December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

COMPLETELY ANONYMOUS POSTING & E-MAIL (fwd)
by William Knowles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Posted in one of the sex newsgroups... In article <4n02a7$ime(a)newsbf02.news.aol.com> shhhnet(a)aol.com (ShhhNet) writes: From: shhhnet(a)aol.com (ShhhNet) Subject: COMPLETELY ANONYMOUS POSTING & E-MAIL Date: 10 May 1996 14:35:51 -0400 COMPLETELY ANONYMOUS POSTING & E-MAIL Send and receive E-Mail and Post to newsgroups with TOTAL anonymity As you must know the government is getting ready to crack down on freedom of speech on the internet. Already people are being fined and imprisoned. Your service providers are being asked to turn over records and they are cooperating. Even if they don't want to cooperate the can be forced by the courts to release records to the authorities. Our New Service let's you send and receive E-Mail and post to newsgroups with no fear of your messages ever being traced to you. Not even a Federal Court Order will result in your identity being revealed. Finally total safety for your most confidential or controversial electronic messages. ShhhNET Will begin operating in late June and you can be a part of the only truly secure way to send and receive E-Mail or post to UseNet Newsgroups. For a limited time ShhhNet will be offered for only $50.00 per Year. If you are interested, Please send E-Mail to ShhhNet(a)AOL.Com We will respond with information about how our service works and how you can be totally secure in your Internet transactions.

2 1

Re: Why does the state still stand:
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"frantz(a)netcom.com" 15-MAY-1996 22:39:50.97 >You could require daily payment and forgo the escrow agent. (Assuming you >are willing to risk a day's pay as an experiment in reputation.) Note that This could work for fixed payments. But what about things like profit-sharing? >What may be a problem for such a company is a social problem. All the >creative groups I have worked with have had close personal relations. >(Although they have not had wide agreement on significant non-work >subjects!) I don't know if good, creative, group-produced products can be >built without such a relationship. Does anyone know of an example of such >a product from an "anonymous" environment? No, but you might want to take a look at some psychiatrists & clinical psychologists who are doing some work over the Net, including anonymnity. It's discussed in the most recent or next-most-recent US News & World Report; I'll try to remember to bring my copy in to give the URLs mentioned. I did spot that they could use some boosts on the anonymnity and privacy side - they weren't using encryption, and the payments were via credit card. Someone from Mark Twain or Digicash contacting them would appear to be a good idea, as well as someone encouraging them to use Mixmaster-type anonymous remailers; I'd prefer if someone with more experience than I sent them an email about it. -Allen

1 0

Re: Securing CDROM from piracy
by Vipul Ved Prakash 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > >Is there any way of making > >sure that the guy doesnt pull a fast on on us? Can we ensure that he cannot > >duplicate the thing and start selling it without sharing the profit. > > Well, I suppose you could get it copyrighted before you hand it over for > distribution. I'd also put my logo and other info somewhere in the code, > such as an "About" box. They would have a hard time saying it wasn't > yours. > You are missing the point. Lets say a firm X is marketing my product. Now if they sell 500,000 copies and tell me that they have sold only 100,000, I have no way of figuring out. -- .od8888bo. \|/ .d%::::88::888b. (@ @) .d888::::::::8:888%. ------------------oOO-(_)-OOo----------------- 88888:::::::88888::%. You walk across with your flowers in your hand d888888:::88;888888::b Trying to tell me no one understands 888888888:888888888888 Trade in your hours for a hand full of dimes Y8888888::::::888888%P Gonna make it baby in our prime. '8888888:::::::8888:%' ---------------------------------------------- '88888888:::888888%' Vipul Ved Prakash Fax : +91-11-3328849 '8888888::88888%' Positive Ideas. Internet : vipul(a)pobox.com '"Y88%B8P"' ----------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: CyberTraveler Auction - Unsubscrive
by molecul1＠molecule1.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Dear Molecule, > > >Best regards, >Cathay Pacific Airways Limited >Los Angeles Marketing Department > >P.S. remove yourself from the CyberTraveler program, (should you wish to). >Simply go to http://www.cathay-usa.com/remove.html. Thank you. > >>>Dear Cathay, > >>> Unsubscrive Molecule1(a)electriciti.com > >>> In peace & wish the purest of wishes. >>> sincerely, >>> M1.

1 0

Re: Why does the state still stand:
by Jean-Francois Avon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 15 May 96 at 15:48, jim bell wrote: > I understand your...uh...caution. But as scary as it may be to > "us," it's going to be even more terrifying to those it is likely to > eliminate. Sort of the difference between two parachute jumps: With > and without a parachute! Mr Bell. Please do not refer to me as being part of what you call "us". The fact that I exchanged on the topic of AP, and more particularly on its intrinsical workings and logic does not mean that I endorse nor like it. Please read what I wrote and stick to it. Respectfully. JFA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2i iQEVAwUBMZohdsiycyXFit0NAQE8HQgAj0YvSDLxlWVKiDVcHfMHRerNwNEc3qxa hu5GAqlyvHF493AGpahgtCnzj3qcvcJjqqp+AR1QLGeGhn6+CjxFpv5E3iEjNGb3 NXKc4Mk11m/bEeZF6xoK/1R+tXLzYoXvKS43s69tu7y7fY7jg/q+fIkUWAin2KqV u03iXapqndBT4lvr2HHYtzkHJosH7DFfvFDGpWhHNW6p/aEM8EjJdGKmNgQFB+QG 0cV3Chsdb6jjQui9OyfeYkn9IvsgbQk+4l0LhfMu8+XcNQ2jSQdXgoGGXqH67lJJ /ai49LqVXbT1tAePjziud5l8KG5+V4oFqLKRP/g7MgRRPxdAPtGrgQ== =z3tY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee Limoges porcelain, Silverware and mouth blown crystal glasses JFA Technologies, R&D consultants. Physists, technologists and engineers. PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891 Unsollicited commercial e-mail will be proofread at US165 $/h Any sender of such material will be considered as to have ac- cepted the above mentionned terms.

1 0

Re: Rural Datafication (Was Re: Edited Edupage, 9 May 1996)
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:10 PM 5/15/96, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > I've gone even farther than that - I don't bother with having a TV, I >just get my info from the net. There is the problem with the satellite net >links that it tends to concentrate data production & distribution into >relatively few hands, from which it can easier be taken by government and other ... Just to make it clear, the _least_ of _my_ reasons for having a satellite dish and televisions in general is to "get info." (Though even when I do want to "get info," I tend to turn to CNN, CNBC, PBS, etc., and not to use the generally short summaries that are carried on the Net, sans video of course.) I won't argue for television pro or con...I'm sure most folks here have met people who are religiously anti-television and who radiate superiority in pointing out that the last time they saw a television program was when "Nicholas Nickleby" was broadcast. Whatever. But having both a video/satellite system and, obviously, a Net/Web system, they are very different things. To each their own. --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."

1 0

Re: Securing CDROM from piracy
by Vipul Ved Prakash 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > On Wed, 15 May 1996, Vipul Ved Prakash wrote: > > > We have developed a multimedia resource that will be cut on a CD-ROM for > > retailling. Since we don't have our own distributers newtwork we will be > > collobarating with another firm for distribution. Is there any way of making > > sure that the guy doesnt pull a fast on on us? Can we ensure that he cannot > > duplicate the thing and start selling it without sharing the profit. Or > > alternatively is there any protocol we could follow that will ensure a fair > > game? > > > Think serial numbers that are cryptographicaly secure. If you're the > only one giving them out and only to registered users, nobody can pirate > without it being traced back to them. Basically have your softrware > disable itself after say 30 days unless a serial number is enterded. Enlighten me! keeping in mind that the distributer will be cutting the CD and the customer will never be in contact with us. Cheers, Vipul -- .od8888bo. \|/ .d%::::88::888b. (@ @) .d888::::::::8:888%. ------------------oOO-(_)-OOo----------------- 88888:::::::88888::%. You walk across with your flowers in your hand d888888:::88;888888::b Trying to tell me no one understands 888888888:888888888888 Trade in your hours for a hand full of dimes Y8888888::::::888888%P Gonna make it baby in our prime. '8888888:::::::8888:%' ---------------------------------------------- '88888888:::888888%' Vipul Ved Prakash Fax : +91-11-3328849 '8888888::88888%' Positive Ideas. Internet : vipul(a)pobox.com '"Y88%B8P"' ----------------------------------------------

2 1

Re: Past one terabit/second on fiber
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:38 PM 5/15/96 -0400, Alan Horowitz wrote: >Hey, let's build faster and faster fiber-optic networks. Let's create >bandwidth so cheap that it won't even pay to meter it. > >Yes, the world's problems will be solved if we have more and more people >talking longer longer and longer on the telephone, sending each other >more and more pages of faxes and e-mails, creating more Web pages, >playing virtual reality games. Anything and everything must be done to >encourage people to occupy and consume bandwidth. > >Now that's progress, don't you think? Yes, I do! Because these activities don't just happen by themselves, they take the place of other activities which were formerly done in their place. The trivial example of sending letters has been replaced by email. Shopping (by foot or by car) is now a web activity. Telecommuting for many is an option, and will be more so in the future. In fact, I would say that one of the best results of Internet connectivity has been a strong increase in political awareness. We just recently had the "Tax Freedom Day" which should alert you that our own time has been co-opted by government for its own ends. Web activity is low-energy consuming, not particularly risky, and is actually fun for many. Eventually, people may take "Virtual Reality Vacations" where they can visit without travel. Since you spend more time at home, you are less subject to crime. Is this progress? Damn right it is! It saves gas, food, human lives, and what will eventually be a great deal of money that won't have to be spend on transportation facilities. It will eventually get us out from under the yoke of tyranny, which should be the ultimate goal. True, it's _different_ than what we're used to, but that's okay. If anything, that's why some people will resist it, but that doesn't make them right. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

Re: Any DLL's that handle Public Key Encryption or Key Exchange?
by pgut001＠cs.auckland.ac.nz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Death rays from Mars made Bill Stewart <stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com> write: >There's an RSAEURO drop-in clone of RSAREF that's on ftp.ox.ac.uk, so you >could write a version of your software that lets Yankees and non-Yankees drop >in whichever version is appropriate without worrying about patent or copyright >problems. I've already got a nice fast RSA implementation, so I think I'll stick with that. Besides, I'm not terribly keen on using a library which has stolen code in it. If anyone wants to create an RSAREF version, all you need to do is replace one module (lib_rsa.c) with an RSAREF-compatible version (that's why I mentioned plug-in encryption modules in the docs - you just unplug the existing code and plug in RSAREF instead). What you need to do is use RSAPublicBlock() and RSAPrivateBlock(), the rest is just wrapper code which you can base on the existing lib_rsa.c. My estimate is that it's about an afternoons work. >Any RSAREF system used in the US has the problem that it's limited to the >"official" interfaces, which means you can't do fully general RSA without >permission. I got permission from RSADSI to bypass the official interface to RSAREF for HPACK, my archiver which has PGP-compatible encryption, in 1993. However I suspect getting permission for the same thing in a general-purpose library, especially one which has RC2, RC4, and DESX[1] in it, may be difficult since parts of the library are essentially a free version of BSAFE (not by design, they just ended up that way). [1] Well, it will have DESX once I can get some test vectors to make sure I've got it right. Does anyone have some I can use? Peter.

1 0

Re: Spending a year dead for tax purposes
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:35 PM 5/14/96 -0700, Hal <hfinney(a)shell.portal.com> wrote: >I think the intention then is to create "fully anonymous" companies. >These would be organizations whose principals and employees are known >only by pseudonyms, even to each other. Their only contact is >electronic, via an anonymous network. And the employees are paid in >anonymous ecash, which they don't pay taxes on since it is unreported >income. ... >Such companies would be illegal, with everyone involved subject to >criminal penalties for tax evasion (and no doubt a myriad of other >violations). But because the anonymity is protected cryptographically, The companies themselves don't have to be illegal, and the principals and employees may have varying needs for pseudonymity, depending on how they're organized. On the other hand, the governments have different possible responses to different approaches. For instance, an Anguillan company Aliceco owned by a non-American could sell software products, either its own (produced by contractors from unspecified countries) or distributed for other vendors (Bobware, in an unspecified country, delivered via the net.) It wouldn't be illegal in Anguilla. Its developers/subvendors might be breaking local law by not reporting the digicash Aliceco paid them, but that's not Aliceco's problem - especially if Aliceco bought/hired them from Caribsoft, another Anguillan company. And Caribsoft may not know where they live - after all, _it_ doesn't have tax forms to fill out, and it doesn't care where Fred(a)Foomail.fi or JaneDoe(a)mailbox.Jersey.uk lives. If Yankees or US companies owned Aliceco and Caribsoft, they'd presumably have to report it for taxes if it made money, but a local owner making a few percent is in a different position. Now, the US government _could_ declare a 50% import duty on imported software (avoiding the uncollectability of income tax) which would of course be evaded. The government could respond to this by requiring all software to include a serial # and the TaxID number of the vendor (if the vendor is an importer, then she'd have to have Customs Receipts or other documentation of US origin to expense her costs for tax purposes.) In this environment, the employees would have to remain unknown to the US, but might be known to the Aliceco or Caribsoft. Of course, Alice may be a Fed, or Caribsoft employee Paul may be a Plant, so there are some benefits to pseudonymity; depends on how paranoid you need to be. Or they could declare Anguilla to be an Economic-Terrorist Enemy, covered by the Trading With The Enemies (Especially Cuba) Act. Restricting acceptance of foriegn digicash would be difficult. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215 # goodtimes signature virus innoculation

2 1