December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Enforcing the CDA improperly may pervert Internet architecture
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

One issue with the "We could require that everybody label their packets" proposal is that a large part of the world isn't under FCC or even US control; why should some foreigner label their packets based on the tastes of US censors? Another problem is that adequate labelling requires public-key cryptography, and the US bans export of crypto; this means you can't use the best technical standards for domestic use and export, and means you can't mass-market exportable rating software. We EEEVILLL Net Users would certainly be _happy_ if the FCC or Congress talked the Administration into legalizing the use of decent authentication technology. (They could argue that the ITAR permits authentication-only technology, but there are clear technical advantages to RSA vs. DSS, and DSS has the subliminal-key options that mean you can use it for non-authentication encryption as well as signatures anyway. There's also the problem that both are patented, though the patents behind DSS are weak and run out in a year or two.) Another problem is that this proposal would require multiple authentication headers per IP packet - not only is it wasteful, but is it even supported? I suppose there's some tunneling approach possible, but it'd be really awkward and non-portable. ObExon: Does the Administration propose to label any on-line copies of the Federal Register? There's often material in there, such as the recent Congressional debates on partial-birth abortion, that are clearly in violation of the CDA if posted to the nets, so they would have to be labeled. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215

1 0

Re: Enforcing the CDA improperly may pervert Internet architecture
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"alano(a)teleport.com" "Alan Olsen" 10-APR-1996 02:41:54.68 >Forget the porno... What are the parents who believe in Creationism going >to do when little Johnny runs into a good skeptical site debunking all that >crap? What are they going to do when the little liberal kids are exposed to >the works of conservitives? Or Biblical Inerentists kidlets are exposed to >the debunkings of that faith? Or Dorthy Denning's kids (if she has any) get >exposed to the writings of the subversive known as Tim May? Quite. It's interesting in that regard that, as well as differentiating between homosexual and heterosexual content, the W3C PICS scheme includes a filtration scheme for attacks on religions. One wonders if they considered that Scientology is currently (probably unjustifiedly) considered a religion? -Allen

1 0

Re: So, what crypto legislation (if any) is necessary?
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:25 PM 4/9/96 -0700, Bill Frantz wrote: >At 6:27 PM 4/9/96 -0800, jim bell wrote: >>At 07:08 PM 4/9/96 -0700, Bill Frantz wrote: >>>At 3:21 PM 4/9/96 -0800, jim bell wrote: >>>>And the rest of us are tired of seeing those non-responses! >>> >>>I wish to state that Jim Bell does not speak for me. >> >>Tell me, what is the most exciting, interesting, and imaginative usage of >>"Yadda Yadda Yadda" that _you_ remember, Bill? > >This will be my last post on this subject. Since Jim Bell ALWAYS has to >have the last word on any given subject, he will continue to try to read >something into my statement that is not there. I can not get much clearer >than: > >I have not authorized Jim Bell to speak for me. > I seem to recall seeing this message about 4 days ago, when it was originally posted. Somehow it is not me who seems to need to "have the last word." Apparently, not only do you need to have the last word, you need to have it TWICE.

1 0

Re: Enforcing the CDA improperly may pervert Internet architecture
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:08 PM 4/9/96 -0400, Duncan Frissell <frissell(a)panix.com> wrote: >Of course that doesn't overcome the "technical problem" of getting the IETF >to adopt that change in the protocols and getting a significant number of >sites to adopt the new protocol. Even if you impose a substitutte on the >IETF, it doesn't stop them from wandering off and creating their independent >protocols and seeing whether the "official" or the "unofficial" get adopted. What, you mean requiring that Americans on an international standards body bully the whole anarchy into accepting a technically inferior kluge because some American politicians want it? This ain't the UN... or even ISO. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215

1 0

PRE_dat
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

4-13-96. Ted's Publisher: "Internet Surprise." An editorial on Internet telephony. "Reconnaissance of Bosnia Goes On-Line. CIA Displays Computer System Using Images From Drone Vehicles." The system draws on material from drone vehicles known as Predators and provides computerized video, data and audio transmissions, using commercial technologies. Separate channels carry information at different levels of security for NATO members, peacekeepers, Russians and US troops. PRE_dat

1 0

Mixmaster through conventional anonymous remailer
by Laszlo Vecsey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is there a way to send an anonymous E-Mail message to anon.penet.fi and then have it pass through mixmaster from there, instead of invoking the mixmaster command locally?

1 0

JBell filter (was Re: So, what crypto legislation (if any) is necessary?)
by David K. Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 05:22 PM 04/13/96 EDT, dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr. Dimitri Vulis) wrote: >"Perry E. Metzger" <perry(a)piermont.com> writes: >> Just a small meta-request. I already filter everything Jim writes -- >> its all junk -- but when people reply to a message of his and send the >> mail only to Cypherpunks, it is hard for me to filter the reply. > >It's a pity most mailers don't preserve 'References:'. >Can you filter out everything that says 'in-reply-to .* pacifier.com>'? > I initially tried filtering out anything _from_ JB; still got overloaded by people trying to talk some sense into him (at the time, it was Black Unicorn arguing law with him). Finally had to simply tell Eudora that anything from him, or including his name (contains:) goes straight to the trash. That finally did the trick. Interestingly, he's the only one I trash, sight unseen..... Dave Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMW96ocVrTvyYOzAZAQH+JgP9G9pAJEFsI0xV263ftQFVdZO1yKM50aKG 5CAqtyWp8fZPtocofo3kC2Z6qdGEbEd2hTM10uxdKh0tggRlWg61Ie44OVjgYfie 5ysPooKQdilinUh2m34lmYpuvMuc4RO+FKn3Y/yrJeUXpvvQX6C8OiWrAVlEAC+c DaTpcPYVkOc= =De5u -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------- "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

2 1

Web of Trust Keyring
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone have a pointer to the Web of Trust Keyring? --- My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

Tips on Tapping Taps
by Dave Del Torto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Vernor, What's your thinking on some privacy protection measures for these types of "embedded systems?" Shouldn't these kinds of "instruments" (one ringy-dingy) have some user-defeats or -definable permissions settings built in from Day One? Do we risk e$ accounts being billed automatically by water/gas/electric meters on a daily basis without the possibility of users disputing the readings in a timely way? Is anyone proposing permissions on such boxes? What're the proposals, if any, for how the automated calls they make get billed, get scheduled and show up on customer phone bills? I wonder if the bills decrease, since this all saves the companies lots of money? I'm all for "smart houses" but I'd prefer they learn the tricks _I_ teach 'em. dave ................................. cut here ................................. >Date: 10 Apr 96 19:03:05 EDT >From: Dan Druck <73543.2304(a)CompuServe.COM> >Subject: H2O Phone Taps > >WATER METER PHONE TAPS > >Recently, I received notice from our local water department (Algonquin, >Illinois) that new water meters are to be installed in every residence. >The twist is that the new meter taps into our telephone line and >periodically and automatically reports the meter reading to the water >department. > >Perhaps this is innocent enough but, being ever vigilant about my privacy, >I've contacted the water department to get more info which they've >promised to send. Interestingly, they told me I didn't have to accept this >phone-tap meter, however they asked to install a different meter with a >similar type of reporting device which is triggered via a device that also >receives the meter reading (from just outside my house). I can only assume >this transmission is made via a radio transmitter on the meter (which >isn't really much of a consolation for me). This seems a bit oxymoronical >since there already exists an external meter gauge on the exterior of my >house. What is the advantage to standing outside my home with a >transmitter/receiver over visually reading the external meter gauge??? > >Obviously, how can one tell what the little micro-chip within the gizmo is >*really* programmed to do? As you might imagine, I'm not at all >comfortable with this thing wired into my phone line. I know..... if Big >Brother wants to, he can listen in to my phone conversations or even into >my house without such hard-wire tap. But I don't feel compelled to >willingly submit to a potential invasion of my privacy, none-the-less! > >I can only assume resisting the installation of this Orwellian device will >result in putting my name on every Barney Fife "what's he got to hide" >list - who knows. > >I urge everyone who reads this to be vigilant about such things. If you >receive such a notice from a public utility, you might be well advised to >question them as I am doing. Sadly, most of my neighbors are probably >submitting to this without a thought as I've not seen any letters of >protest to the editor of the local newspaper ....a sign of the times, I >guess. > >Dan Druck, Council on Domestic Relations >Congressional Candidate / 8th District, Illinois > >Permission to repost/reprint (in whole or in part) >is granted so long as such is accurate and proper >credit is given. 96MML12 > >Council on Domestic Relations web page: > http://www.logoplex.com/shops/cdr/cdr.html > (last update 1/5/96) >Druck for Congress web page: > http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/ddruck > (last update 2/1/96) >"CDR Info Hour" Radio Program / every Saturday @ 6:00p.m. CST > Shortwave 9.400 MHz > Satellite - Galaxy 6, Trnspndr 23, 6.1 Wide Band

2 1

Re: Mixmaster through conventional anonymous remailer
by loki＠obscura.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Since Mixmaster requires a special message format, you must have the client. You can send a completed mixmaster message throught other kinds of remailers before sending it to the first Mixmaster in the chain (although there is not much point). -Lance At 4:59 PM 4/13/96, Laszlo Vecsey wrote: >Is there a way to send an anonymous E-Mail message to anon.penet.fi and >then have it pass through mixmaster from there, instead of invoking the >mixmaster command locally? ---------------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell loki(a)obscura.com PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. Mixmaster, the next generation remailer, is now available! http://www.obscura.com/~loki/Welcome.html or FTP to obscura.com "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche ----------------------------------------------------------

1 0