December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: FOR WHOM THE BELL TOLLS
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:55 PM 6/5/96 -0700, Bruce Baugh wrote: >Do I really have to point out that London was writing the better part of a >century ago, in a substantially different legal and cultural environment? >(Heck, his socialism made more trouble for him than anything else.) It was more restrictive in censorship terms than our current environment. >>Advocating the general practice of killing one's opponents is as legal as >>church on a Sunday. The War College (or is it the NDU these days) does it >>all the time. > >And they, of course, are The Government, who Protect Us from the Evil >Terrorists. Ditto for the heroic BATF agents who only burn bad nasty >terrorists, honest. And all the rest. But I can advocate killing commies too. It's like when this dumb California (State) Senator advocated outlawing groups that advocate violence back in 1980 or so, I pointed out that the Public Schools and the Army were then doomed since both of these groups "advocate violence." Obviously the California State Senate "advocates violence" as well in the enforcement of laws. Military types even plan war against friends. The War Department developed Plan Red in the '20s for a war with the British Empire. Called for an amphibious assault on Halifax and a tank assault via Buffalo to secure Toronto as part of a conquest of Canada. Note too that under the Nurenberg principles, I may be legally compelled (or legally permitted) to kill my superior officers or government leaders if they are committing war crimes. And even the Sainted Ronald Reagan and his government was convicted of war crimes by the International Court of Justice for mining the harbor that serves Managua, Nicaragua. (Air-sown mines.) 'War Crimes' are vague, meaningless, and ex post facto and thus justify quite a lot of enforcement actions in theory (which is why Senator Robert A. Taft opposed US participation in the Nurenberg trials. "Yes, your honor, I'd like to pay taxes and everything but I'm afraid that I might risk conviction at future war crimes trials of aiding and abetting the criminal acts of my government." -- From 101 Flaky Anti Tax Arguments (which may become a web site if I can teach myself forms. >The rest of us (in the US) live in a country where the government can now >pretty much declare anyone they like terrorists, Just foreigners and such designation just affects fundraising. (I've often wondered why Hamas uses/used couriers for getting funds to Israel when Israel has a great ATM network with international links.) >and suspend habeus corpus on the flimsiest of grounds, The Anti Terrorism bill doesn't suspend Habeas Corpus it restricts mandatory federal court review of state convictions to one try. One can still submit an unlimited number of Petitions for Writ of Habeas Corpus and any state or federal court that wants to can grant one of them just as before. >and use evidence against foreigners that doesn't have to be presented to the accused, In deportation proceedings. And then they'll have to go to all the trouble of turning around and coming back like the other million illegal entrants a year. DCF

1 0

NDcrypt available for Newtons
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 22:49:26 -0700 From: Tom Collins <tom(a)newts.com> To: declan(a)well.com Subject: Revisiting an old subject... ** ENCRYPTION TOOL NOW NEWTON 2.0 SAVVY ** Geert Jadoul <76271.2121(a)CompuServe.COM> reports that he has finally finished a Newton 2.0 savvy version of NDcrypt. NDcrypt 2.0 Light is an improved version of NDcrypt v1.6. It has become a US$15 shareware utility with a trial period of 4 weeks. After 4 weeks the "Encrypt" and "UnReadable" buttons will disappear until you fill in the registration code in the preferences window. You will still be able after 4 weeks to "Decrypt" notes or make them "Readable" again, so you will not lose any data. The name "NDcrypt 2.0 Light" also infers that Geert is working on a NDcrypt 2.0 Pro version. This version will have better incorporation of NDcrypt in the system; overview and search functions; and viewing Notes (decrypt a Note to view it but keep it encrypted in the Notes app). NDcrypt 2.0 Light is available at <ftp://newton.uiowa.edu/submissions> with the name "NDcry2Li.sit" and on Compuserve <GO NEWTON> under "NOS 2.0 ONLY". Tom Collins|Innovative Computer Solutions| <http://www.newts.com/> tom(a)newts.com| 1075 North Miller Rd., #142 | <ftp://ftp.newts.com/> pagetom(a)newts.com| Scottsdale, Arizona 85257 |<phone://(602)970-1032/>

1 0

Kook of the Month
by Bruce Baugh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cypherpunks don't just write code, they engage in petty vote fraud! =-=-=-=-= From: mlegare(a)wetware.com (M. Legare, etc.) Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks,news.admin.net-abuse.misc Subject: KotM Winners for May 1996 - SOMEONE'S miffed! Date: 3 Jun 1996 16:05:12 GMT Organization: Castle Wetware's Western Keep Lines: 112 Message-ID: <4ov2fo$1mm(a)numbers.wetware.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: news.wetware.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Well... it's June and here we go with the Winners for May - at least I'm more on-schedule than I was for April... KOOK OF THE MONTH MAY 1996 - DMITRI VULIS (dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com) In one of the most HOTLY contested KotM races in the history of the award under my watch, Dmitri Vilus NARROWLY edged out vote taker Dave C (tale) Lawrence in a race that was right down to the wire. Let's recap: Dmitri Vulis nominated tale for KotM because tale was involved in a "conspiracy of thousands" to send out "forged rmgroup" messages for a newsgroup that Dmitri wanted to create. Dmitri then posted evidence of somewhat dunious validity, and someone nominated Dmitri. And the votes started pouring in. Some from congress.gov, some from algebra.com, some from bwalk.dm.com... hundreds of votes. Well, after an initial surge ahead by the tale backers, a DELUGE of email backing Vulis for KotM poured in, and, since I had to assume that ALL votes were valid (as Dmitri kept forging posts to misc.test in my name to show his displeasure at my INSINUATING that he might have forged any votes), Dmitri won by a narrow 30 vote margin! Vote Count: Dmitri Vulis - 428 votes David C Lawrence (tale) - 398 votes Ed McClosky - 18 votes Yehuda Silver - 9 votes Bill Palmer - 4 votes ellisd(a)netcom.com - 4 votes Mr SAM - 2 votes None of the Above - 3 votes George Conklin - 1 vote Rachel Ewing-Pace - 0 votes smokindude(a)aol.com - 0 votes Clueless Newbie of the Month for May 1996 - MARGE KRICK Marge won in a less vopulumnous but just as hotly contested race. As you may know, Marge is offering a list of ALL USNET NEWSGROUPS for a very reasonable price - JUST the thing we need, unless you know how to look at your ..newsrc file. Oops. Vote Count: Marge Krick - 12 votes Bill Byers - 11 votes Brian Dear - 7 votes John Turco - 7 votes None of the Above - 5 votes Hook Line & Sinker for May 1996 - NONE OF THE ABOVE Apparently, Charles "Chuckie Monster" Newman didn't impress enough people. Sorry, Charlie. Vote Count: None of the Above - 19 votes Charles "Chuckie Monster" Newman - 9 votes The Victor Von Frankenstein Memorial "Wierd Science" Award - THE USA PARLIAMENT Brainchild of politial mover and reformer James Ogle (joogle(a)netcom.com) the USA PAR is the ONLY "fair" and truly representative governing body in the US. Plan? Scheme? Deluded ravings? Well, several members of the USA PAR (who also post to alt.politics.greens) have voted to disband the USA PAR, to replace James Ogle as secretary, and a few dozen other self- destructive things, yet the ballots just keep rolling out... Vote Count: USA PAR - 19 votes Joly*s 4-Dimensional Speakers - 6 votes the Music Theory of Alber Silverman - 4 votes Church of Scientology (write-in) - 4 votes None of the Above - 15 Votes THE GOLDEN KILLFILE - DR. JAI MAHRAJ I'm not gonna explain, because if you don't know, you're better off. Check soc.culture.hawaiian and a few thousan related newsgroups. Vote Count: Jai Mahraj - 30 votes None of the Above - 13 votes the alt.religion.scientology spammer (write-in): 1 LAW DOCTOR JOHN GRUBOR (write-in): 1 Ted Holden (write-in): 1 OK. That's it for May. Nominees go to alt.usenet.kooks, and I'll have the new nominees post out soon. Oh, and by the way, if anyone sees ANYTHING that is nominally from me BUT is also cross-posted to misc.test, you have my express written permission to CANCEL that article. You know who you are. And no more naughty forgeries ok guys? Matthew Legare KotM Vote Wrangler

1 0

Re: [NOISE] Re: whitehouse web incident, viva la web revolution
by hallam＠Etna.ai.mit.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>>it is an insult to the 10 million civilians >>murdered by Hitler to use the term facist simply as a term of abuse, >You insult everyone's intelligence by equating fascism to genocide. >Suggested reading on the origins, meanings and definition of fascism include >Friere, Foucault and even the damn Utne Reader among many others. Meeks was intending to link Clinton's crypto policy to Hitler's. I see no evidence from Meeks' style that he has read Foucault. If Meeks wanted to be effective he could have accused Clinton and Freeh of seeking to build a Stalininst secret police, or make such an organisation possible. It would probably be more accurate to link Freeh to Hoover and point out how such power has been abused in the US political system before. The point was that Meeks' article is not the type to advance our cause. It basically says "if you are a democrat you believe in cypto-control". Err yes, well done, you have just told half the country that they support the opposite policy to the one we are trying to get them to believe in. Plus Bush and Reagan advocated the same policy so he is also saying Republicans are against our cause. If you want you could reduce the ranks of those fighting for crypto regulations to be removed to members of the Libertarian party, but it would be more effective to widen the base. Phill

1 0

Electronic Signatures
by nCognito＠rigel.cyberpass.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Some of the other info in the AP article seems to be coinciding with discussions on the list, so heres a less condensed version of the article. Are we still within the limits of the copyrights? God i hope so. :) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- TAMPA - Flroida now recognizes electronic signatures as legal and binding, however, working out the logistics to implement the new law may take some doing. Andrew Greenberg, an associate at a large Tampa law firm...says, the process saves time by using a computer to handle notary duties that used to be done by hand. he expects the mechanics of electronic certifaction to become simple enough for everybody to use. "It will be like the telephone - anybody can use it without thinking or knowing how it works," he said. Ted Barassi, chairman of the United States Council for International Business, is among a pool of experts Florida Secretary of State Sandra Mortham is expected to call on to set up the state's emerging electronic signature certifacation process. The law does not specify how an electronic document must be signed, but Barassi and others say it probably will mean coding the text and typed signature so they cannot be changed by anyone other than the writer. No on knows yet just how this will be done, but Mortham's own expert on the subject, Gene McGee, envisions a central database that tracks coded computer signatures for individuals and businesses. With Florida already a hub of Latin American trade, cybernotary lawyers could make the state a mecca for international trade, McGee predicts. _______________________________________________________________________ Its kind of scary when the best minds the state could find are so obviously without a clue. One of you politically involved folx could dig up addresses for some of our mis-representatives and forward them discussion from this list, maybe. :) Adios..

4 5

InfoSec Spin
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

6-6-96. UST: "Businesses bypass law to fend off hackers." In cyberspace, where hackers are finding commercial computer systems easy prey, businesses are choosing to hire free-lance security teams rather than involve the law. A Senate subcommittee heard Wednesday from experts who described how businesses, concerned over negative publicity, avoid reporting hacker assaults on their networked computer system. "You stop the bad guy and send him to your competitor," said Dan Gelber, the committee's chief counsel. Senator Nunn asked the subcommittee staff to comment on an article in this week's Sunday Times of London that reported, "Cyberterrorists have amassed up to L400 million worldwide by threatening to wipe out computer systems" belonging to banks and brokerage houses if they refuse to pay a ransom. "While we can't confirm the entire story," said Gelber, "it is extremely consistent with what industry insiders tell us." http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~jya/fendof.txt ---------- UST had two editorials June 5 on encryption: one criticizing the administration's position, and another defending GAK by Sally Katzen with OMB. http://pwp.usa.pipeline.com/~jya/yeanay.txt

2 1

<<Vitamin B>> (June 6, 1996) Reality Check
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Speak of the devil... Cheers, Bob Hettinga --- begin forwarded text To: DAILY DOSE <DAILY_DOSE(a)notes.worldcom.com> From: VitaminB <VitaminB(a)bionomics.org> Date: 6 Jun 96 20:31:04 Subject: <<Vitamin B>> (June 6, 1996) Reality Check Mime-Version: 1.0 Vitamin B: Your Daily Dose of Bionomics June 6, 1996 Reality Check Everyone knows that you can't predict the future. The question is: Can traditional economics understand the present? Not too many years ago, on the eve of the collapse of the Soviet Union, the leading economics textbook had this to say: "The Soviet economy is proof that, contrary to what many skeptics had earlier believed, a socialist command economy can function and even thrive." -- Paul A. Samuelson, Professor emeritus, MIT (in Samuelson & Nordhaus, Economics, 1989) We wonder what "conventional wisdom" of 1996 will prove to be as, ummm, quotable in the not too distant future. --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "If they could 'just pass a few more laws', we would all be criminals." --Vinnie Moscaritolo The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

Tell it like it is, Perry
by attila 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Addressed to: Cypherpunks <cypherpunks(a)toad.com> Perry Metzger <perry(a)piermont.com> now, why would anyone want to send Perry a PerryGram? --Perry's prose is far too elegant to warrant criticism, particularly the closing remark! = Your attitude seems to be "you can't prove anything so you must assume = that they are innocent." My attitude is "I can't prove anything so = they can't go to jail, but that doesn't mean I have to believe that = they are innocent -- in fact, I'm an idiot if I believe that." = = > I think that given Perry's ad-hominem attacks and the fact that this = > has nothing to do with cryptography that its about time someone sent = > Perry a Perry-gram. = = Cypherpunks no longer is a cryptography mailing list. Its a sewer. = = Perry = -- When you can't say 'fuck,' you can't say 'FUCK THE CDA!' --Lenny Bruce rephrased

1 0

DCSB Cocktails Over Back Bay
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Date: 6 Jun 96 10:13:48 EDT From: "Julie Rackliffe" <RACKLIFFE(a)tcm.org> Subject: DCSB Cocktails Over Back Bay To: "dcsb" <dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu> Sender: bounce-dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: "Julie Rackliffe" <RACKLIFFE(a)tcm.org> Greetings! As those who attended yesterday's lunch already know, We Have A Date! I am simply delighted to announce that Open Software Foundation has generously agreed to sponsor our first ever cocktail party for the Digital Commerce Society of Boston. I promises to be a memorable evening and I hope that you will plan to come, and please feel free to introduce a friend to this unique group. Our intention is that this event should be used as a networking opportunity in addition to getting some more people interested in DCSB (and, of course, expanding our mailing list!) So, here's the specifics: When: Thursday, June 20, 1996 5-8 pm Where: The Harvard Club, One Federal Street, 38th floor in The Lounge (sunset over the Back Bay will be featured!) Hot and Cold Hors D'oeuvres ala The Harvard Club and cool libations compliments of OSF and DCSB. What's the Catch?- No Catch! Just RSVP to me before June 17 Do Come! Julie Rackliffe The Computer Museum Annual Fund/Membership Manager 300 Congress St, Boston 02210 rackliffe(a)tcm.org 617.426.2800 X432 ******************************************************************************** The Walk-Through Computer 2000 is open! This is a "must see"! Museum Membership:SR/STU $25...IND $35...FAM $50...NON-PROFIT $250...LIB $500 Web Site: http://www.tcm.org ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ To unsubscribe from this list, send a letter to: Majordomo(a)ai.mit.edu In the body of the message, write: unsubscribe dcsb Or, to subscribe, write: subscribe dcsb If you have questions, write to me at Owner-DCSB(a)ai.mit.edu --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "If they could 'just pass a few more laws', we would all be criminals." --Vinnie Moscaritolo The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

ALERT: Court decision expected soon in free speech case; spreadthe word! (fwd)
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Date: Wed, 5 Jun 1996 11:44:10 -0400 From: shabbir(a)vtw.org (Shabbir J. Safdar) To: Multiple recipients of list <com-priv(a)lists.psi.com> Subject: ALERT: Court decision expected soon in free speech case; spread the word! - ------ [Dear Friend-of-VTW, During our "Turn the Web Black campaign", you wrote us regarding that protest. Because of the success of that campaign, we are asking you to participate again in another net-campaign to draw attention to the upcoming decision in the lawsuit to challenge the net censorship legislation. This information is not widely available yet, and I would appreciate it if you did not redistribute this. Because you helped us out during the highly successful "Turn the Web Black" campaign, we are giving you advanced notice of this effort before we tell anyone else. -Shabbir J. Safdar, Voters Telecommunication Watch (www.vtw.org) ======================================================================== __ _________ __ __ ____ ____ _____ \ \ / /_ _\ \ / / / / / ___| _ \_ _| Raise the roof \ \ / / | | \ \ /\ / / / / | | | | | || | for the Court's \ V / | | \ V V / / / | |___| |_| || | decision on net \_/ |_| \_/\_/ /_/ \____|____/ |_| free speech! Voters Telecommunications Watch / Center for Democracy and Technology JOIN TENS OF THOUSANDS OF NET USERS IN SPREADING THE WORD ABOUT THE FIRST RESULT OF THE FREE SPEECH LAWSUIT June 5, 1996 Redistribute (intact, please) only until June 28, 1996 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table of contents News - A decision in the court case is near How to participate How will this campaign work? Press information on this event Background: what is the CDA? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ NEWS - A DECISION IN THE COURT CASE IS NEAR The fate of the Internet and the future of the First Amendment in the information age hang in the balance. As early as this week, three federal judges in Philadelphia are poised to issue a ruling in the law suit challenging the Communications Decency Act (CDA), which restricts constitutionally protected speech on the Internet. Will the court rule that the CDA is unconstitutional? That the Internet is a unique communications technology that deserves the same First Amendment protections enjoyed by the print media? Or will the court side with Senator Exon, conservative "pro-family" groups, and the Justice Department who have argued that the government is the best judge of what material is appropriate online. Regardless of the outcome, the decision will have a profound impact on the future of the Internet as a medium for free expression, education, and commerce. JOIN TENS OF THOUSANDS OF YOUR FELLOW NETIZENS IN ANNOUNCING THE DECISION When the Communications Decency Act was signed into law by President Clinton on February 8, 1996, the World Wide Web went black in protest. When the decision in the historic legal challenge to the CDA is announced, join tens of thousands of your fellow netizens in spreading the word on the decision and its impact. This campaign follows in the steps of the Turn the Web Black campaign, which was a tremendous success. Believe it or not, many Internet users had only superficial knowledge about the proposed law and the enormous press coverage and online awareness afterwards mobilized large numbers of people. In addition to the online campaign, there are currently rallies planned for New York, press conferences from the CIEC and the ACLU, and a net campaign to raise awareness to the decision and the effects it will have on free speech. The result of the first CDA decision is an extremely important milestone in the fight for free speech online. Will the net look more like print, or more like Saturday morning television? - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO PARTICIPATE: In anticipation of the decision, you can help keep your fellow Netizens informed on the latest news and participate in a dramatic demonstration when the decision is announced. 1. Add the following link *TODAY* in a prominent location on your web site: <a href="http://www.vtw.org/speech/"> <img src="http://www.vtw.org/images/cda.gif" alt="Free speech court decision" align=top></a><br clear = all><br> A decision is near in the fight to overturn the Communications Decency Act. <br>Watch this image and follow the link for more information. 2. To let us know you have joined us, fill out the form at http://www.vtw.org/speech/ with your URL. A list of participating will be displayed. 3. Attend the online press conference with lead CIEC (Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition) attorney Bruce Ennis on HotWired. More details are available on the WWW page. - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ HOW WILL THIS CAMPAIGN WORK? After you have added the link (above) to your page, an animated image signifying that a decision in the case is expected soon will be displayed on your site. By clicking on that image, visitors to your page can jump to a site containing the latest news and information on the case. As soon as a decision is announced, the image will be changed automatically (the update will happen at our server - you will not have to do anything), and Netizens throughout the entire global Internet will immediately be aware of the result (win or lose). By clicking on the updated image, visitors to your page will be able to obtain the text of the decision, analysis, and other relevant information. Until the decision is announced, there will be information about upcoming events and rallies on the VTW Free Speech page, http://www.vtw.org/speech/ - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ PRESS INFORMATION ON THIS EVENT For more information on this event, including press inquiries, please contact: Jonah Seiger, Policy Analyst, Center For Democracy and Technology (CDT) <jseiger(a)cdt.org> +1.202.637.9800 Shabbir Safdar, Online Representative, Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) <shabbir(a)vtw.org> +1.718.596.2851 - ------------------------------------------------------------------------ BACKGROUND: WHAT IS THE CDA? The Communications Decency Act was passed as part of the Telecommunications Reform bill in February 1996. The law seeks to protect minors from objectionable or sexually explicit material on the Internet by imposing stiff criminal penalties on the "display" of "indecent" or "patently offensive" material online. Opponents to the new law argue that while well intentioned, the CDA fails to account for the unique nature of the Internet, and that it will have a far-reaching chilling effect on constitutionally protected speech online. On a global, decentralized communications medium like the Internet, the only effective and constitutional means of controlling access to objectionable material is to rely on users and parents, not the government, to decide what material is or is not appropriate. Two lawsuits have been filed to challenge the constitutionality of the CDA in a Philadelphia federal court. The cases have been consolidated and an decision is expected in early June 1996. The cases have been brought, respectively, by The Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition (CIEC), comprised of civil Liberties groups, libraries, Internet Service Providers, Commercial Online Service Providers, Newspaper, Magazine and Book Publishers, and over 45,000 individual internet users, and a coalition of civil liberties groups, authors, and others organized by the ACLU. Detailed information on the legal challenges, as well as information about the CDA, is available at the following web sites: Legal Challenges To The CDA - ---------------------------- * The ACLU - http://www.aclu.org/ * The Citizens Internet Empowerment Coalition (CIEC) - http://www.cdt.org/ciec Background Information On The CDA/Internet Censorship Issues - ------------------------------------------------------------ * The ACLU - http://www.aclu.org * Center for Democracy and Technology (CDT) - http://www.cdt.org * Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) - http://www.eff.org * Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) - http://www.epic.org * Voters Telecommunications Watch (VTW) - http://www.vtw.org ======================================================================== ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "If they could 'just pass a few more laws', we would all be criminals." --Vinnie Moscaritolo The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

2 1