December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

NEW "Black Box" Technology!!
by omex＠cyberservices.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This message is being brought to you by EMAIL BLASTER 2.0 software. If you would like a FREE copy of this software or any of our other HOT programs ABSOLTELY FREE call our FAX ON DEMAND number at 213-960-7822. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I am sending this to you because I feel that you are an honest person, with a sincere desire to improve your station in life. If I am incorrect, please excuse my intrusion, and simply hit reply to be removed from my database. If you would like additional information, simply send me email with "info" in the subject area. Thanks!! NEW "Black Box" Technology !! GET IN ON THE TOP LEVEL of the Hottest New Program 1. GLOBAL COM TECHNOLOGY -GCT- is the name of the new company created to handle the basket of telecom- munications breakthrough technologies we're going to represent. It is based in Chesapeake, VA. GCT has been put together by a highly seasoned group including MAJOR individuals in the Telecom industry. They have selected Kerry J. Young, a skilled executive and administrator, to be President and CEO. They have also assembled a blue ribbon support team headed by a top level executive from one of the "big three" telephone companies. This combined powerhouse of high-level Telecom experience, management, administration, marketing and financial depth promises to make GCT one of the world's premier telecommunications companies. Their mission: To create the world's largest MLM network to deliver advanced Telecom technology at the most competitive price. In short, they plan on delivering products that will stand the industry on its ear! 2. GCT has set up a 24-hour information line: 415-273-6121. Call it NOW! It is powerful. It will introduce several of the key players and answer questions about the products, how they work and how our business will be structured. 3. The company has announced the official launch date: Monday, March 3, 1997. On Saturday, the 15th of March, GCT will be holding simultaneous training's/meetings in eight cities across the United States. The locations are: Atlanta + Chicago + Dallas + Honolulu + Los Angeles + Orlando + Seattle + Washington, DC. The company will add additional cities as you indicate your preference. Seating is extremely limited and must be reserved in advance by calling an 800# which will be made available within a few days on the GCT hotline. Price: $59 - includes Distributor Kit! 4. What will we be offering? We will have a FULL RANGE of products -- with far more advanced technology and far better pricing than is currently being offered by the several, hastily launched GCT wannabees. The first products announced include a prepaid calling card at 9.9 cents per minute, long distance service at 7.9 cents and WE HAVE the long awaited "black box" technology! It comes in three versions (from basic to advanced) and will wholesale: $39 - $69. In addition, there are several more advanced products which will be brought into our portfolio. As more information becomes available, it is increasingly clear: We are poised to bring the world what everyone has been promised -- but ONLY WE CAN DELIVER! 6. Beware of other companies who have attempted to preempt GCT by implying they can duplicate the various products that we already have on board. This program is not merely an application form and compensation plan offering a single, 7.9 cent product. GCT is a major new Telecom company assembling a full range of leading edge telecommunications technology. The success of this program requires the contacts and know-how of the Telecom industry that can only come from years of experience at the highest levels. Bringing these exceptional products to market is not a project for well-meaning amateurs. 7. The only way to participate in the program described above is to join GCT. They are the ONLY COMPANY with the contracts in hand, technical skill and telecommunications experience to deliver. Global Connections is a group of very experienced marketers and networkers who have an Independent Distributorship positioned directly at the top level of GCT. 8. We are signing up the frontline on Monday & Tuesday... I can place you on the top levels... Email me for registration form at: omex(a)cyberservices.com Put "BLACK BOX" in the subject box.

1 0

Re: DES and RSA crypto hardware from the free world
by bs-org＠c2.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 21:32 1997-02-15 -0200, John Ioannidis wrote: Sorry to correct you, but uti-maco is an old german company ... >I believe uti-Maco (a belgian company) has been using the Pijnenburg chips >for their boards. However, last I checked with them (about half a year ago) >the price of the boards was pretty steep -- of the order of $1K. > >Anyway, if the boards Peter is referring to are ready in the next couple >of months, I volunteer to write drivers for Linux and *BSD*. > >/ji >

1 0

Re: Excerpt on SPAM from Edupage, 11 February 1997
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:45 PM 2/15/97 -0600, Igor Chudov wrote: >Roy M. Silvernail wrote: ... >> Or that the money wasn't there in the first place (absent a trusted >> signature system), or the key doesn't exist, or the wrong key is >> offered, or the sender put the same e-dollar on all 60000 mails sie >> sent and it's already been redeemed. > >Well, if the trusted party performs the encryption by both recipient's >public key and the "retrieval key", the problem that you mention can >be avoided. Yeah. I as a spam artist send the "proof" message through the e-cash verification center with the Send To: field returning it to a mail exploder. Each receipient gets the same dollar. This assumes that the To: field is not hashed into the verification signature, and that the verification works like a glorified remailer. (cash added on a separate channel).

1 0

Re: DFA
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Paul Bell wrote: >does anyone know what has happened to DFA, and the people who >just a few months ago were publishing such encouraging results? There seems be sustained investigation of DFA, offensive and defensive, by Biham and Shamir, by Anderson and Kuhn, by the Bellcore team, by Quisquater and others. However, the smartcard manufacturers appear to have a role in dampening publicity about the ongoing research, or at least diminishing the claims of effectiveness of DFA. Carol Francher, of Motorola, for example, writes in February IEEE Spectrum: Technology is a wonderful thing but criminals, too, can use it as new equipment and techniques become available or less expensive the barriers to cracking a system may weaken. Recently Bellcore announced a paper, "Cryptanalysis in the presence of hardware faults" (available at www.bellcore.com) that proposed a theoretical method for breaking an asymmetric encryption code once a computer (or a smartcard microcontroller) had been forced into faulty behavior. The Smart Card Forum, a multi-industry membership organization headquartered in Tampa, Fla., has stated that it does not regard this approach as a real-world risk, since in smartcard applications more than one technique is used to protect the security of the entire system. But the Bellcore methodology for breaking algorithms -- as well as similar theoretical approaches, such as the one taken by two Israeli researchers, Eli Biham and Adi Shamir -- highlights the need to analyze and evolve the security of any system continually. -- "In your pocket: smartcards." <http://jya.com/tee08.htm> Several of the DFA-type researchers have commented on the smartcard industry's reluctance to publicize security weaknesses when the push is on to increase consumer trust and use; see, for example, Anderson and Kuhn at: http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/users/rja14/tamper.html Quisquater and the SG group also note the reluctance of smartcard mass-marketers to own up to security shortcomings of which their own engineers know and fret. Meanwhile, the DFA proponents and opponents are eagerly absorbing the continuing DFA-relatged reports, quietly watching one another, and both sides eying the booming smartcard market for lucrative rewards, as Ms. Francher suggests: licit and il.

2 1

Thanks to John Gilmore for running cypherpunks mailing list
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, cypherpunks(a)toad.com goes down in four days. I would like to thank John Gilmore for all his efforts that he spent to run the list. Administering a huge mailing list like cypherpunks is a tough job, requiring a lot of dedication, time and patience. John, along with other cypherpunks, created a unique online community that generated many valuable ideas. This community helped a great deal to increase crypto awareness of the masses. I personally joined cypherpunks for very arkane reasons, but later found out a lot of useful information. The moderation experiment failed by many reasons, but the last month should not distract us from what John did over last several years. Again, thanks to John for his work. - Igor.

1 0

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Kent Crispin writes: > Dave is offering a single mailing list, which, while I am sure Dave is > a great person, still represents a single point of control and a > single point of failure. A distributed mailing list has a potential > for being much more robust, and for supporting a wide range of > viewpoints. I can also offer my participation in the distributed mailing list, if that is what it takes to get cypherpunks free of control interests again. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet A poor man shames us all.

1 0

Bad Headers Added to John Young postings via owner-cypherpunks@sirius.infonex.com
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi! The following headers are from a posting by John Young that looks like it was sent to cypherpunks(a)toad.com, forwarded to cypherpunks(a)sirius.infonex.com and/or cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net, and has the Reply-To: header set to reply to cypherpunks(a)toad.com instead of to John Young.... It looks like the obvious implementation of cypherpunks-style mail header patching, but isn't quite right..... Leads to people sending their John Young mailbot requests to cypherpunks(a)toad.com instead, as some well-known cypherpunks have mistakenly done recently :-) ===================================================== Return-Path: <owner-cypherpunks(a)sirius.infonex.com> X-Sender: jya(a)pop.pipeline.com Date: Sat, 15 Feb 1997 09:04:14 -0500 To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com From: John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> Subject: FBI_100 Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)sirius.infonex.com Reply-To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com X-List: cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net 2-15-97. NYP: "Phone Companies Balk At Latest Plan by FBI." Markoff. ============================================== # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

1 0

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by ISP_Ratings 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dave Hayes wrote: > >> censorship on cypherpunks. However, I think most peoples' opinions >> didn't really turn, or at least people didn't realize how serious >> things were and didn't really care, until Tim May [someone the many >> freedom-knights hate] started criticizing this censorship in extremely >> reasonable messages that were suppressed from both the -edited and >> -flames mailing list. > > Assuming that is true, that people do not care about censorship until > a person with an arbitrary reasonability says something, I would say > that such a group cares not about free speech...even if they think > they do. I agree--and again that is sad. Hopefully many have learned from the experience--that does on occassion really happen. Steve

1 0

FC97: Post-strike airfares
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

One more datablip about FC97 and I'll shut up a bit. Having just promised gratuitously cheap airfares to Anguilla/St. Maarten, I went and called the local branch of American Express Travel and got some actual prices. Their number is 617-868-2600, but AEXP-T has branches everywhere, and, I think, an 800 number, so you might want to get ahold of them that way... Anyway, here's what I got, as of about 20 minutes ago: For departures 2/22/97 with return 3/1/97, Boston Anguilla $ 864 Boston St. Maarten 851 (+ Taxi and short ferry ride to Anguilla) San Francisco Anguilla 828 San Francisco St. Maarten 748 Heathrow Anguilla 1,315 (looks like the strike didn't affect you folks, sorry) All in all, that's as good as the prices we were getting for 14 day advance purchase earlier this month. Not bad, but not completely spectacular. Note that it's cheaper to get to Anguilla or St. Maarten from San Francisco than it is from Boston, so y'all don't have an excuse. Well, possibly seat fatigue, but Sunday on the beach will fix that. I'll check tomorrow to see if the airline yield management software war gives us something better after the weekend's over. Only if fares are significantly lower will I post something here about it, in the interest of nomex conservation. :-). If you *do* decide to fly while the seats are hot, don't forget to register for FC97 first, so we can plan for meals and stuff: <http://www.offshore.com.ai/fc97/> Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by stupidity." -- Jerry Pournelle The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/

1 0

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Against Moderation writes: > I believe homophobia is a great way to bring out the censors in > people. However, inducing censorship is only part of fighting it. You assume that it is an enemy to be fought. While censorship is clearly undesireable, making it an enemy only strengthens it. > You also need respectable people to some in, argue cogently against > the dangers of censorship, perhaps even get some extremely reasonable > articles suppressed, and then spread the word about it. I find the > freedom-knights tactics' extremely lacking in this second, "clean up > and analyze the mess" phase. Part, if not all, of that lack is due to our knowledge of the subjective standard of "respectability" that human beings have. That's the same differentiation used in many censorship attempts, and if we made or supported such differentiations this would undermine any anti-censorship actions we could take. The meta-points are: - What is reasonable to you may or may not be reasonable to me. That is why we refrain from censoring others, since we have no absolute standard of reasonability. - You appear to be concerned with convincing others. We are not concerned with that, since we know that the default for most others is to be invincibly unconvincable. We are simply here to be living models for an arbitrary code of behavior...that behavior being outlined in the Freedom Knights FAQ. - Please remember that you have to judge who is and is not a Freedom Knight by their -actions- and not their claims. > censorship on cypherpunks. However, I think most peoples' opinions > didn't really turn, or at least people didn't realize how serious > things were and didn't really care, until Tim May [someone the many > freedom-knights hate] started criticizing this censorship in extremely > reasonable messages that were suppressed from both the -edited and > -flames mailing list. Assuming that is true, that people do not care about censorship until a person with an arbitrary reasonability says something, I would say that such a group cares not about free speech...even if they think they do. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet Two men were fighting outside Nasrudin's window at dead of night. Nasrudin got up, wrapped his only blanket around himself, and ran outside. As he tried to reason with the drunks, one snatched his blanket and both ran away. "What were they arguing about?" asked his wife when he went in. "It must have been the blanket. When they got that, the fight broke up."

1 0