December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: [off-topic] Re: US Power Outages
by Dave Farber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I dnt have the reference handy bit IEEE Spectrum published in about May 66 a real good description of why the Great Northeast Blackout happened.

1 0

Netscape US betas lagging...
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The international version is 3.0b7. The export-controlled version on wwwus is two revisions and almost a month behind at 3.0b5. Have y'all simply not had time/inclination to recompile the 128-bit version with the latest patches, or is there some sort of trouble brewing? - -rich -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQBVAwUBMg7ft5NcNyVVy0jxAQGLNAIAwf9BqKx+kHjfN/4YRfjHhXsqv8S6qbQ2 DiotNQxH/rrauDWOzh5TaTTgUp+0syzWKIvQtXUZC1+9JduWK39d6w== =W2nf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: Rumors of death of Anguilla Data are greatly exagerated.
by an584514＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vince says: > And Anguilla is first and foremost a taxhaven. But it tries hard to be a > very clean taxhaven (does not want drug money etc). I think that "clean" > corporations operating here tax free is a potentially huge market. This is an illusion. There ain't no such thing as a clean corporation operating in a clean tax haven. Every overseas corp that is doing something they can't do without interference back onshore, is running the gauntlet. Remember, its my moral choice as to whether its dirty, and if I am sitting in some Washington quango office, and I decide its dirty, then it is. Plus its my job to fight it, and I'm not afraid of a dirty fight. And I got a list of contacts who've got friends who've got favours to call in... But you must know this, don't you follow the machinations that USG pulls in the region to try and close down the arbitrages? > Anguilla and OIS are not the data haven of cypherpunks wet dreams. Neither > Anguilla nor I want "hit men for hire" advertising here. Sorry Tim. And I > think the loss in clean business would outweigh any money from such by a > long shot. Nobody's talking about things that every body agrees are no-go. Shooting people is generally considered not acceptable. So please don't change the subject. What we are talking about is a fairly harmless concept. An obviously "fake" passport that is designed to fool the supposedly ignorant peasant terrorist when they wave grenades on the some flight from Miami, now going to Havana. It's a laughable concept, and one that most western governments have sniffed at and not lifted one finger to even warn about. OK, so there is a chance that a dumb clerk in a bank could be fooled. Still, opening a bank account with such a person could be done any number of ways. It's equally possible to imagine the Honduras passport being used to escape some sudaka warzone, without being shot for a gringo. Remember PGP? It was used for liberty, crime and freedom, all at once. > One simple example is that OIS was given a project Gutenberg CD-ROM and > may sell online copies of old books. Some countries are extending > copyrights back further into the past. Anguilla is not. So we could sell > books that have expired copyrights in Anguilla but not expired in USA etc. > Think regulatory arbitrage. Crap. It's obvious what book your talking about, if you get Europeans down there. It's about as harmless, or harmful, as "kill the Queen" rants, again its my moral choice. If a phone call from your lawyer causes such good responses, then there is no problem about getting this one made out-of-stock. Do you have a lot of tourists then from *that* place? What's the GDP take for the holiday trade anyway? > Taxhavens are a huge and well understood market. Datahavens are still > new. Not counting gambling, they may only be $0/year rounded to the > nearest million. The distinction is irrelevant. What are you going to do to protect my business? Now I know. SFA. I may be asking you for data protection, but my profits, which (might) pay you, come from a long line of other businesses. We're not all geeks. Tim makes good points, especially as he is not (as far as I can see) in the trade. When my company does business with such a jurisdiction, we look for the list of things allowed and the list of no-nos (which we respect). Then we look at the history of how that country stand up to its word. One thing is what they say, then another is what they do. It's surprising how easy it is to see just how much a place really wants your business for the long run. I will say this, it ain't really your fault that this happened. The webshop was too bright, too blatent. He talked to toublesome scam reporters. That sort of thing is going to bring in trouble. Softly softly catchee monkey is what is needed. Then when the phone rang my guess is it all happened to quickly. You win some you lose some. Lets not make a bad story get worse. Even though this is not a happy post (Anguilla was on our list) we still would like you to suceed. Our advice, worth what you paid, is don't advertise this event, one bad storm doesnt sink a ship. Take a look at all your webpages and tone down the noisy ones. Tell them to camoflage their location, no pun intended. Then, get down to your lawyers office and sit down over a beer and work out how your going to handle this thing next time. Properly. Publish (quietly but definatively) your list of no-nos (ok, that's already said). Think about what new shops want to do and talk it over with your man down at the bar (so you can predict the attacks). Learn some negotiating skills, soften the blow from both ends. Nothing I'm sure you hadn't thought of. Cheers, sorry for anonymity, but as I say, its softly softly in this game. Wish you luck. --****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--***ATTENTION*** Your e-mail reply to this message WILL be *automatically* ANONYMIZED. Please, report inappropriate use to abuse(a)anon.penet.fi For information (incl. non-anon reply) write to help(a)anon.penet.fi If you have any problems, address them to admin(a)anon.penet.fi

3 2

Anguilla / taxbomber - legality
by Vincent Cate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I meant to quote this part in the previous post: taxbomber: >Needless to say, we have NEVER EVER dealt in one single fake >passport, nor have we ever offered, sold or brokered any forged, >stolen or "lost" documents. Nor is there any need to do so, if you can >get the real thing absolutely legally. He was definately selling fake passports. He thinks of them as camouflage. If I look up fake in websters, they fit the definition. Turns out this is not legal in Anguilla. If it is no longer in his web page, you can see quotes from his web page in the David Evans article. The Internet spans many counties and if something is not legal in one country but legal in another, someone can move. He has moved. One of the exciting things about the Internet. If there are taxes in your country and banks cooperate with the government, you can incorporate in Anguilla, put your web site here, and run your business from here (coming in over the Internet) tax free. But fraud is illegal in Anguilla, and fake passports are concidered fraud. -- Vince http://online.offshore.com.ai/

2 2

FCC_ups
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

8-10-96. WaPo: "Phone Service Via the Internet May Slash Rates." Labs of Advanced Technology has developed a way for people to make long-distance calls over the Internet using only their telephones, at about half the price of ordinary toll calls. Customers would merely call a central number, then dial their long-distance numbers. The call is carried on the Internet, then put back onto the local phone system at its destination. The company plans to charge 5 to 8 cents per minute for all domestic U.S. calls, which represents a 50 to 75 percent discount off most domestic long-distance rates. International rates would depend on arrangements made with foreign phone companies. "Twenty years from now, and probably sooner, I don't see the giants of the telecommunications industry existing anymore," said the company's president. The giants hoot, "FCC, PACs, whack him." "PCs and the Postal Service Challenge the Mailroom Reign of Pitney Bowes" New technology has made it possible for IBM, Bell Atlantic and National Semiconductor to start prowling around postage meters, which account for $20 billion a year in postage. With a telephone line to the post office and some fancy computer software, a "stamp" could spin out of the printer at the same time the envelope is being addressed. Computer-generated envelopes will not only have addresses and stamps, but also a bar code that can quickly be read by a computer to hasten delivery. Distinctive stamps called indicia carry a specially encrypted numerical code that Pitney Bowes believes the Postal Service should adopt to prevent counterfeiting. ----- http://jya.com/fccups.txt (22 kb) via: www.anonymizer.com FCC_ups

4 3

Re: Fun with M$
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:07 AM 8/12/96 -0400, Dan Siemon wrote: >> > Exploder is an Active X control which demonstrates security problems with >> > Microsoft's Internet Explorer. Exploder performs a clean shutdown of >> > Win95 and will turn off the power on machines that have a power >> > conservation BIOS (green machines). > >I don't see how anyone can call this a bug. If somebody can write a web page that, when you view it, turns off your PC, the only way I can see calling it a positive feature is to say "it's easy to make people stop using really insecure products like MSIE!" or "Turning off Win95 is a Kind Thing to do!" >Microsoft has chosen what Sun should have: leave the security to the user, >don't take it away from everyone. Java has been severely crippled by the User? What user? The poor unsuspecting fool who hits the web page? The kind friendly person who writes web pages that turn off Win95? Executing signed code from web pages is semi-ok, if the default is to trust no one and make the user explicitly grant permission to code authors. Executing anything that comes down the wire is foolish, and writing software to do so is rabidly negligent. The Java approach is to define a security model that _should_ let you safely execute code if you implement it correctly, do some academic-style analysis to validate the security model, document the level of trust you can expect from the system, and then put out a mildly buggy implementation of the system so grad students can rip it to shreds :-) So far the security problems that have been discovered have been with the implementation, not with the underlying security model. And then add a similar-looking language called Javascript with no underlying security model, make it impossible to turn off, and get taunted mercilessly until you add a "Turn it off" checkbox. The Microsoft approach was to take a hacked-up word-processor gluon, from the folks who brought you the Word Prank Virus Propagation Tool, hack it up some more, add Internet hooks, and replace a few bugs with different bugs while trying to catch up with the market leader on features. Yes, some of the removed bugs were security bugs, but it's nothing near secure, and there's no reason to expect it ever can be. (Brought to you by the folks who added features to Winsock so that their PowerPoint disk-hogging-and-slideshow system chokes to death if you install standards-based networking software, even if you don't use the network features....) # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Defuse Authority!

1 0

Re: Schlafly on crypto
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:47 PM 8/14/96 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote: >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > SANDY SANDFORT > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > >C'punks, > >On Wed, 14 Aug 1996, Alan Olsen wrote: > >> Well, I can think of a few reasons to come to that conclusion. >> >> - Schlafly is the head of one of the more right-wing >> organizations in the country. > >Some right-wingers don't like free speech, most do. This >characterization is not enlightening on the question at hand. Actually, i have found that it does not matter which side you choose, right or left, they desire free speech for themselves and not for others. >> - She is very closly associated with the Buchanon campaign and >> the Christian coalition. > >Does Buchanan favor censorship of the Net? If so, what leads you >to believe Schlafly shares that particular view? This guilt by >(assumed) association is not fair nor persuasive. I am not certain about Buchanan, but i do know that the Christian coalition is very much in favor of net censorship. Actually, I can find no statements in either direction on the Eagle Forum web site. Do you know of any statements by Schlafly and/or the Eagle forum either for or against net censorship? I know of none for, and the circumstantial evidence available does not reinforce the conclusion that she is against it. >> - Her organization, the Eagle Forum, distributes a couple of >> anti-porn rant tracts (http://www.eagleforum.org/users/eagle/ >> public_html/misc/order.html) called _Pornography's Victims >> $4.95 (paperback) by Schlafly, ed._ > >Being against porn does not mean one is pro-censorship. (I don't >like smoking, but I don't think it should be illegal.) We need >something more concrete to support such an accusation. I have yet to see anyone who publishes anti-porn screeds based off of the Bundy case that does not support censorship of such materials. Can you point me to any? Or any material that would lend credence to the argument that she supports freedom for anyone except "Good God-Fearing Christians"? >> I know that he [Phyllis' son] is gay. His mother seems to have >> had some problems coming to terms with the implications of alot >> of her rhetoric involving such things... > >Really? I though she very clearly has stated that she hates the >sin, not the sinner. What evidence does Alan have that she has >had "some problems coming to terms..."? Lon Mabon also claims to "hate the sin and love the sinner". It does not prevent him from dredging up as much hate as possible for those who are gay. Actually my beliefs are based opon statements she made at the time. You may have more information on the subject than I do... >> (She seems to confuse her religion with reality on this point.) > >As does Alan. Without evidence to back up your claims, I cannot make any judgement than what I have made. Her associations with people who believe in censorship and her devotion to a branch of Christianity that supports censorship, as well as her sales of publications used to justify censorship makes me believe that she follows that course. Without specific examples that show that she does not believe in such measures, I have no reason to assume any other conclusion. >> I would say there are alot of reasons to assume that Schlafly >> would try and impose her morality on the rest of the country if >> given half the chance. > >Well Alan can say anything he wants, but he has given no >*substantive* reasons to support his prejudices. By her article >against Net censorship, Schlafly has given us at least one piece >of evidence to the contrary. Has she published against net censorship? The quoted article was about wiretapping. My search of her web site did not reveal any articles on that topic. If you have specific pointers I would like to see them. >> Look at the people she chooses to associate with. > >Jesus hung out with tax collectors and prostitutes. Look at the >people he chose to associate with. Guilt by association again? But Jesus did not try to get the prostitutes and tax collectors elected to high office... (But then again, there are no contemporary records for the existence of such a being in the first place.) >Look folks, in this battle, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Actually I view this as a fallacy. Just because the Christian Right opposes Clinton for good reasons, does not make them friends for causes that I view as just. >We KNOW what Clinton and his gang think of our privacy and >freedom of speech on the Net. Let's not cut off our noses to >spite our faces. If Schlarly wants to lend a hand, let's not >bite it, okay? Lets also not accept them just because they oppose the current threat. I believe they have a number of threats of their own. I do not disagree with the Eagle Forum on everything. (I have just read enough of her early works to make me consider her a danger to herself and others... Especially her screeds on Communism.) She has some points I consider valid on education and other areas. But just because he makes sense in some areas does not mean that I will trust either her or any of her minions in any position of power. Control freaks of either stripe worry me... If they are willing to fight against the Clintonocracy, then i will be glad to see it. Just do not expect me to be willing to swallow their religious beliefs as an alternative. If you have pointers to material that shows that she is against net censorship, then post pointers. I would like to see them. The posted article does not address the net at all, other than as communication on a one to one basis. It does not address the issues of those who post unencoded messages to the public at large. Until I have text that shows otherwise, i have little data to show that she supports freedom of speech other than on a one to one basis. --- Alan Olsen -- alano(a)teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction `finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."

1 0

Re: Anguilla - A DataHaven?
by Arun Mehta 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:27 14/08/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >* the role of physical vs. cyberspace data havens ... >3. Vince seems to be a in a somewhat precarious position, awaiting renewal >of a one-year work permit. I'm sure this has come up before, but what would prevent a server being located on a buoy or something at sea outside territorial limits (or when satellites become cheaper, on a satellite itself) offering such services? Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta(a)cpsr.org http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/ finger amehta(a)cerfnet.com for public key

1 0

re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption Technology
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>At 08:33 13/08/96 -0700, James A. Donald wrote: >> > Demand for Indian programmers is less than supply not because capital >> > has somehow failed to flow to India, but because an engineer in India >> > is not free to produce the value that engineers elsewhere are free >> > to produce. I've worked with companies that bring Indian contract programmers to Silicon Valley and also contract for work back home in Bangalore. Sure, part of the lower price paid for programmers in India vs. importing the same people here is probably because the government is annoying. Why is it worth paying nearly-American-scale wages to have them do the work here rather than 1/5 as much back home? Part of it is because it's harder to interact with people halfway around the world, even using email and faxes, so the jobs that succeed well in that environment are big jobs with well-defined inputs and outputs. For work that needs real interaction between the customer and the worker, it helps to have the worker nearby, so it's worth paying them to come here. For work that needs interaction between workers and machines, especially brand-new-not-yet-working machines on high-speed networks that aren't easy or cheap to drag across the Pacific and then connect to India, you need bodies on site. Even for standard equipment you can buy more of, it's still more productive to work here where you have lots of it and can get spare parts at Fry's than to ship some of it to India and have people use it there. Also, of course, the folks who are good enough to ship halfway around the world to do a job for you are usually the best they've got; they'd get more than the average programmer back in Bangalore as well. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Defuse Authority!

1 0

Re: Anguilla - A DataHaven?
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:15 AM 8/15/96 +0600, you wrote: >At 10:27 14/08/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >>* the role of physical vs. cyberspace data havens >... >>3. Vince seems to be a in a somewhat precarious position, awaiting renewal >>of a one-year work permit. > >I'm sure this has come up before, but what would prevent a server >being located on a buoy or something at sea outside territorial >limits (or when satellites become cheaper, on a satellite itself) >offering such services? Piracy. Some pirates may have black Jolly Roger flags on their ships, but most have flags that say "Coast Guard" or "Navy" or "Harbor Police", and think they're protecting their National Security or something. Satellite launching is generally somewhat government-controlled, though you could get a remailer into space if you didn't tell the government too much about it until it was launched. The US apparently has restrictions on crypto capabilities of satellites launched from the US, according to something I read on the net once. But I suppose you could launch a programmable satellite, and then reprogram it by radio.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Defuse Authority!

1 0