December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

30 FREE HI-RES JPEGS TODAY/Wet dreams at work are dismissable offence
by STUFFED NEWS DAILY 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yet another picture bonanza day, with 30 superb jpeg photos squeezed into today's issue of Stuffed. We're pulling out all the stops now we see more and more of you spending a longer time reading the paper. Rest assured, if you want it, it's legal and we can get it, we'll feature it in Stuffed! + PAGE 2 SPREAD - YEOUCH IS SHE HOT! + WRONG WAY WILLY: DR'S BLUNDERS IN THE WORST PLACE IMAGINABLE + HEALTH FOOD WHOREHOUSE: JUST OFF TO DO THE SHOPPING DEAR... + THUMBNAIL HEAVEN: THAT'S WHERE WE WERE WHEN WE COMPILED IT + TODAY'S SEXY STORY: A SECRET AFFAIR + WOMEN ARE EASY: FINALE OF A FABULOUS SERIES + CLIT IN THE CLOSET + YOUR TRUE SEX SECRETS: TODAY A SALESMAN WRITES + MORE OF THE BEST WEB SITES EVER REVIEWED IN EUREKA! + SEXY SURPRISE THUMBS: A SURPRISE WITH EACH CLICK + DATING THE OLD FASHIONED WAY + SUPER HI-RES POSTER PIC: SAVE OR PRINT IT! ----> http://stuffed.net/98/8/31/ <---- Welcome to today's issue of Stuffed. To read it you should click on the URL above. If it is not made clickable by your email program you will need to use your mouse to highlight the URL, copy it and then paste it into your browser (then press Return). This email is never sent unsolicited. Stuffed is the supplement for the Eureka newsletter you subscribed to. Full instructions on unsubscribing are in every issue of Eureka! ----> http://stuffed.net/98/8/31/ <----

1 0

1,500,000 FRESH Email Addresses - JUST $25 !!!
by ftwi＠magnumhosting.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------------------------------------------------------------------- Removal Instructions can be found at the bottom of this page ! ------------------------------------------------------------------- HERE IT IS!! The earnings pontential you have been looking for! FTWI will provide you with 1.5 MILLION EMAIL ADDRESSES FOR ONLY $25. These are all fresh addresses with no duplications. They are all sorted and ready to be mailed. This is the best deal anywhere today for email lists! Imagine selling a product for only $10 and getting only a 1/1000 response. That's $15,000!!! Money making plans, reports, lists, jewelry, art, etc. Whatever you want to sell! People are making millions of dollars right now by doing the same thing! That is why you get so much email from people selling you their product....it works! These 1.5 Million email addresses are yours to keep, so you can use them over and over and they can be downloaded right from the internet or sent by mail on disk....your choice. Extras included with your order: 1. Links to FREE bulk email capable software downloads. 2. Link to 10-day trial software that turns your personal computer into your very own personal mail server! Never use your ISP's SMTP mail server again! 3. Link to 15-day trial email list management software. Great product to handle all your remove requests and filtering. Handles huge lists FAST! 4. 50 FREE Internet marketing reports. Web positioning in search engines, writing effective sales letters & many more. Use them as you wish. Simply print out and complete this order form and send it to us along with your check or money order made payable to: FTWI for only $25. Send addresses via (circle one): DOWNLOAD MAIL (add $3 for shipping and handling) Name: _________________________________________________ Address: ______________________________________________ City: _____________________State: _____Zip: ___________ Phone number:_________________Date: ___/___/___ Email: _______________________________ Valid email address needed for Download orders. Returned checks are subject to $25 NSF Fee Send your order and payment to: FTWI. 4019 Goldfinch, Ste. J San Diego, CA 92103 We offer more services and products for online marketers. For more info visit our site at: http://www.magnumhosting.com/ftwi/ Or email us at: ftwi(a)magnumhosting.com For bulk friendly webhosting and an opportunity to resell and get free bulk service visit: http://www.magnumhosting.com/osg/2248 THANK YOU!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------ This message complies with the proposed United States Federal requirements for commercial e-mail bill, Section 301. For additional info see: http://www.senate.gov/~murkowski/commercialemail/EMailAmendText.html Required Sender Information: FTWI 4019 Goldfinch St, Ste. J San Diego, CA 92103 6194910215 Per Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 1618, further transmissions to you by the sender of this e-mail may be stopped at NO COST to you by sending a reply to ftwi(a)magnumhosting.com with the word "remove" in the subject line. ------------------------------------------------------------------ The Mailing List that you are being mailed from was also filtered against the Global Remove List at: http://remove-list.com Remove-List is a free public service offering to help the general public get removed from bulk mailings lists and has not sent this message. If you want their help please add your name to their list and you will not receive a bulk email from us or any other ethical bulk emailer who filters against their lists. ------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Is Hate Code Speech?
by Albert P. Franco, II 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From: mcw(a)atreus.ncs.ncsc.mil >Subject: Is Hate Code Speech? > >I acknowledge that you're welcome to use whatever variable names you >want in code you write in private. BUt if you want to sell that code, it >should be held to a standard of professionalism. > I think it is interesting that people are speaking of the program as something published for public consumption. Source code for commercial products rarely goes public and compilers do a rather nice job of obscuring human language variable names. Thus if there is any message or coherent agenda in the source code it is highly unlikely that it will be detectable in the executable, which is in fact the product delivered to the public. Since the source code can only be read by insiders/employees then this does tend to make it rather obvious that a form of speech was intended. I won't rehash the fact that non-relevant, human-language-significant variable names (as opposed to x, y, i, & j) are generally unacceptable programming practice. I would make two points; that in todays programming world source code is protected by copyright law as are other forms of expression legally considered speech and source code is intended to document the process and as such communicate ideas--in a broad sense this is a decent description of speech, a written mode of communicating ideas. If someone finds offensive (hate) material in an obscured text (encrypted) intended for limited distribution, does the encryption make it less hateful? does the encryption make it any less a form of speech? does the fact that distribution is limited (assumming the "target" is in the distribution class) make it any less offensive? Is a crime less illegal if it is hidden? (Be careful, on this one...) I think that offensive, probably hateful, speech was intended. So the next step (or for others, a previous step) is to decide whether there are legal grounds for action. There are several laws which do, in fact, make these activities illegal. Most people in the US today agree that overt racism is wrong. Additionally, most "Americans" agree with laws that make it illegal to use/perform "hateful" speech. These are very dangerous laws since they try to tread a very thin line between the freedom of thoughts (and to some degree, actions) and injury to others. When I first settled down to live in Spain and began to pay real attention to the local political scene I was astonished to find people defending the "right" of the radicals to throw stones and metal objects at those persons expressing ideas contrary to theirs (pro-peace, anti-terrorism demonstrations, 1995-6). Fortunately, we hear less and less of this non-sense that physical harm to another is a valid form of personal expression or speech. But the base problem lingers, where do we draw the line of expression of ideas and intent to do harm. It has long been held that shouting "fire" in a crowded building is not a protected form of speech. Nor is libel (forgetting for now the problems of defining or proving it). And where do we draw the line (or does it even matter?) between public and private? And where do expression and action get separated? Thinking about doing something, or telling some one about those thoughts are not generally the same as actually doing it. But where does thought become expression become action? This case doesn't solely revolve around the speech issue...IMO, it also revolves around the public/private issue, and whether or not the government can rightfully "enter" a "private" business place to regulate these matters. Recent history (80 years or so...) shows an increasing tendency for the government to "protect" workers by regulating the workplace. There are health & safety regs, minimum wage regs, etc. The "American" populace has in general supported (and at times demanded) these external limits on the "private" employer/employee relationship. Legal precedent exists. There are two problems here and historically the government has been called upon to keep a balance between "free speech" and "harmful speech" on the one hand and "Privacy" and "Protection" on the other hand. The debate now is with this case which way will (should?) the pendulum swing? More protection (reduction of privacy), more freedom (or hateful speech)... Personally, I hope no one wins this eternal debate 100% since the results would be disastrous. Just some thoughts... Albert P. Franco, II encryption(a)apf2.com

1 0

CTIA Daily News from WOW-COM - August 31, 1998
by CTIA Daily News 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

========================================== Welcome to today's edition of the CTIA Daily News from WOW-COM. Please click on the icon / attachment for the most important news in wireless communications today. A new multi-billion dollar industry is here! Be at CTIA's WIRELESS I.T. '98 where personal computing and communications converge! Don't Miss Your Chance -- October 12-14, 1998 Bally's Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV For more information, visit http://www.wirelessit.com ===========================================

1 0

No Subject
by Clark, Beau (CLBM) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Remove

1 0

RE:
by Brown, R Ken 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Ray Arachelian[SMTP:sunder@brainlink.com] wrote: > > Anonymous wrote: > >> > >> > http://www.itd.nrl.navy.mil/ITD/5540/ieee/cipher/news-items/980713.LIS > TWATCH > >> .html > [...snip...] >Sorry Anon, but that url 404's... Perhaps you could try again? It works if you put the ".html" on the next line in the URL New nifty way to foil the hackers - put line-breaks in your code! They'll never suss it! Actually I didn't notice at first either - I just sropped the last directory name of the URL and looked at the level above - it's been a sort of reflex action of mine on the web for years. Nice to see a navy site allowing us to browse their directories though :-) The "listwatch" is a very short summary of some of the less wibblish threads in cypherpunks, risks et.c - it is about 6 weeks out of date, nothing new there since it was last mentioned here. So I don't know why it was brought up again. Ken

2 1

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We don't take kindly to racial slurs here. You'll probably be receiving hundreds of email bombs over the next few days from angry cypherpunks. You may want to change email accounts. God bless! At 08:19 PM 8/29/98 -0400, RyanFord(a)aol.com wrote: > hola and good tidings > send some info on spooks please > i will be grateful >

3 2

[Fwd: ISAKMP Key Recovery Extensions]
by Frank O'Dwyer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Well, the attached draft is not designed for corporate recovery of encrypted email, that's for sure. Cheers, Frank O'Dwyer. To: cryptography(a)c2.net, cypherpunks(a)algebra.com Subject: Re: ISAKMP Key Recovery Extensions From: ulf(a)fitug.de (Ulf Möller) Date: Mon, 7 Sep 98 01:47 +0200 In-Reply-To: <199809011443.KAA23307(a)ietf.org> Organization: HR13 Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)algebra.com >From the IETF's IPSEC Working Group: Title : ISAKMP Key Recovery Extensions Author(s) : T. Markham Filename : draft-rfced-exp-markham-00.txt Pages : 13 Date : 31-Aug-98 This document describes the proposed approach for negotiating and exchanging key recovery information within the Internet Security Association Key Management Protocol (ISAKMP). ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rfced-exp-markham-00.txt

2 1

KRAP is at it in the IETF
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hello, It has come to my attention that the KRAP (key recovery alliance program) has submitted an I-D (internet draft) to the IETF for adding GAK (government access to keys) to the IPSEC protocols: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-rfced-exp-markham-00.txt ISAKMP Key Recovery Extensions <draft-rfced-exp-markham-00.txt> 7. AUTHOR INFORMATION Tom Markham Secure Computing Corp 2675 Long Lake Road Roseville, MN 55113 USA Phone: 651.628.2754, Fax: 651.628.2701 EMail: tom_markham(a)securecomputing.com I consider this a perversion of the standards process of the IETF to advance a political agenda which must be stopped at all cost. Below are the e-mail addresses of some people that you should write (politely) expressing your objections to any such additions to the protocols: IPSEC Chairs: Theodore Ts'o <tytso(a)mit.edu> Robert Moskowitz <rgm(a)icsa.net> Security Area Directors: Jeffrey Schiller <jis(a)mit.edu> Marcus Leech <mlecch(a)nortel.ca> As I mentioned before, be polite. These people are not the ones proposing GAK be added to the IPSEC protocols. They have put a lot of time and effort in forwarding the cause for strong encryption. They should be made aware of the communities objections to these attempts by KRAP. Thanks, - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.openpgp.net Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 5.0 at: http://www.openpgp.net/pgp.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: It's OS/2, Jim, but not OS/2 as we know it. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNfOVk49Co1n+aLhhAQFJwwP+O4vrZVKFpOG8vCHFwbDuPIv/99AhBnKF RK/Ikc5y2gGKq9hfxkTb4o77YUrDaEGkYUPHk+ZC57Oag0Lu1v6W1EAbQ5T4RpzH JWYXOonQmbqw5rH0h6brzqrH3ep9Ej9DR0gv4mGgIfSNlJSUu6TWO5ZHXKWiE4yy 5flH0Ngg/TI= =EzNL -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

digital sig bill
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message To: believer(a)telepath.com From: believer(a)telepath.com Subject: IP: About Digital Signature Bill 09/05/98 0752 Source: US Newswire http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/Current_Releases/0904-138.txt Abraham Urges Senate to Pass Digital Signature Bill U.S. Newswire 4 Sep 17:30 Abraham Urges Senate to Pass Digital Signature Bill Next Week To: National Desk Contact: Joe McMonigle of the Office of U.S. Sen. Spencer Abraham, 202-224-8833 WASHINGTON, Sept. 4 /U.S. Newswire/ -- While President Clinton used a visit in Ireland today to digitally sign an electronic commerce agreement with Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern on a laptop computer, U.S. Sen. Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.) urged his colleagues in the Senate to pass his legislation requiring federal agencies to start allowing the public to do the same. S.2107, the Government Paperwork Elimination Act, would require federal agencies to make versions of their forms available online and allow people to submit these forms with digital signatures instead of handwritten ones. It also sets up a process by which commercially developed digital signatures can be used in submitting forms to the government and permits the digital storage of federal documents. "If it's okay for President Clinton and Prime Minister Ahern, it should also be okay for the federal government to recognize the digital signature of ordinary Americans," Abraham said. "This legislation will bring the federal government into the electronic age, in the process saving American individuals and companies millions of dollars and hundreds of hours currently wasted on government paperwork," Abraham said. "Each and every year, Americans spend in excess of $600 billion simply filing out, documenting and handling government paperwork. This huge loss of time and money constitutes a significant drain on our economy and we must bring it under control." "By providing individuals and companies with the option of electronic filing and storage, this bill will reduce the paperwork burden imposed by government on the American people and the American economy. It will allow people to move from printed forms they must fill out using typewriters or handwriting to digitally-based forms that can be filled out using a word processor. This savings in time, storage and postage will be enormous," said Abraham. The Government Paperwork Elimination Act would: -- Require the federal government make available its forms online and allow citizens to sign forms by the use of digital signatures. -- Direct the Commerce Department to conduct a study of the impact of this Act on the use of digital signatures for electronic commerce and on individual privacy. -- Allow Executive Agencies 18 months to establish a method for agencies to put forms online. The forms must be able to be filled out, signed and filed with the agency electronically. -- Work to develop a system whereby fees and payments associated with the forms can also be submitted at the same time. For example, a citizen could use their tax software to create all the information necessary for filling out their tax forms, fill in the IRS online form, submit it and any indicated payments, and immediately receive a tax receipt. -- Enable the federal government to allow its employees to have digital signatures for use with citizens and allow agencies to use electronic notice where written notice had been required, if the citizen prefers electronic notice. -- Establish that a digital signature will have legal standing. -- Provide that Administration guidelines and procedures for electronic signatures that are used for the government forms that are compatible with those the private sector will be using for commerce, and specifies that any system used by the government must be industry and technology neutral. -- State that if an employer is required to collect, file and store paper forms that are completed by employees, that electronic storage will likely be accepted. -- Allow the government five years to implement these provisions. "The information age is no longer new. We are in the midst of a revolution in the way people do business and maintain records. The Government Paperwork Elimination Act will force Washington to catch up with these developments, and release our businesses from the drag of an obsolete bureaucracy as they pursue further innovations," said Abraham. Co-sponsors of the Paperwork Elimination Act include Sens. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Trent Lott (R-Miss.), Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), and Conrad Burns (R-Mont.) -0- /U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/ 09/04 17:30 Copyright 1998, U.S. Newswire - ----------------------- NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml - ----------------------- ********************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address ********************************************** www.telepath.com/believer ********************************************** ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0