December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

a correction
by L. Detweiler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I wrote: > [The `Movement'] was only an infinitesimal whit better when it was just >spread by word of mouth among the conspiring CA slime. By `better' I meant -- `less evil'

1 0

Re: Eric Hughes & the Cypherpunks Movement
by koontzd＠lrcs.loral.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I'm grotesquely ashamed to have ever been associated with this sham, >this mockery, this farce, that masquerades as a `group' or a >`movement'. I have even lended credibility to tentacles by quoting them >in my FAQs and in RISKS, oh how that makes me want to vomit. `Anonymity >on the Internet' -- more like Disinformation, Brainwashing, and Lies by >Tentacles. The cypherpunks list does not deserve to be advertised >*anywhere* except as a dark pit to be avoided at all costs, the >cypherpunks Movement is no more meaningful than graffiti spraypainted >on a wall. It was only an infinitesimal whit better when it was just >spread by word of mouth among the conspiring CA slime. Please, go back >to your dark holes where you came from, and take your odious `movement' >with you. Oh, what insidious despicable poison. (In your best N.E. accent) "ahll righht, who faarted?!"

1 0

Knights who say NII (was Crypto(A), govt & NII)
by fnerd＠smds.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May writes (1): > Having read the three main "position papers" on NII (the White House > paper, the CPSR analysis, and the EFF "Open Platform" piece), I'm as > convinced as ever that the Data Highway is largely about regaining > control of the currently anarchic network system. Mike Godwin replies (2): > For what it's worth, I don't think this interpretation can be read into > EFF's Open Platform paper. A rotated view on each of these. 1) NII is not "about" anything in particular. You can look at what each person talking about it means in each instance, or you can look at what effect the ideas will have when they become incarnated in government organizations and rules, and take on lives of their own. Or you can look at the process that keeps the topic alive as a popular issue. I'm not sure what kind of "about" Tim was talking. 2) It doesn't matter so much what interpretations can be read into EFF's, or anyone's papers. What matters is the effect they'll have. Giving the government savvy advice, telling them they should do whatever will promote, say, competition or open forums...what effects will these have? They may provide justifications, expertise and targeting info for interventions, for instance. New ways to get involved... There's a dynamic to things like this involving momentum and snowballs and chaos theory; government; media; punks; the public; policy orgs, tanks and wonks; and regulated industries. I can't think of one positive thing (as opposed to the negative thing, disengagement) government can contribute to the goals of EFF. I wonder if the EFF folks are sure there are some. Mitch Kapor talks of "decentralists" who want to use government to promote decentralization-- thwart centralization effects that happen in capitalism, I suppose. (You may have missed Mitch's post as it was forwarded by Ell Dee.) The government can stop all the things it does that produce centralization (it produces centralized capitalists, for instance), but the most centralized organization in the world as the decentralist's tool or ally doesn't seem workable to me. The means clashes against the ends. Telling a bull that he should make whatever positive contributions he can to the china shop...is worse than just not mentioning that there are none. To the bull it suggests, well, a fact-finding tour at least... "But we didn't say that." Of course not. The good guys just tag along and advise against what's *specifically* happening, while gesturing in a forward direction. I'm sure anyone in CPSR or EFF who's even heard the word libertarian has weighed similar arguments. I've seen Mitch and Mike (for instance) talk. Both energetic yet eminently rational and calm. The perfect people to talk someone down from a contemplated harmful act. I hope that's what they end up spending their time doing, in this NII business, (although it's not a positive- or creative-sounding or pleasant thing to wish on someone). And sure, of course I hope sane heads prevail everywhere, that everything everyone says is taken in the right spirit by everyone involved and no terrible travesty of "Open Platform" comes to pass, unlike the rest of the history of such things. Times are changing... I just don't like the whole country waiting for the government to "do better this time, we promise," when it's not helpful for the government to do anything except put down the blunderbus and come out. -fnerd(a)smds.com quote me -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a aKxB8nktcBAeQHabQP/d7yhWgpGZBIoIqII8cY9nG55HYHgvtoxiQCVAgUBLMs3K ui6XaCZmKH68fOWYYySKAzPkXyfYKnOlzsIjp2toust1Q5A3/n54PBKrUDN9tHVz 3Ch466q9EKUuDulTU6OLsilzmRvQJn0EJhzd4pht6hanC0R3seYNhUYhoJViCcCG sRjLQs4iVVM= =9wqs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Chaos Communications Congress 1993 (fwd)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: bkr(a)drdhh.hanse.de (Bjoern Kriews) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,comp.security.misc Subject: Chaos Communication Congress 1993 Date: 26 Nov 1993 08:10:08 +0100 Organization: Digital Island Message-ID: <bkr.754297770@drdhh> NNTP-Posting-Host: drdhh.hanse.de [Sorry for crossposting this to so many groups - last year I received complaints that people didn't find the announcement] "Ten years after Orwell" 10th Chaos Communication Congress, Hamburg, Germany The Chaos Computer Club invites the global community to participate in the Chaos Communication Congress in Hamburg and celebrates the tenth anniversary of this convention. This hackers' meeting, taking place annually at the end of December, has become a traditional event which is characterized by a colorful mixture of absolute chaos, serious discussion and detailed presentation. Computer enthusiasts, scientists from well-known institutions, lawyers, politicians, artists and, of course, hackers as well as data-travellers and Internauts from many countries are going to meet at the 'Eidelstedter Buergerhaus' on December 27th-29th for an interdisciplinary exchange of data and other experience. Not only concentrating on technical topics, political and social issues will be focal points of discussion this year. After ten years of creative future concepts the time has come to look for achieved goals and new visions for the future. This year's list of topics: The so-called "great peep attack" (a proposed law reform allowing state authorities to listen in, even in private rooms, in order to fight organized crime) affects every german citizen and is considered one of the most important issues of the year. - What is technically possible? - What is planned and/or wanted politically? - How do the right of privacy and ban of encryption software fit together? Well-informed speakers talk about state-of-the-art technology and legal limits. Public discussion forums invite you to form your own opinion. Money always serves for interesting talk: - How can we improve Electronic Cash? - How to print your own money - How to wash it if it's dirty - How to open electronic cash machines without damaging them It's up to you to add to this list... Hardly noticed by the public, the female part of the hacker scene is growing. Female hackers' activities have become a regular part of the congress, the workshop on feminine computer handling is one of the key events. For the first time, there will be a Women Only room with lots of equipment to try out, opportunity to ask and learn as well as to discuss and create. Other highlights: Discussions and workshops on - citizen networks and electronic democracy - ISDN, MODACOM (german mobile radio data network) and Beepers - Bluebox versus Telekom - Electronic Warfare - Chip- and other cards - inventory differences - underground radio stations - Computer recycling - lockpicking - MIME and *ostscript viruses - copyright law and the GNU generation. Furthermore: the Hackcenter, the Chaos Cafe, the Chaos Archive, the movie theatre (among others: educational propaganda films by the former East German Ministry of State Security), a Zerberus BBS, the Internet-FreePort and lots of other things we forgot to mention. Feel free to contribute more interesting topics, workshops or presentations. Anyway, the hottest news for computer enthusiasts and hackers will be those you won't find in the press. What: 10th Chaos Communication Congress When: December 27th - 29th 1993 Cost: DM 42,- Three-day-ticket Where: Eidelstedter Buergerhaus Alte Elbgaustr. 12 D-22523 Hamburg +49-40-5710523 Contact: Chaos Computer Club Schwenckestr. 85 D-20255 Hamburg Germany Phone: +49-40-4903757 Fax: +49-40-4917689 E-Mail: ccc93(a)t42.ccc.de Press contact: Phone: +49-161-2447146 (european afternoon, please) For reservations in an inexpensive hotel (approx. DM 30,-/night), mail to: sleep(a)drdhh.hanse.de #!/bin/thanks to P. Kane for the word 'InterNaut'. -- bkr(a)drdhh.hanse.de - Bjoern Kriews - Stormsweg 6 - D-22085 Hamburg [76] - FRG By definition, a properly functioning kernel doesn't allow user programs to make it crash unless they say "please". (Richard Stallman)

1 0

EFF Op-Ed from the NY Times
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: mech(a)eff.org (Stanton McCandlish) Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk Subject: EFF Op-Ed from the NY Times Date: 30 Nov 1993 11:38:52 -0500 Organization: EFF mail-news gateway Message-ID: <199311301632.LAA28210(a)eff.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: eff.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >From the New York Times Op-Ed Page, Wednesday, November 24, 1993 A Superhighway Through the Wasteland? By Mitchell Kapor and Jerry Berman Mitchell Kapor is chairman of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit group that promotes civil liberties in digital media. He was a founder of the Lotus Development Corporation, from which he resigned in 1986. Jerry Berman is executive director of the foundation. (Washington) Telecommunications and cable TV executives, seeking to allay concerns over their proposed megamergers, insist that the coming electronic superhighway will be an educational and informational tool as well as a cornucopia of interactive entertainment. Allow the marriage between entertainment and communications giants, we are told, and they will connect students with learning resources, provide a forum for political discourse, increase economic competitiveness and speed us into the multimedia information age. Both broadcast and cable TV were introduced with similar fanfare. The results have been disappointing. Because of regulatory failure and the limits of the technology, they failed to be saviors of education or political life. We love the tube but recognize that it is largely a cultural wasteland. For the Government to break this cycle of promise and disappointment, communications mergers should be approved or barred based on detailed, enforceable commitments that the electronic superhighway will meet public goals. The amount of electronic material the superhighway can carry is dizzying compared to the relatively narrow range of broadcast TV and the limited number of cable channels. Properly constructed and regulated, it could be open to all who wish to speak, publish and communicate. None of the interactive services will be possible, however, if we have an eight-lane data superhighway rushing into every home and only a narrow footpath coming back out. Instead of settling for a multimedia version of the same entertainment that is increasingly dissatisfying on today's TV, we need a superhighway that encourages the production and distribution of a broader, more diverse range of programming. The superhighway should be required to provide so-called open platform services. In today's channel-based cable TV system, program producers must negotiate for channel space with cable companies around the country. In an open platform network, we would avoid that bottleneck. Every person would have access to the entire superhighway, so programmers could distribute information directly to consumers. Consumers would become producers: individuals and small organizations could create and distribute programs to anyone on the highway who wants them. Open platform services will spur diversity in the electronic media, just as low production and distribution costs make possible a wide variety of newspapers and magazines. To prevent abuses by media giants that because of recent Federal court decisions will control the pipeline into the home and much of the content delivered over it, we need new laws. Like today's phone companies, the companies controlling the superhighway must be required to carry other programmers' content, just as phone companies must provide service to anyone who is willing to pay for it. We must guarantee that anyone who, say, wants to start an alternative news network or a forum for political discussion is given an outlet to do so. Americans will come to depend on the superhighway even more than they need the telephone. The guarantee of universal telephone service must be expanded to include universal access to the superhighway. Although market forces will help keep the new technology affordable, we need laws to protect consumers when competition fails. And because several companies will operate the highway, each must be required to interconnect with the others. Likewise, the new computers that will give us access to the superhighway should be built according to commonly accepted standards. Also, even an open, competitive market will leave out organizations with limited resources such as schools and libraries. To compensate for market oversights, we must insure that money -- whether through Federal support or a tax on the companies that will control the superhighway -- is made available to these institutions. Finally, people won't use the new technology unless they feel that their privacy is protected. Technical means, such as recently developed encryption techniques, must be made available to all users. And clear legal guidelines for individual control over access to and reuse of personal information must be established. Companies that sell entertainment services will have a record of what their customers' interests are; these records must remain confidential. Bell Atlantic, T.C.I., Time-Warner, U.S. West and other companies involved in proposed mergers have promised to allow the public full access to the superhighway. But they are asking policy makers to trust that, profits aside, they will use their new positions for the public good. Rather than opposing mergers or blindly trusting competition to shape the data highways, Congress should make the mergers hinge on detailed commitments to provide affordable services to all Americans. Some legislators, led by Representative Ed Markey, Democrat of Massachusetts, are working to enact similar requirements; these efforts deserve support. The best approach would be to amend these requirements to the Communications Act of 1934. Still the central law on open access, an updated Communications Act would codify the terms of a new social contract between the the telecommunications industry and the American people. Copyright 1993 The New York Times Company

1 0

Unsubscribe
by Louis Cypher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please unsubscribe me. It was ok when I owned my own system, but now that I sold it, I cannot keep up with all the traffic. It was fun.

1 0

Unsubscribe
by Paul Gilberti 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Please unsubscribe me. I really thought that this list was for serious discussion of crypto technology/news. Instead, I'm just tired of weeding through my mail of immature postings of posters who are afraid to post under their own names (DL), and all the traffic regarding the censorship of the same.

1 0

democracy and L. Detweiler
by baumbach＠atmel.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

L. Detweiler is a champion of democracy. He has argued strongly for it here on this forum. I am not a supporter of democracy. A crowd of people has no greater rights than one person. L. Detweiler disagrees with this. I shall confront this disagreement with an example that strikes to its core. I propose a vote. This vote will have no time limit. If at any point you wish to change your vote you are free do so. This vote is non-binding on those who do not support democracy. This vote will be conducted publicly on this list. ======================================================================= VOTE: Proposition desist L. Detweiler will cease posting to the cypherpunks mailing list. He will no longer concern himself with the activities of those on the cypherpunks mailing list here or on any other forum. [I support]/[I Do not support] ======================================================================= L. Detweiler will be the only judge of the results of this vote. If he believes a majority of unique individuals carry this proposal one way or another, then by his honor and support for democracy he is bound by it. If he recants his support for democracy, then he is not bound by it. ------------------ I shall cast my vote here: I support Proposition desist. Peter Baumbach baumbach(a)atmel.com

1 0

Crypto-dongle protocols?
by fnerd＠smds.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I know there was talk of making little crypto boxes that attach to the back of bigger computers. "Crypto-dongles," they were called. Did anyone go and build one? Did anyone think up a protocol for talking to one? It occurs to me that pocket computers like the Psion might make nice crypto-dongles, especially for people who use Unix for mail. The little computer could show you the text you were signing or that it had decrypted. All safe from Unix hacks--but is there a good protocol? Integration with PGP functions would be nice and might even ease the implementation. So, once again, Has anyone got a crypto-dongle protocol? -fnerd(a)smds.com quote me -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a aKxB8nktcBAeQHabQP/d7yhWgpGZBIoIqII8cY9nG55HYHgvtoxiQCVAgUBLMs3K ui6XaCZmKH68fOWYYySKAzPkXyfYKnOlzsIjp2toust1Q5A3/n54PBKrUDN9tHVz 3Ch466q9EKUuDulTU6OLsilzmRvQJn0EJhzd4pht6hanC0R3seYNhUYhoJViCcCG sRjLQs4iVVM= =9wqs -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: The Cure
by hawkwind＠dink.foretune.co.jp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>It craves fame. It resents what it perceives to be the fame of the >better-known members of this list to be. It is jealous of that fame, >and wants some for itself. It is sick and ugly, small and unintelligent, >resentful of its underdeveloped brain and the fact that everyone he looks >up to instantly recognizes his stupidity. And now it has found a way to get >those very people to acknowledge it, discuss it, feel threatened by it. >It is used to rejection, so the endless repeats of it mean nothing. And >then even less in the face of the warm glow at the center of the >Cypherpunks collective attention. > >This is the first and the last word I'll ever write about about it. >If we all did that, it would go away. > >Coerr > REALLY excellently stated! Great analysis of the nature of the problem. Thank you, do you mind if I quote this to others? Alas, though, I can not from long and bitter experience agree with you about the solution. In the real world physical verbal/facial expressions of disapproval and disdain might rapidly rid the group of the problem person, but in cyberspace, such traditional cultural prods are non-existent. The aberrant user KNOWS he faces no meaningful penalties or censure and thus has no inducement not to continue his chaotic ways. I do feel that in addition to the observations you made above, that such people often take sheer perverse delight in the mere poisoning of the creativity of the group being creatively atrophic themselves.

1 0