December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Sun's Wallet
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:18 5/2/96, Steven L Baur wrote: >> Sydney, Australia, April 30 -- SunSoft will shortly >> release a workable cash-on-the-Internet program called >> Wallet > >> Once issued, the Digital ID can >> be used within any enabled application such as Netscape >> Navigator Internet client software and Netscape >> SuiteSpot. > >Will it be supported by ApacheSSL? The Java Wallet is supposed to work with any Java enabled browser. The wallet takes care of moving all the data even through firewalls, so I would assume it just piggy-backs on http. Note that anyone can create a Wallet "cassette" for their own present of future payment system. In order for the cassette to work with the wallet, it needs to be signed by Java Soft. Java Soft will charge for the sigs. Last I heard, the exact fee was still undecided. Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

Re: proposed anti-pseudospoofing law in Georgia
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:52 PM 5/2/96 -0700, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >this proposed law in Georgia >would make it illegal to have a login name other than >your legal name, as I understand it. >I consider it rather silly, naive, and unenforcable, >but it does suggest a few things: > >1. lawmakers are starting to notice the internet bigtime. Yes, they are. >2. its starting to freak them out. Apparently, very much so. >3. the identity issues raised by cyberspace have significant >social implications and will not go away quietly. Not if legislators keep pushing their luck... >4. there are some legitimate reasons to require ID in some places >in cyberspace. Only as far as is mutually agreed. If two people want to do business, we can reasonably expect that they will do so under whatever conditions they can agree to. If one of those conditions is that they require ID from the other, fine. The problem comes when third parties (like, for instance, government) requires it; that's wrong. >meanwhile, if the internet really is robust, their irrelevant >posturings should not make much difference, although I am *not* >advocating that people resign themselves to these laws, only that >if they pass the situation is not necessarily catastrophic or >apocalyptic. I don't think it's apocalyptic. But that's because I think there's a permanent solution to their meddling. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: Why I dislike Java. (was Re: "Scruffies" vs. "Neats")
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:34 PM 5/2/96 -0400, Perry wrote: >At one of my clients, there is a software testing lab where all >software that is placed on the trading floor is rigorously tested for Definitely - aside from severe dangers like automated theft or incorrect output, even software that takes a PC down for 5 minutes during the trading day every once in a while can cost big money to a brokerage firm. >Netscape with Java cannot be so tested because important components >come down off the net. So no, I'm not holding Netscape with Java to a >higher standard. I'm very much holding it to the same standard. Netscape now lets you turn off Java and Javascript. An ideal would be to support running applications signed by your choice of application-certifiers, which is BTW likely to be much more restrictive that your list of key-certifiers if you're in a paranoid business like brokerages and airlines. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215 begin 777 goodtimes =96-H;R!H879I;F<@9V]O9"!T:6UE<R!Y970_#0H0 end

1 0

Batman on the Internet??? CyberAngels info
by Terry.Liberty-Parker＠804.ima.infomail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-=> Note: Forwarded (from: netmail) by Terry Liberty-Parker using timEd. Originally from Matthew Gaylor (1:382/87.0) to terry liberty-parker. Original dated: May 01 '96, 13:50 e-Id: <v0213050eadad22805e60(a)[198.4.94.223]> From: freematt(a)coil.com (Matthew Gaylor) From: angels(a)wavenet.com (CyberAngels Director : Colin Gabriel Hatcher) Subject: CYBERANGELS Thanks for your interest in our group. We apologize for any delay in answering your enquiry. Our service is not automated, and we have a huge quantity of enquiries to deal with. Briefing papers about our work are still in preparation. Keep in touch with us till then. If you have any personal problems on the Internet, or if you find an interesting and relevant website, then write and tell us. We will shortly be opening a new WWW site, and we will send a release when that is ready. Till then, take care, and keep your eyes open while you are cruising! Let us know if you find any material or activity that you think should be investigated! Let us know also if you find any interesting websites that share our mission! You are now on our rmailing list! Stand by for regular information and alerts for CyberAngels missions. Gabriel ************************************************************** THE INTERNET IS OUR NEIGHBORHOOD - LET'S LOOK AFTER IT! CYBERANGELS - WHO ARE WE? We are an all-volunteer Internet safety patrol and monitoring project started in June 1995 by senior members of the world famous crime prevention organization The International Alliance of Guardian Angels. CyberAngels membership currently numbers more than 1000 users worldwide in15 countries, who share a common mission - to be a Cyberspace Neighborhood Watch and to fight Internet crime. Our numbers are growing daily. We are working to make the Internet a safer and more enjoyable place to work and play, by being role models for self-regulation and responsibility. We are dedicated: TO FIGHT CRIME ON THE INTERNET in particular criminal activity where there are clear personal victims and/or at-risk users. TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN FROM ONLINE CRIMINAL ABUSE by fighting against the trade in child pornography and by working to deter sexual predators online. TO GIVE SUPPORT, ADVICE AND ASSISTANCE TO INTERNET VICTIMS OF HATE MAIL, HARASSMENT AND SEXUAL ABUSE ONLINE by referring them to professional assistance and by helping to guide them through the compaints and reporting processes. TO PROMOTE, PRESERVE AND PROTECT NETIQUETTE that is, the rules of polite conduct that govern our use of the Internet. We believe in courtesy and respect for others. We support Internet Service Providers who have clearly defined Terms of Service for the User, and who are prepared to enforce it. TO HELP TO PRESERVE INTERNET FREEDOM OF SPEECH by showing Governments that the Internet Community is prepared to take both responsibililty and actions to preserve the personal safety of all its members, and particularly its children. HOW DO WE FIGHT CRIME ON THE INTERNET? Crime on the Internet is a tiny percentage of everything that is there. But it is real and it is claiming victims with increasing regularity. We believe that we the Net Community should take the responsibility for the problem - after all it is our fellow users who are the criminals - and also that we should assume the responsibility for crime prevention measures. CyberAngels don't just talk about it. WE ACT. EDUCATION / ADVICE / CYBERSTREETSMARTS The Internet to us is like a vast city: public and private areas, kids and adult areas, safe areas and crime areas. To travel it safely you need some CyberStreetsmarts. One of our main methods of crime prevention on the Net is by educating users about the possible problems they may encounter, and how to avoid them Education means educating parents realistically about the Internet so that they areaware of the dangers, but are not overreacting. It's important that parents and kids cooperate in this area. The Internet is such a wonderful learning environment that we wish to encourage kids to use it - but adults must take responsibility for making sure our kids do not wander into areas that are not appropriate. We act as an advisory service for any user with problems of personal safety and / or personal security on the Net. This advice ranges from how to deal with mailbombs, forged email, mailing list spams, virii, impersonation and other electronic sabotage and harassment methods, to information about how to deal with hate mail, sexual harassment, kids' safety online and unsolicited email. Many users do not know how to report abuse nor to whom they should report it. CyberAngels can usually help. SAFETY PATROLS CyberAngels volunteers run regular Safety Patrols on the Net. Safety Patrols on the Internet means cruising the electronic highways, keeping your eyes open for problems. The main areas we patrol are the Usenet (Newsgroups) and the live channels (IRC / Chat rooms etc). We read Newsgroups, especially the binaries groups on the Usenet, and if we find images of child pornography posted up there we refer those files to federal law enforcement authorities, eg US Customs Service. We also check out fraud schemes on the Usenet, and if necessary report them to the National Fraud Centre. We also keep track of Spam developments - who is mass mailing unsolicited mail and what they are offering. We travel the live channels of IRC / MUDS or the chat rooms in the big Providers, looking out for sexual predators searching for children, or pedophiles trading child pornography in the live talk areas. This is a major source of child pornography on the Net. If we find it we report it to Sysadmins and Federal authorities. We cruise the World Wide Web, checking sites to make sure child pornography is not being used to attract visitors, and checking that a site that says it is Kidsafe really is suitable for children. We visit and read websites and FTP sites of Racist and other Hate Organizations, keeping a check on their activities. There is a very close relationship between Racist material and Racist activities (eg Hate mail and harassment, violent threats and intimidation). We don't believe in the philosophy that "anything goes" on the Net. The Internet is a society and in societies where "anything goes" then crime and violence dominate, and the stronger consume the weaker. The Internet is a newly developing global nation - and we need Cyberspace law and law enforcement if users rights are to be protected. We believe in FREEDOM AND JUSTICE UNDER LAW. And although we recognize the problems of how National Laws can be applied to an International society, we believe that the first step is that Netizens CARE about Cybercrime and the victims of Cybercrime. YOU CAN HELP US! WE NEED VOLUNTEERS! The Internet Community is huge - a worldwide network of around 40 million people, 11 million Websites, 3500 Service Providers - and it's growing every day. The more volunteers we have, the more effective we can be. And by giving a little of your time to looking after the welfare of the Net, you can make a real difference! Anyone can be a CyberAngel. The only requirement is that you commit a minimum of 2 hours per week to the project. No previous experience or special skills are necessary, .although a computer and an Internet account would be useful! :) Being a CyberAngel involves no risk or danger. You are volunteering only to be eyes watching the Net, looking out for the welfare of others. CAN YOU HELP US? You may be able to help us in other ways - we are a Division of Guardian Angels and we are a 501 (C)(3) Non-profit organization. Our membership is voluntary and we are in desperate need of more resources. All of your donations are tax-deductible. You can help us by donating money, computers, Internet access accounts, design skills, or websites. Alternatively you may like to consider sponsoring our work on the Internet. Contact us for details. * Cyberangels support SAFESURF in their campaign for child safe areas on the Net * Cyberangels support WEBSAFE and their work with kids, teens and parents. * Cyberangels support the BLUE RIBBON Freedom of Speech campaign * Cyberangels support PICS, other rating systems and screening software *Cyberangels support CYBERSPACE LAW AND LAW ENFORCEMENT. CYBERSPACE NEEDS CYBERANGELS! ********************************************************* Colin Gabriel Hatcher - CyberAngels Director angels(a)wavenet.com "Freedom and justice, under law" ********************************************************* **************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt(a)coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-20 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor,1933 E. Dublin-Granville Rd.,#176, Columbus, OH 43229 **************************************************************************** ___ -- |Fidonet: Terry Liberty-Parker 1:382/804 |Internet: Terry.Liberty-Parker(a)804.ima.infomail.com | | Standard disclaimer: The views of this user are strictly their own.

1 0

Re: The Joy of Java
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:43 PM 5/2/96 -0500, Bruce M. wrote: >On Wed, 1 May 1996, Dr. Dimitri Vulis wrote: > >> My recollection is that when IBM first started selling IBM PC, they offered >> a choice of (at least) 3 operating systems right from the start: UCSD p-system, >> CP/M-86 or PC-DOS. IBM didn't do anything to prompte PC-DOS over the other >> two. It won fair and square in the marketplace because the other two were >> even worse crap. (Later versions of CP/M-86 got much better.) > > I always had been under the impression that they charged a hundred >dollars or more for CPM as opposed to DOS which was also a major reason >for its popularity. >Bruce Marshall The story I heard (about 1983) was that IBM had pulled a rather fast one on Digital Research, the source of CP/M for 8080's and CP/M 86. They lured DR into an exclusive contract in which they offered to pay a percentage of the sales to DR on CP/M 86 for the IBM PC, but then deliberately offered it at such a high price (about $250 or so) that "nobody" wanted it. Because the contract was "exclusive" even Digital Research was locked out of the market. By the time that contract expired the market was firmly in the hands of MSDOS. In effect, DR had sold the entire market for a song. Had they been more careful it might have been a horse race. This was identified as an intentional tactic of IBM, BTW. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.comJim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: encrypted Unix backup software
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:02 PM 5/2/96 -0500, VaX#n8 <vax(a)linkdead.paranoia.com> wrote: >Okay, before you flame me and tell me to pipe it through >a symmetric cipher filter, hear me out. Tape handling is >hairy, depending on what kind of functionality you want. A regular >filter may write(2) in strangely sized blocks, not working very well >with your tape drive. > >Mostly though, things get difficult when you have to/want to deal with >multiple tapes. > >Although I could probably hack up "catblock" to do the job, and use >a line of the form >dump -0uBf ... | symmetric_cipher | catblock blockfactor > /dev/tape >if there exists something which already does this job, or something like it, >I'd like to know. Now that I think about it, maybe this is the cleanest way. Yup. It's a classic Unix tools approach - let each piece do what it does best, and use a standard simple interface between tools. You don't need to write "catblock", though - there's the "dd" command designed for just such applications (well, designed for the way those applications looked 20 years ago, when you needed to do things like EBCDIC conversion and line-length padding to deal with IBM tapes, and the syntax has a certain evil OS360 JCL look to it :-) Newer versions may handle multiple tapes a bit better. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215 begin 777 goodtimes =96-H;R!H879I;F<@9V]O9"!T:6UE<R!Y970_#0H0 end

1 0

Re: Sen. Patrick Leahy's PGP key now avail.
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:06 AM 5/3/96, Bill Stewart wrote: >One of the most important parts of any security analysis is the >threat models. In this case, we're talking about sending email >_to_the_government_. > >There may be something you want to tell the Senator or his staff that >you want kept private from the public or from rest of the government, >and Tim's phrase "Unless the information is 'secret'" seems to cover that. >Maybe you want to say "My company lost $X to competitor Y"; that's private. >Maybe you want to say "The FBI is reading your email, y'know..." >Maybe you want to attach a $20 MarkTwain DigiCash campaign contribution. And besides my explicit mention of "unless secret," which I suspect is not the case in the context of "communicating with Sen. Leahy," I also explicity mentioned that it is unlikely Sen. Leahy is doing the reading of e-mail or the encrypting. The PGP key is really "Leahy's office key." I'd say it's 99.95% likely that the PGP key was generated by a staffer--the resident e-mail geek--and that only staffers know how to use PGP. (In fact, probably only the one staffer who generated the key and knows the passphrase....) This gives new meaning to "man in the channel." When you send an encrypted message to "Senator Leahy," be sure to tell "Mitch" it's urgent that the Senator see it! (Don't misunderstand me, anyone. I'm not expecting perfect security, and the fact that secretaries and staffers may likely be the actual "keepers of the keys" is hardly new or surprising. They've always served this role. And until this changes, with PGP getting easier to use or with a more conventional key arrangement, I expect few senators will be typing in PGP stuff. (By "more conventional" I mean a model where some token or object is used, as with the crypto ignition keys, which I can imagine _some_ Senators actually carry and use, depending on their connections to the intelligence and military establishment. Or biometric security, etc.) >But usually, telling the government something is fairly similar to >publishing it, in terms of expectation of privacy, even in a republic. >The tradeoff is between using PGP to make a point, and getting the staff >to read it. Typically, Congressional Staffs are Your Friends, at least >more directly than the Congresscritters themselves. Lobby _them_; >making their job easier is a good start. I agree. My main point was that staffers are already extremely pressed for time, often quickly sorting incoming constituent mail into "yes" or "no" piles for later counting on some issue. It's unlikely in the extreme that a PGP-encrypted mail message will be looked at, unless the staffer thinks it must be spook-related. When the staffer finds it's just a position advocacy letter, and that he spent time decrypting it, it'll likely have the opposite effect we want. And it _still_ won't be the "real" Senator Leahy doing the decrypting! So, what is accomplished except "feel good" thoughts? --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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

Re: Why I dislike Java. (was Re: "Scruffies" vs. "Neats")
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 23:37 5/2/96, Jeff Weinstein wrote: >Perry E. Metzger wrote: >> Netscape with Java cannot be so tested because important components >> come down off the net. So no, I'm not holding Netscape with Java to a >> higher standard. I'm very much holding it to the same standard. > > The Netscape Administration Kit will allow a site security admin >to create a configuration that disables Java, and does not allow the >user to enable it. If your customers require netscape, perhaps this >is an option that will make you more comfortable. Does it prevent the user from downloading an unrestricted copy from Netscape's ftp site or installing one brought from home? Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

3 2

Re: [Complete NOISE] Re: aufweidersehn, * grave$
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [ObCpherpunkRelevance: there's a good bit about bizness views of privacy and anonymity on the Internet on the home page of the class that gave birth to that Spawn of Satan WhoWhere?. See especially the Bulletins. The class lives at http://gsb-www.stanford.edu/class/M395/home.html] ROTFL!!!!! Many thanks to jamesd(a)echeque.com for forwarding me Skippy's original message. > Glad that lying anti-racist jerk is leaving. With all his/her's > nyms, rc graves is impossible to trust. Mike Beebe, Beowulf, > ezundel, nietzsche, ernstzundel and others to make transparent > trolls the ignorant anti-racist makes up. I've never even heard of Mike Beebe, but I'll look him up on DejaNews. Boewulf is the nym of a very real racist who is so over-the-top silly (and 1/4 Jewish) that some people don't believe he's for real. I once claimed to be "Beowulf" for laughs. "Nietzsche(a)gnn.com" was a real racist who spammed widely in early January with a message smearing MLK; he later posted a lot to news.groups about the rec.music.white-power troll, but seems to have closed his account once the free hours ran out. ezundel(a)alpha.c2.org is a friend of mine who reposts Ingrid's stuff to alt.fan.ernst-zundel. ernztzundl(a)aol.com was a really annoying AOL troll who has thankfully gone away. I've got enough email between him and me to prove that we're different people, and of course he knew a lot about DC that I couldn't. Wow. At first I didn't believe that Skippy "or" Dave Harmon were anything but anti-racist spoofs, and I'm still not entirely convinced, but they're so consistently malicious that they must have something against me. I swear that "Skippy" isn't me, but on second thought, I wouldn't really mind if other people thought I was harassing myself. That would be poetic justice indeed. Maybe if we don't believe he exists, he'll go away. So, Skippy, did you forge an unsubscribe message for tallpaul, or was that someone else? I'll take my answer OFF THE LIST, PLEASE. - -rich -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMYmgIY3DXUbM57SdAQGmwQP+MTp0UTFkSiMKYeIbmQGpAEaC/oMns0ly Md9IPXBraHAQsxAfWOKME4DUXMaDmL0nUPJ41lRjLH2UjaLYkjE7qEzTWAazLb9+ Ub/EwTNlqitSoOSdkxxQkgX/GXNffRr08pPUpYgcPIcrWelou6MnE2hgmf8aR2bz gM5eIm1A3Og= =rO9a -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

No Subject
by Ecafe Mixmaster Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From: Brian D Williams <talon57(a)well.com> > Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 11:16:35 -0700 > > >From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Tue Apr 30 23:58:28 1996 > >Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 00:52:03 -0500 (CDT) > >From: snow <snow(a)smoke.suba.com> > >To: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry(a)piermont.com> > >cc: "L. Detweiler" <vznuri(a)netcom.com>, cypherpunks(a)toad.com > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >Subject: Re: Why I dislike Java. (was Re: "Scruffies" vs. "Neats") > >MIME-Version: 1.0 > >Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII > >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com > >Precedence: bulk > > Game, set, match...... No, probably done intentionally. Note the lower-case snow...

2 1