December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Orbiting Datahavens
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 2 Jul 1996 17:06:47 -0700 (PDT), Brian Lane wrote: >> I'm not sure who would launch it - a Japanese launcher? (ESA is >> strapped for cash, which was one reason for the phenomenaly stupid move of >> putting space probes onto the maiden flight of the Ariane 5.) > > We'd want someone more reliable than ESA! I doubt that we could afford >to have a backup satellite in case of a disaster. Once the Delta Clipper >is functional the payload costs to orbit is supposed to drop tremendously. Or, who knows. NASA could finally wake up, really that the shuttle sucks as a cargo hauler, start using something like the Phoenix (They stonewalled it - would have made them look bad) to build orbital industry and then setup giant solar-powered launch lasers and have surface to orbit at pennies per pound. Oh well... Who'd have thought we'd go to the moon and stop. | Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> - Webpages for sale! Se habla JavaScript! | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp | Autoresponder: send email w/subject of "send resume" or "send PGPKEY"

1 0

Re: "Utilization Review"
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:22 AM 8/19/96, Black Unicorn wrote: >I listened with horror this evening to a radio program which >discussed the state of medical record privacy today. > >In one segment a doctor (psychologist) described an experience >she had after a session which was covered by the patient's >insurance plan. A friend of mine is a psychotherapist very concerned with such issues. There are many pressures on him to reveal information about patients, most of which are "unsurprising" in a world of what can only be called "socialized medicine." (I say "socialized" in that very few persons pay cash or their own money for medical care, psychiatric treatment, sports injury therapy, etc. Most are paying only a per-visit deductible, if even that, and the rest of the charges are picked up by their employers, their insurance plans through employers, the various social welfare institutions, etc.) Insurance companies want proof that the treatments are needed, or are working, and cannot merely take the word of a shrink, for example, that his services are needed. (I can think of some solutions, such as "second opinions" and "independent review panels," but, I can tell you, such things are not common with psychotherapy regimens.) >The doctor in question received a phone message with a 1-800 .... >about the patient's session in order to conduct a "utilization >review to determine medical necessity." Most alarmingly, the >representative could be heard typing on a computer during the >entire review. Let's hope the resulting entries did not show up on a Web page! (This has actually happened, accidentally. Only discovered when the search spiders found the data and others then found the records.) >The program went on to indicate that among the provisions in the >most recent health insurance reform bill there was a provision >for information sharing among insurance companies to facilitate >the transfer of insurance policies when the insured switches >jobs. Among the more alarming suggestions in the legislation is >the use of a "unique medical identifier." Many of you will see >this coming. One of the currently proposed "identifiers" is the >Social Security Number. First, Clinton's dormant Health Plan (her husband is not pushing it) would've _required_ such cross-linking of records. My friend the psychotherapist is a liberal, but was aghast at this and lobbied with his fellow mental health care professionals against this. He also got PGP as a result of this scare. Second, the "Social Security Number" worry is misplaced. They _already_ have enough identifiers to cross-link records til the cows come home. Thinking one is safe if the SSN is not used is "ostrich security." The real issue is having confidential medical or psychiatric or legal records out of the containment of a trusted holder. >Members of the list might also wish to consider that companies >which self insure their employees for health benefits are >entitled to all their medical records directly. Indeed, when I was at Intel an engineer was outraged almost to the point of quitting and filing a lawsuit when he learned that his "Human Relations" bimbo in a cubicle down the hall had the details of his vasectomy. I'm sure by now the news of his vasectomy is a hundred different file system in a dozen different institutions. An Alta Vista search should turn it up. --Tim May ObCrypto Relevance: One of the ways safes (the steel kind, not the alternative to vasectomies kind) got stronger was not through imploring and lecturing, as we in the crypto community do, but through _insurance_. Why? A way to discount future costs/risks to the present. A merchant who has never been robbed probably doesn't think about the security of his safe. But his insurer does. And he says to the merchant: "The charge is $2000 a year if you continue with your current safe, and $1000 a year if you get a Mosler Titan-2 safe. Your call." The same motivation is, I think, what will eventually get security and crypto more widely used. A hospital sued for multiple millions because its records got intercepted and placed on the Web will have its insurance company rethinking policies and rates, and setting procedures for protection of information. This will drive security in a way that lectures, rules, and even scare stories will not. 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

No Subject
by winsock＠c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

DISCORDIAN SOCIETY SUPER SECRET CRYPTOGRAPHIC CYPHER CODE Of possible interest to all Discordians, this information is herewith release from the vaults of A.I.S.B., under the auspices of Episkopos Dr. Mordecai Malignatius, KNS. SAMPLE MESSAGE: ("HAIL ERIS") CONVERSATION: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 STEP 1. Write out the message (HAIL ERIS) and put all the vowels at the end (HLRSAIEI) STEP 2. Reverse order (IEIASRLH) STEP 3. Convert to numbers (9-5-9-1-19-18-12-8) STEP 4. Put into numerical order (1-5-8-9-9-12-18-19) STEP 5. Convert back to letters (AEHIILRS) This cryptographic cypher code is GUARANTEED TO BE 100% UNBREAKABLE.

3 2

Re:Why BlackNet *IS* a Data Haven
by mccoy＠communities.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May writes: > Without splitting too many semantic hairs about the precise definition of > "data haven," let me examine some ways in which BlackNet behaves > identically to a conventional data haven. I would be willing to concede the point if you would take a few seconds to examine the issue of complete lack of persistence in BlackNet. Your descriptions of BlackNet as a data haven seem to be completely based upon the presumption that an anonymous contact service and contract exchange is the functional equivalent to a data haven. Here are a few reasons why I would disagree: As a publisher of "naughty bits" I do not have the ability to just toss data up and assume that it will be there when someone wants it. I am forced to continuously monitor the appropriate newsgroups to find messages from people asking me to post the blueprints to the orbital mind control lasers or kiddie porn. I cannot put my data onto "the Net" with an expectation that any arbitrary user will be able to get the bits one month later. To maintain persistence I need to constantly repost my data, making it easier for authorities to trace me through simple taffic analysis if nothing else. > The classical data haven is closely identified with "place." To many > people, they naturally assume "data haven" = a haven for data, a "harbor" > (same IE root as haven) = a physical place. > > But is "place" important? No one has really claimed place is important, in fact the ideal data haven has no physical existence whatsoever. This is a given. As a practical matter it is a lot easier if you start off in a "place" because there are fewer complications but this has never been a necessity. > A person in the U.S. seeking the Necronomicon posts a message to BlackNet > (or any similar forum, using the same methods) asking for a copy of it, or > offering to pay for it. (Whether the information is free or for a fee is > not central to the idea.) This request is, of course, untraceable. > > Anyone, anywhere in the world, with a copy of this banned material on his > or her private machines may see this request and respond, either giving the > material away, or negotiating a fee. (As I said before, the absence of a > robust digital cash system, bidirectionally untraceable, is a known > limitation of all such systems.) Now you reveal the objection I had to BlackNet being a data haven. What if only one person has a copy of this banned material? It may not be in this publishers interest to have the data available to anyone for posting in response to the query ("Information does not want to be free, it wants to be expensive and liberated...") and some data is not widespread enough or of interest to enough people to assume that multiple copies exist to those who read BlackNet postings. Therefore the only way for a publisher to maintain availability of their data is to constantly monitor the appropriate newsgroups and republish for each request, persistence is maintained only through eternal vigilence (much like liberty, only requiring a lot more effort :) > It's a data haven. No, it is an anonymous contact service. To claim this is a data haven is like claiming that the classified ads in a newspaper are the equivalent to a mall; you could probably find the same goods if you looked long enough, but there is a reason that manufacturers sell goods through stores rather than just posting classified ads across the country. When one does not have the time to check the classified ads, wants to goods from a reputable source, and wants the goods in a timely fashion they will go to a shopping center. jim

2 1

ETS Call
by Theodor Schlickmann 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The European Commission DGXIII/7 Security of Telecommunications and Information Systems has anounced an open call for tenders in the Official Journal as part of our preparatory work for ETS (the Europe-wide network of Trusted Third Party Services). The work proposed tackles the area of ETS infrastructure specification, design and implementation in the form of field trials or "pilots" as well as performing studies on communication and legal aspects. >From the above data, further details of the Call can be found on our Web site: http://www.cordis.lu/infosec/ For those who are unable to access the Web site, please send an e-mail request to Fiona Allan at the following address: fiona.allan(a)bxl.dg13.cec.be The identical information will then be mailed to you using the normal postal services. After reading the documentation, please direct any queries that you may have to Theodor Schlickmann at the following address: 73064.1247(a)compuserve.com Kind regards Theodor W. Schlickmann

1 0

Re: Unix passwd-cracker online?
by couto＠oim.uem.mz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi Arnauld! Where can I get this file??? Is there a new version of Cracker Jack than 1.4? There is a whay of puting Cracker Jack to manage passwords bigger than 8 characters? Thanx in advance, cRaZy bYtE couto(a)oim.uem.mz On 17 Aug 96 at 22:53, Arnauld Dravet wrote: > Date sent: Sat, 17 Aug 1996 22:53:51 -0500 > From: Arnauld Dravet <scraver(a)mnet.fr> > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Subject: Re: Unix passwd-cracker online? > there's a new cracker under dos called John the Cracker, and coded by > UCF96. It's optimized for Pentiumsand is better than cracker jack on a > lot of points : can work with or without wordlists, and u can modify all > what u want....approx 30% faster than cracker jack on a pentium (i run > it at usually 4000 cps on a P90/32Mb ram and a 25Mb wordlist (yeah it's > big)) > > scraver(a)mnet.fr >

1 0

Re: [RANT] Death of Usenet: Film at 11
by tob＠world.std.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

frantz(a)netcom.com (Bill Frantz) writes: > At 1:34 PM 8/19/96 -0700, Mike Duvos wrote: > > > Moderated newsgroups gain reputation from their moderation policies and > probably should not be included in this scheme. Actually, this was hashed out a long time ago on the late, lamented news.future. I'm pleased to see ideas I fought for coming to life again. Moderation could easily fit in. A moderation-stamp would be just one more field for the search to work with. Someone (I think it was me but it's been years since all this was said!) speculated that this would actually be an improvement in several ways: * If rejected messages were indicated by simply missing a signature of approval, voluntary not searched for by individual readers, it would be harder to claim moderator censorship. Or to accomplish it, for that matter. * Multiple independent moderators could work on the same newsgroup. * If the stamp of approval were dissociated from the message proper, messages could propagate without waiting for the moderator's receive-email-and-post cycle. The moderator's "OK" would catch up later, for those readers that wait for it. Imminent resurrection of Usenet predicted. Film-teaser at 5. Tom

3 2

Re: (null)
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sat, 17 Aug 1996 07:03:32 +0200 (MET DST), Anonymous wrote: >>There are many computer companies that are full of Bozos, >>Microsoft isn't one of them. Most of the people griping about >>Microsoft can't code any better. >Gee Phill, as I'm preparing to leave MS after 6 years, I have to >disagree with you. Mediocrity and bureaucracy have eatten away >at a lot of the core of the company. It is entirely marketing driven >now, and the coders have definitely gone down hill since I first >started in Apps. The "bozo" factor has steadily increased. Only >those new hires without a sense of history think it's a real cool >place to work. And, a few egocentric folks totally tripped on >power and greed. (Apologies to any MSofties on the list I don't >know personally.) That would match my general impression of the way things have gone. Originally Microsoft was a small company that *had* to write good code (anyone remember DR DOS?) to survive. At the time, they had to do tons of work producing usable products out of IBM's code. (Apparently due to optimization, at one point MS was writing a negative total codelines for OS/2 1.x) Now, IBM is writing good code (Warp/Merlin/etc) and making usable products out of MS blunders (Win-OS/2. It may crash (not quite as much as the real Windows - separate sessions) but it doesn't bring down the whole house... >Talk to HR about the turnover of people with 5.5 to 8 years >under their belts who are bailing with their stock options because >it ain't a fun place to work anymore. Testers, developers, UE, >you name it. > >I can gripe because I was there. I never seem to recall seeing >your name on any internal e-mail. > >Oh yeah, this is coming through a remailer, because I'm reading >the list at work. And I doubt BillG would appreciate my opinions >being sent out over MS resources. | Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> - Webpages for sale! Se habla JavaScript! | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp | Autoresponder: send email w/subject of "send resume" or "send PGPKEY"

1 0

Unbreakable Hoax
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Mon Aug 19 11:55:19 1996 > > DISCORDIAN SOCIETY SUPER SECRET CRYPTOGRAPHIC CYPHER CODE > > Of possible interest to all Discordians, this information is herewith > release > from the vaults of A.I.S.B., under the auspices of Episkopos Dr. > Mordecai > Malignatius, KNS. > > SAMPLE MESSAGE: ("HAIL ERIS") > > CONVERSATION: > A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z > 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 > > STEP 1. Write out the message (HAIL ERIS) and put all the vowels at the > end > (HLRSAIEI) > STEP 2. Reverse order (IEIASRLH) > STEP 3. Convert to numbers (9-5-9-1-19-18-12-8) > STEP 4. Put into numerical order (1-5-8-9-9-12-18-19) > STEP 5. Convert back to letters (AEHIILRS) > > This cryptographic cypher code is GUARANTEED TO BE 100% UNBREAKABLE. I found an optimisation to reduce computation time: Replace steps 1 to 5 by the following step a: STEP a. Sort the string according to the alphabet. The properties of the algorithm are still the same, it's unbreakable (unfortunately also by the originator, but that's a petty detail). ;-) - ------< fate favors the prepared mind >------ Remo Pini rp(a)rpini.com PGP: http://www.rpini.com/crypto/crypto.html - ----< words are what reality is made of >---- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMhg6ChFhy5sz+bTpAQHlZggAwr3W4+XGpF+yqd2D/8YFbBK4v+ddjlSB Wgjd7xU4N+KB0bRcNLMZzdiHVyeLMoi6TMmxTNarhAzqTmn5dEjhwysSkWxWsKUo cK7T3pXO5A33r+Htv6L6W1mTlFhIW6neFM45P4NQgYdYwhPJAP8B+xMy0z0OIcoM BHwvmaDZFJVY6ps/T23gClzKDWQI8XDFbGyL8iNNefRXKWnwLS3YZgRXGKJD9BrX R/LtW1KzKJk63tPFWngehXItQc2WeuCdR/BhO9hCVN66j4B7t40d9e4mxCkr2f/Z kqhaI9Cl81BA/Xj508sLADgq3NGa6ps7dIFg6Js+UD7K9NIuAfg/jg== =qkkB -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: US Taxes on X-Pats (getting off topic)
by Stephen Cobb 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:24 PM 8/18/96 -0400, you wrote: >As I understand the proposal, the immigrant-benefits thing would be for >immigrants admitted AFTER the act was, uh, enacted. So, no ex-post-facto >problems. > > I know this is getting way off topic...but what I am not clear about is this: 1. Americans living and working in London used to be eligible for certain benefits from the British social security system, into which they are required to pay. There is a reciprocal arrangement between the US and UK on soc sec benefits and payments. The new US law seems to alter that, which could affect the US citizen living in London, as in, "sorry mate, you can't come in here with that knife wound, not without your cheque book you can't." 2. Making legal immigrants living in the US pay soc sec "taxes" without being eligible for benefits sounds pretty unfair, even "unamerican." Maybe someone who knows more about the law in these matters can clarify. Stephen

2 1