December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Filtering out Queers is OK
by Troy Denkinger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:07 PM 7/18/96 -0700, you wrote: [Cerridwyn Llewyellyn's text snipped] [Lucid argument snipped, I was with you until right around here] >I see nothing wrong in this. Anyone who disagrees is, of course, free to >set his filters differently, but not to insist that my filters be changed. >And the government is not free to pass any laws about what filter sites can >and can't do. We have an interesting problem here, though. You say that the government has no right to tell you how to set your filter; no doubt about that, imo. However, most people who use these filters are going to be quite happy to allow some corporate entity the privilege of setting their filters for them and, if the consumer should ask about criteria and such, they are told that that's a trade secret. So, people will be allowing a corporate entity that exists for profit to set their filters for them. This is a very scary thing and perhaps even more frightening than having the government do it. I think that the people on this list tend to maintain a healthy scepticism toward the various TLAs, but we have to remember that a large, multinational corporation has not even got a sense of a greater "national good" or even "national security" to guide it. [snip] I'll preface my following remarks by saying that I'm not a libertarian. >Some parents simply get tired of spending time each night trying to undo >the propaganda taught in many public school, such as books like "I Have Two >Mommies." Many of these parents eventually give up and put their kids in >religious or private schools (even though they continue to pay taxes for >schools their own children are no longer using). First point first. The "propaganda" taught in schools is generally aimed at teaching our children how to think. Perhaps rote learning and cultural naivete make us all comfortable at night and let us sleep better, but in a world where critical thinking is undervalued I'd rather have my and my childrens' views challenged than constantly affirmed. (Btw, I have no children at this moment, so it's quite possible to contend I'm talking out my ass here; time will tell.) Public school funding is way off topic, so I'll concede your "point" and let it slide. [Now the meat of the queer bashing, how charming. Sad to see you sully what was a decent argument up to this point with ignorant foolishness] >Queers are, as far as I'm concerned, perfectly free to practice their >AIDS-spreading practices to any and all receptive anuses they can find, but >I eschew this lifestyle and will fight to the death for this right to avoid >their practices from being forced on me or my children (if I had any, which >I don't). When was the last time a homosexual attempted to force their practices on you? I'll leave your fictitious children out of it for the moment. Are you an active eschewer or simply a theoretical eschewer? Have you ever been hit on by a gay person? I have; I told them I wasn't gay and that was that. No one forced their "AIDS-spreading practices" on me. >I think of AIDS as "evolution in action." Retroviruses which have existed >for millenia now find new vectors for spreading in our population. I cry no >tears for those dying of AIDS, and work to reduce to tax dollars spent on >such things as "AIDS research." Let those who introduced the new vector pay >for the research. I usually read your posts to this list and often find them insightful, however the above statement leaves me wondering if some ignoramus has taken control of your keyboard or if the above was a simple, but remarkable, typing error. Following your reasoning, it's also proper to say that cancer and heart disease as well as violent crime resulting in death of a victim are also "evolution in action" isn't it? Your assertions are absurd and unfounded. Your final point that those who "introduced the new vector" should pay for the research for a cure continues to spotlight your inchoate notions on this topic. Pray tell, who introduced the vector? Who was responsible for the spread of the virus? Who are the victims of this disease? Who are the future victims of this disease--do they have to pay because obviously they're engaged in some kind of risky behaviour? What part does an unresponsive worldwide health structure have to pay? How responsible are you for the social blight that leads the underclasses to participate in risky behaviour through hopelessness or lack of education? Really, Mr. May, look further than your own front yard for a change. You live in a world -- welcome to it. Troy Denkinger

6 6

Encrypted files in terror case
by Joe Thomas 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Excerpts from a N.Y. Times News Service piece available at http://www.nando.net/newsroom/ntn/info/071896/info12_18308.html : NEW YORK (Jul 18, 1996 02:00 a.m. EDT) -- In the seven weeks since the trial of Ramzi Ahmed Yousef began, the case, charging a plot to blow American jumbo jets out of the sky, has come to hinge on one off-white laptop computer. [Most of the story, dealing with the defense contention that Philipine police altered files on the laptop, deleted.] Several witnesses reported that some computer files were in code, part of which the police could not decipher. Last week, after the jury adjourned for lunch, Duffy [the judge in the case] prodded the defense to point out that encoding files was not unusual and that some software programs offer such an option. "I don't want the jury to think that encryption is something that only bad guys do," Duffy said.

1 0

Re: Netscape download requirements
by Cerridwyn Llewyellyn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I realize you're probably overloaded with email/etc, but as you don't read c'punks, I'll take a chance with a personal note anyway... >> Well one 'ITAR gangsta' can alwas upload the linux version to a >> 'liberated ftp site'. >Great. Convince the government to withdraw our permission >and never to give it again while the current laws stand. >Please don't do this. Allow the government to think that we think it has the right to give us their permission and we've lost everything. The government should need OUR permission, not the other way 'round. To give the government the impression that we will bow to it's power on these matters may be financially beneficial for a corporation, but is unacceptable and humiliating for free individuals. >I'd bet on the first. Why screw with this? We worked hard >to make this possible and you want to ruin it. Sheesh. Because freedom doesn't come in degrees, it's all or nothing. >"I hate the government so I'll blow up a federal building >and then the FBI will get more money and attention and >power and, um, that'll show 'em, er, ah....." Exporting crypto-systems and killing people is comparing apples and hand grenades. Please come up with a relevant analogy. >For those of you who think some of our info requests go too far: well, >my position to the US was: I want to do a download. I'll do what it >takes. Given all the ITAR vagueness and total lack of case law, I >think both sides did very well. While I don't agree with the While I am one of those who believe your info requests do go too far, I also appreciate the fact that you wouldn't be able to "do a download" without it. I thank you for your efforts on these fronts, and have two things to say regarding: 1) Please don't chastise individuals who take direct action and use civil disobediance as a measure to change bad laws and policies (ie by making your companies software available internationally). When done on a mass scale, the long-term benefits FAR outweigh the short term consequences. While you as a corporation find it much more difficult to take such actions, as they would most likely ruin your corporation, individuals acting in this capacity cannot be ruined quite so readily. 2) Please don't misuse the information you gain by logging all your network traffic. I like using Navigator, and would hate to have to give up using it due to some breach of trust by Netscape regarding someone's personal info. >wrong place to wage battle. Rather than attack some odd piece >of enforcement, participate in the debate over the regulations >themselves. Strides are being made. This is a good time for >your voice to be heard. If you don't like this mechanism, don't >use it. It's your choice. I agree mostly. I would rephrase, however, to say: In addition to attacking odd pieces of enforcement, participate in the debate over the regulations themselves. Besides, contrary to your gist, this is probably one of the most prominent pieces of enforcement, and therefore a very logical candidate for attack. //cerridwyn//

8 18

Re: ANNOUNCEMENT: PGPfone Beta 7 Now Available for Download
by Robin Powell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>>>> In article <1.5.4.32.19960718150222.0030bf9c(a)giasdl01.vsnl.net.in>, Arun Mehta <amehta(a)giasdl01.vsnl.net.in> writes: > In response to my question about how I might use PGPfone without my ISP knowing, > At 10:52 16/07/96 -0400, Robin Powell wrote: >> >> Hmm... This looks like a _really_ good place for stego. Granted, you >> might get a significant slow down, but it might be worth it depending >> on your needs. > Wouldn't that be very, very slow? It would suffice if I could > have the ISP think that the packets were for irc, or something > else they allow... I actually wasn't reffering to your particular situation so much as a general comment. Having a game of nettrek with encrypted voice in the unused packets would be _very_ secure, I should think... -Robin

1 0

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids
by law＠Samoa.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I prefer to keep a large jar of marbles available in the entry room, aoupled with a hard floor, it makes it a bit tricky for an entry team towork properly.. You can probably check out your local crack house for tips on preventing forced entry..there seems to be a constant race between LEO entry tactics and what the drug dealer do to defend themselves.. I might also suggest that you check out Bo Gritz'z SPIKE phase 8 video tape http://www.bogritz.com/products8.html "Perhaps one of most exciting phases and controversial. In Phase 8 you learn Close Quarters Combat (CQC). You'll learn how to identify friend or foe so that you don't shoot a friend. You'll also learn how to clear a room safely and identify a terrorist and hostage." SPIKE 8 also has a good section on room defense. but then who am I to talk. bob's lawyer Vinnie Moscaritolo ------------------ "friends come and friends go..but enemies accumulate." http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/ Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A

1 0

Re: US versions of Netscape now available
by liberty＠gate.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [I've wanted, and tried (honest!) to stay out of this emerging flamewar, but David Sternlight <david(a)sternlight.com> wrote: <...> >It doesn't "leak overseas" as if there were some regrettable lapse in the >plumbing. Someone has to commit a felony violation of Federal law. Also known as "civil disobedience," a dangerous concept which is probably being taught today in civics classes in highschools across the nation. [HORRORS!] On a more serious note, I think that the requirements on the Netscape download page might actually be a "Good Thing," since they expose the public, in an election year, to the info-lust of the GAK crowd in a way that cypherpunks alone never could. I, too, wish that "my life as an arms trafficker," or the CJR book/t-shirt requests, or some of the wilder stuff like Vince's export-a-cryptosystem-to-Anguilla page were linked to Netscape's page discussing ITAR requirements, but I fully understand that Netscape is a business and that they must deal, on a continuing basis, with the government. The government officials whose jobs depend on stupid regs. can be rather humor-impaired. JMR Regards, Jim Ray -- DNRC Minister of Encryption Advocacy "It is long past time to end the laughable presumption that voters who can easily cope with the choices offered at Burger King are somehow 'confused' by more than two choices at the voting booth." -- me Defeat the Duopoly! Vote "NOTA," not Slick/Dull in November. Harry Browne for President. Jo Jorgensen for Vice-president. http://www.HarryBrowne96.org/ ___________________________________________________________________ PGP id.E9BD6D35 51 5D A2 C3 92 2C 56 BE 53 2D 9C A1 B3 50 C9 C8 <mailto:liberty@gate.net> http://www.shopmiami.com/prs/jimray Coming soon, the "Pennies For Perot" page. Keep billionaires off welfare! ___________________________________________________________________ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Freedom isn't Freeh. iQCVAwUBMe5TwW1lp8bpvW01AQFbpgP/aic2ShJ5N09eVJLxZAUfkP1FsNlNRdFY MNgLvE8+0PnlLoXA2Js5HVo7Zad7URYrtwrSG2C7MwPcs6zwXgxLT6pf+oCg05/m fqaGbc/bWFLTyJDV/+BNEZCWRXPr19FvHv+0NNEVYbQ81IuQsLIgBf/E3g2KXD6X Ma44rCMPTFU= =JR+d -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

RE: Cypherpunks and Toad.com
by nobody＠zifi.genetics.utah.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

root@HellSpawn wrote: >I'd like to put the words > >Cypherpunks(a)toad.com > >On a tee-shirt. Is cypherpunks, toad.com, or the combination thereof >copyrighted or trademarked or otherwise limited for use? Not that I know of, and you are of course free to do anything you want, but I urge you to leave off the "@toad.com" to prevent clueless subscription requests/noise. There are a number of cpunk tshirts already, one of which contains TCM's sigfile, so the word is likely not copyrighted???

2 1

Re: Making encoding out of an authentication cipher
by David F. Ogren 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To: EVERHART(a)Arisia.GCE.Com, cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Thu Jul 18 12:44:15 1996 > Suppose you have a secure hash function H(msg) that delivers a random > long period set of hash bits for msg, which is computationally infeasible > to invert and such that the value of H(msg) depends very sensitively on > all bits of msg. These things are used for authentication and tend to > be > all over the world. > > Now suppose I have a key and apply the following transform, where "+" > will mean binary exclusive OR. > > Cipher: > H(key) + M(1) = C(1) > H(key+M(1)) + M(2) = C(2) > H(key+M(2)) + M(3) = C(3) > > and so on where M(n) is the message and C is the enciphered message. > > Decipher: > > H(key) + C(1) = M(1) > H(key+M(1)) + C(2) = M(2) > H(key+M(2)) + C(3) = M(3) > > and so on. > > If the hash function is cryptographically strong, is this or is this > not > a strong cipher? Are there fast hash functions around? > This, along with several other methods (Karn, Luby-Rackoff and MDC are some others) have been suggested in order to convert a hash function into and encryption algorithm. And while the method you suggest has not been broken (at least to my knowledge) there are at least two major problems: 1. It is slow. This method would appear to be approximately the speed of MDC. And MDC (using SHA, what appears to be the most secure hash) is (very roughly) 5 times slower than Blowfish and 3 times slower than IDEA. And although MDC is faster than 3DES in software, 3DES could easily outpace MDC in hardware. 2. (To directly quote Bruce Schneier from Applied Cryptography, page 353) "While these constructions can be secure, they depend on the choice of the underlying hash function. A good one-way hash function doesn't necessarily make a secure encryption algorithm. Cryptographic requirements are different. For example, linear cryptoanalysis is not a viable attack against one-way hash functions, but works against encryption algorithms." (Any typos are mine.) - -- David F. Ogren | ogren(a)concentric.net | "A man without religion is like a fish PGP Key ID: 0x6458EB29 | without a bicycle" - ------------------------------|---------------------------------------- Don't know what PGP is? | Need my public key? It's available Send a message to me with the | by server or by sending me a message subject GETPGPINFO | with the subject GETPGPKEY -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMe5p4uSLhCBkWOspAQFzLQf+J7VGyboBIb4/x2uT3ACs/xgMP11EnggF 6xnrT/TalqJofF1KcEGa3+DgfRRSAn0lxe2jGnLRCAj85zNwXNBy6V4A9pr/0Ldg lD0aHpDFBRXZngqHtCANce8OJvC/EwPbotOuFR+V2vwrB7CHD+4XlNxcfcWDZN7i /ffD6YdUnOpKtvj5ElmPmbOfODC10XD35nRbu1NMurmJQESA14Ohzk9KhRzVkNtv pYkwcCqkR2kWGnWSkew9Zfw4U+IOdFiwb9etgiOEl86hM38cK1SM1RxArEfW3vIw k2EM6o/rF4OIiDUYlJ3STxYAn7kAnOQ6PeYeUu48WmX1Y3q05qmFrQ== =Hj2r -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: US versions of Netscape now available
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:35 AM 7/17/96 -0700, Yap Remailer wrote: >Have you heard any reports of anyone successfully downloading it >period? Netscape always times out in the middle of a download. I >think the server is so overloaded that it's actually impossible to >download the software. Yep. Got it just after the announcement. Came through fine. (After that, i could not get it to download anything, but the first try worked fine.) Sounde like it is overloaded. (Of course, since it is mentioned on their homepage and they only have one machine serving it, what do you expect?) >I sure wish there were an ftp site overseas somewhere, then I could >actually get the damned thing. Give it a week and i am sure that someone will have it available. Something announced this far and wide will manage to leak out somewhere... --- 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: #E-CASH: PRODUCT OR SERVICE?
by Steven Seyffert 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Part of original message below Well Stig, the world is getting crazier by the second..... What about the dutch man that made a trademark out of the name 'Route 66' combined with the highway sign. He got it and now has a nice swimming pool.........of about 100 meters long.......and it's heated! -- ________________________________________________________________________ Steven Seyffert Webmaster at http://www.sale.nl/ Korenbloemstraat 17 3551 GM, Utrecht Utrecht, the Netherlands +31 (0)30-2441251 webmaster(a)sale.nl private: steven(a)knoware.nl ---------- : From: Stig <stig(a)hackvan.com> : To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com : Subject: Re: #E-CASH: PRODUCT OR SERVICE? : Date: woensdag 17 juli 1996 5:00 : : > btw: I'm surprised DigiCash didn't file for a European Trademark, : > but opted for Benelux and US protection. : : Perhaps this has already been voiced on the main list (I get a filtered : helping or two of cypherpunks), but *I'm* surprised that such a generic name : as 'Ecash' was granted trademark status anywhere. : : It's like giving Microsoft a trademark on the term 'Email'... It's nuts! : Was the term ecash not in use before DigiCash showed up on the scene? : : Stig : : :

1 0