December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: AA BBS sysops found guilty
by jim＠bilbo.suite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > At best, the SC decision could include language says that > > persons downloading information are responsible for > > ensuring that the material is not in violation of local > > laws. At worst, the SC could say that the operators of > > information systems are responsible for insuring > > material is not made available to persons in certain > > regions, if the material violates laws in those regions. > > > > And both are similarly unreasonnable: At best, how do you > know for sure before you download, Exactly what I fear most from this case. In order to assist users, sysops may be required to rate and/or categorize all downloadable material using a rating scale or list of categories determined by some governing body (FCC?). If the sysops do not following the guidelines, then they can be considered participants in the distribution of "bad stuff" to "good places". > and at worst, are you supposed to know the law for all > countries, states, counties and cities with access to > Internet and connected networks when even an attorney > cannot possibly know the law for a single state? > I think "At worst" is not very likely, for the reasons you state. That's why I worry more about "At best". I think the only real good outcome would be that the verdict is overturned because of some technicality, preventing the case from becoming some kind of landmark. However, this would only delay things until the next case. Jim_Miller(a)suite.com

2 1

Keyword voice searching
by cmckie＠ccs.carleton.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone have access to the original article? The author is unnamed in this version. One would wonder who the "congressional and other sources" are as well. ============= Ottawa Citizen Friday July 29 1994 A9 Key words trigger U.S. security system Seattle Times WASHINGTON - Dozens of words, including "bomb", "assassination" and "terrorist," apparently can trigger a recording device used by the National Security Agency to monitor phone calls between the U.S. and foreign countries. So say congressional and other sources who have been offered a glimpse of the agency's secretive electronic intelligence gathering. There is surveillance equipment, referred to simply as the big vacuum cleaner, said to be capable of sweeping up conversations in the air, recording them and then searching for words that might indicate some hostile action against this country. In his book The Puzzle Palace, author James Bamford contends the agency operates a worldwide network that can eavesdrop on almost every phone conversation in the world. The agency has denied it has such broad capabilities.

1 0

penet spoofs
by rjc＠powermail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yours truly has been stung. Someone used rjc(a)powermail.com to create a penet address. Since I have never used that address to post anywhere else except cypherpunks, the spoofer is probably on cypherpunks. I thought it might have been caused by a penet'er being subscribed to cypherpunks but a similar thing did not happen to my other accounts. -Ray

3 2

No Subject
by sidney＠taurus.apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Excerpted from a NewsBytes article with the headline "Consumer Apps For Electronic Fingerprint Reader": The Microreader can take an analog picture of a finger, convert the analog picture into a digital code, and store that code for matching. [...] the Microreader is being miniaturized and the price is being reduced from $1,500 to "substantially less than $100." The article lists a bunch of possible applications involving verification of identity and access control, incorporation in keyboards and cellular telephones to secure them, etc. It does not mention any time frame for when this device would actually hit the market or when the price would drop to that $100 figure, so take it all with a grain of salt. -- sidney markowitz <sidney(a)apple.com>

1 0

Re: NYET to censors, REPOST
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Graham wrote about the NYET proposal: >I see a lot of call here for legislation and government control. > >Keep your fucking religion out of my face, Zook. If you want >censored-kiddynet, create your own one privately out of funds >donated by Good Christians, but take your state control and >stuff it where ypu stuff your crucifix. > Amen, amem. The christian right is attempting to keep their children in ignorance to minimize the effort it takes to brainwash them. I shall not rest posting on the Net until those children ask their parents: "Daddy, do you know how to perform a genuine French duck fuck?" "Gasp!" "Well, we do. Would you like to know?" -- Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP public key by finger

2 1

article for cypherpunks (fwd)
by tcmay＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Irony of ironies! Keith Henson, who I was just minutes ago writing about, just asked me to forward an article to the CP list. --Tim Forwarded message:

1 0

Attempted Compromise of anon.penet.fi Server?
by nobody＠kaiwan.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- A number of postings to the alt.test Usenet newsgroup from pseudonymous accounts at anon.penet.fi have recently been reported. Correspondingly, a number of people have received email from that server indicating that an unsolicited pseudonymous account and ID and have been established for them at that server. Assuming no actual compromise of the anon.penet.fi database itself, this attack could serve a number of purposes. Let's assume that an attacker had obtained the Cypherpunks mailing list, perhaps merged with a listing of all posters to sci.crypt, alt.security.pgp, alt.politics.org.nsa, etc. and, forging a message from each member, attempted to create a new pseudonymous account at the anon.penet.fi server for each one. Likely motives for, and outcomes from this attack are: SCENARIO #1: Attempting to assign a new anon account to a person by posting to alt.test. Each failure would indicate that the address owner already possessed a password-protected anon ID there. This information could prove potentially "useful", I suppose. For example, a list of names of anon forwarder users could be collected for "special treatment" later, possibly a "sting" operation of some sort, it would also net a few people whose only use of anon.penet.fi was merely REPLYING to another's pseudonymous address, which also results in the allocation of a new ID. See Scenario #4 for further speculation. SCENARIO #2: Attempting to create such an account and SUCCEEDING would now match up the user ID with the new account number. Any future posts via this account could then be easily cross-referenced back to the source. Any account thus created, as evidenced by a "welcome" message from anon.penet.fi, should probably NOT be used, at least where anonymity was needed. SCENARIO #3: If the new accounts were password-protected by the forger, and the passwords NOT revealed to the putative "owners", the result would be a "denial of service". Has anyone received a message that an unsolicited new account has also been password "protected"? (Scenarios #2 and #3 are mutually exclusive, BTW.) SCENARIO #4: The most serious of all is the possibility of a "barium attack". A special "coded", but seemingly innocuous, message could be sent to each email address identified in Scenario #1. If the person replies, he/she has just blown his/her anonymous cover, and any previous (or future) postings/correspondence using that ID are then traceable back to the source. Needless to say, anyone who has a pseudonymous ID at anon.penet.fi that he/she would like to keep secret should be EXTREMELY careful in responding to any messages coming through that server. The most likely means of accomplishing this attack is through the Subject: header, since many people reply to messages and keep the original subject, prefixing it with "RE: ". If I send messages to Alice, Bob, and Charlie via anon.penet.fi, using a slightly different Subject: line for each, then a reply containing that Subject: line will link the pseudonymous return address on the reply with the recipient of the original message. The source of this attack could be either a TLA (three-letter agency, such as NSA, FBI, CIA, etc.), some hacker, or even the infamous Larry Detweiler. I cite the "TLA" option since a number of messages have been posted to various newsgroups via anon.penet.fi that seemingly violate Federal law. At first glance the attack would seem to have been executed in a somewhat clumsy fashion, particularly the posting of public messages with the text "I am John Doe", or whatever. OTOH, given the inevitable "welcome" message from anon.penet.fi to the "holders" of the newly assigned IDs, such "clumsiness" could also be designed to make a sophisticated attack look amateurish to disguise the motives and capabilities of the attacker(s). Or, this whole thing could be an attempt to achieve "Death to Blacknet" by undermining user confidence in the anon servers by spreading "fear, uncertainty, and doubt". QUESTION: Has anyone with a previously existing, password-protected identity at anon.penet.fi received an "invalid password" message recently, even though no attempts to send mail through the server had been made? If not, then that's a bad sign because it might indicate that password protection has somehow been curcumvented by the attacker. -- Diogenes - a registered pseudonym. PGP key (ID# D1150D49) available through PGP Public Key Servers -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLjmja+Rsd2rRFQ1JAQExTAP6A4kTUwufW05Bx5Mznz3AkjDKuP18K5/P FhZT3LEed2j8x1fxFbwmNdkUnHVsxf+pvA0cfmQQV68CY9R0BIkPEUmf59wMAlZ4 vr6kei5nNw6WFb8W3ihk7GhqynTuIZjGCHdPXP/IaZKcxGx0tdTB2A1A74eVYBB3 yRWrSTbSEbc= =7yi1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: "Just say 'No' to key escrow."
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Graham Toal . . . . . Bill Gates is attempting to create a worldwide network of about a hundred satellites. You don't get to do that without political assistance, and no way is the USG going to let Bill put those birds up unless they control the technology to snoop on the entire net. ............................................................... Could Bill even think about setting up a satellite network without confronting the Governmental Presence? Anyone who plans to do anything in communications must come to terms with the Divine Intervention Department; maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but for sure by payday. Can anyone in the United States get away with introducing a product or service which is not going to require that "government interests" be represented in some way (if only at tax-time)? They must, at the very least, have meetings, conferences, discussions to ensure that 1) no one in the world is going to be damaged by the new service, and 2) that the MotherShip will get its revenue % . Is there any legally-sanctioned enterprise/company which can avoid this? This is a real predicament not limited to Billg and his interest in the internet. I think quite broadly about all of the areas in which the government steps in to maintain a controlling influence; any time a new idea is introduced, They Will Be There to make sure that they can protect us from the new-fangled object in case anyone tries to use it against us, the Precious Ones, the Most Valuable Citizens of the World. Scanaphobia, anyone? Blanc [Obligatory Reminder: The company won't leFrom owner-cypherpunks Fri Jul 29 21:18:02 1994 Return-Path: <owner-cypherpunks> Received: by toad.com id AA15874; Fri, 29 Jul 94 21:18:02 PDT Received: from selene.wright.edu by toad.com id AA15859; Fri, 29 Jul 94 21:17:23 PDT Received: from discover.wright.edu (discgate.wright.edu) by selene.wright.edu (PMDF V4.3-7 #2485) id <01HFAQ3YAUXS0001IY(a)selene.wright.edu>; Sat, 30 Jul 1994 00:14:36 EDT Received: by discover.wright.edu (4.1/SMI-4.1) id AA13118; Sat, 30 Jul 94 00:16:39 EDT Date: Sat, 30 Jul 1994 00:16:38 -0400 (EDT) From: Aron Freed <s009amf(a)discover.wright.edu> Subject: Re: No SKE in Daytona and other goodies In-Reply-To: <9407292014.AA07120(a)sosfc.avtc.sel.sony.com> To: Eric Weaver <Eric_Weaver(a)avtc.sel.sony.com> Cc: blancw(a)microsoft.com, tcmay(a)localhost.netcom.com, cypherpunks(a)toad.com Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9407300035.A12869-0100000@discover> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk On Fri, 29 Jul 1994, Eric Weaver wrote: > The government should NOT be viewed similarly to an employer in its > relationship with citizens. Employees are free to quit and make their > income some other way. Yeah and since when has this country been so easy to quit and find a new job with the same relative pay???? Do you think it's that easy??? Uh I don't think so.. duh huh... I can't even get a summer job working at a computer store and I'm very computer literate for my age. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- -=- YABBS - telnet phred.pc.cc.cmu.edu 8888 -=- -=- -=- =+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=

1 0

Graham Toal and His 'Fucking Religion'
by Anonymous User 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

gtoal(a)an-teallach.com (Graham Toal) wrote: > Keep your fucking religion out of my face, Zook. If you want > censored-kiddynet, create your own one privately out of funds > donated by Good Christians, but take your state control and stuff > it where ypu stuff your crucifix. Ironic what you say, Graham. Given the fact that the subject matter is PORNOGRAPHY, often involving explicit depiction of sexual intercourse, which is somewhat of a "religion to some", maybe that's exactly what Nathan was asking -- for pornographers to keep their "fucking religion" off the net... Just as adults can avoid reading what the consider "offensive" material, so can you, too, avoid lashing out in a blind fury at posts like this that YOU disagree with. If one didn't know better, it'd seem that YOU are almost advocating censorship of ideas that you deem offensive. <g>

1 0

Re: A new flavor of spam
by roy＠sendai.cybrspc.mn.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Yeah, I know it's a forward. But it's short, and raises a very good point about tuna... In alt.current-events.net-abuse, nreadwin(a)london.micrognosis.com writes: > levin(a)bbn.com (Joel B Levin) writes: >>If you'll note that bottom of these messages, the (forged) user's real >>ID is included in the text. > > Do you have evidence to back this up? The forger can map the forged > from line to the anon id using the subject line. The id in the body may > be unrelated. The forger might even deliberately try to mislead anyone > reading alt.test into thinking that infamous-anon-id-X corresponds to > some-email-address using this. Neil. - -- Roy M. Silvernail -- roy(a)sendai.cybrspc.mn.org perl -e '$x = 1/20; print "Just my \$$x! (adjusted for inflation)\n"' "What do you mean, you've never been to Alpha Centauri?" -- Prostetnic Vogon Jeltz -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUBLjmivxvikii9febJAQGthwQAuvscCVExgQ4mtuL3Ju+BdO1/+vZxtazb zWy48A6hZC5qrp6n3F/nUGrITC6CD5ZvJ3OOwyU1jCsieuKFjFwwkMJQumm98iF+ ibd+WVcurBqEr+oWGVXl7Oyfcs474w1/533HJwUZDK/MC/QCfdFcPJdVrC36146E Q+r1Ck8CzPE= =FLAh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0