December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Aghast..
by TQDB 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I couldn't believe my eyes when reading through Inter@ctive Week's "The Driving Forces of Cyberspace" Top 25 list I saw that Louis J. Freeh, Director of the FBI received an Honorable Mention because of him supposedly believing that "Encryption is an inalienable right." I suppose that isn't necessarily a lie, but it would need the word "Weak" added on to the front in order to qualify it. Anyway, I was quite disappointed in seeing their poor choice of this candidate. .TQDB -=| T.Q.D.B. - tqdb(a)wichita.fn.net - http://www.feist.com/~tqdb |=- "The term 'hacker' is not necessarily derogatory. A small percentage of them give the rest a bad name." --Special Agent Andrew Black, FBI SF Computer Crime Squad

1 0

re: Gilmore / Logos
by nobody＠cypherpunks.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Heh. Think again. Logos is obviously someone who has a lot of time on his/her hands. Consider the volume of Gilmore over the last several months compared to the volume of Logos over the last several days. Gilmore has quite a bit more on his mind than how people behave on CP. Logos' identity is clearly not Gilmore. I doubt Gilmore even reads CP anymore. So who _is_ Logos. We know that Logos: 1)Tim May suspects who Logos is 2)Is a prolific poster 3)Intends to combat DLV/DT and other Detweilers The oddest tidbit yet is Tim May's posting to the *list* "P.S. I certainly hope this "Logos" nym is not who I suspect it is, as this will surely end our Real World friendship. A fucking bozo." This post clearly is an act of misdirection. If May had a personal bone to pick with someone he actually knows than what purpose does it serve to announce this to the list? Nothing less than to preempt the obvious assertation that Logos is Tim May. W.W. Brierson

1 0

Re: The Science Generations
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:12 AM 12/6/96 -0800, Dale Thorn wrote: >I would guess that those who became and remained successful technically >(as opposed to becoming "business people") were using HP computers and >such in the 1970s. I for one was a heavy user then, and PETs, Apples, >Radio Shack, etc. computers weren't reliable enough for serious work. I guess those people using VisiCalc on the Apple ][ weren't doing serious work :-). (Also the many small businesses using these early machines for AR, Accounting etc.) Me, I was doing OS programming on IBM 370s. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The lottery is a tax on | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | those who can't do math. | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | - Who 1st said this? | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

2 1

Re: Laptops and TEMPEST
by thad＠hammerhead.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'll bet that the laptop that was radiating stuff was doing it from the external VGA port that many laptops have, rather than from the LCD screen. thad -- Thaddeus Beier thad(a)hammerhead.com Visual Effects Supervisor 408) 287-6770 Hammerhead Productions http://www.got.net/people/thad

1 0

Re: Systems with weak crypto, was: The House Rules At The Permanent VirtualCypherpunks Party
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:46 AM 12/6/96 -0500, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >If an entrepreneur wants to sell a new electrical gizmo and wants an >independent review of its safety, he pays $$$ for it. Apparently one of the >functions of the new brand of "cypher punks" is to provide a similar service >for free. Sorry, I'm not a part of it, and I'm not *that* interested in Don's >proposal. I have better use for my time. However, I assume that you have no objection to others reviewing Don't proposal for free (Actually for reputation). > >I also don't think that the ease of breaking the code should be the only >consideration in evaluating a low-end cryptographic product. ... > >... If someone wants to market (and support) a crypto package for >the masses and gets the masses to deploy it, I take my hat off to them. It >doesn't matter if the code itself can be cracked as easily as the codes used >in PKZIP or MS Excel or MS Word (reportedly). If the users discover that the >code isn't strong enough for their needs, they'll upgrade to stronger codes. >The path from weak crypto to strong crypto is much shorter than the path from >no crypto to some crypto. > >If the user interface and [did you mean "is" - bf] logical and transparent >and provides hooks to >replace the weak (non-export-controlled) crypto being shipped with a stronger >one (say, by FTPing a DLL) then it's a Good Thing. Good interfaces are definitely something needed for the widespread adoption of crypto, either strong or weak. However, the general opinion I have heard is that UIs with easily replaced crypto are covered by ITAR. >Don is doing a Good Thing and the "cypher punks" are doing an evil thing. If Don is contributing to better interfaces, then I agree he is doing a good thing. If all he is doing is proposing a new algorithm and describing it with, to be charitable, non-standard uses of well defined terms, then I disagree. I strongly disagree that cypherpunks are doing an evil thing by exposing the weaknesses in anyone's (including Don's) crypto system. There are many ways to contribute, and publicizing the facts about a system are one of them. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bill Frantz | The lottery is a tax on | Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | those who can't do math. | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | - Who 1st said this? | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

2 2

RE: Silence is not assent (re the Vulis nonsense)
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Dale Thorn If you could analogize the list to a human society, then you might understand that a pattern of decadence can set in here as it does in the more visible society, as is run from Washington DC, etc. It is my hope to make a contribution here (as in the more visible society) to fight off some of that decadence, even when I get beat up on for it. ................................................. There is a huge the difference between a society of people relating to each other based on principles of coercion vs an extemporaneous society of individuals who make their own decisions (daily) about when/where/how long they will associate with another. The society run by Washington,D.C. expects that people will have no choice but to fly in formation in the direction set by the leader who represents the majority (sort of). The virtual "society" of the cpunks is only based on their interest in opening up their mail and reading a few messages here & there according to their mood of the day or the moment. It is true that formal societies, like the one which was initially intended by The Founders (of the US), often run afoul of the original purpose for which it was begun. They decay for many reasons. This is precisely one of the elements in the background of the cpunks thinking ("the founders" and others) about societies and the "ties that bind" (supposedly) us to each other: the interest in being released from that supposition that we are bound to each other and are obligated to maintain a relationship of some kind (as determined by the PC moral 'authorities'). The concepts are too involved to discuss the details on this list, but the fact that individuals do not maintain a steady and predictable course throughout their lifetime, or the lifetime of the projects which they begin, is the very reason why your attempts at "fighting off the decadence" are doomed: the objects of your attention may not hang around on the list long enough to be reformed. Remember the purpose of the list is discussion & information, not moral rehabilitation (except as it clears the intellectual air regarding privacy & potential crimes to humanity). It could happen that some decadent subscriber would "see the light" and behave themselves, but if it does I expect it would be an indirect side-effect and the result of their own desire to change their style & manners. .. Blanc > >

1 0

Proof that "cypher punks" have complete degenerated...
by John Fricker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM (dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com) said something about Proof that "cypher punks" have complete degenerated... on or about 12/6/96 9:17 AM > >No one even commented on the latest Dr. Dobbs issue. Oh? If you had something to follow up on my postings re: RIPEMD-160 and the Bozoki interview I didn't see them. --j ----------------------------------- | John Fricker (jfricker(a)vertexgroup.com) | -random notes- | My PGP public key is available by sending me mail with subject "send pgp key". | www.Program.com is a good programmer web site. -----------------------------------

1 0

Re: Aghast..
by Will Rodger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Folks - just for the record - the Freeh summary was a CLEAR typo, or at least vague in its meaning. Someone meant to say Freeh thought it was an *alienable* right. So much for cute phraseology. Then again, anyone familiar with the numerous pieces we've run on crypto would likely have guessed at our meaning. Sen. Conrad Burns, after all, was #21 on our list. > I couldn't believe my eyes when reading through Inter@ctive Week's > "The Driving Forces of Cyberspace" Top 25 list I saw that Louis J. > Freeh, Director of the FBI received an Honorable Mention because of him > supposedly believing that "Encryption is an inalienable right." I > suppose that isn't necessarily a lie, but it would need the word "Weak" > added on to the front in order to qualify it. Anyway, I was quite > disappointed in seeing their poor choice of this candidate. And yes, my face is at least as my hair, right now....... Will Rodger Washington Bureau Chief Inter@ctive Week

1 0

Re: Aghast..
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Sender: e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Will Rodger <rodger(a)worldnet.att.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Fri, 06 Dec 1996 16:48:05 -0500 From: Will Rodger <rodger(a)worldnet.att.net> To: Multiple recipients of <e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com> Subject: Re: Aghast.. Folks - just for the record - the Freeh summary was a CLEAR typo, or at least vague in its meaning. Someone meant to say Freeh thought it was an *alienable* right. So much for cute phraseology. Then again, anyone familiar with the numerous pieces we've run on crypto would likely have guessed at our meaning. Sen. Conrad Burns, after all, was #21 on our list. > I couldn't believe my eyes when reading through Inter@ctive Week's > "The Driving Forces of Cyberspace" Top 25 list I saw that Louis J. > Freeh, Director of the FBI received an Honorable Mention because of him > supposedly believing that "Encryption is an inalienable right." I > suppose that isn't necessarily a lie, but it would need the word "Weak" > added on to the front in order to qualify it. Anyway, I was quite > disappointed in seeing their poor choice of this candidate. And yes, my face is at least as my hair, right now....... Will Rodger Washington Bureau Chief Inter@ctive Week --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "The cost of anything is the foregone alternative" -- Walter Johnson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

KIDNEYS STOLEN FROM A NAKED DRUGGED MAN
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

2 1