December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: OS/2 encryption utilities
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"unicorn(a)schloss.li" "Black Unicorn" 20-APR-1996 19:57:53.83 >>From: mirele(a)xmission.com >> Due to the fact that I have been threatened by the Church of Scientology >> with legal action if I do not cease and desist posting encheferated >> parodies of their secret scripture (per a letter I received from Cult >> attorneys via Federal Express today) I am in search of OS/2 disk >> encryption programs. >Were I a Co$ attorney, I would use this to bring discovery violations >if I took you to court. How would this work, since they _haven't_ served her with a subpoena? >I'm not saying they would pass muster, but they sure would be annoying. This is the Co$; they'll be annoying (or worse) no matter what. Admittedly, letting them get more annoying unnecessarily isn't a good idea. Now, I wouldn't disagree that she should have posted through a nym. -Allen

2 1

Re: Oklahoma City - One Year Later - The Coverup Continues !
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 17 Apr 1996 ssalgaller(a)CCGATE.HAC.COM wrote: > Suggested Reading: > > Oklahoma City - The Suppressed Truth We have already been through this several times on the cypherpunks list. The physical evidence indicates a very large deflagrating explosive, such as a truck full of ANFO or gunpowder, not a small detonating (military) explosive. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | 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

E-mail harassment by c2
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear folks at C2, If people don't ask you to be placed on a mailing list they jolly well don't have to follow *your* instructions to get taken off. You can keep me and other people on "clueless" until we do what you want. But you can neither force other people to do it nor avoid getting a reputation for e-mail harassment for your "cute" games. --tallpaul >From Majordomo-Owner(a)c2.org Sat Apr 20 20:43 EDT 1996 Received: from infinity.c2.org (infinity.c2.org [140.174.185.11]) by mail.nyc.pipeline.com (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id UAA12128 for <tallpaul(a)pipeline.com>; Sat, 20 Apr 1996 20:43:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from daemon@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.7.4/8.6.9) id RAA11637; Sat, 20 Apr 1996 17:37:24 -0700 (PDT) Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: <URL:http://www.c2.net> Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 17:37:24 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199604210037.RAA11637(a)infinity.c2.org> To: tallpaul(a)pipeline.com From: Majordomo(a)c2.org Subject: Majordomo results: Re: Welcome to clueless Reply-To: Majordomo(a)c2.org Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1476 -- >>>> Since I didn't ask you to put me on the list I see no reason why I should **** Command 'since' not recognized. >>>> follow your instructions to be taken off. **** Command 'follow' not recognized. >>>> >>>> --tallpaul END OF COMMANDS **** Help for Majordomo(a)c2.org: This is Brent Chapman's "Majordomo" mailing list manager, version 1.92. In the description below items contained in []'s are optional. When providing the item, do not include the []'s around it. It understands the following commands: subscribe <list> [<address>] Subscribe yourself (or <address> if specified) to the named <list>. unsubscribe <list> [<address>] Unsubscribe yourself (or <address> if specified) from the named <list>. get <list> <filename> Get a file related to <list>. index <list> Return an index of files you can "get" for <list>. which [<address>] Find out which lists you (or <address> if specified) are on. who <list> Find out who is on the named <list>. info <list> Retrieve the general introductory information for the named <list>. lists Show the lists served by this Majordomo server. help Retrieve this message. end Stop processing commands (useful if your mailer adds a signature). Commands should be sent in the body of an email message to "Majordomo(a)c2.org". Commands in the "Subject:" line NOT processed. If you have any questions or problems, please contact "Majordomo-Owner(a)c2.org".

1 0

Re: OS/2 encryption utilities
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 14:26 4/20/96, mirele(a)xmission.com wrote: >Due to the fact that I have been threatened by the Church of Scientology >with legal action if I do not cease and desist posting encheferated >parodies of their secret scripture (per a letter I received from Cult >attorneys via Federal Express today) I am in search of OS/2 disk >encryption programs. Parodies have been found by the courts over and over again to not infringe on copyrights. Tell the criminal cult to shove it. They are bluffing. [IANAL.] Don't know about OS/2 disk encryption programs, though. Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer, DigiCash, Inc. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

Re: Bernstein ruling meets the virus law
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 15:50 4/20/96, Computer Virus Help Desk wrote: >To the best of our knowledge simply writing Virus Code including it's >"distribution" is not a crime in the United States. However, the >deliberate, malicious upload or infection of another's computer or system is >a crime in many states. What about making Virus binaries available for download? Someone I know has been thinking about putting the famous "Outlaws" CD on the web, to provide a one-stop place for unrestricted virus information, including source code and live viruses. Of course the user has to accept an agreement that they will use the information for research purposes only. Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer, DigiCash, Inc. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

Smartcards are coming to the US
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Years after smartcards have become ubiquitous in such countries as Pakistan and Nepal, not to mention Europe, I just saw my first smartcard commercial ever on US television. Way to go :-) Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer, DigiCash, Inc. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

3 2

Re: Spaces in passwords
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:32 PM 4/19/96 EDT, Paul_Koning/US/3Com%3COM(a)smtp1.isd.3com.com wrote: >>>Of course not. In a normal Unix password, adding spaces to the >>>password search space increases the search space, so it necessarily >>>makes the search harder. >>Depends on the space of ideas that are leading to your passwords. >>If the reason you're adding spaces is to separate an n-character word >>from the dictionary from a 7-n character word from the dictionary, >>this reduces the search space for a cracker considerably. >>At least pick random punctuation instead. > >Huh? I don't follow your reasoning. >If you use two random words, the search space for a dictionary attack >with an N word dictionary is N^2. That's true whether you include a space >or leave it out. The context is Unix passwords, which are limited to 8 characters, not arbitrary-length passphrases like PGP uses. The size of the dictionary of words you can use to put two of into 8 characters is fairly small; the natural choice for two words with a space is a 4-letter word and a 3-letter word, both chosen from English dictionaries, though 5/2 and 6/1 are also possible. It's _way_ searchable, even if you're not attracted to popular phrases like "Exon You" or "Oh Exon!". If you're length-constrained, the choice of one word limits the maximum length of the other. If you take away another character for punctuation or space, it reduces it even more. If I were writing this on a Unix box, I'd check the number of words in the appropriate length categories, but it's pretty low, and there's probably a lot less entropy in 3-character words than 4. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215

1 0

Re: Welcome to clueless
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Since I didn't ask you to put me on the list I see no reason why I should follow your instructions to be taken off. --tallpaul On Apr 20, 1996 08:35:52, 'Majordomo(a)c2.org' wrote: >From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Sat Apr 20 11:54 EDT 1996 >Received: from toad.com (toad.com [140.174.2.1]) by mail.nyc.pipeline.com >(8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id LAA08182; Sat, 20 Apr 1996 11:54:35 -0400 (EDT) >Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id IAA10610 for >cypherpunks-outgoing; Sat, 20 Apr 1996 08:42:08 -0700 (PDT) >Received: from infinity.c2.org (infinity.c2.org [140.174.185.11]) by toad.com >(8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id IAA10593 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Sat, 20 Apr >1996 08:42:03 -0700 (PDT) >Received: (from daemon@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.7.4/8.6.9) > id IAA05505; Sat, 20 Apr 1996 08:35:52 -0700 (PDT) > Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: <URL:http://www.c2.net> >Date: Sat, 20 Apr 1996 08:35:52 -0700 (PDT) >Message-Id: <199604201535.IAA05505(a)infinity.c2.org> >To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >From: Majordomo(a)c2.org >Subject: Welcome to clueless >Reply-To: Majordomo(a)c2.org >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Precedence: bulk >Content-Type: text >Content-Length: 392 > >-- > >Welcome to the clueless mailing list! > >If you ever want to remove yourself from this mailing list, >you can send mail to "Majordomo(a)c2.org" with the following command >in the body of your email message: > >unsubscribe clueless cypherpunks(a)toad.com > >Here's the general information for the list you've >subscribed to, in case you don't already have it: > >#### No info available for clueless. >

1 0

Re: OS/2 encryption utilities
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:08 PM 4/20/96 -0400, Black Unicorn wrote: >On Sat, 20 Apr 1996 mirele(a)xmission.com wrote: > >> Due to the fact that I have been threatened by the Church of Scientology >> with legal action if I do not cease and desist posting encheferated >> parodies of their secret scripture (per a letter I received from Cult >> attorneys via Federal Express today) I am in search of OS/2 disk >> encryption programs. > >Were I a Co$ attorney, I would use this to bring discovery violations >if I took you to court. You know, I've always thought it odd how some people misuse the English language when they speak in their chosen shorthand. "bring discovery violations"? How, exactly, does one _BRING_ a "discovery violation"? Like, maybe, bring it in a whellbarrow?!? Is "bring" a proper word in this context? Why not stop using that silly shorthand. BTW, you seem to have forgotten that this would be an excellent way to deter the kind of "knock and smash" warrant service common amongst government thugs. Any argument by the cops that "we must break down the door or else they'll erase the data!" is rendered obviously silly if the data is ALREADY encrypted and inaccessible. If anything, it would make the data permanently inaccessible since it would make (arguably) the release of a decrypt key "incriminating" if it were a criminal case. Yet another excellent reason to encrypt the data is that it deters burglaries, where the purpose of the burglary is to get this data illegally. Given the COS's history, that is a reasonable fear. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

3 2

Re: Georgia Legislation - Remailer Effect???
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:28 PM 4/20/96 -0500, Lou Zirko wrote: >T have included copy of text from c/net about a bill passed in the >Georgia legislature. It would definately impact remailer service. >Location of the remailers might fall in with the Arkansas (or was it >Tennessee) BBS/Porno case. The URL is at: >http://www.cnet.com/Content/News/Files/0,16,1144,00.html >Article follows >- ---------------------------- >Georgia OKs "Net Police" law > By Rose Aguilar > April 19, 1996, 5 p.m. PST > A bill signed into law this week by Georgia Governor >Zell Miller has sparked yet another firestorm > ver what role the government should take in curbing >the Internet and whether legislators are > sufficiently techno-savvy to make considered judgments. > > House Bill 1630 was introduced on February 8 by Georgia >House of Representatives member Don > Parsons (R-Marietta). The bill makes it illegal to >falsely identify yourself or place a registered >trademark or logo on your home page. The bill also >makes it illegal for email users to have addresses > that don't include their own names. [much scary but useful information deleted] Well, I love to be an "I told you so." Back when nearly everybody was fawning over the Leahy bill, I (and a few other people, to their credit) was telling you about its likely effect on the usage of encrypted remailers. Not surprisingly, my warnings were eventually recognized to be accurate, at least potentially so. Fortunately (I hope?) we were also told that "they" (government thugs, etc) would definitely oppose that bill, a claim which if true, would guarantee its quick death _IF_ the opposition of Internet-friendly people was also present. Now we see that if the thugs can't get what they want by Federal legislation, they're gonna try to sneak it through by state law. Hey, it's really doubtful that even NATIONAL law can have a prayer of controlling the Internet; I really doubt that Georgia is going to succeed at this attempt. Most likely it isn't even constitutional, and it certainly isn't compatible with the First amendment or the Federal regulation of most communications media. Even so, this shows just how desperate the statists have become to try to get a foothold into the regulation of the Internet. Ignore this at your own peril. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0