December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

None Other / Re: None
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

? the platypus {aka David Formosa} wrote: > On Wed, 20 Aug 1997, Anonymous wrote: > > >It's actually closer to a cult -- a small group with it's own shared > > >reality -- a reality quite at variance with societal norms. > > > Ahhh, look, the spook speaks. > > Never the less the spook has a good point. We must never let ourselfs get > into a form of group thing or let ourselfs get blinded by ideology. "Close ranks! Every man for himself!"

1 0

Re: An end to "court appointed attorneys"
by nobody＠neva.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

frissell(a)panix.com wrote: > Jury nullification and aggressive attacks on the judge and the prosecutor are > just a few of the defense strategies that a lawyer won't indulge in but a > client proceeding in pro per is free to use. > > DCF > > "I respectfully request that your Honor recuse yourself because you have a > financial interest in the outcome of these proceedings. Your salary is paid > from tax monies and if my arguments on the tax system are accepted, your > income will be cut off. I request appointment of a judge who does not > receive payment from taxation." Things Judges Love To Hear #328: "If you're going to be deciding my fate, would you mind peeing into this cup for me? Nothing personal, you understand." PissMonger

1 0

Re: publicdata.com
by Martin Pool 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The fact that it will now be controlled from Anguilla is particularly tasty. Martin -- Don't believe everything you read. ------ fwded ------------------------ Forwarded-by: glen mccready <glen(a)qnx.com> Resent-Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:14:49 -0400 Resent-From: 0xdeadbeef(a)substance.abuse.blackdown.org Forwarded-by: Nev Dull <nev(a)bostic.com> Forwarded-by: "John P. Kole" <kole(a)slash.rsn.hp.com> This is referring to the web site that allowed you to obtain drivers license information from a name, or a name from a license tag number. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 02:54 From: WEBINFO(a)PUBLICDATA.COM Subj: GoodBye PublicData.com Dear Friends, It is with mixed emotions that I bring you news as to the future of PublicData.com. First let me tell you that we appreciate all of the letters of support that you have sent. During the many days of confusion, your kind letters help us to remain focused on the tasks at hand. Our company ShadowSoft, Inc. publishes Public Records CDs and we specialize in consulting or contracting with databases (preferably large databases). ShadowSoft was approached around the end on 1996 and was asked if we could place our public records databases on the Internet. After a little bit of tinkering the basic model that you see at PublicData.com was developed. ShadowSoft is staffed with the best technical people in the industry but we don't have skills in the area of marketing. It has been our desire all along to simply be the technical and database contractor for someone who wished to run the business of marketing and merchandising PublicData.com. A law passed by the Texas legislature this year banning the distribution of public data records over the Internet has made finding a merchandiser difficult and has made us re-think our position. I have made the decision that ShadowSoft shall cease operating PublicData.com on August 31, 1997. Because of my own personal belief that keeping public records available to the public in a free society is critical and essential to keeping our country free, ShadowSoft has sold PublicData.com to a company based in Anguilla, British West Indies. The company which is named PublicData.com.ai Ltd. has purchased all of the programs that ShadowSoft developed which gives you access to the information over the Internet. In addition, ShadowSoft will consult for PublicData.com but our data was not sold to them as a part of our deal. Instead, PublicData.com has purchased another copy of the same databases and should be able to provide uninterrupted service to you after September 1, 1997. The new owners of PublicData.com should be sending you a note very soon. Thanks again for all of your support and please consider keeping a subscription with PublicData.com. Sincerely, Bruce President ShadowSoft, Inc.

1 0

Re: Remailer chaining
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

C. James wrote: > Since Jam started chaining through Neva I have had double the > complaints, double the spam. Its like I run 2 remailers now. Multiple Choice: 1) Chain all of your mail through Jam, then it will be like you are both running no remailer. 2) Chail all of your incoming mail, except for that from Jam, through Jam, then it will be like you are both running 1 remailer. 3) Put Jam's abuse address in your headers, then it will be like Jam is running 2 remailers. 4) Put the Whitehouse address as the abuse address in your headers, and write to let us know how Jim Bell is doing. ChainMonger

1 0

SSLRef (SSLtelnet)
by don＠cs.byu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I have been looking at a number of SSLTelnet/FTP programs (available from utopia.hacktic.nl by the way) and they would seem to all require Netscape's library. Anyone know about this? I found the following link for SSLRef but I was just wondering if it was the only way to implement SSL telnet&ftp. I would hate to see people not be able to use them simply because there's no illegal copies available. URL: http://home.netscape.com/info/sslref.html If anyone knows of any clones or foreign sources please speak up. Don -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMElX4cLa+QKZS485AQERIQL/SBZAOAdAWSzfl/W9GNfDEU7e+3pBua5s z84iGGuT5CfCGM4X5rYGKV4DuRVfFPyNQc++bn8SpPgyenbvBK+gc6400FHVskr3 Y4HAlBTqSSoyfOUHlhnEAs63nsjDGdFM =ihYg -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- <don(a)cs.byu.edu> fRee cRyPTo! jOin the hUnt or BE tHe PrEY PGP key - http://bert.cs.byu.edu/~don or PubKey servers (0x994b8f39) June 7&14, 1995: 1st amendment repealed. Death threats ALWAYS pgp signed * This user insured by the Smith, Wesson, & Zimmermann insurance company * PS: my failure to lament violations of ITAR should not be confused with actual involvment in criminal activity. Heh heh heh. Catchyalater

2 1

Re: An end to "court appointed attorneys"
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May wrote: > > At 1:16 PM -0700 8/20/97, Patrick Oonk wrote: > > >I am glad I live in the Netherlands, where there's at least of bit > >of social consciousness left. > think of it as > evolution in action. > > Besides, in about 6.7 years, the world will have replaced them. People are > like Doritos...the world will make more. Doritos, broken eggs and spilled milk are the key in-greed-ients for Huevos Capitalist. (No onions, because of the spilled milk.) Poached eggs are the key in-thieve-ient for Huevos Socialist. (No garlic, because blood-suckers are allergic to it.) (When people ask me what I brought to a pot-luck dinner, I tell them I brought a pig's stomach.) HuevoMonger

1 0

Re: O.J. ObCrypto: Fuhrman's Folly Fans Fakery Fears...
by monty.harder＠famend.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

RA> separate step/pass) Encrypt the Signed Message (IOW is E+S just a short cut RA> for the two processes done in sequence using the same key for both The only way that -es uses the same key for both the encryption and signature is if I have EncryptToSelf turned on, or I explicity specify my signature key as one of the recipients. My privkey is used for the signature, but =your= pubkey is used for the encryption. * A dork with a modem can become a dork with a modem and an Internet address. --- * Monster(a)FAmend.Com *

1 0

Re: Direct Socket to Remailer?
by loki＠obscura.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:25 PM 9/1/95, ROBO Mixmaster Remailer wrote: >I've heard of telnetting to port 25 to send SEMI-untraceable e-mail. >The procedure, quite frankly, sounds rather complicated. > >Most of my mail that I don't want traced goes through the Mixmaster >remailer network. I'm using Winsock-compatible software via a PPP >connection. Is it possible, for example, to tell my mailer software >to use the remailer itself, such as "remail.obscura.com" as the mail >host, rather than "mail.myISP.com"? Will it work, at least for >sending, without having an account at "obscura.com", or whatever >remailer? Would that be less traceable than sending it through my >ISP's mail host? I don't think it would provide much more security, but it might keep you ISP from logging the mail. If you are using mixmaster(a)remail.obscura.com as your remailer, you are welcome to use it as the mail host for that mail. It is a slow connection so please do not use is as your regular mail host. You should try the telnet port 25 trick. It is amazingly simple (but not secure). Just "telnet some.machine.com 25" and type help. It will guide you through it. It is quite informative. -Lance ---------------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell loki(a)obscura.com PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. Mixmaster, the next generation remailer, is now available! http://obscura.com/~loki/Welcome.html or FTP to obscura.com "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche ----------------------------------------------------------

4 3

Re: Crypto '95: Robert Morris
by anon-remailer＠utopia.hacktic.nl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

So Robert Morris worked for NSA. Does that mean that the infamous 1988 Internet Worm was part of a NSA-sponsored intelligence-gathering mission?

2 1

None
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:26 PM 8/20/97 -0700, you wrote: >Slippery slopes are something to worry about, for sure. But librarians are experts in this. We put a lot of thought and care into "borderline cases", we agonize over Madonna's Sex and American Psycho. That's why the early filters were unacceptable to us. You may not like filters, but you have to admit, they have improved a great deal, offering much finer granularity and configurability than before, and improving all the time. ROFLMAO!!! > >Most would-be censors I've met aren't evil people, they're intentions are usually quite noble and sincere. Except they want to censor everyone based on their views, which is tyranny. That isn't noble. >True, many of them are wrong and misguided, but it accomplishes nothing to demonize people you disagree with, except to promote fear and misunderstanding. I don't misunderstand censors. They're Nazi bastards who enjoy making the internet to fit their evil views and intentions, not caring what the rest of free speechers on the net care.

1 0