December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

No Subject
by Andy Silber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> NED_PUEV <NED_PUEV(a)HP-Loveland-om2.om.hp.com>, > Radar <radar(a)itouch.net>, > Denise HP TechSupport <sdm(a)hpuerca.atl.hp.com>, > sgajar <sgajar(a)crosslink.net> >Subject: FW: FWD>Bill O Rights >Date: Wed, 21 Feb 96 14:27:43 PST >Encoding: 120 TEXT >X-Mailer: Microsoft Mail V3.0 >Status: > > > > ---------- >From: Dave Behrns >To: MIS Mail Group >Subject: FW: FWD>Bill O Rights >Date: Wednesday, February 21, 1996 2:10PM > > > >>>To whoever may read this, >>> >>>This is not a typical letter, in that by passing it on to as >>>many people as you can, you are taking part in what may yet become the >>>world's biggest practical joke. The U.S. Government has rece ntly >>>passed an act which enforces censorship on the internet. A group of >>>internet users has now come together to kick back at this oppression, >>>and have a bit of fun at the same time. >The aim of this exercise is >>>to re-establish the United States as "The land of the Free", not a >>>fascist state where freedom of speech and thought are curtailed. >>>Communist Russia fell as a result of s uch limits being placed upon >>>the minds of the general populus. On receiving this letter, please >>>pass it on to as many friends or E-mail lists as you can. We predict >>>that if everybody copies the lette r to 5 other addresses, by February >>>29th 1996, this letter should have reached in excess of 2 million >>>people. That's when the fun begins........ >On February 29th, please >>>send the message: >>> >>>Dear Mr. President, >>>Do you remember this: >>> >>>And afterwards enclose the pre-typed copy of the Bill of rights. By >>>sending the letter on the date above, you will contribute to either >>>one huge petition for freedom, or else lead to a crash of the >>>whitehouse server.Send all letters to: >President(a)Whitehouse.gov >>> >>>Remember that solidarity is the key to success !!!!! >>> >>> >>>--------------------------------------------------- >>> >>>THE BILL OF RIGHTS >>> >>>Amendment I >>> >>>Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or >>>prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of >>>speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to >>>assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. >>> >>>Amendment II >>> >>>A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free >>>state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be >>>infringed. >>> >>>Amendment III >>> >>>No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without >>>the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be >>>prescribed by law. >>> >>>Amendment IV >>> >>>The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, >>>papers, and >>>effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be >>>violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, >>>supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the >>>place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. >>> >>>Amendment V >>> >>>No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise >>>infamous >>>crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except >>>in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when >>>in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any >>>person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of >>>life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a >>>witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or >>>property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be >>>taken for public use, without just compensation. >>> >>>Amendment VI >>> >>>In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a >>>speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and >>>district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district >>>shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of >>>the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the >>>witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining >>>witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his >>>defense. >>> >>>Amendment VII >>> >>>In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed >>>twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no >>>fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of >>>the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. >>> >>>Amendment VIII >>> >>>Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor >>>cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. >>> >>>Amendment IX >>> >>>The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be >>>construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. >>> >>>Amendment X >>> >>>The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor >>>prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states >>>respectively, or to the people. >> >> >> >

1 0

Re: "and two forms of ID"
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>You got my position completely backward on this. I feel much better now. :-). I really didn't want to cross swords with someone who's S/N ratio is as high as yours is around here. >You may be thinking of what I said about the >cost of defeating traffic analysis. That must have been it. >The natural state of the Net seems to be a kind of semi-anonymity. Ah. I believe this is what I'm talking about... >Trying to push it in either direction (complete traceability or >anonymity) is costly. I'm going to build a rant about this pretty soon, but I think that in a geodesic network, audit trails of any kind cost more money, particularly in the "fringes" of the network, where all the processor growth is going to happen, assymetries or not. As processors handle smaller and smaller stuff faster and faster, it becomes harder and harder to "control" and monitor all of them. To operate efficiently, they have to be more and more autonomous. One way to provide decision rules for autonomous processors is to introduce micro-e$ auction markets into the net's infrastructure. A good example might be packet routing. Suppose you attach some very skinny money to a packet (something issued with Micromint, maybe?), and strip it off as the packet goes through the network, sender pays. Routers price their throughput based on their load at any given moment. When you create this "economy of switches", it becomes harder to establish the hierarchical book-entry control/coodination models we all know and love, certificate hierarchies among them. I think that something like this might work as a way of randomizing traffic in a network of remailers, by the way. Let the market determine the remailer path. Specify the number of hops left, and attach enough money for that number of hops. This is one way for people to pay for the use of remailers, and eventually, it could map to packet-level-anonymity someday. For the moment, I'm going to claim that anonymous auction markets are always more efficient than identified, command economies, just like flight is faster than surface travel. At least that's what I think this morning. :-). More as I get some time. However, I do agree that it's foolish to simply declare that everything must be unauditable, just as it is to declare universal auditability. It's better to let the market figure this out. ;-). Cheers, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Reality is not optional." --Thomas Sowell The e$ Home Page: http://thumper.vmeng.com/pub/rah/

1 0

Re: IBM Breakthrough?
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Responding to msg by mpd(a)netcom.com (Mike Duvos) on Wed, 21 Feb 9:3 PM >Those wishing to read IBM's explanation of this new >technology may browse their Web page on Quantum >Teleportation at... > >http://www.research.ibm.com/quantuminfo/teleportation/ Thanks much for your precis and the IBM pointer. IBM's ad seems inspired by Clarke's "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." The teleportation site hiply introduces the topic with its science fiction ancestry. The site even has a link to the "goulash" featured in the ad, so the tease is PR for IBM's magical research explorations. It was illuminating to read the tie of teleportation to quantum research -- cryptograpy, communication and who knows what else burbling in that wizard Watson lab. Because my Lynx could not get into IBM's "quantum cryptography," perhaps Blue is onto some Lotus-like Q-Crypto soon to be teased in ads for cosmos-wide Net security or surveillance-proof chips and goulash.

2 1

ASS_alt
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

EcoMist of Feb 17 has more on The Seychelles lure for wealthy outlaws; a look at Richleson's new book on spying; and the assault on Swiss vaults for outlaws and spies by outlaw, spying prosecutors. ASS_alt (for the 3) [Thanks to AS]

1 0

Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.)
by Anonymous User 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

IPG Sales wrote: > running fakers like us out of business should be its own reward On the contrary: it's a voluntary waste of time, for which there seems to be an unending supply of fodder.

1 0

Re: Need SSL firewall
by cmca＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [To: shamrock(a)netcom.com (Lucky Green)] [Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com] [Subject: Re: Need SSL firewall] Why not get BSDI's current version and run it on a PC. Rumor has it that is what Microsloth uses for a firewall. Chris McAuliffe <cmca(a)alpha.c2.org> (No, not that one.) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUBMSvHLoHskC9sh/+lAQHoVwP/V9D1VmvK0awiKDvqXs27StkTy5yXSrR7 a4zs6aWF2+pz23bINhMqbdN73tzEkuHQWnFrXuAVY3XxrWH1mMARwuBZGnEctDjI d1PyFWuahyIkZgJokNPgzyoENE29WF2mMRk7LK7/BwPLNk4JGnzWPt9XhQk37NZQ MoQsoRHSujA= =gD6Y -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: IPG hoax?
by Mutant Rob 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Wink Junior wrote: > I must admit that after the first day I've been wondering if this whole > IPG thing isn't some kind of deep troll or early April Fool's joke. > anyone actually spoken on the phone with IPG or confirmed their existence > in any way? For the record, I'd like to state that I saw their ad [..] Been wondering the same thing. The noise generated by this is awfully suspicious. It's also rather suspicious that a couple of my posts here have mysteriously not showed up in the archives, although I've received replies to them (but that's another issue altogether). - --- [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 iQBFAwUBMSvslCoZzwIn1bdtAQGomgF/ckqMkUKfMmmkkz9EoadDUYetwmZHedSY RYSEAo/sTtXdBzgbKEEOTj20ZA7z5O72 =Ar7E -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.)
by cmca＠alpha.c2.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [To: IPG Sales <ipgsales(a)cyberstation.net>] [cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com] [Subject: Re: Internet Privacy Guaranteed ad (POTP Jr.)] IPG Sales <ipgsales(a)cyberstation.net> blathered: >that the encrypted ciphertext can be any of the N to the >256th power possibile clear/plain text messages/files. That would be 256^N, actually, a somewhat bigger number generally speaking. I hope your cryptography is better than your combinatorics, but I (like a lot of others) doubt it. Why, in your challenge, is your system to be tested by only US citizens? Why not submit it to the NSA and in 15 days you could get a CJR for it... then the c'punks in France, Germany and News Zealand could work on it too, and you will have saved a lot of time. Chris McAuliffe <cmca(a)alpha.c2.org> (No, not that one.) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAwUBMSvGToHskC9sh/+lAQFHNwQAsVYB9OodDBRqJshya+TyAKFURc4EqmKf Sj23Y7605XteUAxlPuF+vm3KnXnAV73hWTpQu+x296oO8ubwmM5XybhyLZqN/8Wa uT4qatkTVIvrGwtbUpYrjqnO+AgdPZvxoRbrf7QZu4O7k8ONF8J9C0DVRtvGS8BU Y6ABbc5H3GI= =5PWi -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

A Challenge (perhaps!)
by KarL MarX 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi! My friend has just written a new crypto program that he is trying to get included on a PC Magazine CD-ROM over here... I don't know too much about it at the moment, but he said he thought it would be a good idea to see if anyone on this list could crack it and thus help to make it more secure. I don't know too much about it ATM... I know it doesn't exercise key technology and relies on the secrecy of the algorithm (which from my very limited knowledge on cryptography I think makes it almost doomed from the start (?))... I have some ciphertext of this application but apart from that I have nothing else... Would anyone have any objectiosn to this being posted to the list? If not, could someone tell me what I should post to the list, plaintext and resulting ciphertext, would that be enough, or shoudl I post some info on the algorithms as well ??? The application is written in Visual Basic and I could probably get a copy of the compiled (well VB is actually interpreted, but that's neither here or there) .EXE file.... -- Karl Marx

2 1

Re: Edupage, 20 Feb 1996
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>EUROPE BACKS V-CHIP >>The European Parliament has followed the lead of the United States in >>supporting the use of Canadian-developed V-chip technology that allows >>parents to screen violent or adult content from their televisions. >>(Montreal Gazette 20 Feb 96 C7) Why, Oh why is there so so much talk about the V Chip. This stupid device only covers over-the-air broadcast TV a dying part of the spectrum. It does not cover cable-only programs (HBO, etc) and it does not cover net-based audio and (soon) video programming. It is meaningless. DCF

1 0