December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Info on Netscape's key escrow position
by blancw＠accessone.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From Hal Finney: [in regard to Jim Clark "preaching acquiescence"]: Where is the recognition that the right to tap communications is not granted by God but an accident of technology, one which can be taken away by technological progress as easily as it was granted? .............................................................. I agree with Hal's comments. If Netscape acquiesced to the use of GAK, it would be very easy for cypherpunks and others to switch browsers; they could re-direct interest to Mosaic or even create their own. Netscape is in a prominent position, however, in the net community, which is looking to prevent government control of their electronic communication. The NSA and other government agencies are looking for excuses to give their decisions the appearance of legitimacy. Any perceived weakness on the part of the commercial key players in cyberspace can be perceived as conducive towards the implementation of mandatory security plans, in disregard of the actual desires of internet users. It appears that Netscape is stuck between a rock and a hard place: . if they adamantly resist GAK, they're in trouble with "the Law" . if they appear agreeable to complying with future legal mandates, they're in trouble in with their customers in cyberspace. Losing the fight intellectually precedes losing it in fact. This is more likely to result when the distinction between government "authority" vs citizen "rights" is obscured from the general consciousness (as in: whose business is it, anyway?). Anyone who provides a communication service which can be made accessible to "the Law" becomes by default a representative of the issue, which to me amounts to what someone want to promote in the U.S. (or the world) in terms of ideals; in terms of a way of life. It would promote an atmosphere of intellectual integrity to have explicitly definite statements about the objections to GAK, but barring that it is useful to know that these representatives appreciate why the difference is important. . is it because money is being lost? . because privacy is at stake? . because the ideal of self-determination is being muddled, along with . an understanding of where the concept of "individual unit citizens" stands in relation to concepts of "government authority"? . because of the consequences of that obfuscation? The caution with which this GAK business is being dealt with I think is symptomatic of an underlying problem, which is of not having a sense of freedom to stand up to the Dark Side. .. Blanc

1 0

apachessl info
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- "James A. Donald" <jamesd(a)echeque.com> wrote: >>At 11:32 PM 12/2/95 -0800, sameer wrote: >> I hate to repeat myself, but sometimes people don't listen. >>http://www.c2.org/apachessl/ >This Web page fails to explain what Apache-SSL actually is, what it is good >for, >and why people should use it. What I missed was the how-to on getting a certified key. Wasn't there a way of doing that through e-world (Apple's on-line service) for free? Wilhelm Busch -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMMI8XYiUi5SQtQ3tAQFplQf/Ua4/xmkbLRkDCqK1ws6HkhG4IyzFIz0r ESxaEXme6Ev9jTIzQtR+Stabi31H1hbMwkOR/MKSxx9vhuCpzX4PrKtjaMpugXMy nJ6voHmveZd4gErQJ6TM9X42TroaypDa/lL6Bc9UGAGoMAl37tst/jzL3l11iRfO OLKrsL9rDRtwu50sdulqEhrbphuTZriPuReDR5ZluAwZzsDcu8Upor1DIP9W+bVu zYTziaFmHAigP/dJOyi6x/Zd6aDoIl2U55YfQ+Pa3RUyarDVIjcnR/D6N8NeB7Cr XSZo78T9mG4JygZItY86z9Ct5vL1o1MzSNcm3KmuUwuyYOJcGUlddg== =Jry0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQEPAzC9XzIAAAEIAMJ9b1kiyvrhoa5OGf7G1hSt6yWmzX7napWo5qRAh+xUE+Ue ftxUmGE1p/lFoUJIRKhH2I0yktcp3Wirmm61rIfJ5S0s9BnE3W+Uk8B1jxim2JvZ ezOPn0so+dUJP4tvtzDQZDCk5VGTsJkMAvhxahripQKpkWC5qL9nM9cvKa2ZnFjT 8NRaaAx1eMST/k4ntc431jFXNgnBDrxNBb8RNMb7b7jtFGOFN8Y3Mj5TmprXps2V ydtL57Z85MKfFjkAMeMtugqieJBWEsqA3C1/wKhB9cKb1Rdu/97VpZ0v+FQe9Y1k qwsQ78chNzBpfHjxSSuo8T4NV0AZiJSLlJC1De0AEQEAAbQNV2lsaGVsbSBCdXNj aA== =/fpw -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

2 1

Pegasus Mail PGP Extensions?
by Adam Hupp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know if there are any PGP extensions for WinPMail, and where to get them? -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6 mQBtAzCNppQAAAEDALhWZl7IuGZ9zZT5bACo0b/1L0Nv0C72vKHIO3IHh+cwpHHa 2Ozb9aeO0UvXGwkkZIYgUm0EvmzKh7yb1GTLvBp5kXpR3I9w+Yj4LGlBDERpUWw6 x4ED49pwDnz1Hl5FBQAFEbQYYXNoIDxhaHVwcEBwcmltZW5ldC5jb20+ =PtJK -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

Re: Info on Netscape's key escrow position
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I say "Hear, Hear!" to Hal Finney's message about why we should be mad at Netscape and Jim Clark. (Although I still have a bit of hope that Netscape and Clark will see the importance of not simply giving up.) --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."

1 0

Re: Questions/Comments on ecash protocol (fwd)
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hal wrote: [parts elided] >BTW since apparently both deposit and payment messages are not encrypted, >coins made out to "@" are in danger of being stolen both while en route >from customer to shop and from shop to bank. This is significant from >the point of view of payee anonymous systems, which will need to use such >coins. More encryption will be necessary when such coins are passed >around. Absolutely. Wildcard coins are stealable in transit. However, one might safely assume that transactions conducted using such coins be encrypted by other methods. >Well, I would think identification of the payer's bank will be >necessary for any coin based system so you know where to cash in the >coins, so I don't think this is going to go away. Of course as of now >everyone has the same bank so it is not an issue. Your analysis is correct. The good news, for the free marketers on this list :-), is that there will be other banks issuing Ecash in the near future. However, they are unlikely to offer the flexibility you have with Mark Twain Bank. >There is no such thing! This is one of the most common misconceptions. >This version of ecash does not trace double spenders. It prevents double >spending by checking each coin to make sure it has not already been >spent. Tracing of double spending is only necessary in offline systems >where coins are not checked right away, but that is not present here. True. >Very good comments. I'm sure the next version will be much better if >they are careful to clear up the kinds of issues you have raised. Will do. <insert standard disclaimer here> -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

2 1

Re: prototype slot-machine
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:23 PM 12/2/95 -0800, sameer wrote: > I've written up a slot-machine thing for ecash, very >experimental, very buggy, not very slick, (i'd like to get the >technical bugs worked out before i put a fancy wrapper on it) and i'd >*like* to announce it here for testing, but I'm worrying about >gambling laws.. > any thoughts? Use the demo digicash; it's not real money, and it's never been illegal to play for poker chips. The mere fact that there's an exchange market for real money vs. digicash play money doesn't change that. It'd be nice if you take small bets, since many of us only have $100 or so of play money; quarters should be fine. To do the job right, you need audio.... #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, Freelance Information Architect, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # Phone +1-510-247-0663 Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # Anybody notice that Microsoft's Wide Open Road ad has barbed-wire fences # on both sides of the road?

2 1

Talking to Jim
by wiltship＠iccu6.ipswich.gil.com.au 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Gidday all I emailed Jim Clark day before yesterday about his comments re key escrow. He responded. As it's not good form to post private email, might I suggest that one of the 'elders' here put to Jim a list of questions on the proviso that his answers can be posted to the list. You never know, a lot of speculation might be confirmed or denied. cheers Peter Flight to Quality Wiltshire Productions Pty Ltd Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Intl Voice 61 7 3376 3535 Intl Fax 61 7 3279 4027 Email wiltship(a)gil.com.au PGP Key ID 3E584C7D PGP Fingerprint 01 03 FB F4 BE F8 2B F3 5D 84 6B 69 37 80 FE 10

4 3

Re: Netscape gives in to key escrow
by Jay Campbell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Gee, and Tim May didn't get a new ISP when his current PC-ISP canceled >his Usenet access because of his protected speech and then gave it back >only if he included a disclaimer on his messages. Fire away, Cypherpunks!!! Get your facts straight before spewing this nonsense to the masses. There's not an ounce of reality reflected anywhere in that whole sentence. -- Jay Campbell edge(a)got.net - Operations Manager -=-=-=-=-=-=- Sense Networking, Santa Cruz Node Jay(a)Campbell.net got.net? PGP MIT KeyID 0xACAE1A89 "On the Information Superhighway, I'm the guy behind you in this morning's traffic jam leaning on his horn."

1 0

Re: Globally legal Netscape
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Fred Cohen wrote: > Law enforcement is almost universally used as an excuse to > collect information on individuals in the name of helping society, > but this power is easily abused. In addition to Fred's good examples of abuse of information, I'd like to add the use of census data to arrest Japanese-Americans during World War 2 - not only was the data collected under great promises that citizens could trust the government, and that it would only be accessible for lawful purposes, it was used to attack people who weren't doing anything illegal or wrong when it was collected. Everything you say on the nets sticks around, and if the government has master keys, then even what you said in private sticks around. It's not illegal to say "[expletive deleted]" in private mail today, and won't be even after Exon-II passes, but it _may_ be kept around so they'll know whose mail to get law enforcement access to to enforce the Verbal Morality Act of 2001. At 04:26 PM 12/3/95 -0600, rthomas(a)pamd.cig.mot.com (Robert Owen Thomas) wrote: >look, this is just a *bit* extreme. having been one of those folks sworn >to uphold the Constitution, I can tell all of you that there is no master >plan to rid the American people of their rights and freedom. Remember the fundamental job of any bureaucracy - self-preservation and growth, by whatever means necessary. No need for any master plan or conspiracy. Are there herds of opportunists interested in taking political advantage of anything that comes their way? You bet. Listen to Louis Freeh talk about the need to be able to eavesdrop on anybody they want to be able to catch narco-terrorist child pornographers, and think about whether you want the FBI able to tap your email - especially if you occasionally send email to people whose chronological age you don't know using language that Senator Exon might disapprove of. Reminds me a lot of Harry Anslinger talking state governments into banning Evil Marihuana in the waning days of Prohibition. >o Robert Owen Thomas: Corvette pilot. Cymro ydw i. User scratching post. o ^^^^^^^^^^^ Between the anti-encryption cops and the English-Only right-wingers, you may not be able to say that much longer - Welsh isn't quite as heavily encrypted as, say, Navajo, but it's bound to violate some law soon enough :-) #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, Freelance Information Architect, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # Phone +1-510-247-0663 Pager/Voicemail 1-408-787-1281 # Anybody notice that Microsoft's Wide Open Road ad has barbed-wire fences # on both sides of the road?

1 0

more examples of privacy invasion as a prelude to oppresion desired
by fc＠all.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I think it would be a very good idea to collect a great deal more data in support of the correlation between the reduction in privacy and the removal of other rights - eventually resulting in bad things - throughout history. I would be happy to collect as much data as possible on this from the cypherpunks (and others) and to post the information in a more complete form when the examples start to slow down. The more facts and citations you can provide, the better it will be for the purposes of making this point clear, accurate, and hard to dispute. -> See: Info-Sec Heaven at URL http://all.net/ Management Analytics - 216-686-0090 - PO Box 1480, Hudson, OH 44236

1 0