December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Political Cleanup program
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:04 AM 12/17/95 -0800, you wrote: >It occurs to me that it would be a major advance if a system could be set up >that would "blind" campaign donations as to their source: The donor could >be satisfied that his donation gets to the candidate or cause, but the >candidate couldn't know who actually paid the money (and the donor would be >unable to prove that he made a donation, for example). Admittedly there are >a lot of details that need to be worked out, but if this could be >accomplished it would change politics as we know it. I think you would see alot less donations by the corporate powers that be and the favormongers. (Which is why such a system will probibly never come into existance.) It would be a good step in the right direction. However... I live in a state which just inacted a series of campaign reforms. The first thing the lobbyists did was find a way to exploit every loophole possible to get around that legislation. Such a system would have to be pretty tight and pretty specific. (And therefore will be fought against by almost every politician ansd lobbyiest on the planet.) The fundraising dinners will certainly have to go... > > > > > > > | Remember: Life is not always champagne. Sometimes it is REAL pain. | |"It's only half a keyserver. I had to split the | Disclaimer: | |other half with the government man." - R. Rococo | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ | alano(a)teleport.com |

1 0

GLO_bul
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

12-18-95. NYPaper: "His Goal: Keeping the Web Worldwide." An adoration of selfless Tim Berners-Lee with a pan gloss of the World Wide Web Cartel. "From Mainframes to Global Networking." I.B.M.'s selfless strategy for Net supremacy, hand-in-hand with altruistic AT&T and eleemosynary Microsoft. GLO_bul (17kb)

1 0

Re: Is ths legal?.. (fwd)
by Jay Holovacs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is the reference I couldn't find for my previous post. It would seem to have some relevance here Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA) (18 U.S.C. ss 2510 et seq.). "It shall not be unlawful under this chapter for an operator of a switchboard, or an officer, employee, or agent of a provider of wire *or electronic* communication service, whose facilities are used in the trans- mission of a wire communication, to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his employment while engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the rendition of his service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service, except that a provider of wire communication service to the public shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service quality control checks." 18 USC section 2510(2)(a)(i). Doesn't seem to leave much room for snooping on contents of messages. Jay Holovacs <holovacs(a)ios.com> PGP Key fingerprint = AC 29 C8 7A E4 2D 07 27 AE CA 99 4A F6 59 87 90 (KEY id 1024/80E4AA05) email me for key

2 3

RE: Political Cleanup program
by Russ Cooper 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A much simpler solution might be to just force all politicians to give up their campaign funds when they retire, or even better, immediately following the elections. Today, whatever is left in their campaign funds are given over to them when they retire or are forced out of office, on top of their lucrative pensions. Cheers, Russ

2 1

Re: Is ths legal?...
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Dec 16, 1995 18:37:05, 'Jay Holovacs <holovacs(a)styx.ios.com>' wrote: >I was told today that students at Oklahoma University have their computer >accounts subject to administrative inspection and that encryption (even >email) without escrow is prohibited. Maybe the story is not quite straight >but federal law supposedly protects personal electronic communication and >I somehow don't think OU can overide this simply because it passes thru >their computers. > First, it may not be true. Second, if it is true, people frequently define the ability to do something as a "privledge" not a "right." As in a hypothetical "Use of student accounts at O.U. is a privledge extended to the students by the University. By using our computer you keep to our rules, including abandoning any notion you might have that your communications are in any way private" etc. etc. --tallpaul

4 4

Political Cleanup program
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Politics is traditionally corrupt, it appears, because donors to politicians and political campaigns expect a quid pro quo for their donations. Various unsatisfactory solutions include campaign spending limits, etc. It occurs to me that it would be a major advance if a system could be set up that would "blind" campaign donations as to their source: The donor could be satisfied that his donation gets to the candidate or cause, but the candidate couldn't know who actually paid the money (and the donor would be unable to prove that he made a donation, for example). Admittedly there are a lot of details that need to be worked out, but if this could be accomplished it would change politics as we know it.

3 2

Re: PAY-OFF TIME FOR BUG-BUSTERS, NETSCAPE PLEDGES "DOGFIGHT"
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Mon, 11 Dec 1995, Michael Coates wrote: > PAY-OFF TIME FOR BUG-BUSTERS, NETSCAPE PLEDGES "DOGFIGHT" > Netscape Communications has awarded two software sleuths $1,000 each for > finding security gaps in its Netscape Navigator 2.0 software. The company > also awarded gifts to 50 other contestants in its "Bugs Bounty" program for > identifying non-security problems. (Wall Street Journal 11 Dec 95 B7) Can anyone tell me whether Ian Goldberg and David Wagner got their $25,000 from Netscape for finding the HUGE security flaws in Netscape's existing product line?? I can't remember whether they got anything or not ... (Sorry, but I've been away from the list. One of those, "fate of the Free World hangs in the balance" thingies ... ;-) Have Netscape and AT&T shown some holiday goodwill, or are they still engaged in their felonious freeloading foolishness? Alice de 'nonymous ... <an455120(a)anon.penet.fi> ...just another one of those... P.S. This post is in the public domain. C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E.

2 1

Re: CFS and Linux
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

So the master is at last fallen. Kudos to Mr. Jim Choate and Dr. Dimitri Vulis for having the courage of their convictions to help unmask AT&T's deceit in claiming to support Linux and free software when, in truth, it is doing just the opposite. Maybe, just maybe, we can seize this opportunity to advance the cause of justice, if not justice itself (true justice would require AT&T to recognize its obligation to our heros at Berkeley and pay them their USD 25,000). I call upon us all to expose AT&T for what it is! Had your software erased by the CFS install programme? Return their own medicine! Sue them! Tired of Blaze's prattle about how he is a Linux-lover even though he can't be bothered to use Linux? Challenge him! Tired of AT&T and Netscape employees stealing your resources? Configure your servers to deny W3 access to AT&T and Netscape computers! Linux isn't perfect, but its open environment is a good start for building REAL secure software. Don't let AT&T's lies bully you into abandoning it! CFS will never run under Linux until it is plucked from the monster's grasp. We, too, are guilty when we continue to invite the monster not only to walk in our midst unchecked, but to sleep in our homes as an invited, nay, paid, guest. Alice de 'nonymous ... <an455120(a)anon.penet.fi> ...just another one of those... P.S. This post is in the public domain. C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E.

6 6

Employer Probing Precedents?
by "Jason D. Livingood/WSC"＠hks.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To Whom It May Concern: I was curious as to where I might find some electronic freedom legal precedents. If, for example, an employer was planning to probe file systems on PCs in the off-hours and employees began encrypting their hard drives, what legal precedents would support the employees or would support the employer in blocking the encryption? Thanks for any info you can give me!! Jason Livingood jlivingood(a)hammer.net - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMOG/6ioZzwIn1bdtAQHQ2QF/cOq8vE9o+V/yGuk5KLbYv5E6xWJjV2cB pSHFhr4O0HtiTgOtTxMhylVmXFZpuosm =fIWG -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

5 6

GAK shutdown?
by Thomas Grant Edwards 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Last night I realized that NIST has been shutdown since the weekend...congratulations to congress for a temporary halt to GAK! -Thomas

1 0