December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by Hal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If you want to not be able to read the files on your storage site, then why not just try reading them? Check their entropy to make sure it is maximal, check that they can't be unzipped, unstuffed, displayed as gif or jpeg files. When a new format becomes popular add that to the list. This is all you can do. What does this gain you? I'm not sure. If someone posts encrypted Windows 95, then publicizes the location and the key, people will get the data just as easily as if it were not encrypted. Hal

1 0

voice pgp
by Loren Fleckenstein 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've heard mention that Phil Zimmermann was going to demonstrate Voice PGP at the January Cypherpunks meeting at Cygnus. Can anyone mail me a note about this? Has the meeting already taken place? How well did the demo perform?

2 1

Self-service computers
by Ben.Goren＠asu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A friend of mine forwarded this to me; I couldn't resist forwarding it to the list. b& ---- Date: 4 JAN 1995 16:32:23 -0500 From: Kay Lukens <klukens(a)halcyon.com> Newgroups: alt.humor.best-of-usenet Subject: [pdx.general] Re: Keep self-service COMPUTERS out of Oregon! From: keithl(a)chip.klic.rain.com (Keith Lofstrom) Newsgroups: pdx.general,or.politics Subject: Re: Keep self-service COMPUTERS out of Oregon! It has been pointed out by the stalwart defenders of our rights (to be told what to do) that self-service for gasoline is a Bad Thing. We are assured by many of the same people that self-service for pharmaceuticals, personal defense, transportation, and education are also Bad Things. Other folks, nominally their political competitors (in the same sense that Burgerville and Burger King are competitors) assure us that self-service in personal morality is an *extremely* Bad Thing. And look at what happened to Joycelin Elders when she suggested self-service for sex... >From this, we must conclude that self-service is in itself highly suspicious. Look at self-service grocery stores - all the time people are buying things that are bad for them. Self-service entertainment has resulted in Beavis and Butthead. And look at the way many computer professionals dress - if this is not an indictment of self-service apparel, what is? However, in the finest tradition of bureaucratic micromanagement, we as computer professionals are not qualified to even consider these effects on other aspects of Society. Such thoughts must be reserved for Wiser Heads Than Ours (unless of course the subject is economics or nuclear power, in which case Our Opinions Count). No, we as computer professionals must confine our thoughts to self-service as it affects us - through our flagrant, dangerous, and socially irresponsible use of Self-Service Computers! Self-Service Computers: Threat or Menace? Carpal Tunnel Syndrome. Backaches. Obesity. Bleeding Piles. Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. Computers are a known health threat. Reputed Scientific Journals, such as the National Enquirer, are full of stories of people being turned into three-headed cabbages by Nucular Radiation from video displays. It is obvious that the average computer professional, while quite able to find obscure flaws in Pentiums or the secret levels in Doom, is a helpless incompetent when it comes to actually typing on or reading from personal computers. We get so caught up in our alleged thinking that we don't notice our bodies turning into rickety tubs of cancerous lard. We Need Help! Meanwhile, the Great Unwashed Masses are being deprived access to the Information Super Duper Highway. Confined to low paying jobs as sanitation workers or Congressional Representatives, these poor wretches are unable to share in this cornucopia of undocumented, virus-ridden software, poorly informed opinion, and stolen pornography that we call the Internet. These outcasts of the information age must fritter away their time which such mind-numbing activities as outdoor sports, rampant sex, and junkets to the Caribbean. When these people accidentally find their way onto the Internet, perhaps by mistakenly sending their rent check to America On Line, they begin posting meaningless, inappropriate drivel such as spam advertisements for shady lawyers, or actual referenced facts from original sources, violating the hallowed traditions of the Internet. While all citizens must have access to the Net, LET'S NOT GET CARRIED AWAY HERE. What Should We Do? (That is, how can we find new excuses to control other people with minority opinions?) The only solution is to ELIMINATE self-service computers! Every computer in the State of Oregon *must* be operated by THREE OR MORE people - one to do the thinking, one to do the typing, and one to read the screen - preferably through a foot of leaded glass! Think of all the jobs this would create! Not only would we have jobs for all the new operators themselves, we could create vast new bureaucracies to insure that the operators are specially trained, certified, and licensed! Computer Cops could roam the streets, equipped with special Jolt-sniffing dogs, breaking down the doors of self-service scofflaws! Pizza delivery drivers would find new income and respect by turning in their hacker clients! Elizabeth Furse, famous for not reading her own email and for having flunkies type in press releases, will become our shining symbol of the new, socially responsible computer age! You can help. Send your checks to C.A.S.H., the Committee to Abolish Selfservice Hardware, care of me (thnx Frank). I will see that your donation gets the attention it deserves. And on behalf of all of us here at C.A.S.H. (Arnold who handles the left side of the keyboard, Julia the right side, Millie the punctuation, Sam who reads the verbs, Trevor who reads the nouns, and our shop steward Penny, who is lobbying for a government grant to bring in a mentally-challenged lesbian vegetarian special needs hispanic-surnamed person of color to watch the blinky lights on the modem) may you have an appropriate and socially enlightening seasonal celebration! -- Moderators accept or reject articles based solely on the criteria posted in the Frequently Asked Questions. Article content is the responsibility of the submittor. Submit articles to ahbou-sub(a)acpub.duke.edu. To write to the moderators, send mail to ahbou-mod(a)acpub.duke.edu. -- Ben.Goren(a)asu.edu, Arizona State University School of Music Finger ben(a)tux.music.asu.edu for PGP public key ID 0x875B059.

1 0

Re: C`punks slogan? - Pri
by jsled＠free.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- lmccarth(a)thor.cs.umass.ed wrote: > Lest we suffer a recurrence of the C'punks Logo thread, which generated a > whole raft of list traffic which would have been better kept private, please > reply directly to Joshua and not to the whole list. [He seems to imply that > he wants private replies ("testing procmail") anyway, but I want to encourage > this practice explicitly.] Thanks... actually, that's exactly what I wanted, but forgot to put it in... and my last post about "Slogan help": disregard that entirely... it's not needed (either part). But so far I've only gotten one reply about the slogan thing, so please give me help on that one, folks... Josh Sled <jsled@ctp.org/jsled@free.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLxf3kKTT29daLBKRAQGEWgQAhrKR/r/+mqXO63RN86c7hq3bsmid2KLU ct2zJAebaZBzVvltrF3WsBYoWmCSo1tWrYFjv3QsU1gnRJRyxSGVtzzkfOSq7b51 UlGRzUb+6AXvviWmqdBwHGWbT4M6/mxxH8X8gC/eeFWyHMpgEcFzhV9tWUHCqkC/ GMDvXoaKPa0= =i71M -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- þ KWQ/2 1.2g NR þ "MTV get off the air!" - DKs

1 0

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by pstemari＠erinet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> newsgroups. Mandating encryption renders this mode useless. >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > At 02:42 AM 1/15/95 -0600, Larry E wrote: >Here, I don't understand your point. If you mean an encrypted >message to a remailer cannot result in a plaintext usenet posting, >that of course is not true. The remailers have PGP keys of their >own, just as any private user may. In addition, some of the >remailers support direct usenet posting. Thus, a message may be >encrypted to the remailer and posted as plaintext as the remailer >decrypts the message. I wasn't referring to requiring encryption using the remailer's public key. I was referring to the stuff discussed here, where the remailer operator insists on ensuring that the traffic is encrypted over and beyond the remailer's public key, in order to give the operator plausable deniability. Really, all inbound remailer traffic should be encrypted with the remailer's public key if any significant level of security is desired. --Paul J. Ste. Marie pstemari(a)well.sf.ca.us, pstemari(a)erinet.com

1 0

Another problem w/Data Havens...
by Robert Rothenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I can see a potential problem with Data Havens (as they've been discussed here) that may very well inspire the wrath of the authorities more than nuclear secrets or dirty pictures of J.Edgar Hoover... How does one keep a site from becomming a remote pirated-software exchange site? (Esp. since after that MIT case laws may be changed...) It seems that such a service could become a magnet for the "elite warez" crowd... and even if the operator isn't jailed it could lead to a shutdown of the service.

3 3

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by pstemari＠erinet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:53 AM 1/14/95 -0600, Larry E wrote: > ... Those who believe remailers are an evil will argue against any >measure that will promote their presence (and I'm not suggesting >you're in that group). ... True enough. > ... Is encryption a step in the right direction, if an imperfect one? If >not I hope some other positive steps are proposed soon, else I fear >remailers may face extinction. The big problem I have with mandatory encryption for remailers is that it thwarts one of the two major purposes of remailers. Basically I see remailers serving two goals: 1) Defeating traffic analysis of point-to-point communications. Mandating encryption for this is redundant--anyone who wanted this would be encrypting their mail to begin with. Also, I don't believe this mode of operation generates many complaints. 2) Anonymous broadcast transmission. This one can generate a lot of complaints, but it is also very important for things like *.recovery newsgroups. Mandating encryption renders this mode useless. There is a third use, which is anonymous point-to-point transmission. While this is of some benefit for anonymous tip line, it makes things like mailbombs and hate mail very easy. --Paul J. Ste. Marie pstemari(a)well.sf.ca.us, pstemari(a)erinet.com

2 1

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by pstemari＠erinet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:51 AM 1/14/95 -0700, Ben.Goren(a)asu.edu wrote: > ... Dave certainly doesn't want to know what Alice is sending him, because he >might have to answer to a Grand Jury if he did. ... > >Of course, any data haven worth paying for will offer lots of neat >features, like PGP support, anonymous file drops, and all other sorts of >goodies. But that does little good if Alice can trick Dave into selling >child pornography. ... At 11:45 PM 1/14/95, Robert Rothenberg wrote: > ... How does one keep a site from becomming a remote pirated-software exchange >site? (Esp. since after that MIT case laws may be changed...) It seems that >such a service could become a magnet for the "elite warez" crowd... and even >if the operator isn't jailed it could lead to a shutdown of the service. The whole point of a "data haven" is that the site of operation is in a jurisdiction where these things are not legal problems. If you operate a DH in a location where child pornography/copyright laws are vigorously enforced, I really doubt that encryption is going to make any difference. As Robert rightly points out, a DH probably will become a location of massive copyright violation, etc ad nauseum. I've cc'ed Mike Godwin on this in the hope that he can shed some light on what the scienter requirements for something like this would be. --Paul J. Ste. Marie pstemari(a)well.sf.ca.us, pstemari(a)erinet.com

1 0

L.A. area-Karl Hess Club
by j.hastings6＠genie.geis.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following was written by me, Kent Hastings: Sorry, no PGP sig, I'm stranded in Chico,CA for a while... L O S A N G E L E S A R E A M E E T I N G "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, and let me remind you, moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue." - Aristotle, as used by Karl Hess for Barry Goldwater. --- T h e K a r l H e s s C l u b --- "GOODBYE, MURRAY!" In the third meeting in the Post Election Series, we intended to present an update on the Objectivists after our meetings with the Republicans, the Libertarian Party, and Left Anarchists. Unfortunately, the Ayn Rand Institute declined our invitation to address our group on The Night Of January The 16th. When readers of Liberty Magazine were asked to rate the influence of various thinkers, at the top, with an equal rating to Rand, was "Mr. Libertarian," Murray N. Rothbard, PhD. Murray died last week, so we will instead have a special Memorial tribute to his life and thought. He is best known for his work in Austrian School economics and Libertarian philosophy, and notorious for bashing Objectivists with essays like "The Sociology of the Ayn Rand Cult." (Don't worry, the abuse was mutual). His most recent libertarian strategy was to make an alliance with the Old Right, a.k.a. "Paleoconservatives." We hope you'll agree that this is relevant in our Post Election environment. Samuel Edward Konkin III (SEK3) knew Murray personally, and credits him as a founder of the modern Libertarian movement in written accounts in his magazine, New Libertarian. I assume SEK3 will host tributes from others who also knew Murray. Monday, January 16, 1995 Hasmik's Family Restaurant Cheviot Hills neighborhood of Los Angeles National Blvd (I think 9824 National) Unfortunately, I can't attend this one because of the floods, and I don't have the address handy, but it is the same time and place as the last meeting. Kent - j.hastings6(a)genie.geis.com

1 0

Re: Scientology
by lcottrell＠popmail.ucsd.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- 1/15/95 TO: THOMAS M. SMALL COUNSEL FOR RELIGIOUS TECHNOLOGY CENTER AND BRIDGE PUBLICATIONS, INC. FROM: Lance Cottrell Operator of remailer@nately and mixmaster@nately In response to your email of January 3, 1995 requesting that I block anonymous posting to the Internet news groups alt.clearing.technology and alt.religion.scientology. Although my remailers have always supported direct posting to news groups, this feature has never been advertised or supported. Since direct posting from my remailers is never used, I am willing to comply with your request. Posting to alt.clearing.technology and alt.religion.scientology has been blocked. By this action I do not admit to any wrongdoing on my part, nor do I wish to imply any wrongdoing on the part of any users of my remailers. I am merely turning of a feature that I never intended to be used. By design it is not possible to prevent users from using my remailers to send a message to another computer to be posted. I can not, and will not, block mail to other remailers or to mail-to-news gateways. Yours, Lance M. Cottrell CC: Cypherpunks(a)toad.com, remailer-operators(a)c2.org, alt.privacy.anon-server, alt.privacy, alt.religion.scientology, alt.clearing.technology -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUBLxl9WlVkk3dax7hlAQH5lAP9HWND3nMsoz/Yn6fz36iqtDqI7s3cEllM Gaajeq4qAR/t5a5CrEyOW1sYq+bxw5UZppREJC5uBbcp7ZP2k/7jprEcq9O7run3 ZX985aIY8f5kI6GmUemhmQcflgyNDoeDJMFhRBrvDQqCWueLKVUZLNXx9bsMCi94 EH/mStSfdJY= =UgN1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1