December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: [Rant!] Death by praise Re: Netscape gives in to key escrow
by KJC＠cityscape.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > >On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Jay Holovacs wrote: > >> On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, Timothy C. May wrote: >> > Can Netscape continue to prosper? This latest issue won't kill it, >> >> I suspect this will unfortunately help. Stockholders are interested in >> profits, not principles. Co-oping with the feds will help Netscape get to >> the commercial market sooner, and most customers, sadly don't give a damn >> about privacy (or don't understand). > ><Rant mode on> >Clipper and family are vampires; shine some light on them and they're dead. >Witness the public ridicule of the FBI 1% scheme. Compare that to the near >mainstream silence about DT. The last round of Clipper was wonderful, for >a while in '94 we had Time sounding like Brock Meeks. > >If Jim Clark really does mean this nonsense then I hope he does a Dorothy >Denning and takes his show on the road (sorry Jeff). This is simply >easy fodder for journalists without a story, totally black and white >cheap shot at the gov. While people don't give a damn about their privacy, >they sure do get mad when they're shown how easy it is to take away. >They *hate* hearing the $ cost. > >Maybe some of the people on this list with higher profiles than myself should >start defending Clipper and GAK as loudly and stupidly as possible. I've >grown dead tired of trying to get anyone around me interested in pgp, >remailers and whatnot. Reverse psycho sounds a lot easier: > >"Noted counterterrorism expert Timothy May was quoted on Connie Chung Live >last night as saying "Clipper, GAK and CTHULHU666 are a hundred billion >dollar investment in your national security. Only through complete wiretapping >will we save our nation's children from violent cigarette smokers, tax >cheaters, unlicensed pit-bull owners, Tax 'n Spend Liberals, murderous Nation >of Islam Dope Pushers, audiophiles, christians, fat people, OJ and >jaywalkers on the infohighway." -USA Today" > >(Apologies. You may now killfile me with a clear conscience.) > >If you can't beat 'em, subvert 'em. > > > As a _very_ low profile member of this list I thought a futile gesture was needed at this point: *I agree with you* I've been trying to interest the BBC in the U.K. in pgp, clipper et al for ages - I give up!.- BTW- after 'Britland' MPs posted hear a while back I thought _maybe_ we'd hear more.Will the last one to leave Grate Britain please switch out the lights! kc ------------------------------------------------------ Fingerprint:OF 3B IE 6A 8D 14 EC 9B 75 9B FB A2 E8 35 FE Finger: .plan + public key -> af91(a)ftp.cityscape.co.uk http://www.gold.net/users/af91/kjc.htm "...and now...five in a row by Whitney Houston" ------------------------------------------------------

1 0

List of reliable remailers
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Tue, 21 Nov 1995, Raph Levien wrote: > Groups of remailers sharing a machine or operator: > (robo syrinx c2) > (flame hacktic replay) > (alumni portal) Anything more specific on the above info? robo, syrinx, c2 all running on c2.org alumni, portal run by Hal Finney hacktic, replay run on xs4all / by Alex de Joode? ok so far, but flame is xs4all/de Joode as well? flame used to be: Slovenian Anonymous Remailer <remailer(a)flame.sinet.org> Does the fact that it is now listed along with hacktic and replay now imply that it is no longer / never was in Slovenia? The reason for asking is that jurisdictions are interesting properties for remailers. The more jurisdictions available the better the legal morass can be created by remailing through 101 different jurisdictions. Speaking of which, these new additions: ford <remailer(a)bi-node.zerberus.de> ecafe <cpunk(a)remail.ecafe.org> are welcome aditions both being in Europe (Germany, and UK respectively) Any other European/Australasian cypherpunks care to add a remailer in their jurisdiction? Alice de 'nonymous ... [just giving the acquired nym a work out, and I wanted to ask the Q anyway, so I thought I may as well flesh this Nym out, and give it a better rep than the impostor who refuses to sign posts :-) Again, anything that isn't signed isn't from me.] ...just another one of those... P.S. This post is in the public domain. C. S. U. M. O. C. L. U. N. E. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBML3jzIbu8OQjKS7RAQFIQQP/ShGx18pfAT0TZcsAaY0T/LRuaXkE+C+k 9lL6mXo/FY1bHDXFUsNkb4wjJx6RujyMRWL6eI7T/ph531CY2wYaBzVdMXHjPy8m kCMSZai08WlLJboe06tlZCGHvpDEqGPATZd1VZoulFSD1F9Ughhidspvp9/jqIR8 q/cZbGkWSrY= =vvNf -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 1

Re: The future will be easy to use
by attila 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 30 Nov 1995, P. Rajaram wrote: > On Nov 29, 10:25pm, attila wrote: > > Subject: Re: The future will be easy to use > > OK, I have not seen it (like I said, I will get it) or read ipsec. > > > > However, despite the group ego, Sun _does_ listen and Sun does wish to > > be the leader. If the rest of ipsec group has a specific list, maybe it > > needs to presented higher up the pole. > > There are different groups within Sun. > The people pushing SKIP don't talk much with the group building IPv6. > that's a given. NIBM (not invented by ME) syndrome. That is what needs to stop. however, Sun has been playing the game recently of introducing an early product, then coming on with a more standard product. that does not change the fact the twogroups need to talk, and someone needs to coordiante resources. Nothing wrong if SKIP shakes out a few details as they implement, but then it needs to go to the standards.

1 0

[NOISE] Re: cypherpunks at ietf
by Frank Stuart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[...] >THE WWW MUST BE CONSUMER FRIENDLY IF IT IS TO SURVIVE. > >THE AVERAGE CONSUMER THRU A PC, OR A "DEDICATED WEB TERMINAL ON TOP OF THEIR >TV SET", MUST BE ABLE TO USE THE WEB IN THE FUTURE TO: > > 1. SEARCH FOR CONSUMER GOODS; ORDER CONSUMER GOODS. > 2. USE THE WEB FOR TELEPHONE COMMUNICATIONS AND E-MAIL > 3. DOWNLOAD TIME SHIFT AUDIO & VIDEO > 4. DOWLOAD MOVIES, SOFTWARE, AND P.P.V. EVENTS > 5. HOOK ON-LINE TO VIDEO & AUDIO 6. View text in lower case. :> [...] | (Douglas) Hofstadter's Law: Frank Stuart | It always takes longer than you expect, even fstuart(a)vetmed.auburn.edu | when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.

1 0

Re: Netscape gives in to key escrow
by Rich Salz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Absent such clarification, we must assume he considers the > press reports of what he said to be reasonably accurate. Speaking for myself, I wouldn't feel comfortable assuming that Clark's priorities vis-a-vis correcting a handful of misquotes were as high as I might want them to be. So I wouldn't take this position (fun and full of righteous wrath though it may be). Instead I'd be optimistic and say "he hasn't gotten around to it yet." Just as I figure Elvis will eventually tell all those tabloids that he and JFK were playing cards with Hoffa in Bimini all these many years. /r$

1 0

Re: cypherpunks at ietf
by Michael Coates 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> OUR CURRENT PROBLEM IS THAT THE AVERAGE CONSUMER CAN NOT COMPLETE AN > ACCURATE >> SEARCH ON THE WEB. >> >> [...] >> >> AT THIS POINT SO MANY CYBERPUNKS HAVE EMBEDDED SO MUCH GARBAGE ON THE > WEB, >> THAT YOU CAN NOT COMPLETE AN ACCURATE SEARCH. > >Gee: Someone who has not learnt to use the caps key on his computer >cannot do accurate searches, so will everyone else please get off >the net. > >> >> [...] >> >> BUT MORE IMPORTANT, WE NEED TO CLEANUP THE TRASH THAT THE CYBER-PUNKS ARE >> PLACING ON THE WEB. > >Pleasant comic relief. > My guess is; he simply wanted to embarass himself. Don't they have karaoke bars for that sort of thing?

1 0

SUN, UNIX, et al versus MS standards
by attila 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

my only comment on Sun's non-portable software is that it **used-to-be** a case of excessive Berzerkely attitude. Solaris is an effort, and a very credible effort to meet industry and consumer standards. The code is compatible to Sys V R4, and on x86 implementations will execute Sys V R4 binaries, as well as SCO binaries which opens that whole set of markets (software availability). at the Solaris 2.1 and 2.2 levels, Sparc Solaris and X86 Solaris were not even compatible to each other. I just took 200K+ lines of code from a Sys V package and ported it to both Sparc and X86 Solaris 2.4 --perfect. The code also had defines for 4.2+ BSD --those also compiled. Take your pick. Sun got the message on standards; their respone was to meet both; and, they have done a good job of it. Secondly, there is no such thing as bug-free code --that's like free-lunch and it's all relevant. Which would you rather have? patches available on the net, or be forced to upgrade to new bugs with MS plus a few more overkill features. Again, my point is: why bad mouth Sun? This is what has fractured UNIX in the market place and gives the MS assholes the ability to not only stomp UNIX with reviews which always ask "...which flavour of UNIX is it this month?" but, even worse, it gives Gates an opportunity to set YET ANOTHER **PROPRIETY** MS STANDARD --that does not run securely with the mainline. Do you wish to give Microsoft, whose intentions have never waivered from getting a piece of every transaction in the world, **complete** control over everything? on every desktop? In other words, do you want to see Microsoft, and possibly only Microsoft/Intel, in the marketplace. Network managers complained about the Ray Noorda cult, but wait until everybody is forced to join the Bill Gates cult. SUN is not the enemy; MS is. Do you wish to live with MS who, according to the head cultist, **never** issues a maintenance release since the software does not have bugs. Just updates, **expensive** updates, which fix some bugs, add a few overkill features, and introduce new bugs. Is there any really good software for **applications** on UNIX at even close to windows compatible prices --let alone the wealth of material available. Sure WABI gets the main productivity pieces, but PagerMaker and Corel are frozen at Version 5 for WABI. Personally, I use OS/2 as the front end to my Suns; OS/2 is likewise frozen at W3.1 level software --but at least WinOS2 does not crash my entire system or network. I want some of the features in the W95 versions of Corel and Pagemaker, such as HTML --they will never be made available for either OS/2 of UNIX. In other words, we need to stop bitching, and start supporting the alternative systems --constructively. It all comes back to software, and even us techo-freaks, or whatever we are with the long hair blowing all over, need to think about the people who want a simple answer and MS gives the glitter --if we do not help sustain the alternatives, we will not even have the luxury of decent hardware. Even GNU has a W95 and an NT **full pack**.

1 0

Re: cypherpunks at ietf
by Michael Coates 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> OUR CURRENT PROBLEM IS THAT THE AVERAGE CONSUMER CAN NOT COMPLETE AN > ACCURATE >> SEARCH ON THE WEB. >> >> [...] >> >> AT THIS POINT SO MANY CYBERPUNKS HAVE EMBEDDED SO MUCH GARBAGE ON THE > WEB, >> THAT YOU CAN NOT COMPLETE AN ACCURATE SEARCH. > >Gee: Someone who has not learnt to use the caps key on his computer >cannot do accurate searches, so will everyone else please get off >the net. > >> >> [...] >> >> BUT MORE IMPORTANT, WE NEED TO CLEANUP THE TRASH THAT THE CYBER-PUNKS ARE >> PLACING ON THE WEB. > >Pleasant comic relief. > My guess is; he simply wanted to embarass himself. Don't they have karaoke bars for that sort of thing?

1 0

Re: Attribute-testimony example (was Re: The future will be easy touse)
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"cme(a)TIS.COM" "Carl Ellison" 30-NOV-1995 12:34:35.18 Once an element of that set is identified, it can be assigned a codeword (to make parsing easier). ---------- How about an email address? Or a URL? Those can be autodetected easily enough. Plus, the email one could be used to automatically use the appropriate key if reading something from a particular address (whether for decryption or for signature verification). If there are more than one with that address, try all of them and if one turns up looking right (looks like email headers, for instance) use that decryption. That last is even easier with the signature verification, and that can show up the user-specified portion of the field so as to remind you who's sent the message. Sorry if this has been thought of (and suggested) before... it is kind of obvious. -Allen

2 1

Re: VisaCash security.
by ljo＠ausys.se 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

<fletch(a)ain.bls.com> wrote: > I think the Visa stuff is basically stored value and >rechargeable smart cards, not really ecash type money. Supposedly >you'll be able to get a card with $10 or $20 on it and all the >vending machines and phones around the Olympic venues will be set >up to take the cards. So to answer your questions, no it's not really >digital cash (like ecash); and yes I think it's probably traceable >to some extent (unless you buy stored value cards w/paper cash). > > First Union, the bank selling the cards, has a page on them: > >http://www.firstunion.com/visacash/ > > Low on the technical info, but they give an address to mail >questions to. A couple of weeks ago I was giving a talk at a conferance on computer technology in financial applications in Stockholm. I mentioned VISA:s electronic purse 'Smart Cash' in my talk and during the break afterwards a representative from a danish bank told me that VISA:s 'Smart Cash' was actually bought from the danish purse/project 'Danmont'. Does anyone know the truth of this, please let me know. Regards, /Lars Johansson ljo(a)ausys.se

1 0