December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

MOO: on the virtual meeting
by hughes＠ah.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I didn't get a chance to get to the virtual meeting proper last night, but I did stop by afterwards for a while. This morning I got a chance to see some what was on the videotape which was left in the camera in the meeting hall. My praise to Arthur Chandler for setting this up. Definitely a worthwhile experience, expecially given the topic of the Bay Area meeting this weekend. I've a few comments for now, though. -- Client software. A must-use. telnet is really annoying. I point this out because unimportant technical considerations make huge differences in usability. -- Speech. A lot more people talk in the MOO than on the mailing list. And you thought the mailing list was loud. People get up to speed much more quickly on overall structure, but it's still not very good for quickly explaining detail. -- Time Zones. One never forgets that real people are behind the pseudonyms because the entering and exiting is based upon clock of bodily origin. A surprising intrusion into the abstract environment. Might I suggest that some future v-meetings happen at morning hours Pacific time, in order to allow those to the east of the Atlantic to participate? I heard from a dear old friend who's living in Cambridge that he was thinking about showing up, but it was 4am local time. A noon Pacific time meeting is 8 p.m. London time, for example. -- Names. A number of people were logged on, as guests, with their real names, including me. The authentication of guest names here, though, was even lower than email addresses. I was logged on as Eric_Hughes, but anybody else could have done so as well. A small proposal. It would be convenient for meetings in the future, which might be held at different locations, to have persistent identity across MOO's. A cryptographic identification scheme seems appropriate. We can't use a global naming space, since that doesn't scale. We can, however, nicely use a hierarchical naming space since MOO names are assigned on a per-MOO basis. So, for example, we could have Haakon of Lambda or Blast of Bay. We can also resolve conflicting common names by the old custom of place-naming as differentiation. Each MOO would have an identity-signing key, which would be use to attest that a particular key was the possession of a name on that MOO. The MOO's could distribute keys amongst themselves or use a central signature source to sign MOO keys. This technique would allow characters to visit other MOO's, even as guests, and retain their identity. These pseudonyms need not even be issued only by MOO's. IRC seems another source of pseudonyms, as does the cypherpunks list. Xenon of Cypherpunks, for example. This same segmentation could be used to determine the origin of objects, as in, "This vcr is of bay-arean make." Finally, this hierarchy could be distributed with DNS, e.g. bay.moo MOO <MOO public key> bay.moo ADDRESS mud.crl.com 8888 blast.bay.moo PERSON <public key, signed> DESCRIPTION "He's bald. Very bald." (Acknowledgements to Carl Ellison. Here the identity is the key, and enforced by software.) Eric

6 6

Re: Oh No! Nazis on the Nets
by freeman＠MasPar.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> What kind of state is this, where you can drive a car with 16 years, > marry with 18 years and drink your first beer with 21 years? It probably has to do with the perceived dangers of errors in judgement concerning the various activities, and I agree with your skepticism... The age for marriage should be set much higher. -- Jay Freeman ;-)

1 0

Clipper Brain Pick
by matthew＠wired.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Here at WIRED Online we are working on promoting awareness about the Clipper debate. Hence we are looking for suggestions regarding resources, online and otherwise, that we can either post or reference in our online spaces. Below is a list of the resources I have a list of already. If you have suggestions for things to be added to the list or things to be omitted from the list please send them to me <matthew(a)wired.com> Thanks. Matthew Nelson, aka Net.Serf LIST OF CLIPPER RESOURCES FOR WIRED ONLINE ========================================== newsgroups ---------- CuD (?), Bits-n-Bytes (?), EDUPAGE (?) comp.org.eff.talk alt.politics.datahighway alt.privacy.clipper alt.security.pgp alt.activism talk.politics.crypto comp.risks [RISKS] mailing lists ------------- cypherpunks (subscribe address is cypherpunks-request(a)toad.com) com-priv (subscribe address is com-priv-request(a)uu.psi.com) risks(a)csl.sri.com (subscribe address is risks-request(a)csl.sri.com) (fidonews(a)f23.n1.z1.fidonet.org [CuD] imp-interest(a)thumper.bellcore.com 2600(a)bongo.cc.utexas.edu sci-crypt(a)cs.utexas.edu eff-austin(a)tic.com thesegroups(a)tic.com cni-modernization(a)cni.org extropians(a)extropy.org cypherwonks(a)lists.eunet.fi fringeware(a)io.com natbbs(a)echonyc.com [NOMA] futurec(a)uafsysb.uark.edu [future-culture] IPCT-L(a)GUVM.CCF.GEORGETOWN.EDU surfpunk(a)versant.com [subscribe address is surfpunk-request(a)versant.com] FTP sites --------- soda.berkeley.edu/pub/cypherpunks/clipper ftp.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/ ftp.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Legislation/ ftp.eff.org/pub/Groups/outposts.faq (= a regularly updated list of "cyberliberties" organizations) cpsr.org /cpsr/privacy/crypto/clipper Gophers ------- eff.org cpsr.org [not working] gopher.eff.org/00/EFF/papers/Crypto/ gopher.eff.org/00/EFF/legislation/ gopher://gopher.well.com/ WWW sites --------- ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/ ftp://ftp.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Legislation/ gopher://gopher.eff.org/00/EFF/papers/Crypto/ gopher://gopher.eff.org/00/EFF/legislation/ http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Crypto/ http://www.eff.org/alerts.html http://www.eff.org/pub/EFF/Policy/Legislation/ gopher://gopher.well.com/ file://ftp.eff.org/pub/Groups/outposts.faq (= a regularly updated list of "cyberliberties" organizations) http://www.acns.nwu.edu/surfpunk [surfpunk archive] conferences ----------- The WELL AOL (keyword "EFF") phone numbers ------------- Dept. of Justice (202) 616-2771 email addresses --------------- ???

1 0

Meeting Ramblings
by Robert A. Hayden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Just thought I'd take a few minutes to off some comments on the virtual meeting on 2/9. 1) Agenda There was a problem in that, while the topic of the hall was set, imeediately everyone launched into every other concern they had as well. This led to a total confusion that eventually splintered the participants. I think that next time, there should be a set agenda, with a time limit for each subject. For example 10:00 - 10:25 Issues of Copyright on Usenet 10:30 - 10:55 Remailers 11:00 - 11:25 Anonimity on the Net 11:30 - 11:55 DigiCash Thus, at 10:00, there would be a topic, at 10:25, the topic is wound down (either moving to another location or finishing) and people gear up for a topic change. That way, if I had no interest in copyright, I could wait until 10:30 to sign on. In the meantime, if people want to talk about something other than the main topic, they can amble off to their own room. (perhaps build some 'meeting rooms' off of the main hall, and people can go in there, set the topic of the room and talk about that, while the main hall has the main topic) 2) Speaking The idea of there being four people speaking at one time is good, but there was a problem of people getting a speaker position and refusing to yield, thus people never moved up the queue. This is bad. Perhaps auto-yields after 2 'says' (in case you munged the first) would help. Hmm, now that I think about it, I guess that's about all. I really think the meeting was a good idea, and I hope it happens again real soon. Just a little more organizing would have been more helpful. Thanks to all who did this :-) ____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden(a)krypton.mankato.msus.edu \ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=- \/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> In the United States, they \/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> first came for us in Colorado... - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- (GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++ n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCVAgUBLVqnNp3BsrEqkf9NAQFHVAP9En8qST6+IWDncrVuT1DJRHGiKrQlRTkx dPsZspkdyeRzTP7nQC4ga1EcFiEYICRC0ee1kh0QH6S019VsBhqDfpb6dnh/HzvM A9+tnU7vNNPXzMfboU5/jGvS8U8C2sFkw+0bGRMyTntVT4ZvSbenu3/7rxQcovXp 0ZEAWz+WOGs= =GlgI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Oh No! Nazis on the Nets
by danisch＠ira.uka.de 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Could I publish a newspaper containing Nazi propaganda in Germany? What do you want to hear? If I say yes, then you call the german Nazis. If I say no, then we have no press freedom in your eyes. Give us a chance to have 'press freedom' *and* to protect us against Nazis. > No? > > Then everyone doesn't have the right to produce a newspaper, does > everyone? Don't mix this! Whether *everyone* has the right to produce a newspaper and whether you can print *everything* into a newspaper, are two different things. Can we allow to print everything into a newspaper? No, not everything. And I think, the law is well choosen. The important detail is, that you are not forbidden to print a newspaper before, but they can be after you *after* you have print anything bad. For example you are not allowed to call for hating other races, but this is not special for the press. This is everywhere. The limits for the press are low and they forbid themes only which are *real* criminal [at least in my oppinion]. Look at the mailbox system used by neo-nazis. We can't allow this. But if we take them their mailboxes away, everyone says "The Germans don't even allow computers". You can't have both. In the last months they found nazi-newspapers with exact descriptions of how to build bombs and lists of people to be killed for speaking against nazis. You do not expect us to accept this, do you? The restrictions against such things are not a law against the press. It is forbidden, independend whether it comes in a newspaper or whereever else. > I feel it is a fundamental right to be able to publish whatever > newspaper one would like to publish, and I say that as a Jew who lost > most of his family to Nazi murderers in the second world war. Again, I feel beeing pressed to an answer which will be wrong, whatever I answer. > Restrictions on speech ultimately backfire, providing oppressors with > mechanisms to silence opponents. Protection from Nazism must come from > strong respect for the freedom of all to express themselves and live > as they wish so long as they do not harm others, and not from > preventing the dissemination of "dangerous" ideas. Spoken well, but far away from reality. If you see 100 Nazis and 10.000 people. The 10.000 don't have a job, don't have money, don't know what to do and are not the intellectual elite. They have a lot of problems and don't know where the problems came from and how to solve them. Now come 100 Nazis and tell them, everything were the fault of ugly, stupid foreigner, which steal their jobs, rape their women and are bad by nature, they should be killed or thrown out. Now you see, that a lot of these 10.000 are going to believe this. Many of them come from the German Democratic Republic and they learned to believe everything anyone tells them. Other just want to beat anyone. Do you want to do nothing and let them continue until it is too late? Didn't we have this before? > Only when a neonazi > attempts to beat someone up or set fire to a building does his action > become the legitimate subject of prosecution. No, then it is too late. When building are burning, people die. Some turkish people died because their house was set on fire. You can't bring them back. Can't you remember what Americans told about the Germans when the two american sportsmen were beaten some months ago? > The oppression of > communication or of ideas, regardless of how repugnant, is > incompatible with a free society. A free society must be able to defend. If the target of the communication is to stop the society beeing free, a free society can't accept this. A free society must be free to *stay* free. Hadmut

3 2

beta level pgpmail.el available for ftp
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- My emacs lisp code which interfaces PGP with sendmail.el, and rmail.el (mail handleing packages in GNU Emacs) is now available for (anonymous) ftp. The URL are (I think) FTP::/ftp.markv.com/pub/pgpmail/pgpmail.el FTP::/ftp.markv.com/pub/pgpmail/pgpjm.el I concider the code to be beta level, so expect a bug or two. Read the first page of code for documentation. An undocumented function may also be of interest (but it is alpha level). If you call pgp-mail-add-hop while editing a mail message, it will add the correct gubbish to route the message through (another) CP remailer. As I did with this message. j' - -- O I am Jay Prime Positive jpp(a)markv.com 1250 bit fingerprint B06229 = B8 95 E0 AF 9A A2 CD A5 89 C9 F0 FE B4 3A 2C 3F 524 bit fingerprint 2A915D = 8A 7C B9 F2 D5 46 4D ED 66 23 F1 71 DE FF 51 48 Public keys via `finger jpp(a)markv.com', or mail to pgp-public-keys(a)pgp.mit.edu Your feedback is welcome directly or via my symbol JPP on hex(a)sea.east.sun.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQBXAgUBLVqsbNC3U5sdKpFdAQFxvwIMC09zdCWnDJkZOVhzG9l65iWHiADVwblq 4jm7gDt3Lq2rgjTrvp4n2EZQHsqbBhHGNRyzw50s21GFupVfZfaZPelK -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Oh No! Nazis on the Nets
by danisch＠ira.uka.de 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perry E. Metzger says: > Incorrect. Those who do not understand freedom think that by > oppressing Nazis and preventing them from speaking you have somehow > protected freedom. However, in doing so, you have used the methods of > the Nazis. If a murderer tries to kill you and you have a gun, you will shoot back, I assume, even if you use the same method as him. > You can fight Naziism by spreading information about the evils of > Naziism. I wish it were true. They were trying this for many years. We all thought that Naziism will never come back because the lesson (WW II) was big enough. But it didn't work as you can see in the news magazines. What do you believe, is it a good idea to publish software like PGP if it is used by the Nazis to organize their work? > You can fight it by vigorously prosecuting those who commit > acts of violence. If you can get them... > > > I'm sure that american press freedom is not better than german ones. > > Untrue. In the U.S., I can start a newspaper without any licenses from > the Government, and I can print anything I wish in that newspaper > without fear of government prosecution. (I might be sued by a private > party for libel if I intentionally lie about someone, but thats quite > different.) In Germany, I cannot just open a newspaper and print, say, > Nazi editorials in it. Untrue. In Germany, I can do the very same. And I do not get sued by private party with lawyers who want to get some millions of dollars. And whether you are allowed to open your Nazi editorial depends on what you understand under "Nazi". In this discussion "Nazi" is everything from an idea to settings buildings on fire. If I say allow, they say I would allow killing people. If I forbid, they say I forbid to publish ideas. Tell me what is "Nazi" in your argument. > > Seen from Germany, american presidents elections look like a mixture > > of a football game and a tv show. > > Yes, but that is a statement that the press in the U.S. is bad, not > that it is unfree. Freedom and quality are orthogonal. Untrue. A press without freedom can't be good. And if your press is bad and not interested in publishing anything real, then of course you don't need to control it. But this is neither freedom nor quality. > > In Germany I can get my Cryptosoftware from whereever I want, > > Actually, you can do that here, too. We just cant send the software > overseas. I can publish everything about Cryptography and publish it everywhere over the world. I can publish newpapers with nude girls on the front. Is this possible in your country? As far as I know in your country a lot of things are controlled by religious groups. Is this freedom? Hadmut

3 2

Re: Oh No! Nazis on the Nets
by danisch＠ira.uka.de 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mike McNally writes: > Really? So your only defense against ideas you don't like is to make > the dissemination of the ideas illegal? Clearly there are values you > rate higher than press freedom. (That's not necessarily bad, though I > personally don't like it.) I never said this. Why do you think it is the only defense? Why do you all mix ideas with calls for killing people? Isn't it a difference whether I publish an idea or whether I pray killing people? Is this allowed in your country? You all seem to have a nice patent for defense against Nazis. Why don't you tell/sell us this patent? It could be very helpfull. Don't you believe that we are interested in a free press? Don't you believe that we want to fight against Naziism? How do you fight against your Nazis? > Sorry, but if you have to go to some office and ensure them you're > following the "rules of newspapers" or whatever, then that statement > is incorrect. Arrrrrghl! Stop this stupid tale! Do you want to play silly games with me? Who did you tell that you have to go to any office in germany? > I can this instant decide to print out thousands of > copies of whatever I want, drive down to some public area, and start > handing out my documents (or charging for them), all without a visit > to a government office. That's not illegal. Only "pornographic" > material is inherently illegal to distribute . Exactly the same as in Germany! Many people do this! We printed papers at the school, we print papers at the university, we do it everywhere. Print anything with your computer, go to the next copy-machine. Print as much as you can pay and carry and give it to everyone you want. It happens nearly every day. When I began to study at this university I got my half bag full of papers in the mensa every day. Meanwhile they are printing less because noone reads them all, you can't read them all, they are too many. At the first day at this university I got invitations from two groups of homosexual groups, one invitiation of the lesbians group, about 20 invitations of political groups and a lot of paper I didn't even look at. > > Seen from Germany, american presidents elections look like a mixture > > of a football game and a tv show. > > What does that have to do with press freedoms? What is the use of press freedom if the press doesn't use it? > Actually, we don't see much about German elections; there's not enough > airtime between the football games and TV shows. I'm sure you don't see much about Germany at all. Where did you get all those stories? > So can I in the US---today. The problems spring up when I try to > export what I write. Is this what you call press freedom? Hadmut

6 5

Returned mail: Host unknown (Name server: host not found) (fwd)
by Grand Epopt Feotus 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You're eqipped with a hundred billion nueron brain, that's wired and fired, and it's a reality generating device, but you've got too do it. Free youself ----Tim Leary---- To: cypherpunks(a)taod.com Subject: Re: Oh No! Nazis on the Nets From: Grand Epopt Feotus <68954(a)brahms.udel.edu> Date: Thu, 10 Feb 1994 17:31:50 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <9402102018.AA08946(a)deathstar.iaks.ira.uka.de> Hehe, well I can give my software to whomever I want too 8) Hmm, let's try to keep this from becoming the "This is Your Democracy Forum" and generating a "my system of govt is better than yours" cause that doesnt really accomplish much. And besides, we all know that no govt is goo govt 8) You're eqipped with a hundred billion nueron brain, that's wired and fired, and it's a reality generating device, but you've got too do it. Free youself ----Tim Leary----

1 0

Re: Commodity Jurisdiction success for Kerberos Bones!
by mcb＠net.bio.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

John Gilmore wrote (a week or so back): > Re: > REQUEST FOR COMMODITY JURISDICTION FOR: "Kerberos 900104 > bones.tar.Z patchlevel 6" software program > [...] > I encourage people and companies who are interested in export issues > to submit a commodity jurisdiction request for some software that you > want to export, and go through the process. In public. The State > Department and NSA don't publish their guidelines for what is exportable > and what isn't, so the only way we-the-public are going to find out > is by asking, and then telling each other. Are these guidelines, which are undoubtedly written down *somewhere*, exempt from disclosure under FOIA? If not, then this might be good way to go; if the claim of exemption appears weak, it may be worth litigating. Getting actual disclosure of the guidelines may be worth quite a bit, since not only does it inform us-the-public about the rules, it can make it easier to sue the government for not abiding by its own rules (if it violates them). -- Michael C. Berch mcb(a)net.bio.net / mcb(a)postmodern.com

1 0