December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: IP: Funny Money: New $20 FRNs are here
by pnet＠proliberty.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Excerpt from the following: >It also incorporates several >>security features that have proved effective against would-be >>counterfeiters: a watermark; enhanced security thread; Of course no mention is made here of the enhanced ability for goons to steal your money. It has been reported that these 'security threads' enable detection equipment at airports to measure, or estimate, the amount of cash a person is carrying. This further enables seizures which are now taking place in the proximity of US borders, with the excuse that the carrier of the cash could be 'intended' to cross a border, without filing a customs report. Mere possesion of 'large' amounts of cash, in the proximity of a US border, is coming to be considered 'prima facie' evidence of 'money-laundering'. See previous message: >Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 08:32:43 -0400 >To: cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net >From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> >Subject: IP: Tougher laws are sought to seize cash If I had been smart enough to see this coming when they came out with the new security threads in $100 bills, I never would have traded the old ones in. Of course, carrying gold or silver will set off the metal detectors too. I wonder if diamonds show up on the scanners? - Tom Paine At 3:27 AM 9/25/98, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >From: believer(a)telepath.com >Subject: IP: Funny Money: New $20 FRNs are here >Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 17:05:38 -0500 >To: believer(a)telepath.com > >Source: US Newswire >http://www.usnewswire.com/topnews/Current_Releases/0924-109.txt > >U.S. Treasury, Federal Reserve Issue New $20 Note >U.S. Newswire >24 Sep 10:45 > > U.S. Treasury, Federal Reserve Issue New $20 Note > To: National and Financial Desks > Contact: Hamilton Dix of the U.S. Department of the Treasury, > 202-622-2960, or > Bob Moore of the Federal Reserve, > 202-452-3215 > > WASHINGTON, Sept. 24 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Treasury Secretary Robert >E. Rubin and Federal Reserve Board Chairman Alan Greenspan today >announced the issuance of the redesigned $20 note, which includes new >and modified security features to deter counterfeiting of U.S. >currency. > > Rubin and U.S. Treasurer Mary Ellen Withrow marked the >issuance of the new notes in a ceremony at Treasury's Cash Room in >Washington, D.C. More than two dozen regional events hosted by >Federal Reserve banks and branches and major retailers were also >conducted around the country. > > "We have introduced a series of features that greatly raise the >hurdle for counterfeiters," Rubin said. "Together these features >amount to a formidable tool, and make spotting a counterfeit >note easier than ever. For them to be effective, it is important that >people stop for a moment to look for the new features." > > The new $20 will replace older notes gradually, and older series >$20 notes still in good condition will be recirculated. About >$83 billion worth of $20 notes is currently in circulation, 80 >percent of those in the U.S. More than $450 billion worth of >U.S. currency circulates around the globe. > > The Series 1996 $20 note is the third U.S. currency note to be >redesigned to include new and modified security features. New $10 and >$5 notes are expected to be issued simultaneously in 2000, and a new >$1 note with a more modest redesign will follow. > > "We are confident that the introduction of this third redesigned >note will be as smooth as that of the $100 and $50 notes," Chairman >Greenspan said. "Older notes will not be recalled or devalued. All >existing notes will continue to be legal tender." > > Like the Series 1996 $100 and $50 notes introduced since 1996, the >new $20 note has a familiar appearance. The size, color and >historical subjects have not changed. It also incorporates several >security features that have proved effective against would-be >counterfeiters: a watermark; enhanced security thread; fine-line >printing patterns; color-shifting ink; and a larger, off-center >portrait that is the most noticeable change in the overall >architecture of the note. There are also two features for the blind >and visually impaired. The new $20 note includes a capability that >will allow the development of technology to help the blind ascertain >the denomination of their currency. In addition, the $20 and $50 >notes have a large numeral on the back that make the notes easier for >millions of Americans with low vision to read. > > The continuing introduction of redesigned notes is a critical >component of the Federal government's anti-counterfeiting effort. >The new series aims to maintain the security of the nation's currency >as computerized reprographic technologies such as color copiers, >scanners and printers become more sophisticated and more readily >available. The $20 note is the most frequently counterfeited note in >the United States. > > Since the $20 note is so widely used in daily commerce and most >frequently dispensed by ATMs, broad nationwide recognition of the new >note when it is introduced will minimize apprehension on the part of >the public. A public education campaign now underway encourages the >public and people who handle cash every day to become familiar with >the design and security features of the new notes. Retailers and >financial institutions are educating their employees and customers by >sending posters to their outlets, training cashiers, offering >pamphlets to the public, and including information about the new note >in advertising circulars and on shopping bags. More than 100 >constituency organizations have helped reach small business owners, >loss prevention managers, visually impaired and older Americans, and >others with a stake in the new note's introduction. U.S. embassies >and consulates are using materials translated into 15 languages to >conduct localized education outreach to ensure that local users of >U.S. currency as well as financial institutions are prepared for the >issuance of the new note. > > Fact sheets on the new note, the history of U.S. currency and >related agencies are available at http://www.moneyfactory.com. > > -0- > /U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/ > 09/24 10:45 > >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 >**********************************************

2 1

Re:
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sun, 27 Sep 1998, Reeza! wrote: > > At 12:14 AM 9/27/98 +0200, Anonymous wrote: > >CSapronett(a)aol.com (note: AOL.COM -- LOL!) wrote: > >>My only regret is that I wont get to watch you all burn in hell !!! > > > >I see. Would you mind elaborating? We are going to burn in hell > >because...? We don't use AOL? We like our privacy? We use cryptosystems > >that you'll never understand in your life time? Because we know how > >to use (and create) remailers? > > Don't bother, it is a troll. > > Not a very original, or even interesting one either. Whenever these people troll for flames here they get them one way or another. Then it seems Merrill always tries to take the moral high ground and show us all his bleeding heart and tell us how we should embrace the AOL idiots and cherish them. The AOLers get triple effect that way. I don't think Merrill ever misses a chance to defend AOL and attack anybody who attacks them. About a week ago somebody posted a copy or parts of most AOL postings which were sent here in the last months. Merrill ignores the part about how the posts were classified and sends back some vague flame accusing the author of classing posts he disagreed with as "clueless" then he quotes the entire thing back to the list. I don't know which is worse. At least the people flaming the AOL wimps are funny.

2 1

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Navy fights new hack method http://www.abcnews.com/sections/tech/CNET/cnet_navyhack980925.html Tim Clark CNET NEWS.COM Hackers are banding together across the globe to mount low-visibility attacks in an effort to sneak under the radar of security specialists and intrusion detection software, a U.S. Navy network security team said today. Coordinated attacks from up to 15 different locations on several continents have been detected, and Navy experts believe that the attackers garner information by probing Navy Web sites and then share it among themselves. "These new patterns are really hard to decipher--you need expert forensics to get the smoking gun," said Stephen Northcutt, head of the Shadow intrusion detection team at the Naval Surface Warfare Center. "To know what's really happening will require law enforcement to get hold of the hackers' code so we can disassemble it." The new method involves sending as few as two suspicious probes per hour to a host computer, a level of interest that usually won't be detected by standard countermeasures. But by pooling information learned from those probes, hackers can garner considerable knowledge about a site. Northcutt said the new technique for attacks was discovered only this month and has been detected at Defense Department facilities as well as in private sector sites, including some outside the United States. The Shadow group has posted descriptions of the attacks and countermeasures, and the information has been forwarded to CERT, which investigates security attacks. "Most intrusion detection systems have a threshold, a radar. These attacks are intentionally sliding under that threshold so normal intrusion detection tools will not detect them," said Tim Aldrich, principal analyst at the Navy facility. The Shadow team said that although the new method is harder to detect, it should not affect sites that are well-secured. But the technique puts sites with weak security at greater risk. The attacks do not involve a new hacker tool or new kind of attack, but rather represent a low-visibility technique for perpetrating attacks. For example, one coordinated attack that involved at least 14 locations simply probed a Web site for security weaknesses without mounting a break-in. The Shadow Intrusion Detection team said it cannot determine how many people might be involved in the attacks--hackers frequently use many different machines to launch their attacks. But the number of individuals involved is less important than the technique itself, Northcutt said. The technique could be used to scan or mount attacks from more than 100 Internet addresses. The security experts also suggested that makers of commercial intrusion detection software need to counter the new method. "This stealthy probing enables large amounts of parallel firepower, which means many attack attempts [from many sites] over a short time frame," said a note distributed by the System Administration Networking and Security (SANS) Institute. Going public with a news of new hacker techniques is somewhat unusual in the secretive network security community, which often fears that publicizing attacks before countermeasures are known will tip off attackers to vulnerabilities. "We went public in hopes of raising awareness," Northcutt said. "You're only going to be able to find stealthy stuff by looking for stealthy stuff." But before publicizing the new hacker technique, he added, the Shadow team had checked to be certain it would not jeopardize any official actions against the attackers. He also thinks that users of the attack may be caught. "If they're working together, it ought to be easier to track them down because they leave more of a trail," he said.

1 0

Ueli Maurer's Univ. Stat. Test for Rand No -in C
by David Honig 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

/* UELI.c This implements Ueli M Maurer's "Universal Statistical Test for Random Bit Generators" using L=16 Accepts a filename on the command line; writes its results, with other info, to stdout. Handles input file exhaustion gracefully. Ref: J. Cryptology v 5 no 2, 1992 pp 89-105 also on the web somewhere. -David Honig honig(a)sprynet.com Built with Wedit 2.3, lcc-win32 http://www.cs.virginia.edu/~lcc-win32 26 Sept CP Release Version Notes: This version does L=16. It evolved from an L=8 prototype which I ported from the Pascal in the above reference. I made the memory usage reasonable by replacing Maurer's "block" array with the 'streaming' fgetc() call. Usage: UELI filename outputs to stdout */ #define L 16 // bits per block #define V (1<<L) // number of possible blocks #define Q (10*V) // at LEAST 10 * V, to assure each block seen #define K (100*Q) // at LEAST 100 * Q, as large as possible #define MAXSAMP (Q + K) #include <stdio.h> #include <math.h> int main( int argc, char **argv ) { FILE *fptr; int i; int b, c; int table[V]; float sum=0.0; int run; // Human Interface printf("UELI 26 Sep 98\nL=%d %d %d \n", L, V, MAXSAMP); if (argc <2) {printf("Usage: UELI filename\n"); exit(-1); } else printf("Measuring file %s\n", argv[1]); // FILE IO fptr=fopen(argv[1],"rb"); if (fptr == NULL) {printf("Can't find %s\n", argv[1]); exit(-1); } // INIT for (i=0; i<V; i++) table[i]=0; for (i=0; i<Q; i++) { b= fgetc(fptr)<<8 | fgetc(fptr); table[ b ]=i; } printf("Init done\n"); // COMPUTE run=1; for (i=Q; run && i<Q+K; i++) { // COMPOSE A 16-bit quantity b=fgetc(fptr); if (b<0) run=0; c=fgetc(fptr); if (c<0) run=0; if (run) { b = b<<8 | c; sum += log( (double) ( i-table[b] ) ) ; table[ b ]=i; } } if (!run) printf("Premature end of file; read %d blocks.\n", i-Q); sum = (sum/( (double) (i-Q) ) ) / log(2.0); // i should be K if enough samples printf("fTU= %f\n\n", sum); printf("Expected value for L=16 is 15.167379 \n"); // Add further interpretation/thresholding of the number of sigmas from expected, // and include the fudge factors explained in the paper. } // end

1 0

Re: [salman rushdie]
by NMIR 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone have any idea what this guy is on about?. Regards, NMIR www.netlink.co.uk/users/impact/namir/namirm.html billp(a)nmol.com wrote: dave --- ABQ J 9/24/98 Iran May Withdraw Writer's Death Threat LONDON - Author Salman Rushdie met with British Foreign Office officials Wednesday amid reports Iran is preparing to withdraw the threat on his life. The late Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini pronounced a "fatwa," death sentence, against Rushdie in 1989 after the publication of his book "Satanic Verses," which many Muslims deemed blasphemous. Islamic militants then put a $2 million bounty on Rushdie's head, forcing the author to live largely in under British police protection. --- I THINK that I heard tonight and saw Rushie's picture on TV that the above was called off. Progress. I am reading again your stuff at http://www.jya.com/filth-spot.htm Let's all hope for release of the requested documents and SETTLEMENT. bill > --------------------------------------------- > Attachment: bw1.html > MIME Type: text/html > --------------------------------------------- ____________________________________________________________________ Get free e-mail and a permanent address at http://www.netaddress.com/?N=1

2 1

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CSapronett(a)aol.com (note: AOL.COM -- LOL!) wrote: >My only regret is that I wont get to watch you all burn in hell !!! I see. Would you mind elaborating? We are going to burn in hell because...? We don't use AOL? We like our privacy? We use cryptosystems that you'll never understand in your life time? Because we know how to use (and create) remailers? ** ~*--*~ ___________________________________________________________________ You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail. Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com Or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]

3 2

faggots
by CSapronett＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

My only regret is that I wont get to watch you all burn in hell !!!

4 3

TODAY'S NEWS AND PICS PACKED STUFFED! - READ IT NOW!
by STUFFED NEWS DAILY 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

+ 30 FREE HOT JPEG PHOTOS + 5 SUPER SEXY STORIES + OH MY GOD, YOU'RE MARRIED + TROY BEYER TALKS ABOUT SEX + THE BOTTOM LINE IN SURFING FOR SEX + THE BEST OF EUREKA + SEX COURT + MENO-PLAY + MAROONED IN THE BIG EASY + SEX STILL SELLS ----> http://stuffed.net/98/9/27/ <---- 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/98/9/27/ <----

1 0

This stock up 250%
by oppykm＠usa.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Omicron Technologies, Inc. The stock is up 250% in less than 45 days. During this same time period the DOW has gone down over 1,700 points! This obscure, but soon to be famous company can make you a fortune with patented technology originally developed for NASA Don't Miss This One For more information: http://www.network-2001.com/orcron The stock symbol is: OGPS _______________________

1 0

Re: Clinton's fake apologies (fwd)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 23 Sep 1998 04:27:46 Reeza! wrote: > Well, it seems I have an admirer. A follower, anyway. Quoting things I said > from two separate posts. I read all the posts to cypherpunks. Some several times to try to understand what some blowhard is trying to say. [Re; Clinton] > I believe the other issues are relevant. ... clear evidence of malfeasance > in many, and every area should not be ignored ... My argument was: 1. You can't seriously be this fired up over perjury (post OJ), can you? 2. there have been several topics discussed on cypherpunks that were more odious. 3. Charge him with his big crimes. Don't "Al Capone" him. Your belief that Starr is leading up to the real issues is compatible with my (now belaboured) point. I still don't understand what you're trying to add. > I'm not building up the bogey man, I'm discussing what I see. What I see, > on every major and minor newstation, is a disgrace. A documented, public > record disgrace. Well, this *is* a pathetic reason. You want Clinton impeached because the media tells you so. At 23 Sep 1998 04:31:48 Reeza! wrote: > > -- an anonymous aol32 user. > > You must be proud of that sig. It's a shit magnet. Works, too! > I'll bet you weren't on the list when the list of deceased CIC bodyguards, > friends and associates was posted either. > <sigh> > flush out your head, you aol user. there is more going on here than just > 'fibbing'. Fine. charge him with the other things! As far as the "newby" flame, I've seen that corpse lists here twice recently. Maybe you've dated yourself? I remember a time without Reeza! posts... And there's a sig flame in there, trying to get out. A new low for you, Reeza? > > Reeza! -- an anonymous aol32 user.

2 1