city boy by any chance? >Does anyone really doubt the extent of State control and power >across the Net? Excuse me, can someone remind me why we're all here please? > My point is that this is inevitable. The Internet is a >mirror of the rest of the world, not a new form of society, and I fail to >understand why anyone should be surprised that that is the case. You said it. You fail to understand. The reasons are obvious. Your eyes are closed, your mind is shut, and you can hardly be heard over the traffic. >I disagree with this statement. I do not believe that laws breed more laws >nor that laws lead to less freedom. I believe bad laws compromise freedom >(eg CDA) while good laws protect freedom. Freedom for whom? Freedom, like technology, is neutral. Laws are always of the form "You shall" or "You shall not". Laws against mugging (to protect the citizens) do not prevent muggings. They restrict the freedoms of muggers and eventually incarcarate them. The existence of muggers causes people to restrict their own freedom, by not jogging at night etc. Mugging is a social and a community failure. A "good" law against the activity reduces overall freedom while simultaneously failing to address the problem. In short, a simple, ineffective, but visible fix. A perfect business for politicians to be in. >>>I don't believe that security is the enemy of >>>freedom. I believe that freedom needs security in order to exist at all. >> >>Good. Join us in spreading cryptography around, and security will >>bloom (along with freedom). > >Cryptography enhances and protects privacy, which does not inevitably lead >to greater security. Security for the sender, yes, in that no one else can >read the message, but security for the Community? Sure. It means that the community can continue life as normal without realising that the Mayor is gay. She does a fabulous job, everyone gains, the community is very secure. Or shall we throw some FUD into the equation, tell everyone, and have the uproar wreck the community? > Doesnt that depend what >the message said? The technology itself is neutral. Facts are neutral too. It does not depend on the message. >Child pornographers >encrypt their hard drives so that law enforcement cannot gather crime >evidence - that is certainly a state of greater security for the >pornographer, but it does not improve our Community, and as child >pornography increases, the law is by definition broken more and more, and >so the Community becomes less free than before. And that's not the tyranny >of government but the tryanny of criminals. You really have laws on the brain, don't you? Lets see. Breaking laws reduces freedom? This is where you have the wrong end of the stick. Making, not breaking laws reduces freedom. If our mayor friend above looks at 1 naked minor a week, how does this reduce the freedom of her community? What about 100? Much less free obviously. >I do in fact support cryptography for personal security, not least because Does that personal security extend to encrypting your hard drive? What makes you different from Ms. Mayor? >********************************************************* >Colin Gabriel Hatcher - CyberAngels Director >"Two people may disagree, but >that does not mean that one of them is evil" But ignorance plays a big role :-) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steven Weller | Weller's three steps to Greatness: | 1. See what others cannot | 2. Think what others cannot stevenw(a)best.com | 3. Express what others cannot

3 2