December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

No Subject
by anon-remailer＠utopia.hacktic.nl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

what is currently the best remailer-in-a-box out there?

1 0

Re: Freedom and Security
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Again, I would appreciate it if someone would forward this message to Mr. Hatcher. From: IN%"angels(a)wavenet.com" 1-MAY-1996 09:47:03.01 >Every society has a social contract whereby the freedom of the individual >is defined within the context of the society. Freedom means your freedom >to be who you want to be, think how you want to think, say what you want to >say, hold whatever beliefs you wish, balanced against the Community's need >for stability. You may demand the freedom to kill those who disagree with >you but no community will grant you that freedom. But no one living in a >community where murder is outlawed can serious claim that their freedom has >been taken away by that particular law. You cannot be free to speak your >mind unless there are laws preventing others who disagree with you from >killing you. If it were permitted to kill those who disagreed with you, >then no one would be free to speak their mind at all, for fear of the >consequences. Quite simply, if freedom is defined by a social contract, then there would be no need for a Bill of Rights. Protected freedoms are there because even a democratically elected government - the closest thing to a determiner of the "social contract" in the real world - cannot be trusted. For instance, the current social contract in Germany would apper to say that some political speech - that of neo-Nazis - is not permitted, and that this is not a violation of freedoms. It is reasonably evident that this is not the case by any true definition of freedom. Certainly, if someone can murder you for speaking your mind, your freedom of speech may be restricted. But I again defy you to come up with how many of the activities you oppose are violations of anyone's freedoms, as opposed to violations of what most people happen to want. >I am not currently aware that either your right to encrypt nor your right >to use anon remailers is under threat, so why should I do anything? But >while encryption and anon remailing protect *you* from certain threats to >your freedom, they are also being used for example to make the >international trade in child pornography more effective and less easy to >prosecute. The technology itself is neutral and can be used or abused. >That is why the focus should be on individual actions rather on the >technology. It would appear that you are incorrect with regards to the right to encrypt and anonymous remailers; such regulations and laws as ITAR restrict this, as do some movements toward mandatory government-access-to-keys (the eventual intended result of Clipper, which has certainly not disappeared from the intentions of law enforcement and espionage agencies). I have previously pointed out the ways in which the child pornography argument does not work, and is only an excuse. >My concern is not so much with network sabotage or infiltration (there are >plenty enough organizations addressing that problem) but with personal >safety within the Internet community - that means you, not your hard drive. I am not physically attached to the Internet; it is not possible for my safety - as opposed to my hard drive's safety if I connected it - to be compromised by the Internet. -Allen

1 0

Re: Why I dislike Java. (was Re: "Scruffies" vs. "Neats")
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"perry(a)piermont.com" 3-MAY-1996 16:49:35.61 >The users can't afford not to have the numbers they are watching not >in front of them, even for brief periods. Its a real problem. Hmm.... has anyone ever created a specialized computer (or computer running a specialized program) that would put multiple screens on the same screen, perhaps with some GUI manipulation capabilities? If they're trying to read Netscape material while watching the other numbers, they're then in the exact same situation from their viewpoint. >And yes, this isn't a joke. They all eat lunch on the trading floor so >they don't have to leave their desks. They race back and forth to the >bathroom. The environment is tough. I should have remembered this from reading Liar's Poker; thank you. (One wonders if any of them will start using catheters...) -Allen

2 1

RE: Calling other code in Java applications and applets
by Blake Coverett 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I don't have any hints, but I think people need to be aware up front > that calling native code from a Java applet disables > any security that might otherwise be enforced for the applet. This, of course, presumes that the native code in question is less robust/trust-worthy than that Java runtime and the browser. It's not obvious to me why this should be the case. regards, -Blake (who figures its all a reputation thing again)

2 1

Re: CryptoAnarchy: What's wrong with this picture?
by Jordan Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From unicorn(a)schloss.li Fri May 3 23:23:21 1996 Accounting costs as a result of a deduction based, multi-tiered, progressive, and supplimented system of income taxation are silly. By the way, the IRS (in spite of it's shortcomings) is (by far) the most efficient tax collecting organization among the major economic powers. It costs roughly $0.50 per $100 collected. Canada is second at about $1, Germany (for instance) is at about $7, mostly because they don't have payroll deductions. /jordan

2 1

Re: encrypted Unix backup software
by VaX#n8 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In message <199605030425.XAA05924(a)primus.paranoia.com>, Bill Stewart writes: >>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 >Yup [agrees on cmdline] >You don't need to write "catblock", though - there's the "dd" command >designed for just such applications... >Newer versions may handle multiple tapes a bit better. Hmm, I've got this a few times from people and I just wanted to clear up a few points. 1) BSD dd doesn't treat EOT specially: /* ... If a partial write, and it's a character device, just warn. If a tape device, quit. ... */ GNU dd (from what I remember) doesn't, either. 2) "dd" will only work safely across all tape types and all size pipes using the degenerate form "dd ibs=1 obs=(your_bf_here) conv=sync ...". I'll hack up catblock today. Who says we don't code :)

1 0

Re: Edited Edupage, 25 April 1996
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:55 PM 5/3/96 EDT, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: >From: IN%"educom(a)elanor.oit.unc.edu" 25-APR-1996 21:40:28.52 > >>FCC BOOSTS PROSPECT FOR SUPERNETS >>The Federal Communications Commission may reserve a band of radio >>frequencies to allow free and unlicensed transmissions at 25 megabit speeds >>of large volumes of data within a group of buildings. These so-called >>"supernet" wireless services, which would operate at no more than one watt >>of power in order to avoid interfering with neighboring supernets, could >>then be connected by high-speed phone lines to the Internet, thus largely >>bypassing local phone companies to get Net access. (New York Times 25 Apr >>96 C1) > > If these are not covered by the regulations against encryption in >the use of packet radio, this would seem to be an opening for such. Indeed, >encryption of radio messages would appear to be rather critical for security. FAIK, the prohibition on encryption applies only to hams transmitting on amateur radio frequencies. It wouldn't cover this kind of thing. I agree that encryption is going to be vital in this case, say 1024-bit RSA or better. Thus encrypted, it would be even better if the there was also a law which prohibited _the government_ from picking up these transmissions or attempting to decrypt them. Another useful purpose of such a "supernet" would be alternative telephone system competition. At this data rate, we're talking about the equivalent of 500+ simultaneous phone call capacity. That's enough to serve perhaps 5000 homes or more. >>HARDWARE SOLUTION TO E-COMMERCE SECURITY >>VLSI Technology and Tandem Computer's Atalla are developing chip-level >>security products to protect electronic transactions over the Internet and >>intranets. The products will incorporate DES, RSA and other encryption >>technology, and the companies hope their joint venture will establish a >>hardware-based security standard for electronic commerce. (Information Week >>15 Apr 96 p34) Remember, however, that VLSI technology is the company that built Clipper... Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

URLs for Capabilities
by norm＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am preparing a talk for this morning at CP in PaloAlto. Here are some relavant URLs. http://www.agorics.com/agorics http://www.agorics.com/agorics/allkey.html http://www.cis.upenn.edu/~KeyKOS/

1 0

Re: CryptoAnarchy: What's wrong with this picture?
by jordan＠Thinkbank.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From sandfort(a)crl.com Fri May 3 21:52:50 1996 At 11:31 AM 5/3/96 -0700, brerrabbit(a)alpha.c2.org wrote: >Do tell. How would someone, just for instance, who is considering >leaving a "permanent" job for the higher compensation available to >contractors and consultants be able to structure a business in such a >way as to benefit from these techniques? 2) Take a vacation to a tax haven you like because of what you've read about it. I'm confused as to how "merely" putting your after-tax (you *will* declare this consulting revenue on your Schedule C, won't you?) bucks in an offshore account will "save" you money. This only "works" if you are able to use what you've taken away to advantage; you may generate a tax "savings" on those gains. Oh, and it also only works if you are willing to expose yourself to being arrested at some point for tax evasion. This is silly; there are legitimate reasons for structuring business efforts in other tax juristictions. Avoiding income tax on your primary source income isn't one of them. My answer to the original question: save your $1k you'd send to Sandy for the "advice" (plus travel associated with finding your 'haven') and open a SEP. /jordan

3 2

RE: Why I dislike Java. (was Re: "Scruffies" vs. "Neats")
by Pete Loshin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

E. Allen Smith wrote: > From: IN%"perry(a)piermont.com" 3-MAY-1996 16:49:35.61 > > >The users can't afford not to have the numbers they are watching not > >in front of them, even for brief periods. Its a real problem. > > Hmm.... has anyone ever created a specialized computer (or computer > running a specialized program) that would put multiple screens on the same > screen, perhaps with some GUI manipulation capabilities? If they're trying to > read Netscape material while watching the other numbers, they're then in the > exact same situation from their viewpoint. Actually, this is the kind of application that seems ideal for X-Windows. There are a lot more, but it has never really caught on in the PC world, which is a shame since it makes much more sense than many of the solutions people have come up with over the years. -Pete Loshin

1 0