December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

re: Netcom
by I'm Wozz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Oh yes....and how can we forget... for all its superiority....it seems to have dropped SLIP/PPP because that made them have to deal with the customers too much. Makes you feel all loved eh? , + . /\_-\ ==================---------------------- . ` . <((_))> ==============-------------------- ` x . \- \/ ===========------------------ , /\_-\(:::::::::)/\_-\ matthew e. cable - systems administrator . . <((_)) MindVox ((_))> phantom access technologies inc . \- \/(:::::::::)\- \/ wozzeck(a)phantom.com + ` /\_-\ ===========------------------ . , * ' <((_))> ==============-------------------- + x \- \/ ==================----------------------

1 0

Can someone verify this conjecture for me?
by nelson＠crynwr.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'd like to make sure I understand how a digital mix works. I've read Chaum's paper on it, but hey, there's a reason why I don't have a Phd in spite of having all the coursework done. It seems like it solves two separate problems: 1) foiling traffic analysis, and 2) foiling a cheater remailer. The problems are separate, really, because if you really, really trust the remailer (as many people do Julf), then 2) isn't a problem. All you need to do is solve 1. Or, you can solve 1) by using a single remailer. A necessary but not sufficient step to foil traffic analysis is to strip headers. If you trust any one remailer, then you needn't bother using any other ones (assuming that remailer has enough traffic, delay, mixing, etc to foil traffic analysis). There's no real difference between using a set (N>1) of trusted remailers and using only one, because you can consider the set of remailers to be a single remailer from the point of view of traffic analysis. But to be sure, at least one of your remailers MUST attempt to foil traffic analysis, otherwise you're effectively mistrusting the remailer operators but trusting the NSA (or FBI). As I said a month or two ago, you MUST assume that the spooks are watching all the remailers. It's cheap and easy, therefore it's being done. Sorry for the Crypto 101, but I figure that there are other people out there who don't understand it. -- -russ <nelson(a)crynwr.com> http://www.crynwr.com/crynwr/nelson.html Crynwr Software | Crynwr Software sells packet driver support | ask4 PGP key 11 Grant St. | +1 315 268 1925 (9201 FAX) | What is thee doing about it? Potsdam, NY 13676 | What part of "Congress shall make no law" eludes Congress?

1 0

Carol Anne Whoever
by jrochkin＠cs.oberlin.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I don't care very much about Carol Anne whoever. I don't care very much about her plight. I have received just enough information about her plight (via this list, oddly enough), to know that I don't have enough information to tell who I agree with in this dispute. I don't particularly want to get enough information to do that, because I don't care. If I did care, I would get the information through some other method then this list, because it seems completely inappropriate. The merits of netcom vs. smaller services seem irrelevant to this list, too, in my mind, and I don't care to see those either. If you were wondering. I also don't care to see 10 or 20 posts a day by Carol Anne Whoever which are resposes to random crypto-related posts wherein the whole post is quoted, and then Carol Anne adds "me too!", or "Does that remind you of a certain sysadmin? giggle, giggle.", or "Good point!" I am at a loss as to why Carol Anne thinks the details of her life, and her inane "me too"s are of interest to the cypherpunks list. I guess we can't stop Carol Anne from sending this stuff to the list anyways (but I can killfile her), but it would be nice if people would stop responding to her stuff. Obviously if you really feel it's an appropriate use of the list to do so anyway, I can't stop you. I'm just asking you to for purely selfish reasons, so I don't feel the need to killfile people who make otherwise intelligent posts, and miss those posts. [I'm beginning to suspect that Carol Anne, and her sysadmin too, are just tentacles of Detweiler.]

2 1

Re: Outlawing Anonymity
by No Taxes through No Government 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

TC May writes: >I see no prospect whatsover that a ban on anonymous mail could be >implemented, enforced, or upheld in the courts. Never say never. Even coming from Tim, this surprises me just a little. Never think that government won't do something. The effectiveness of their 'solution' may be minimal, but billions can be wasted, and countless lives ruined, before it can be stopped (or more likely, dammed; once government achieves power, it is loath to relinquish it without a death struggle). Some nation's groups of 'leader'-thugs may be in a better position than others to go for such a power grab at this moment in time. But any and all of them should be constantly scrutinized for the inevitable slide down that slippery slope. The "article" by our pal Martha which the SF Chronicle had the poor judgment and atrociously swollen cojones to publish, is one of the most dramatically explicit warning signs of the year so far... and NOT because the year is yet so young. And to think, Tim used to be the pessimist on this list, saved only by the reassurances of Duncan and Sandy... :-S

1 0

Too Much!
by Brian Lane 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yet again I have un-subbed from the list because of the S/N ratio. And things were looking so good there for a while. Advice to Carol Ann: Take your crusade to e-mail. Brian ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Everyone is a prisoner holding their own key." | finger blane(a)seanet.com -- Journey | PGP 2.6 email accepted ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Remailers, Linux, & Help ...
by root 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi all, Normaly I use(d) 'ravage(a)bga.com' to access this list but the times they are a changin' ... I have successfuly gotten my network at home on Internet via a ISDN link. We are interested in setting up a remailer which among other things supports anonymity. If anybody has experience or learned input on doing this under Linux please contact me. A reminder that RoboFest 6 in Austin, TX will occur this year on April 1 & 2. If there are any c-punks interested in giving a talk or doing demo's then please contact me. If any of you folks are in the area then stop by and say Hi. I will be working at the Wired Society booth. Take care!

1 0

Re: Peter D. Lewis
by nissim＠acs.bu.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm unfamiliar with what it is people have against Kevin Kelly. Why "wanton scum"? people might want to send mail not cc:ed to cypherpunks to keep the list from experiencing too much of a burden here. -A

1 0

Addresses
by admin＠tcg.sask.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, I came across your post in a MLM newsgroup and thought you may be interested in an email address list. It worked great for me. http://www.unibase.com/~visions/email/ Robert L. James

1 0

Re: Remailer Abuse
by doumakes＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > One thing to keep in mind, though, is that it's really the _last_ remailer > in the chain that's taking the most heat, and it would be nice if they got > payed. There's also an issue of some remailers refusing to be last in the > chain, so they dont' expose themselves so much. I agree, this is an important issue. But I think it's a separate one from the question of how users pay for the service. In other words, once there's a consensus to have a Guild of for-pay remailers, all the users should have to do is pay the Guild once. The Guild can then haggle over how to divvy up the money. Hard jobs, such as posting anon news, should command more money. On the issue of the medium of exchange, I favor blinded digital cash with its absolute anonymity. The "remailer in a box" that we spoke of earlier would do well to include this capability. - -- ______________________________________________________________________ Don Doumakes Finger doumakes(a)netcom.com for PGP public key Foxpro databases built to your specifications. Email me for details. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUBLw3RTBtumcu2AjihAQF+DQQAmhQxuMl4C6VzZLD+mHF5i0OAjLUZAhV+ eNOi4F6bUBsDyfm7TmxxWMsiJRlJFrKhIMT+A16lmBZPdQ/pnZjQSk2keLyXgs0N phsPmZsTWGZMOyWGH+Hh2ggBc5syhmZxuTWwHFqqbAKTVoYRC4esxW8g/lTKot7F drI0amkbq20= =pHqY -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: Files and mail
by cactus＠seabsd.hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Anybody want to offer odds on whether or not this merry little exchange will be reported in Wired as news? - - -- Todd Masco | "life without caution/ the only worth living / love for a man/ cactus(a)hks.net | love for a woman/ love for the facts/ protectless" - A Rich Cactus' Homepage - - -- Todd Masco | "life without caution/ the only worth living / love for a man/ cactus(a)hks.net | love for a woman/ love for the facts/ protectless" - A Rich Cactus' Homepage - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBLw301xNhgovrPB7dAQFj3gP8CJV4TyRUl+sEQRHX6qH2TKK+B+JKLrwk kUM7Y0yaY2ZwScBnYRva5/Pyu8r70i2Z3yQUQFF7ECasxHwrYftfWweD0/4Pc4ws qEGNfGIheHtnP/J0B7G7xsIyAMSZIlUD3RCQ49o4BOpWk6bev4t5i/RP10yK9sit dA1go4Jiaag= =eQPF - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBLw4vqSoZzwIn1bdtAQER/QF/SkRQGEEjHn+E0SZEiWs0McAvRccuzxFQ Uv76Kmmya6EMxTJOJFtatP1uQ7V6JmSA =g1Bd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2