December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

RANT: When hi-tech is a hinderance (freedom w/in limits)
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A short 'rant' on techno-dinosaurism... Saw a blurb on CNN last night about computerized missiles that would defeat jamming devices and analyze the type of target and configure their warheads appropriately. All that I could think of is what an expensive waste of computing machinery... is the cost of a "genius bomb" (assuming it does actually work, unlike the Patriots in Gulf War) worth while? Wouldn't it be better to use a lot of dumb bombs that launch several millions of dollars apiece at a tank or bit of artillery? I'm reminded of the tech they used to detect guerrillas in Vietnam... sensors that went off when uric acid (?) was present so the VC would pis in buckets and walk away, making the sensors go wild... the US put a lot of effort into bombing pis buckets. Or look back to the 13th century when European soldiers were high-tech wearing tons of armor and used cross bows. it was imposing high-tech for the time, but they couldn't move fast or fire arrows quickly... and they were skagmeat for Mongols who were comparatively low-tech. Cypherpunks or crypto relevance? Sometimes high-tech can be a weakness. I've heard that the Soviets, not having the luxury of sexy Crays and whatnot, were adept and using hundreds of PCs to do their cryptanalysis... and so may have a lot of interesting parallel processing algorithms. To paraphrase Miles Davis, creativity is "freedom within limitations".

1 0

This post is rated LTC for `Low Technical Content'
by JMKELSEY＠delphi.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [ To: cypherpunks ## Time: 01/27/96 02:19 am ## Subject: This post is rated LTC for `Low Technical Content.' ] >Date: Thu, 25 Jan 1996 18:04:21 -0800 >From: tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) >Subject: Re: "This post is G-Rated" >I see self-ratings of Usenet and mailing list posts as possible, >just nearly worthless. And the reall contoversial stuff, this kind >of goddamned fucking shit, will not get screened out. After all, I >voluntarily rated this thread "G," and look what got through! (And >it's only the tit of the iceberg, so to speak.) The best solution has always seemed to me to be one of these three: a. Tags appended to notes/posts, from various reviewers, digitally signed and otherwise coded to allow intelligent filtering, or b. Electronic distributions of reviewers' evaluations tagged to notes in some simple way. (I.e. give each note or post a unique ID which appears in the message.) Then, a smart newsreader/mail program sorts the notes accordingly, or c. The reviewer reads the group/list, and rates posts according to some useful criteria. He then resends it out to his users, filtered as desired. (CP-LITE seems like a very early version of this.) Any of these can be pretty easily ported to that magical set-top box we hear so much about (no doubt running Windows '05). In many ways, (a) and (b) are easier. >A meaningful "parental filter" cannot be done on-the-fly with >self-ratings. Some minor steps can be taken, but not all worth the >expense and hassle of a mandatory system. Actually, I think in practice this will mean that programs get a given rating, which is renewed every so often. You don't rate Melrose Place episode #89, you rate the entire series. This whole idea offers two wonderful opportunities to control content on TV. First, get the TVs shipped with the V-chip filter turned on. Most people don't bother setting their VCR timers, and they also won't bother setting this unless it denies them access to lots of shows they like. And, if turning the filter on and off is hard enough to actually keep the average 12-year-old out, then it will be hard enough that many families with kids will simply never change its setting. They may even forget or lose the PIN that allows them to do so. This means that you have a sizeable audience who depend on this rating system, the only one readily available. Second, apply pressure to television networks in whatever ways necessary, by threatening a re-evaluation of their top-rated shows. After all, ER really is a little gory for kids to be watching. Oh, you've decided to spend less time on covering the losses in the great Bosnian Peace Initiative? Well, I suppose a little real-life drama won't hurt anyone. If the V-chip is used widely at all, this represents a really useful threat. What happens to the network executive who gets ER to lose half its audience, even just for a few weeks while a review board takes up the network's appeal? >--Tim >Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, >tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero Note: Please respond via e-mail as well as or instead of posting, as I get CP-LITE instead of the whole list. --John Kelsey, jmkelsey(a)delphi.com / kelsey(a)counterpane.com PGP 2.6 fingerprint = 4FE2 F421 100F BB0A 03D1 FE06 A435 7E36 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMQrIiUHx57Ag8goBAQGhIAQA2F3guHlTnebja5fcGwEwOKx3CwdhAs90 zn6Di+nztSoGt6JF2kIC60zsfVHgQ//RJcMtuiFzBsQoTn/E56JM2mZ4vJpsfipO lVbKlZ1HylDyGLcF/pBllBVfvmXLjpvu0OXkFt3yqEohjaNlF7l49bOz28ngLv/A CATYZGlDP64= =6BO+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

The Press
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:25 AM 1/28/96, Mark Allyn (206) 860-9454 wrote: > >I would like to make a suggestion that D. Denning; others >who are pro-escrow/clipper; and some of you folks here on >this forum get together for a debate. There have already been several debates about Clipper. I recall one at George Washington University, in D.C., with Prof. Lance Hoffmann as the moderator, and the usual suspects on each side (Denning representing Clipper, one or more of the EPIC/EFF/CPSR/ACLU folks on the other side). Didn't change a lot of views, I suspect. And I'll bet a hundred bucks that not a single Congresscritter saw the debate, either live (of course not) or on C-SPAN (assuming it was carried). And there was an IRC "town meeting" with DRD herself, though I don't recall the details. My point was that few cryptographers and computer scientists actively support the pro-control, pro-GAK position, not that we need more meaningless debates with Dorothy Denning, Donn Parker, and Stuart Baker. >Ideally, this would be real nice on a TV show such as the >McNiel Lehrer show on PBS. Barring that, I would think >that an IRC chat channel could be set up so that they >could get on line and engage in an on line discussion. Absolutely not enough time. The News Hour with Jim Lehrer could only devote at most 20 minutes to such a story. Hardly enough time to even explain the issues to a public which has no idea whatsoever what PGP stands for, or what key escrow means, etc. (Consider how many hours a week of reading this list and other sources it took before you, the reader, knew which end was up.) And if the News Hour _did_ do such a report, they'd look to the canned experts they have in their backyard: the EPIC/CPSR/ACLU Washington staffers. When major media outlets send a film crew out to California it's usually to get crowd shots of those whacky "Cyberpunks" arguing about privacy. "Is the head dead yet?" But, of course, I would never discourage anyone from talking to the local media. Maybe it will help. Sure. Fine. Whatever. --Tim Boycott espionage-enabled software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: This post is rated LTC for `Low Technical Content'
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:55 PM 1/27/96 -0500, JMKELSEY(a)delphi.com wrote: >The best solution has always seemed to me to be one of these three: > >a. Tags appended to notes/posts, from various reviewers, digitally >signed and otherwise coded to allow intelligent filtering, or > >b. Electronic distributions of reviewers' evaluations tagged to >notes in some simple way. (I.e. give each note or post a unique ID >which appears in the message.) Then, a smart newsreader/mail >program sorts the notes accordingly, or > >c. The reviewer reads the group/list, and rates posts according to >some useful criteria. He then resends it out to his users, filtered >as desired. (CP-LITE seems like a very early version of this.) d. The "V-Chip" device makes a network query to the selected rating service to ask for a rating. What happen when the rating service is unreachable is just one of the many parameters that the parent needs to set. (If designed right, no parent could use it, but its availability would still stop the adult censorship croud in congress.) This approach as the advantage that the communications costs accrue to those using the feature and not to everyone else. A disadvantage is that each content item needs some ID. Bill

2 1

Re: RANT: When hi-tech is a hinderance (freedom w/in limits)
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:48 AM 1/28/96, Anonymous wrote: >A short 'rant' on techno-dinosaurism... ... >Cypherpunks or crypto relevance? Sometimes high-tech can be >a weakness. The canonical story being Arthur C. Clarke's "Superiority," said at one time to have been required reading at MIT. >I've heard that the Soviets, not having the luxury of sexy >Crays and whatnot, were adept and using hundreds of PCs to >do their cryptanalysis... and so may have a lot of interesting >parallel processing algorithms. I'm skeptical. Sun Microsystems did indeed buy up a bunch of Russian programmers, a couple of years ago. Haven't heard anything come out of this. And loosely-coupling PCs, for a task such as Anonymous describes, does not sound like terribly good preparation for other tasks. No point in speculating further, as the speculations and counter-speculations are underdetermined. --Tim Boycott espionage-enabled software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: RANT: When hi-tech is a hinderance (freedom w/in limits)
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 01:48 AM 1/28/96 +0100, Anonymous wrote: >Cypherpunks or crypto relevance? Sometimes high-tech can be >a weakness. You don't know how right you are. Jim Bell Klaatu Burada Nikto "Something is going to happen. Something.....Wonderful!" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMQrhZvqHVDBboB2dAQFKZAP/U6tKRFYbMmag6wB/HEO/K8XxsSUFr5dt 9sMaeptBa2EEvn2f4rrlZ9AadKTEX8qhd9VI3gF+XfsZ8tVnfK7FSvdeteoN7iBB tVPfXgozxLWqKFUe1YoYIKJof9c5q4IPNkOaWCUAiMbOiA8BrhYLPUOISkC0W5f8 0yse7fmFA1w= =0Fe9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: This post is rated LTC for `Low Technical Content'
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:36 PM 1/27/96 -0800, Rich Graves wrote: >On Sat, 27 Jan 1996, Bill Frantz wrote: > >> At 7:55 PM 1/27/96 -0500, JMKELSEY(a)delphi.com wrote: >> >The best solution has always seemed to me to be one of these three: >> > >> >a. Tags appended to notes/posts, from various reviewers, digitally >> >signed and otherwise coded to allow intelligent filtering, or >> > >> >b. Electronic distributions of reviewers' evaluations tagged to >> >notes in some simple way. (I.e. give each note or post a unique ID >> >which appears in the message.) Then, a smart newsreader/mail >> >program sorts the notes accordingly, or >> > >> >c. The reviewer reads the group/list, and rates posts according to >> >some useful criteria. He then resends it out to his users, filtered >> >as desired. (CP-LITE seems like a very early version of this.) >> >> d. The "V-Chip" device makes a network query to the selected rating service >> to ask for a rating. What happen when the rating service is unreachable is >> just one of the many parameters that the parent needs to set. (If designed >> right, no parent could use it, but its availability would still stop the >> adult censorship croud in congress.) > >This just gets ridiculous. It adds a lot of overhead without necessarily >giving you good information. ... <lots of good rant deleted> Rich - Remember that this is NOT being designed for usability, only to stop a bad movement in congress. The reason I proposed solution (d) is that it adds no overhead to people who don't use it. (I propose using the Message-ID: header as a lookup ID for items received by email. I suspect it has spoofing problems, but perhaps congress won't notice.) Perhaps we should re-visit the need for usability if anyone really wants to use such a system themselves. As a parent, I always wanted my children to explore freely and discuss anything they found that bothered them. Bill

1 0

Re: This post is rated LTC for `Low Technical Content'
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 18:03 1/27/96, Bill Frantz wrote: >d. The "V-Chip" device makes a network query to the selected rating service >to ask for a rating. What happen when the rating service is unreachable is >just one of the many parameters that the parent needs to set. (If designed >right, no parent could use it, but its availability would still stop the >adult censorship croud in congress.) Of course the V-Chip transmits the ID number of the program to be rated upstream. Since all programs will be rated by the chip, regardless if you choose to use the rating or not, the exact channel you are watching will be tracked and logged. Have fun, -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

Re: This post is rated LTC for `Low Technical Content'
by Weld Pond 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

shamrock(a)netcom.com (Lucky Green) quoth: >Of course the V-Chip transmits the ID number of the program to be rated >upstream. Since all programs will be rated by the chip, regardless if you >choose to use the rating or not, the exact channel you are watching will be >tracked and logged. Ahh.. Finally a use for anonymous remailers that the Christian right would understand. Weld Pond - weld(a)l0pht.com - http://www.l0pht.com/ L 0 p h t H e a v y I n d u s t r i e s Technical archives for the people - Bio/Electro/Crypto/Radio

1 0

"German service cuts Net access" (to Santa Cruz)
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[I sent this to the Cyberia list, but it seems likely to have some interest for Cypherpunks. Apologies to those who get it twice.] More interesting news from my own backyard: "German service cuts Net access: Neo-Nazi materials posted on Web by Santa Cruz company" San Jose Mercury News, 1996-01-27, D1 "Germany's biggest Internet provider has blocked access to a Santa Cruz computer service that makes available neo-Nazi propaganda in another sign of the growing tension over material available on the Internet. "Deutsche Telekom, Germany's national phone company, blocked its 1 million customers Thursday from gaining access to Internet "Web sites" maintained by customers of Web Communications of Santa Cruz. "The 18-month-old company offers customers the ability to self-publish material on the World Wide Web, a fast-growing subsection of the Internet. Among its 1,500 custoemrs is a Canadian manwho has posted material that questions the existence of the Holocaust. ""We want to make it very clear we condemn anti-Semitism, racism and hatred in any form," said company president Chris Schefler. But "we do not monitor, police or control the content of any of our customer sites."" ---- I'd quote more from the article, but I think I'm at about the limit of fair use quotation. I expect the story will be picked up nationally; it was on several t.v. shows last night and today. For those interested--though merely including this information could I suppose cause the William and Mary site to be similarly turned off, the page in question is noted Revisionist Ernst Zuendel, or Ontario, Canada. His Web page at Webcom can be found by searching on Zuendel or Zundel and the usual other terms: holocaust, revisionism, Webcom, etc. (I tried last night to connect to Zuendel's page, and couldn't. Nor could I connect to www.webcom.com, so they may be having problems.) Apparently irate users at Webcom, whose pages are likewise now inaccessible to Germany, are clamoring to have Zuendel thrown off, so that all good Germans can once again access their pages. The implications of this are fairly clear. I'm not sure if there are any U.S. _legal_ questions, except that Zuendel and similarly controversial material is protected by customer agreements (as Schlefler notes, Zuendel has violated no user rules, and so Webcom cannot kick him off for rule violations). What next? AOL and Compuserve turn off access to the many European countries that have Web pages containing what we call "child porn" (but which is legal in the Netherlands, Denmark, etc.), Bangla Desh turns off access to sites that have pages describing the cooking of beef, and Iran turns off access to any country that allows women to have a presence on their systems? A good thing Web proxies (remailers for http accesses) are so far along! By the way, I saw Schlefler being interviewed. I'll keep you posted. --Tim May Boycott espionage-enabled software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 2