December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

CPAC/Sewer/XtatiX Continues to Brew
by Mike Duvos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Fwd from alt.censorship: Another unhappy customer of CPAC. Stephen Hopkins writes: > Some time ago, an organisation called CPAC, the murky Child > Protection and Advocacy Coalition decided to crusade > against certain so-called "boy-lover" sites on the > Internet, with the aim of getting them shut down. The > organisation, headed by one Anne Cox- -who refuses to > identify the organisations comprising CPAC--identified some > black-listed sites, of which my own, > http://www.stadiou.demon.co.uk, is one of them. Actually, the Lovely and Talented Ms. Cox is far too shrewd to actually libel people on her organization's home page, so she generally links to other sites performing this function, while maintaining a discreet distance behind an appropriate disclaimer. Two months ago, I wouldn't have known CPAC from a hole in the ground. Today, quite a few people have come to know the organization and its various shills, largely because of their attempts at "Ideological Cleansing" on the World Wide Web. I had a pretty good idea what the organizational agenda was when I saw the name Debbie Mahoney, who most Usenetters remember from the Nikki Craft frivolities. Half a dozen screws short of a fully connected brain, even on her better days, and an agenda and a bag of dirty tricks that would have made Richard Nixon jealous. > I feel almost honoured that my on-line activities have > attracted this much interest, but in including it on a > list of "child molestors" and "pedophiles" CPAC attribute > far more importance to it than it deserves. Most of CPAC's visible agenda is pretty reasonable. It's the part about harrassing legal First Ammendment protected speech on the Net, based on their perception of the sexual orientation of the people engaging in it, because supposedly such people might *SOMEDAY* commit a crime, that is a bit of a civil liberties stretch. Like most Dworks, they believe in "voodoo molestation," where unnamed children thousands of miles away are vicariously "exploited" should a single stranger have "impure thoughts" about them by looking at even innocuous photographs, or should accurate depictions of childhood sexuality be permitted in mainstream media. They are getting their nonsense written into the law one tiny step at a time, the Hatch "synthetic sexual depictions of minors" smoke and mirrors being their latest accomplishment. > Jim Tradwick, a San Antonio, Texas businessman, can testify > to the tactics of vigilante censors. Tradwick runs XtatiX, > a small Texas based company offering Web space to > individuals and companies. In June he found himself on the > receiving end of hate e-mails and harassing phone calls. > The U.S. Customs threatened to confiscate his computer > systems for investigation, and the San Antonio police > threatened to take away his young son. What's really amazing is how much under the table support the anti-civil liberties agenda gets from LEAs and agencies of the Federal Government. With Civil Forfeiture laws reversing the concept of "innocent until proven guilty," and helpful government agencies attempting to apply pressure to suspected "Thought Criminals," it becomes very difficult for the typical business owner to avoid capitulating to these folks. > Had Tradwick been caught dabbling with child pornography? > Or had he perhaps allowed his systems to be used by a > pedophile ring? Twice no. His only "crime", that so > infuriated CPAC, was to host a gay site called "Free > Spirits" (http://www.ivan.net/fs) abou t attraction to > teenagers, which included articles written by gay teens > themselves. > But Cox, along with her ally--a retired police officer > called Mike Paladino obsessed with sexual perversion--and > his contingent of jackbooted thugs, decreeded that Free > Spirits was beyond the pale. And thus Tradwick found himself > on the receiving end of harassment, hate mail, and even > death threats against his son. Paladino isn't just a retired police officer, he is a retired Police Captain! We're talking management here. He doesn't just wield the ol' "Assault Plunger," he's part of the design team. :) > I made an effort to build bridges between myself and CPAC > by posting what I hoped would be considered reasoned and > reasonable debate on their discussion board. However, even > that was too much, as my access to their forum was > restricted to read-only. I can only conclude that Cox didn't > want reason to interfere with the prevailing views > expressed in the forum. Har! The only rhetorical weapon the Lovely and Talented Ms. Cox needs in her forum is the Delete Key. > So I am circulating, via Usenet, blind e-mail, and BoyChat, > the text of the message I attempted to post to CPAC's forum > under my BoyChat and IRC nickname Rob Walker. I welcome > anyone from CPAC to discuss the points herein, anywhere > they like. I know poste rs to the CPAC forum occasionally > monitor BoyChat, and Usenet groups such as alt.censorship > and others. Unlike other boards, BoyChat does not censor > messages whose sentiment its Webmaster does not agree with. Well, that's very nice, but I think this is a task tantamount to trying to convert the Ayatollah Khomeni to Episcopalianism But I wish you the best of luck in your quest. [CPAC-Censored Social Science Essay Expunged] -- Mike Duvos $ PGP 2.6 Public Key available $ enoch(a)zipcon.com $ via Finger $ {Free Cypherpunk Political Prisoner Jim Bell}

1 0

Acceptable NIS&T restrictions
by Pat Farrell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If we can break away from t-shirts as munitions... I'm going to the NIS&T session this week. I'm trying to figure out what, if any, part of the process can be made acceptable to those in favor of bringing US policy into the 90s. I'm not sure that this is possilbe. NIS&T published (and it has been reposted to the list and sci.crypt many times) their goals. Can we make suggestions to any that are acceptable and realistic? Here are some of their criteria: "Avoiding multiple encryption -- How can the product be designed so as to prevent doubling (or tripling, etc.) the key space of the algorithm?" CME has been suggesting DES | TRAN | DES | TRAN | DES for years. Can they really _avoid_ (i.e. prevent) this? "Disabling the key escrow mechanism -- How can products be made resistant to alteration that would disable or circumvent the key escrow mechanism? How can the "static patch" problem be avoided? How can this be tested?" This is easy in hardware. Is it even possible in software? "Practical Key Access -- How can mechanisms be designed so that repeated involvement of escrow agents is not required for decryption for multiple files/messages during the specified access period?" At least this has a chance of being real. We need to have a suggestion for expiration times for the escrowed keys. This was a huge problem with the initial Clipper. Is there a reasonable middle ground between long term keys such as PGP uses, and the ephemeral keys of a D-H exchange? "Certified escrow agents -- Can products be designed so that only escrow agents certified by the U.S. government (domestic, or under suitable arrangements, foreign) are utilized? What should be the criteria for an acceptable U.S. escrow agent?" We all know that Tim's Flakey Key Escrow Service is most likely not "an acceptable US escrow agent." But since CKE is a good thing, what are the characteristics of an acceptable service to us? I've added the discussion "topics" that NIS&T sent to participants to my WWW pages if you want to see them all, http://www.isse.gmu.edu/~pfarrell/nistmeeting.html But I expect that most of the criteria that I edited out are unacceptable to most on this list. Without further discussion. Pat Pat Farrell Grad Student http://www.isse.gmu.edu/students/pfarrell Info. Systems & Software Engineering, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA PGP key available on homepage #include <standard.disclaimer>

1 0

The Dangers of Caribbean Data Havens
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From Bruce Sterling in "Islands in the Net" to various reports of data havens and Internet services being set up by actual people, there has been much speculation about using Caribbean islands for data havens. But the infrastructure has been lacking. Low-bandwidth inter-island links. And now yet another huge hurricane is bearing down on the Lesser Antilles, heading directly for Puerto Rico and Hispaniola (Haiti and Dominican Republic). "Outages" lasting days or weeks after these islands get torn up every few years will not go too well with international commerce. Some fixes may help: * higher-bandwidth connections, e.g., undersea fiber. * satellites as primary or secondary connections * more secure on-island facilities, designed to maintain contact with satellites or fibers even with a Force 4 hurricane direct hit. The "regulatory arbitrage" aspects still make using the Islands advantageous (though they can be buffeted by political storms as well as physical ones). At least two current or past Cypherpunks are living in the Islands and working on some schemes. Something to think about. Personally, I think a distributed system based on crypto is a more robust approach, the "Libertaria in Cyberspace" view I've talked about. --Tim May ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 2

None
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:33 PM 8/22/97 -0400, you wrote: >> Great Barrington, MA -- In a recent >> pronouncement, television evangelist and >> head of the Christian Coalition, Pat >> Robertson, advocated death by stoning for >> crypto enthusiasts. Figures. I've never understood this dumb Christian overlooking of how the world actually functions. You don't "stone" people to death anymore, there's other ways to kill them. Second, this "Pat Robertson" is a fascist. >> Robertson used the news of the July 25th >> Senate Commerce Committee hearing to promote >> his extreme beliefs. A segment on the July 27, >> 1997 broadcast of The 700 Club featured news >> of the Senate hearing. Employing the >> historical event as a starting point, the >> program delved into the possibility of the >> existence of anonymous free speech on the >> Internet. Something that should be spread, rather than destroyed, but narrow minded Christians don't seem to get that. >> While Robertson viewed the Internet with >> suspicion, on a more serious note, he >> launched into a diatribe against those who >> entertain the existence of uninhibited free >> speech on the Internet. He said, in a >> rambling discourse, that if such a thing >> existed, it would simply create demons that >> would lead people away from Christ. Lead them away from opression, to freedom. According to this guy, the people who helped stike down the CDA are devils. Also, this clearly shows that this man is a Nazi. >> According to Robertson, the threat is so >> serious that people who believe in free >> speech should be put to death by stoning -- >> according to "God's word." Fuck him. God's word is fascism, hate, narrow-mindedness, and a Big Brother State. He can take his bible and shove it up his ass. >> "The Bible says the Earth belongs to man, >> but the Word belongs to the Lord," >> Robertson said. Sorry, we own earth, and God doesn't exist. >> "He has given us the Earth. He also warned >> us in the book of Matthew of the dangers of >> corrupting forces such as the Internet which >> can be used for evildoers: First of all, this also proves Christians are incabable of making real world arguments, because they rely so heavily on a 1000-page book filled with lies. >> "'A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can >> a bad tree bear good fruit. Every tree that >> does not bear good fruit is cut down and >> thrown into the fire. Therefore, by their >> fruits you will know them. (Matthew 7:17-20)' I'm not going to bother with cryptic messages sent by a god-loving Nazi. >> "And you see, there is only one Word, and >> that is the Word of God: Bullshit. >> "'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word >> was with God, and the Word was God. (John 1:1)'" >> 'For the Word of the Lord is right; and all his >> works are done with faithfulness. He loveth >> mercy and judgment: the earth is full of the >> mercy of the Lord. (Psalm 32:4-5)' Mercy? How merciful is commiting mass-murder because humans don't fit your bill, god? Second off, cryptic responses aren't worth a shit in arguments. The word of the lord is fascism. >> "Can a demon appear as a slanty-eyed, >> funny-looking computer hacker? No, but I see them all the time in tghe form of men wearing robes with crosses on them, reading from a 1000-page book of lies. >> Of course >> he can, or it can. Of course they can deceive >> people. And if they can lead somebody away >> from the true God, or away from Jesus >> Christ, anyway it happens, it doesn't >> matter, you will lose your salvation. It >> doesn't matter how they get you. The >> question is, did they get you, and under >> what guise? As i said, they don't lure you away from god, they open your eyes, and you grow up and stop the nonsense. >> "This is man in rebellion against God, who >> refuses to take God's Law. And God says, >> 'My covenant says you won't do this. And if >> I find anybody in Israel,'-- "which is his >> pure nation" -- 'If I find anybody in >> Israel that's doing this sort of thing, >> then I want you to take him out and dispose >> of him." That is fascism. Nazi fascism. >> "It's a clear violation of God's word. >> Stone them." That's a clear violation of my rights, shoot that Christian prick. >> Skipp Porteous, Freedom Writer publisher, >> commented: "As the founder and chairman of >> the Christian Coalition -- a group >> dedicated to becoming the most powerful >> political force in America -- Robertson's >> extreme ideas need to be taken seriously, >> for they not only negate pluralism, but >> condemn to death those who dare to believe >> differently." Which is fascism. Nazi fascism. This loser makes Communism sound good, considering it outlaws religion. This post has moved me considerably. Some parts of his speech requires a response that words could not adequately describe. This speech of his outlines in entirety the Christian Agenda. Enslaving, murder of those different, intolerance, fascism. If Christians try to stone anyone, they should be shot right away. Freedom-Thru-AtheismMonger "Your god is DEAD!!! And no one cares!!! If there is a hell, I'll see you there!!!!!" - Nine Inch Nails, "Heresy"

1 0

Re: Emergency File Wipe Algorithim Re: Emergency File Wipe Algorithim
by anon-remailer＠utopia.hacktic.nl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

When a running computer is seized in some sort of law enforcement raid, what are the chances someone would think to backup the contents of a RAMDISK drive prior to powering it down?

4 3

e$: More fun with cash: Senate Bill 307
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Has anyone heard about this bill? Comments? Cheers, Bob Hettinga >From: glasgow(a)geoserv.isgs.uiuc.edu (Mary.Glasgow) >Subject: Senate Bill 307 2-tier Money System >Date: 31 Aug 1995 13:54:45 GMT >Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana >Summary: Senate Bill 307 2-Tier Money System >Keywords: Senate Bill 307 2-Tier Money System > >In the Senate of the United States, January 30, 1995, Mr. Leahy introduced >the following bill, which was read twice and referred to the Committee on >Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. > >...for purposes of brievty, I will quote only from sections (c) Currency >Exchange and (d) Domestic Use and Nondomestic Use Currency. > >(c) Currency Exchange-- > (1) Plan--Not later than 12 months after the date of enactment of this >section, the Secretary shall devedlop and begin implementation of a plan to >require the exchange of all existing $100 denomination United States currency >held within and outside of the United States for $100 denomination domestic >use and nondomestic use United States currency issued in accordance with this >sectin. > > (2) Exchange Requirements--The plan established under paragraph (1) shall >require the currency to be exchanged-- > (A) at financial institutions regulated under United States law and >subject to United States currency transaction reporting and other money >laundering deterrence requirements; or > (B) at financial institutions that the Secretary finds, because of >treaty obligations, other provisions of law, or other agreements, are >required to report significant transactions in United States currency to >the United States Treasury, and abide by such obligations. > (3) 6-Month Exchange Period-- > (A) In general--During the period beginning on the date that is 12 >months after the date of enactment of this section and ending on the date >that is 18 months after that date of enactment, the Secretary shall permit >the exchange of circulating $100 denomination United States currency for >equal numbers of the domestic use and nondomestic use $100 currency issued >in accordance with this section at institutions described in paragraph (2). > (B) Non-Negotiability--Except for claims pursuant to subsection (e), >beginning on the dat that is 18 months after the date of enactment of this >section, the United States Treasury shall not recognize $100 >denomination >United States currency issued prior to the date that is 12 months after the >date of enactment of this section as constituting a negotiable claim against >the United States Treasury, and such currency shall not constitute legal >tender for any debts, public or private. > >(d) Domestic Use and Nondomestic Use Currency--Beginning on the date that is >18 months after the date of enactment of this section-- > (1) domestic use currency, issued in accordance with this section shall >be recognized as constituting a negotiable claim against the United States >Treasury only when presented within the United States, and shall constitute >legal tender for any debts, public or private, only when presented in the >United States, but such currency may be exchanged for equal values of $100 >denomination nondomestic use currency (or other United States currency) only >at financial institutions regulated by United States law and subject to >United States currency transaction reporting and other money laundering >deterrence requirements; and > (2) nondomestic use currency shall be recognized as constituting a >negotiable claim against the United States Treasure, and legal tender >for >any debts, public or private, only when presented outside of the United >States, but such currency may be exchanged for equal values of $100 >denomination domestic use currency (or other United States currency) at >financial institutions regulated by United States law and subject to >United States currency transaction reporting and other money laundering >deterrence requirements. > ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Shipwright Development Corporation, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 323-7923 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf(a)clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<<

3 2

Re: Cyphernomicon, and a section on Escrow and Reputations
by dsc＠swcp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I finished my first release, a megabyte-sized file done in MORE, a powerful >outline processor (which enabled me to maintain notes, make >cross-references, and generally manage such a huge writing project). I >released it last year, and put it in my anonymous ftp account at >ftp.netcom.com, in the directory /pub/tc/tcmay, as the file CP-FAQ. Netcom >is often very crowded, though. After several tries I was not able to get this. Has anyone made it available in an alternate location? Dar (list newbie) =========================================================== Dar Scott Home phone: +1 505 299 9497 Dar Scott Consulting Voice: +1 505 299 5790 <--- 8637 Horacio Place NE Email: darscott(a)aol.com Albuquerque, NM 87111 dsc(a)swcp.com Fax: +1 505 898 6525 http://www.swcp.com/~correspo/DSC/DarScott.html My preference for attached files are in this order: AOL, Mime, Binhex4, PGP, UUencode ===========================================================

3 2

Re: Breaking Legal News.... (fwd)
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>The American legal system has spun out of control. I don't argue that she >should not have the right to sue...everybody does. But a judge can quickly >dismiss a case on a matter of law. According to the Mercury-News, the suit has been dismissed. <http://www.sjmercury.com/news/breaking/docs/016909.htm> -- Greg Broiles gbroiles(a)c2.net 510-986-8770 x 309 voice ** please note phone number has changed ** 510-986-8777 fax

1 0

Re: A problem with anonymity
by terrell＠sam.neosoft.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>To: TCMAY(a)GOT.NET, CYPHERPUNKS(a)toad.com >Subject: Re: A problem with anonymity >From: monty.harder(a)famend.com (MONTY HARDER) > > > But if the escrow agent is anonymous, we simply recurse, moving now to >the question of whether anyone can trust the Anonymous Escrow Agency not >to take the money and run. > >TC> (I mention banks because, when you look at it closely, today's banks can >TC> quite easily claim that a customer made a withdrawal when he didn't. That >TC> they don't says more about the nature of persistent businesses than about >TC> any government oversight or security features. This is a side point, but it >TC> bears keeping in mind that the real world of banks and businesses, etc., is >TC> not fully secure, either. And yet it mostly works pretty well. The reasons >TC> for this are interesting to consider.) > > A bank has $$ invested in impressive-looking buildings, (so that >vanishing into the ether and setting up shop elsewhere is rather >difficult) and several officers whose TrueNames are registered with the >appropriate agencies, so that they may be sued if they pull this >crap. > > While individual stockholders might appreciate the anonymity (and >protection from legal action) of owning stock in a bank or escrow agency >(might just combine the functions, while we're at it), they demand >onymity of the officers with whom they entrust the keys to the >corporation. >Monster(a)FAmend.Com * > > The real secret is that for most banks the individual transaction is << than the total stream of transactions. Defaulting on a single transaction will show a profit that is miniscule compared to the over-all earnings at stake if the bank's credibility is jeopardized. When banks have gotten into trouble it is frequently when they allow one customer or one transaction to represent a significant share of their business. You have a high probability of being able to trust an escrowee with your $1 if you know he intends to collect commissions on holding $1million for others based on his "trusted" representation. Buford C. Terrell 1303 San Jacinto Street Professor of Law Houston, TX 77002 South Texas College of Law voice (713)646-1857 terrell(a)sam.neosoft.com fax (713)646-1766

1 0

my crypto rump session abstract
by Matt Blaze 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(the one that david sternlight misinterpreted to mean that we had proven that clipper has no back doors): M. Blaze, J. Feigenbaum, F.T. Leighton, "Master Key Cryptosystems", Crypto '95 "rump session" abstract, August 1995. Available as: ftp://research.att.com/dist/mab/mkcs.ps -matt

1 0