December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Tim's friend's mildly retarded son
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:50 PM 3/15/96 +0100, Asgaard wrote: > FDA has a very good reputation This is not correct: The FDA has a thoroughly villainous reputation. Among other things it engages in corruption and extortion. Companies who want their stuff approved hire ex FDA "advisors". There is ample evidence that these advisors do no actual work, the FDA simply knocks back applications that fail to pay large sums to their friends. Indeed one company recently won a court case on this ground. The FDA is famous for grotesque scientific incompetence, (as for example its recent showboating on silicone), for playing to the gallery, for simple extortion, as a court recently found, for corruptly excluding drugs that people who are not well connected wish to sell and for corruptly approving the often identical drugs that people who are well connected wish to sell, and for a callous and light hearted disregard for human lives. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: Why escrow? (was Re: How would Leahy bill affect crypto
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:41 PM 3/13/96 -0800, jamesd(a)echeque.com wrote: >At 03:27 PM 3/13/96 -0800, jim bell wrote: > >> There is nothing in Leahy's bill which appears to prohibit the >> escrow agent from informing the key holder of a request/demand for the key; > >On the contrary: See section 2802(c)(4) Ooops! You're right, it's much worse than I thought... This bill is truly a pile of crap.

1 0

BES_ieg
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Architectural Record reports in the March issue on "Building Security: Coping With Threats From Bombs to Break-Ins." It shows the parallels of designing to protect vulnerable buildings and the hapless computer systems inside them. It reviews current approaches for "crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED)." And offers a cypherpunkish outlaw-and-disorder survey of besieged corporatism: For Which of the Following Does Your Organization Have Response Plans? Employee theft 90% Bomb threats 85% Fraud 80% Employees bringing weapons to work 79% Fights among employees 76% Robberies 75% Threatening phone calls 72% Verbal threats from employees 69% Employee sabotage 65% Murder threats 60% Civil unrest 53% BES_ieg

1 0

Re: Beat Remote Monitor Snooping?
by Gary Howland 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> At 12:18 AM 3/16/96 GMT, John Lull wrote: > >On Thu, 14 Mar 1996 21:54:10 +0100, Gary Howland wrote: > > > >> NTSC (TV video) modulation is done by phase modulation of the 3.579545 MHz > >> subcarrier. > > > >This is not correct. I'd suggest you go back and re-read your NTSC > > references. Sorry, I didn't write that! I accidentally replied to this mail, but didn't comment on it - must be someone else!

1 0

Re: Venona NSA web page
by Mutant Rob 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Re: maling list
by David K. Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:51 AM 03/15/96 +0000, you wrote: >Can you please take me off your mailing list. Thankyou. >firebrd123(a)mail.interconnect.net We can take you off the maling list, or we can take you off the mailing list. Which would you prefer? Of course, you'll still be on our shitlist.... Dave Merriman ------------------------------------------------------------- "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." P. J. O'Rourke (b. 1947), U.S. journalist. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> http://www.shellback.com/personal/merriman/index.htm

1 0

Re: Venona NSA web page
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:42 AM 3/14/96 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >------- Forwarded Message > >Date: Wed, 13 Mar 1996 06:59:32 -0500 (EST) >From: merkaba(a)styx.ios.com >Subject: VENONA PROJECT (fwd) > > > > >- - ---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Tue, 12 Mar 1996 22:07:24 -0500 >From: Ronald Pearce <ronald(a)cybercomm.net> >To: merkaba(a)styx.ios.com >Subject: VENONA PROJECT > >http://www.nsa.gov:8080/docs/venona/venona.html > >The VENONA Project > >In July 1995 the Intelligence Community ended a 50-year silence regarding >one of cryptology's most splendid successes - the VENONA Project. ... How they did it (from http://www.nsa.gov:8080/docs/venona/memory.html) A word about the VENONA cryptosystems---they should have been impossible to read. They consisted of a code book in which letters, words, and phrases were equated to numbers. So a code clerk would take a plain text message and encode the message using numbers from the codebook. This would have presented a significant challenge itself depending on how long the code book was used. However, the messages were further modified, in other words double-encrypted, by use of a one time pad. The use of a one time pad effectively randomizes the code and renders it unreadable. The key to the VENONA success was that mistakes were made in the construction and use of the one time pads---a fact that was discovered only through brute force and analysis of the message traffic. (http://www.nsa.gov:8080/docs/venona/monographs/monograph-2.html) ... One-time pads used properly only once are unbreakable; however, the KGB's cryptographic material manufacturing center in the Soviet Union apparently reused some of the pages from one-time pads. This provided Arlington Hall with an opening. Very few of the 1942 KGB messages were able to be solved because there was very little duplication of one-time pad pages in those messages. The situation was more favorable in 1943, even more so in 1944, and the success rate improved accordingly. Bill ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Re: FCC-type Regulation of Cyberspace
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:59 AM 3/15/96, Bill Frantz wrote: >At 9:26 PM 3/14/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote: >>Mr. Frantz, unless you can prove your claims here, forthwith, I must inform >>you that they are in violation of the Truth in Speech Act of 1996. Please >>retract them, now. > >Political speech, not commercial speech. The act doesn't apply or is >unconstitutional. I recognize no such distinction, and neither does--in my reading--the First Amendment. The First doesn't say, "Congress shall make no law...except for commercial speech...and except for religious speech...and except for insulting speech...." It said, simply, "Congress shall make no law..." (Before Bill jumps in and points out that he said nothing about religious, insulting, etc. forms of speech, I added those because it underscores just what "Congress shall make no law" means.) The issue of _fraudulent claims_ is presumably a main reason for those who think commercial speech is "different" from ordinary speech. Fraud is tough to control through legislation without severely limiting free speech. For example, if a Jehovah's Witness comes to my door and tells me all the wonderful things that will happen if I convert, is this fraud? Before one says this is "noncommercial," more fortunes have been lost or given away to Moonies, Christians, and other cults than all the financial scams in history. If a recruit to the Unification Church "is led to believe" that she will find salvation in the bosom of the Church if she donates her inheritance, is this fraud? Personally, while I view all religions as basically fraudulent, liberal societies have accepted the view that it's best that the State not seek to determine which claims are true, that "caveat emptor" should be the rule. The same caveat emptor view is the basic rationale for the First Amendment. It is recognized that free speech will inevitably cause some people to make bad decisions, to make bad investments (such as in the canonical case of an investment advisor giving advice that turns out to be flaky), and so on. "Don't believe everything you hear" is the operative phrase. Again, I see no distinction between commercial and other forms of speech. If a contract is involved, then civil law is the way to handle this. (As it might be with religious speech, where someone is told contractually that if they give $10,000 to the church their blindness will be cured. Key to a contract must be a testable set of results.) The First is under constant attack by people who claim that some type of speech is "not covered" by the First, or that other clauses of the Constitution give the State authority to regulate speech, or that the Founders did not "intend" for certain types of speech to be protected. The "campaign reformers" want limits placed on how much speech a candidate may issue (or how much speech people like me, as a volunteer or PAC, can issue). The medical protectionists want the speech of quacks, midwives, and other non-union members suppressed. And the arguments about "commercial speech" could mean broad limits on speech. >>Do you see the problem? > >Of course. Why do you think I said (in the 4th paragraph which you didn't >quote) (ZING :-) ): Touche. >BTW - I consider non-free markets, produced primarily by oligarchic >combines of large organizations to be a major impediment to removing >government influence from the economic system. Easing market entry is one >way to reduce the power of these oligarchic combines. I don't want to just >trade elected government oppression for unelected corporate oppression. To >put it bluntly, to suppress the 19th century coal mining strikes, the >companies hired the Pinkertons. I don't see a whole lot of difference >between this kind of private enterprise transaction, and Ruby Ridge. But this is direct violence. Libertarians don't condone this. Using episodes of such violence, by any side, as an argument against free markets is just an appeal to emotion. (I'm of course not saying we will ever be free of people initiating the use of force.) As for "oligarchic combines," certainly much larger and more concentrated examples may be found in Microsoft and Intel, which currently have about 80% apiece of their respective markets. Not to many Pinkerton guards forcing we Mac users to switch to Microsoft and Intel.... --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" 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

New Nym Server! (cubed)
by NSA Spook 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello everyone! There is a new nymserver on the net! alias(a)alias.alias.net (cubed) is running the Alpha code by Matt Ghio (ghio(a)myriad.alias.net) It's short name on Raph's list will be "cubed" with an actual email address of alias(a)alias.alias.net. Enjoy! Here's the public key: -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAzFKvt4AAAEEALz0GGp2todRpJsnPUUPo5dLK4b/xY6BEmh5H/v0Ujx3TuiU Bz++YxyGfcps1m0GpXp61hzSA1QDyhQFIMn98yyG7uzmeS1O3KX3/a5941+EO3yQ Vov8WkkewHxuSv62KcweynQjct0K+aeUopjzHvo6C/c0c5bzYTxTYiwGgKGpAAUR tCxUaGUgQ3ViZWQgTnltIFNlcnZlciA8YWxpYXNAYWxpYXMuYWxpYXMubmV0Pg== =i/Px -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0

RE: Java bignum package
by Hal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Bill Stewart <stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com> > Does Java have a run-time way to do > #if_exists library_X > foo = library_X.method_a(bar, baz) > #else > foo = library_Y.method_a(bar, baz) > #endif > or equivalent? This would let you distribute a slow pure-java library > that's compatible to a native-mode library and use whichever you need. Bill is referring to an announcement I made elsewhere about a bignum package I am working on in Java. Take a look at <URL: http://www.portal.com/~hfinney/bignum/bigarithtest.html> to play with a little interactive "calculator" I made with it. You need a Java enabled browser to use it. I think Bill's idea is a good one but I will discuss it further on coderpunks since it gets into some technical aspects of Java that may not be of general interest. Hal

1 0