December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

adobe and microsoft products cheap, 22
by pumei＠vester.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

MICROSOFT OFFICE Pro 97 only $399.00 (Full Version) for Windows 95/NT Get the latest verion of Micosoft Office Pro 97 that includes new versions of Word 97, Excel 97, Powerpoint 97, Access 97, Outlook 97, and Bookshelf Basics for the awesome price of $399.00 !! Compare our price to your typical store price of over $650.00 !!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ADOBE PHOTOSHOP 4.0 only $450.00 (Full Version) for Windows 95/NT/3.1 Professional Image Editing Adobe Photoshop 4.0 is the world standard and professionals choice in photo design and production for images used in print, multimedia, and on the web. Its packed with new creative features - and its even faster than before. Compare our price or $450.00 to your typical store price of over $600.00 !!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ADOBE PAGEMAKER 6.5 only $399.00 (Full Version) for Windows 95/NT Worlds leading desktop publisher Designed for all your layout needs, Adobe pagemaker 6.5 is the best professional publishing software for printed and online pages. It smoothly integrates with Adobe Photoshop, Adobe Illustrator, and other Adobe products. Compare our price of $399.00 to your typical store price of over $600.00 !!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ADOBE ILLUSTRATOR 7.0 only $299.00 (Full Version) for Windows 95/NT Vector drawing and illustration Adobe Illustrator 7.0 is the industry standard illustration software. Its speed, flexibility, accurate color, and rugged production stability make it one of the fundamental tools everyone depends on. Now this new version adds even more power plus brings it all the web for online graphics. Compare our price of $299.00 to your typical store price of over $450.00 ****************************************************************************** TO ORDER: Please call D.J. Distributors at (919) 537-9222 to order by credit cards (visa and mc only please). OUR STORE HOURS ARE M-F 10-5 EASTERN TIME. IF YOU NEED TO FAX YOUR ORDER PLEASE SEND CC#, EXPIR. DATE AND YOU NAME AS IT APPEARS ON YOUR CARD (FAX # IS: 919-537-3125). * Shipping is $7.95 for all U.S. orders and $24.00 for all others. )To=c

1 0

Re: Munitions shirt (again)
by liberty＠gate.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Cypherpunks: I sent this yesterday, but it appears toad may have eaten it. Here it is again. JMR -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Ian Goldberg wrote: <snip> >>So, any consensus as to whether it's actually illegal to do so? I >>remember some disagreement a few weeks ago that AFAIK wasn't resolved. And Tim replied: >The _consensus_ here seems to be: "This t-shirt is illegal to wear in front >of non-Americans," judging by the comments here. And since _I_ started all this trouble with a private e-mail to Futplex; I'll now jump in saying again, [IANAL]: "This t-shirt may or may not be illegal to wear in front of non-Americans," from my reading a while back of the dense text of this silly law, [I'll spare all of you a quote of it, but there's text that MIGHT be interpreted that way.] >The _reality_ is quite different, I think, and the "this shirt is illegal" >hype is, in my opinion, just that, hyperbole. I agree with Tim that actual enforcement of this silly a law is unlikely, especially in Ian's case right now, and *especially* during our US (election) "silly season," for obvious reasons. The availability of strong encryption is unlikely to be a major issue during this election cycle, despite Cypherpunk efforts, and enforcement of this dumb law would be a "gift" to those of us who think it should be. [I hope I'm wrong here, but I think you're safe, Ian.:)] >Even hyperbull, too. I wouldn't go *that* far, though. Poorly written, ambiguous, statist<g> laws can be interpreted in any number of ways and for a variety of reasons having little (or nothing) to do with justice. <sigh> JMR <snip> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Freedom isn't Freeh iQCVAwUBMGBvrW1lp8bpvW01AQFj1AP8C1RKpayv6V15sTBLiFLWV4tlfWRUuLfm JVWgeUeHUFxBV1EttbGv30iTmwlCJmBab/wLUag9S57DLZ6Ajed7jQe0rpra56Nl OgmM1gGU8nJJazYeqiWbYrOc/VSheSqQVLAj+vOoufW8XnU1iFkXQnRziCcyO2Nc bto4hKBrFWY= =qlSx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Regards, Jim Ray "People are deceived in masses, but enlightened one at a time." -- Dick Boddie. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- PGP key Fingerprint 51 5D A2 C3 92 2C 56 BE 53 2D 9C A1 B3 50 C9 C8 Key id. # E9BD6D35 James Milton Ray <liberty(a)gate.net> ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Help Phil! email zldf(a)clark.net or see http://www.netresponse.com/zldf _______________________________________________________________________

1 0

Prosecution of Cracking Security Systems
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:42 PM 9/20/95, Brian Davis wrote: >Certainly, Cypherpunks has gotten press lately, and what I've seen has >been good press. Capitalize on it. > >Finally, I've got to say that, as someone new to the concepts discussed >here, I found it extremely cool to read about the latest break here and >then see it in the news a day or two later. Indeed, it gives you a day's head start in preparing a prosecution! (Just kidding, of course. Brian may be a DA, but he's showing signs of being "one of us.") And on a serious note, the cracks of these various systems are helpful to the overall community. Better locks. To pick up on a point Brian made several days ago about whether or not hackers who break into systems should be applauded, criticized, prosecuted, whatever, this is how I see things, in direct parallel with the recent Netscape cracks: * Situation 1: A person who enters my home by bypassing locks cannot claim to be "just testing security" and should be prosecuted for trespass, if nothing else. * Situation 2: However, a person who publically demonstrates that a well-known type of lock is weak and can be easily bypassed is well within his rights and is, I think, doing the community a favor. I mean that he demonstrates this on a lock, or system, and not by breaking into a system. (It may be true that some number of potential thieves use the knowledge that a given lock is weak to commit crimes, but that's not the responsibility of the person demonstrating the weakness.) (Sidebar: There are some subtleties. What about someone who breaks into a computer system and leaves a harmless message announcing his intrusion? What about someone who enters my house while I'm asleep and leaves a message saying "Get better locks!"? What about Randall Schwartz and his security checks of his employer, Intel?) It seems clear to me that the breaking of Netscape's security is an example of Situation 2. And many cracker break-ins are Situation 1, though in many cases the crackers are not full-fledge criminals and may think they are just testing security. (This goes to motive, I'm sure Brian would agree, and may be why a 16-year-old cracker gets a suspended sentence instead of hard time.) (A more problematic case is what about systems with very weak or no security? This is somewhat like a yard with no clearly marked boundary, no fence, etc., or like a beach towell with valuables left on it. We've debated issues like this several times on the Cyberia list, so I won't here.) One thing that worries me is that some of the proposed laws about intellectual property and enforcment of copyrights may make it illegal to try to break the cryptographic protections of systems, even systems one has control over. (Some similarities to the "no reverse engineering" shrink-wrap licenses.) It's conceivable that Netscape Communications could, under these "anti-hacking" laws, seek a prosecution of some future Goldberg and Wagner. My guiding principles about locks and security are these: * Theft is theft, even if a bicycle is left unlocked or a house door is left ajar. * However, the first line of defense is for a property owner to lock his property up, to place fences around property, etc. Cops cannot protect in all situations, which is why security services and tools exist. * Since enforcement resources are limited, I can understand why the investigation of a theft involving unlocked, unsecured property is given low priority. This doesn't make the theft "right," and if the thief is somehow caught he cannot use the "But it was unlocked!" defense. (These problems are lessened in a system where people pay for protection, as with insurance systems, and of course as with anarcho-capitalism of the sort discussed by Benson, Friedman, and others.) --Tim May Notice: With 1000 people on the Cypherpunks list, and many on other lists I am on, nearly every article I write generates at least one question, request for more information, dispute with my choice of words, etc. I have been trying to respond to these, usually privately, but the burden has become too much, and I no longer plan to respond to trivial or ephemeral points. If you don't hear from me, this is why. Some requests for pointers to information will still be handled, but I advise people to learn how to use the archives and/or search tools. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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."

1 0

Re: Nuclear Hedge Funds / Social Engineering in History / Wiretap DiFi
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:14 PM 9/9/97 -0400, declan wrote: > ... >I'd like to ask that if anyone is planning to Nuke Washington, they >politely let me know so I can go on an extended business trip to the >Montana mountains. I mean, it's just common courtesy! ... What? And have another Juy Falkes Disaster? One of Guy Falkes co-conspirators warned a parlament member who happened to be Catholic to stay clear on the appointed day, that is how word got out. You would feel compelled to tell your closest friends. Who would, if they didn't just blab outright, tell others that they might want to leave. Ultimately, someone who dates a congressional aide will tell the aide, who having a certain loyalty to the congressperson would warn the congressperson, etc... No, it's best that you die. But at least you'll die a martyr.

1 0

[NOISE] Re: NYT on Netscape Crack
by Rob Vaughn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perry sez: >I'll pay for the "I broke Netscape's Security" T-Shirt for the >enterprising person that takes the time to find them in the object >code. (See Sameer's page on the shirts he's developing as prizes for >the Netscape flaw finders.) I find it very ironic that a company that recently raised about a gadzillion dollars through a public stock offering has been able to sit back and let people find problems with their software for free. Now people like Sameer and Perry are offering rewards for it. Kudos to them, but I think Netscape should be the one making an offer like this. A textbook author/prof who taught a class using his own book had a great method for finding mistakes in the new edition: he had us buy the current edition and gave us copies of each chapter of the new edition as we got to it, then he offered a $10 reward for each typo or mistake found, and a $100 dinner for two and credit in the new edition to whomever found the most mistakes by the end of the semester. I made $160 before I had to drop the class due to a schedule conflict. In the end, he said he was able to find over 100 errors, and considered it the cheapest and most thorough proofreading he'd ever paid for. And the class got a big charge out of it. Netscape should be offering rewards for people who find problems with their software. They'll get a lot of hard work for almost free (since you only get paid if you do find something) and in a year or two they'll have one of the most solid applications on the market. Lord knows it'll help raise public confidence too. If a tee-shirt motivates people, think what $US 1000 reward would do. Or $e 2000 in credit towards goods purchased through Netscape commercial servers? Rob V.

1 0

Re: GAK patents, anyone?
by stonedog＠ns1.net-gate.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 9 Sep 1997, Sean Roach wrote: > At 01:34 AM 9/9/97 +0200, Anonymous wrote: > > >International terrorism as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2331 is > >"activities that > >(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life > >that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United > >States or of any State, or that would be a criminal > >violation if committed within the jurisdiction of the United > >States or of any State; (B) appear to be intended (i) to > >intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to > >influence the policy of a government by intimidation or > >coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by > >assassination or kidnaping." I can't read this paragraph without shaking my head in awe. Even if their motives were for the best, which is certainly debateable, who here _can't_ think of a few incidents where our own government's agencies were involved in _exactly_ these sorts of activities? I realize that I'm not saying anything that hasn't been noted time and again in this forum, but I suppose I'm young enough that this sort of blatant doublespeak just blows my mind. -stonedog

1 0

Cryptography book source
by Joel McNamara 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just stumbled on to an online book vendor that advertises over a million titles available for order, many discounted from list. Very nice Web interface. A quick search for "cryptography" displayed 121 titles. A wide range, from Crypto proceedings to technical to historical. Check out: http://www.amazon.com Joel McNamara joelm(a)eskimo.com - http://www.eskimo.com/~joelm for PGP key Thomas Jefferson used strong crypto, shouldn't you?

1 0

No Subject
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate wrote: > Let's look at an admittedly contrived example but I believe it will suffice. > There are two fires at opposite ends of the coverage area for a fire house. > On Saturday they receive a call to go to one end, where the wealthy live. > Would you have the owner pay prior to the firemen putting the fire out? > Would they pay some premium beforehand? Now on Sunday a fire occurs on the > other end where the poor are. Assuming they can't pay the bill would the > firemen drive away? If so, wouldn't this in fact pose a threat not only to > the other poor but also the wealthy since the fire might spread if it got > large enough. Would the wealthy then be asked to pay for that run of the > fire truck? What if they refused, how would the firemen pay for the food to > feed their family? Perhaps go out and burn down more rich houses... Contrived? Did you read the post from News of the Weird about the funeral home owners in Bankok(?) who were paying hospital employees to murder patients who were known to them and likely to use their services when they died? (Subject: Oxygen Escrow?) Sadly, no matter what sicko, bizarre scenario you wish to 'contrive' in order to illustrate a point, if your point is valid, then it is likely that you can find a real-life example that runs parallel to it.

2 1

Crypto *import* ban?
by Brad Dolan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What exactly does a ban on import of "defense articles and services" which are not in "furtherance of world peace" mean? Could you ban crypto imports? Imports of chopped liver? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Here is a final rule issued by ATF regarding the import of "defense articles" into the United States. It appears in the Federal Register at 60 FR 47866 (9/15/950). This becomes a regulation in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 27 CFR, part 47, Importation of Arms. Sec. 47.52 Import restricitons applicable to certain countries. (a) It is the policy of the United States to deny licenses and other approvals with respect to defense articles and defense services originating in certain countries or areas. This policy applies to Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Mongolia, North Korea, Sudan, Syria, Vietnam, and the States that comprise the former Soviet Union [list of countries omitted]. This policy applies to countries or areas with respect to which the United States maintains an arms embargo [list of countries omitted]. It also applies when an import would not be in furtherance of world peace and the security and foreign policy of the United States. [end excerpt]

1 0

Deadly Argyles [was Miami Vice]
by jordan＠macandco.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>>> Here's one: http://cnn.com/US/9709/09/briefs.pm/crime.sock.reut/index.html - Jordan <<<< He should have kept them rolled in his pants where they belong! For the browser impaired: [Begin quotation] Police think sock is gun, shoot man September 9, 1997 Web posted at: 7:43 p.m. EDT (2343 GMT) MIAMI (Reuter) -- A Florida man who covered his hand with a sock to work on his car was recovering in the hospital Tuesday after being shot by police who were told he had a gun. Bobby Whipple, 27, had wrapped his hand in a dark sock while working on his car Saturday, prompting at least two people to alert police to a man wielding a gun. After receiving the reports, 14 officers surrounded Whipple and five of them, including one using a shotgun that shoots pellets, opened fire when he did not respond to calls to put his "weapon" down. A spokeswoman at Jackson Memorial Hospital said Whipple was in good condition. "Witnesses said that he had a gun and the officers assumed they were correct ... He took the position of an aggressive stance," said Pat Brickman, a spokesman for the Metro-Dade Police Department. "At this point, we don't have any indication that they acted inappropriately when faced with deadly force." The Miami Herald reported that Whipple's attorney was preparing a civil rights lawsuit against the police department over the shooting. Copyright 1997 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.

1 0