December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

negative reputation (was: WRITTEN CODE)
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Daniel 'genius' Charpentier <drcharpe(a)hamlet.uncg.edu> wrote: > he mentioned his desire to see more cryptographic program code and > I didn't want to see this initiative die. I am a new commer to > cryptography and I know I shouldn't be posting yet but that is > what I thought cypherpunk postings was supposed to be in the first > place ( program code, protocols, and algorithms ). Please don't > flame me to badly for this message. I am doing everything I am > supposed to before posting ( reading the FAQ's, the entire > cypherpunk archive, and APPLIED CRYPTOGRAPHY by Bruce Schneier ) It sounds like you are afraid of getting a negative reputation. Well don't be. Simply create a persistent pseudonym and sign your messages with it instead. That way, if it turns out that everyone disagrees with you and/or flames you to death, you can simply disgard your old pseudonym. Otherwise you keep your pseudonym and continue to post under it. This technique is not new, so you may already have seen it in the archive. Logically, a pseudonym is simply a public key. However you may want to give it a human-readable name so other people may more easily refer to it. If you decide to do this, I suggest that you do not name the key on its first post because there is a high probability that you will decide to disgard the key. If you name it and throw it away, then you have unnecessarily cluttered up the limited name space. - a new entity, as yet unnamed - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMK5/P42Fr67QcvwZAQGVdwP5AaE5MR8JztPBv1k/0GdVlZSzuBBMboRW d7Ofyw2EloKS7YTgb+ZoGDT92h+n5Yzpp5Jb5+0zm8iDLQbm0RTQJxE86Ty4DrO4 5w1CUCSa8VF4mTVoRvyaYrWHTq4uxOj4LAPC6Zxx5qIPUSRgceWoYsmEoarIYYLU FEhnF34o5m0= =T80R - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAzCuftgAAAEEAL35udZ/l0s590SjtzSM9eAepxAGe9Mp38ZoTsvfmNQh008W sLtiYKmSYKBPuuRZIpYBZEjLZry5p6xHUpsKuflNXy7sdeHBviU+x8J57ip4DLx2 +tlv4dtjLKxzVGEqEfWOb3oRHCJ1t2IgV5A9RBzp2SXke56pTo2Fr67QcvwZAAUT tBxhIG5ldyBlbnRpdHksIGFzIHlldCB1bm5hbWVk =h9Uo - -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMK5/9SoZzwIn1bdtAQFS0wF+NyWTvLIZr05q8O4LOCgM0W1lHKBy+iu3 P3k3Yy7+FIS15erO88CDpwIBbywqQ+Pa =wJn0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Spammers' Email List Obtained!!!
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Using only the tools provided by the spammer, and without compromising system security in any way, we have obtained the full list of email addresses that were used by the bulkd(a)valleynet.net direct email spammer. I am not going to tell the public how to get it because I do not want this list to fall into the wrong hands. There are several curious features about the list that strongly suggest that it was purchased from other spammers. I *strongly encourage* the person who formerly used the bulkd(a)valleynet.net account to apologize to news.admin.net-abuse.misc and provide us with the source of the list immediately. - -rich llurch(a)networking.stanford.edu -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMK6E943DXUbM57SdAQHopwP/aY+cRnmrtUBhILl7lvfeQakrpW+uLwuY J1jR6SrSFdiZ+rGM8D4tc5HarOrU77X2zjpqDNOFySJ+yukP3eXvKny3v+3ndUGA ozbnH5EnshOQZE0hQ+aV9TKu+zM0ihfT65PxuvgehPnBi+CgSRHtDddhjuWMvRSD aNGKoAyZLaA= =mKyw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Anderson on SSL
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

One of the mags I get for free is called _OEM_. It recently ran an interview with Marc Anderssen from Netscape. I'll key in a few crypto-relevant passages. ... Q. Everyone's looking for ways to make money on the World Wide Web. What is the future for advertisers on the Web? A. Advertisements in an interactive medium definitely function best as a service; really, the line between advertising, informational marketing and direct sales blurs incredibly quickly. I expect a lot of creativity to be devoted to pulling people into commercial sites and keeping them there, including continuing sponsorship of innovative content. Q. Do you see many small transactions as a possible model for making money on the Web? A. Tiny transactions will be a part of the grand scheme of things. They'll make possible the 2-cent joke of the day and lots of appropriate forms of content. Q. How will people deal with getting costs down for each transaction to eke out a profit? A. That's the challenge for the companies that intent to make money processing tiny transactions. I can't wait to see who does it first. Q. Now that the InterNIC has started to charge for domain names, do you, as an Internaut, miss the anarchistic, "anything goes" community the Net once was? A. The Internet was never really anarchistic and "anything goes". It was always a cooperative venture that everyone derived benefit from. That's pretty much the case. In fact, I still get a thrill -- more now than ever -- when I go through directories like Yahoo. There's much more out there on the Net now. Everything is accelerating. ... Q. Do you think that the Netspace's Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) is the de facto standard for Internet security now? A. SSL is a de facto standard, widely adopted throughout the industry by Microsoft, Novell, Apple, IBM, Sun, Digital Equipment, Intel, MasteCard, Visa, etc. The security space is a very broad space, though, and SSL solves a specifically defined set of problems: encryption and authentication for a secure data channel over TCP/IP. There are many other problems yet to solve. Other protocols will play a role in solving those problems, and we will support them. Q. What happened to the deal with Enterprise Integration Technologies and its Secure Hypertext Protocol (S-HTTP), which was Netscape's only real competition in the area of secure server software? A. Early this year, we announced that Netscape (along with IBM/Prodigy, America Online and Compuserve) became an investor and partner in Terisa Systems, which was previously a joint venture of EIT and RSA Data Security. All Parties agreed to support both SSL and S-HTTP. Unfortunately, Terisa has been unable to ship its toolkit, so things haven't gone as well as we had all hoped. In the meantime, virtually everyone is supporting SSL [but not S-HTTP]. Q. Do you think that your server software, and especially your protocol Secure Courier, will lessen the public perception that credit-card entries aren't safe on the Net? A. I think it's happening. We're in the middle of a broad shift in consumer behavior, and there will be a lot of exciting things happening over the next few years as a result. Things are definitely warming up right now. Of course, one of the great things about doing business on the Net is that it's a lot cheaper for the merchant than doing business in the "real" world. One of the broad trends we're starting to see is that a lot of entrepreneurial companies will be coming up on the Net. They, more than anyone, will help drive the shift in consumer behavior by offering innovative goods and services and innovative ways. ... --- Dr. Dimitri Vulis Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: Anonymity and Intellectual Capital
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I suggest that arbitration is well suited to >pseudonymous commerce, and propose the use of an old device - the >unincorporated, or deed of settlement, company. First of all, this is a damn fine post. Outstanding! The first thing that strikes me about all this is how time seems to be "unwinding" as far as centralization of power, or anything else, is concerned. I've ranted about all this here and elsewhere, how falling semiconductor prices, public networks and strong cryptography beget the reemergence of bearer certificates, this time in digital form (of which ecash is only the prima facie example, the existence proof) and what I call, for lack of a better term, a "geodesic", instead of hierarchical, economy. We're seeing in this "unincorporated company" idea the devolution, the surfacting, of concentrations of information, and thus power, back out to individuals, and with that, responsibility, and of course, freedom. Truly marvelous. Hope there's more where that one came from. Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA (617) 958-3971 "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell The e$ Home Page: http://www.webstuff.apple.com/~vinnie/Rah >>>>Phree Phil: Email: zldf(a)clark.net http://www.netresponse.com/zldf <<<<<

1 0

Re: e$: Come aaaannnndddd Get it!
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:18 PM 11/16/95, Robert Hettinga wrote: >At 8:57 PM 11/15/95, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: >>------------------- >> I will as soon as someone comes up with a _fully_ private digital >>cash system and starts using it for something. As I understand it, Chaum's >>ecash system is not one (i.e., non-privacy to the sender and of amounts to the >>bank). If I'm incorrect, please tell me and I'll set up an account with MTB >>immediately (if there's a text-based interface). > >Ahhh. Next year in Jeresalem... > >Tell me, are you actually selling something on the net yet? How many >customers do you have? Bob, let me do a minor vent here. You are critical of E. Allen Smith's viewpoint, and essentially question whether he has anything to sell. Not much of an argument. Especially when folks are urging that "people put their money where their mouth is" and get MTB accounts. Me, I don't plan to sign up for various reasons: 1. I'm not selling anything, and won't sign up just for "moral support." (I tried this once before, getting an AMIX account early on, and that system offered more of a chance for a 2-way market. Still, a waste of my time.) 2. I wish Mark Twain Bank well, but the success of the kinds of digital cash we hope to see will not likely hinge on the success of one particular operations, such as MTB. 3. The success of BankAmericard (later renamed Visa) came when real customers and real shops started to use it, not when early pioneers set themselves up as clearinghouses and whatnot. I have more interesting things to do, personally, than to be a pioneer so I can then have nothing to sell, and little to buy....when "interesting markets" start to appear, I'll look at it again. In any case, I wish all the pioneers well, and am happy to see Lucky Green's involvement. But when you urge people to be pioneers, and they express reservations or doubts about the system, attacking their motives or implying they have nothing to sell anyway is not too helpful. Just my views, but, then, I don't have any customers either. --Tim May Views here are not the views of my Internet Service Provider or Government. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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."

2 1

.Sig Heilarchy
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

.SIG HEILARCHY REVEALED >Logically, a pseudonym is simply a public key. However you may want >to give it a human-readable name so other people may more easily refer >to it. If you decide to do this, I suggest that you do not name the key >on its first post because there is a high probability that you will decide >to disgard the key. If you name it and throw it away, then you have >unnecessarily cluttered up the limited name space. > > - a new entity, as yet unnamed "Cluttering up the namespace" is a growing problem. Fortunately, the InterNIC has taken on the important task of registering pseudonyms, and will coordinate the issuance of new pseudonyms with the Postal Service. [The issuance of these items is temporarily on hold due to the Government Shutdown (tm).] The fee for this will likely be quite reasonable, in the $300/year range, consistent with SAIC's plans for other emerging markets. The InterNIC also sees great promise in collecting fees for .sig blocks, tentatively priced at $10 per line per year. As SAIC Chairman Bobby Ray Inman points out, this is the easiest way to control the proliferation of long .sig blocks. --Klaus! von Future Prime, a Sanctioned Pseudonym [.sig removed by order of the InterNIC .Sig Heilarchy until Herr von Future Prime sends us his past due amount]

1 0

Re: (CANADIAN PRESS REPORTS)
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sat, 18 Nov 1995, jim bell wrote: > >anonymous writes: > >> I still feel such a sense of violation with what LD did, such an > >> utter sense of helplessness at the character assassination I've > >> suffered at his hands, > > > >So use PGP, sign your messages. Simple solution. > > Absolutely! Anybody who uses anonymous remailers to post to public areas, > and does not use digital signatures to prevent spoofing when it is obviously > needed, is a fool or worse. Most people believe THAT a digital signature is evidence that I am who my signature _says_ I am when it really doesn't do that at all. It isn't reliable at all. Unfortunately, I've learned the hard way NOT to do that. Digital signatures don't prevent spoofing. In fact, I think that thinking something is secure when it isn't leads to even more trouble, and could even lead to many tragedies. In a nutshell, here's the problem. If someone takes my pgp secret keyring and my password, then they can sign a message *digitally* so that people believe the spoofed message is really from me. In fact, since most people tend to rely on a pgp message far more than a non-pgp message, most people would be absolutely convinced that the message was in fact from me. Signing with PGP is just not a solution. Alice de 'nonymous ... ...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: negative reputation (was: WRITTEN CODE)
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:53 PM 11/18/95 -0500, a new entity, as yet unnamed wrote: >Logically, a pseudonym is simply a public key. However you may want >to give it a human-readable name so other people may more easily refer >to it. If you decide to do this, I suggest that you do not name the key >on its first post because there is a high probability that you will decide >to disgard the key. If you name it and throw it away, then you have >unnecessarily cluttered up the limited name space. > > - a new entity, as yet unnamed Here's the new entity's key, signed :-) I haven't added it to the PGP key servers; I'll leave that up to you... -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.7.1 Comment: PGP available outside U.S.A. at ftp.ox.ac.uk mQCNAzCuftgAAAEEAL35udZ/l0s590SjtzSM9eAepxAGe9Mp38ZoTsvfmNQh008W sLtiYKmSYKBPuuRZIpYBZEjLZry5p6xHUpsKuflNXy7sdeHBviU+x8J57ip4DLx2 +tlv4dtjLKxzVGEqEfWOb3oRHCJ1t2IgV5A9RBzp2SXke56pTo2Fr67QcvwZAAUT tBxhIG5ldyBlbnRpdHksIGFzIHlldCB1bm5hbWVkiQCVAwUQMK61KfnzJsm1fsvF AQGJeAP/c0DO4e1y4SIpLAF9vJwqr6ewFHWopHJRprWUUyBhH+TRehOQLPgocwR/ 7lOILgfizrLshu5W5fOyY+pjBVj6LssF8dILMe81I5LjlDT58NVtkfPDdkHNxFpf fgEmJlKYYfsCrXDlwn0RAFwzLC1x+1okAoixhvLWx7ygr1rpyKA= =PED/ -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, Freelance Information Architect, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # Phone +1-510-247-0663 Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281

1 0

Re: CANADIAN PRESS REPORTS (was Re: CSE gets flak on TV)
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Alice here (the real one) ... On Sat, 18 Nov 1995, Perry E. Metzger wrote: > I hope everyone realizes that Detweiler is probably arguing with > himself, three levels deep. I must admit that the levels he stoops to > in order to draw attention to himself are pathetic. Why don't you just > stick to posting as Vlad Nurzi? Its more dignified. Deitweiler certainly is getting around ... but I'm beginning to have my doubts whether it is Deitweiler who is spoofing me. And Deitweiler might be Vlad Nurzi or whoever, but it seems that whoever is spoofing me -- whether it is Detweiler or not -- is privy to certain "facts" ... verifiable facts ... some of which are very worrisome. And its not just whatever news is breaking over the wire. anonymous-remailer(a)shell.portal.com writes: > > > > Here is the TRUE unedited story for the list which Deitweiler felt he > > had to TWIST to the nth degree. His attempt at making mountains out > > of mole hills will not succeed with this one. > > This story truly is a non-starter. Big deal. It really has no > relevance to this international list. This is simply a Canadian matter. I take this last comment back. It was premature. I think that this is in fact very relevant to this list. And it's not just a Canadian matter. My little spoofing-shadow, Mr. Mystery-Writer, seems to not only have a juvenile sense of humour, but seems to have a handle on some pretty sensitive information. His information isn't limited to how Canada was able to outbid the United States on a wheat deal with China, but his information encompassess matters of an order of greater significance, especially when Mr. Mystery-Writer wrote: > And that's the fleshed out version of the story. > > I'm just sorry that our Prime Minister is in such a bad position because > of the timing of this "Jane Shorten's" revelations. She also revealed > that Canada spied on Japan. > > To think ... Canadian Prime Minister Chretien is a guest of the Japanese > people today. Talk about some awkward moments. I mean, what on earth do > you talk about?? > > George Bush and Sushi?? Whoever it was who wrote this, they took a real swipe at a former President of the United States. This is very, very serious. Joking about Japanese / American relations is very black humour and is one thing, but taking an open swipe at a former American President is grossly inappropriate and was completely another, I thought. But, ironically, Mr. Mystery-Writer had incredible foreshadowing skills. > Let's see ... over the last couple of days, we've had one provincial > Premier resign over "BingoGate" -- kickbacks from bingo games, another > premier is under some pretty heavy fire for some insider trading in a > company he promoted in Hong Kong, (actually his wife got stock she never > had to pay for), while Canada in conjunction with the normally very > neutral Swiss have frozen accounts pertaining to about $20 million or so > in kickbacks from Airbus Industries to a "senior Canadian politician". > > And all these stories ... coincidentally ... broke back to back. This to me was the kicker ... especially in light of news which just broke tonight. Mr. Mystery-Writer was trying to throw a clue. And boy, what a clue it was. It wasn't the former President of the United States that he was speaking of ... it was the former Prime Minister of Canada. It was reported today that former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney has launched a $50 Million pre-emptive lawsuit against the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the Canadian Department of Justice for their possible future allegation or possible future charge of taking kickbacks from Airbus Industries while the former Prime Minister held public office. This is one heck of a newsflash ... especially considering the co-operation of the normally secretive and discreet authorities in Switzerland. Can you imagine if former President George Bush had in fact launched a $50 Million pre-emptive lawsuit against the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Department of Justice, because they were investigating him for something?? Or if George Bush tried to stop a news story through libel chill? My shadow was right (even if he did announce before the wires, did), Canadian politicians are beginning to drop like flies. Let the "Jane Shorten" Film-Fest begin. Can you pass the popcorn? Alice de 'nonymous ... ...just another one of those... P.S. This post is in the public domain. C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E.

1 0

VB4 secure mail software
by Cybie＠cris.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To the guy who was interested in writing a secure mail program that worked with MS Exchange in VB4, e-mail me... I was also thinking of working on something like that, we could probably work together on this.

1 0