December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: overview.htm (fwd)
by Nurdane Oksas 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Nurdane Oksas wrote: > > i think it's good also to exercise outdoors as well as your > > indoor nordictrack machines..sun and air is esp. necessary; > > but remember, tanning will kill ya. Yes it will; Not a fan of tanning myself...it also causes lots of skin problems, have seen women age too soon tanning; we don't go outside naked here in NorthEast...do remember; love, oksas!

1 0

WinKrypt
by Frank Willoughby 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Out of curiosity, is anyone familiar with WinKrypt by Syncronsys? I picked up a copy & there is no mention in the documentation which encryption algorithm it uses & what the key lengths are. FWIW, my impression is that the documentation seems to deliberately avoid mentioning the algorithm/key lengths. Hmmmm. (food for thought) I was curious how it compares to McAfee's PC Crypto which uses 40-bit DES or 160-bit Blowfish (user-chooses) & other PC/laptop encryption products. BTW, I would also appreciate your input on any crypto products which you believe to be robust, easy-to-use & secure. (I know I can only have 2 out of 3, but it's worth a try anyway). 8^) Please send marketing info to me directly at: frankw(a)in.net and **NOT** to the entire mailing list. (BTW, I mentioned WinKrypt & PCcrypo because they are the only two which are available at many computer stores as COTS s/w). TIA for your help. Best Regards, Frank

2 1

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

blanc wrote: > From: Dr.Dimitri Vulis > However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should > not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their > civilians > in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. > The U.S.G. has many more resources than most of us to do these things, > including equipment, cooperative troops, money, and recognition from other > governments. If other nations disagree with the U.S.G. they have the > resources to discuss, bargain, negotiate, criticize, form alliances, take > their chances and retaliate, etc. I wish this were true, at least of nations which would be friendly to someone like me (white, Western, etc.). A bully on a school playground can always be knocked down, no matter how big or how vicious he is. Sadly, the U.S. bully cannot be knocked down. Bad enough you get nuclear, chemical, and/or biological stuff waved at you - if you get into a hot war like Desert Storm, your country is carpet-bombed with fleets of B-52's until it is thoroughly debilitated. How does one country get on top and terrorize the whole world? By following Tom Wolfe's intimation concerning the pirates: "The people on the East coast were constantly victimized because they couldn't comprehend just how vicious and ruthless the pirates really were" (quote approximate). People who read this might argue that the "true power" is international now, and not confined to the USA. I say it doesn't matter which end you look at it from, the "true power" has been concentrating and centralizing itself for some years now, and you can use any nation-label you like.

1 0

RE: Fighting the cybercensor
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:30 AM 1/26/97 EST, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >blanc <blancw(a)cnw.com> writes: >> The identifications of self as a citizen who must be identified with the >> vote of a majority, and consequently suffer the perception of oneself as >> someone who "voted to accept restrictions of the net, therefore should not >> be helped against it", is becoming irrelevant. When a distress call goes >> out from someone anywhere on the planet, the assistance and relief may come >> from anyone anywhere who chooses to rally others and provide assistance. >> >> It is not the traditional "we" against "them", and it is not the "citizens >> of the US" helping those who "voted themselves a Hitler into power" or >> "voted themselves into restrictions against free speech". It is "those of >> us who appreciate the liberty in communications technology" against "those >> who would take it away". > >However U.S.G. is able to say that people of Iraq or Lybia or Cuba should >not be permitted on the 'net. It also bombs Iraq and murders their civilians >in retaliation for something their governments supposedly did. "I have a solution to that problem." Seriously! Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see any recognition of this fact. For the benefit of the masses, the AP ("Assassination Politics") solution to, for example, the Iraq problem would be to allow anyone and everyone in the world to donate money towards the death of Saddam Hussein, and any leadership which survives him, until that leadership satisfies the public that they won't be following in Hussein's footsteps. Simple. Economical. And, dare I say it, fair. I believe that the Coalition spent $60 BILLION dollars doing the Iraq war, and they didn't even get rid of Saddam. I'm sure AP would have done the task for under $100 million, and possibly far less. (and that money would have been collected by donation, not stolen in taxes. Much of that money would have come from the Iraqi people themselves, BTW.) There would be few if any civilian casualities, no hunger or poverty caused among the people. Even their soldiers would be relatively unaffected, except that their militaries (as well as ours) would be disbanded. Reminds me of the punchline to that joke. "He sent two boats and a helicopter! What more did you want?!?" Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program
by bernard 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > Newsgroups: comp.security.misc > > * DPT Win 3.xx, 95, NT ENCRYPTION program > > * at; http://www.xs4all.nl/~bernard > > Bernard, thanks for an interesting post. I am Cc-ing your message to > > Cypherpunks mailing list which is ostensibly dedicated to discussions > > of cryptography. > > > > As follows from info on your home page, you do use simple XOR to > > encrypt your data. It was not clear to me though, how do you generate > > the keys to encrypt the data. I am sure that many readers of cypherpunks > > mailing list will be interested, so please send a copy of your reply > > to cypherpunks(a)toad.com. You can enter a short key or import one with command [Get Key]. This is, you point any file, and the key will become the 30000 first characters of this file. You can get this file any where on your machine, the network, the internet, foppy,,,,, If you add (paste or type) or delete characters at the begining of the imported key, the reste will shift right, and this imported key become a new key. You can't remember a key of 30000 chr (so you have to store it) but you can remenber the the change you made (10 to 100 or more chr) and of course, don't store it. Thank you for your interest. DPT dos / DPT16 / DPT32 http://www.xs4all.nl/~bernard

1 0

Re: David Kahn advocates GAK
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:03 AM 1/27/97 GMT, Robert Rothenburg Walking-Owl wrote: >On Thu, 23 Jan 1997 17:32:56 GMT, John Savard <seward(a)netcom.ca> wrote: > >>This is surprising, given that (in Kahn on Codes) Mr. Kahn expressed >>forceful opinions > >>- against certain aspects of export controls, > >>- questioning the value of the NSA's mission, in contrast to social >>demands on government revenues. > >I didn't find his opinions forceful in Codebreakers, 2nd. ed. > >Questioning the NSA's purpose vs. advoctating GAK are not incompatible. > >>However, while I oppose making key escrow mandatory in general, and >>share the general suspicion of a voluntary Clipper, if Mr. Kahn's >>support for Clipper is limited to cellular telephones, then I have no >>quarrel with such a position. > >>Encryption is illegal, without special permission, for use over the >>airwaves, particularly where mobile radio is involved. This is a >>long-standing restriction, and not unreasonable. Private communication >>between people at home is one thing, but allowing criminals to closely >>coordinate their activities on the move is another. It's odd that I can't seem to find the original message here. Contrary to the original claim, encryption over radio is generally legal. (One noted exception to this is ham radio...) Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

RE: Fighting the cybercensor
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> writes: > > Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to > prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see > any recognition of this fact. I said many times that I find AP a very interesting notion, worthy of study. Given how fast online gambling is growing, how soon do we have to wait for a web site for taking bets on deaths of politicians and other prominents? Why not set one up, using "funny money" not convertible to anything? > For the benefit of the masses, the AP ("Assassination Politics") solution > to, for example, the Iraq problem would be to allow anyone and everyone in > the world to donate money towards the death of Saddam Hussein, and any > leadership which survives him, until that leadership satisfies the public > that they won't be following in Hussein's footsteps. Simple. Economical. > And, dare I say it, fair. I have much respect for Saddam Hussein. I understand he's more admired by Iraqi people than, say, the kkklintons are by American people. Saddam even commands the respect of his Iranian enemies. > I believe that the Coalition spent $60 BILLION dollars doing the Iraq war, > and they didn't even get rid of Saddam. I'm sure AP would have done the > task for under $100 million, and possibly far less. (and that money would > have been collected by donation, not stolen in taxes. Much of that money > would have come from the Iraqi people themselves, BTW.) I doubt that they would collect much among the Iraqis: both because Saddam is pretty popular, and because they don't have much cash, thanks to the sanctions. I doubt they'd collect billions or even millions in the Western countries. These were involuntary taxes. Do people really hate Saddam so much as to bet that he'll live and hope to lose their bets to an assassin? I doubt it. And you can't do the standard fundraising trick of collecting some funds, then using them to run media ads soliciting more funds. I suppose Kiwaiti and Saudi sheikhs might bet a few million. (I hate these guys - I'd like to bet on the continuing existence of a basket of sheikhs :-) > There would be few if any civilian casualities, no hunger or poverty caused > among the people. Even their soldiers would be relatively unaffected, > except that their militaries (as well as ours) would be disbanded. > > Reminds me of the punchline to that joke. > > "He sent two boats and a helicopter! What more did you want?!?" Was it really Bush's goal to topple Saddam's government and bring in a U.S.-friendly one that would need billions of dollars of aid? --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com writes: > Dale Thorn wrote: > > 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, > > 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that > > they've just left things as is. > > > Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold > > the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will > > hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between). > > In case of 2, they are probably not worthy of your help. I wholeheartedly agree. By now everyone's painfully aware that there are 3 mailing lists. It's not my responsibily (or Dale's) to encourage cypherpunks subscribers to do what I think is best for them - resubscribe to cypherpunks-unedited. Folks who choose to let Sandy choose what they read and don't read should be free to do that. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

(Fwd) Just Say No to Telcom "Reform"
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thought this might interest you guys. ------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Sun, 26 Jan 1997 13:00:14 -0800 (PST) From: Audrie Krause <akrause(a)igc.apc.org> Subject: Just Say No to Telcom "Reform" To: iaj-futuremedia(a)igc.apc.org * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ACTION ALERT Please re-post where appropriate * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * Dear Friends, On February 8, the first anniversary of the Telecommunications Reform Act of 1996, NetAction and the Center for Educational Priorities are launching a month-long Internet demonstration to call attention to the wide gap between the rhetoric and reality of this sweeping legislation. President Clinton and Congress promised the American people that enactment of the Telecommunications Reform Act would lead to a cornucopia of technological innovations that would change the nation's cultural frontiers, expand our choices, dazzle our eyes, and inform our minds. Instead, we've been censored in cyberspace, subjected to TV ratings systems, and prevented from experiencing the benefits of a truly competitive marketplace by the emergence of "cartels" created by mega-mergers in the telecommunications and media industries. This is not reform! And it's not too late to demand that our decision makers deliver on what they promised us on February 8, 1996: MORE competition, MORE consumer choices, MORE widespread access to information technology. The Center for Educational Priorities and NetAction are spearheading this demonstration in an effort to pressure the Federal Communications Commission and other state and national regulatory agencies to ensure that the Act is implemented in a way that truly benefits the public. We invite you to join this effort by linking to the site at <http://www.cep.org/protest.html> for one month beginning on February 8. By linking to the protest site, you will be adding your voice to a united demand for true telecommunications reform. The site is currently under development. When completed, it will feature brief summaries of the impact the Act has had in its first year on telecommunications and technology policy, media ownership and content, and censorship, along with suggested actions to help ensure that implementation of the Act truly benefits the public. We are also creating extensive links to other organizations working on these issues, as well as to other sites with current information on censorship, mega-mergers, universal service, school hook-ups, and the v-chip. We welcome suggestions for additional links to add. Please let us know if you will participate in the demonstration by contacting NetAction, by email at akrause(a)igc.org, or by phone at 415-775-8674. Thanks! =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906

1 0

RE: overview.htm (fwd)
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On or About 26 Jan 97 at 2:19, blanc wrote: > >Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >>>Jim Choate wrote: > >>>>>Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > >>>>>>>irrelevant(a)nowhere.com wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>Dale Thorn wrote: > > It can be said 100,000 times, but it still comes out the same: > Just as in "The only cure for bad speech is more speech", "the only > cure for 'list-focus-drift' is more on-focus postings". THE PRICE OF FREE SPEECH IS TOLERANCE OF IDEAS THAT WE MAY OBJECT TO. =-=-=-=-=-=- Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906

2 1