December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Shrink-Wrap Lic. uphelo by courts. From Edupage, 4 July 1996
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

------- Forwarded Message Follows ------- Date: Thu, 4 Jul 1996 17:27:43 -0400 (EDT) From: Edupage Editors <educom(a)elanor.oit.unc.edu> Subject: Edupage, 4 July 1996 ***************************************************************** Edupage, 4 July 1996. Edupage, a summary of news items on information technology, is provided three times each week as a service by Educom, a Washington, D.C.-based consortium of leading colleges and universities seeking to transform education through the use of information technology. ***************************************************************** [..] "SHRINK-WRAP" LICENSES OKAYED BY COURT The validity of the "shrink-wrap" licenses that many software publishers rely on for copyright protection was bolstered by a recent appellate court ruling in Chicago. Last month, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a lower court's finding that shrink-wrap agreements were unenforceable. Plaintiffs in the case, ProCD vs. Zeidenberg et al., charged the defendants with distributing the software program via the Internet. The defendants had argued that they couldn't be held to the license terms because they'd had no chance to negotiate or object to parts of the agreement. They also said the license agreement should be printed on the outside of the box, where it could be read before purchasing. The latest ruling found this suggestion to be an onerous burden, but did say the box must have a notice saying there's a licensing agreement inside, and that buyers should be able to return the software if they don't agree to the license once they read it. (Investor's Business Daily 3 Jul 96 A5)

1 0

Re: rsync and md4
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:05 AM 7/1/96 -0400, David F. Ogren wrote: > I stand by my statements. When you are deep in a hole, it is time to quit digging. > The problems that you bring up have to do with situations > where an active attacker develops a slightly different > pair of documents with the same hash. > > Although this is highly undesirable characteristic for a > hash function, [...] No kidding. Current state of the art is that MD4 is broken for signing documents prepared by other people, and MD5 may be broken soon, but MD4 is not broken as proof of authorship. So if everyone was using MD4 for PGP signing, which they are not, it would still not be a problem for most people. But it would be a problem for authors of software, who should know that a security bug that sinks only *some* people is still a security bug. Therefore no author of software should employ MD5 or MD4 in new software, but existing users of software that employs MD5 and MD4 should not panic. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | 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

Re: I confess [Was: Who was that Masked Cypherpunk?]
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:56 PM 7/5/96 -0400, Jim Ray wrote: >'Twas me, the guardian of the *original* definition of the fine old >term "escrow" against the slick denizens of Newspeak. I have found >this Libertarian convention to be a super-fun experience, and I will >be demonstrating PGP, Private Idaho, and lots of other fun stuff on >Saturday at 3PM. All are invited to attend. Since no one has mentioned exactly what happened at the LP Convention, I will relate it from memory and JR can correct me. They were going to vote on adopting a platform plank that upheld the right of everybody to use any crypto they wanted and export it an everything and also opposing the proposal for a requirement that people use a key escrow system set up by the government. JR offered an amendment which changed the language to refer to "so-called Key Escrow (actually government access to keys GAK)" and he also explained that "escrow" is where you place something with a trusted third party and the government is neither trusted nor a third party. He mentioned cypherpunks live on CSPAN. Maybe when JR finished the Con he can post the original proposed language of the LPs plank and the final language as amended. DCF

2 1

Re: Net and Terrorism
by attila 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Addressed to: CyberEyes <cyberia(a)cam.org> Cypherpunks <cypherpunks(a)toad.com> CyberEyes <cyberia(a)cam.org> pontificated at 07/05/96 12:29pm -0400 = On Thu, 4 Jul 1996, attila wrote: = = > "denied zones" (we were never there) is no longer in vogue. however, we = > will probably see that again in parts of the world as many cultures do = > not have the basic respect for life we do. = = What is your last comment supposed to mean exactly? Just because = some Islamic militants decide to kill a few people in a terrorist attack = does not mean that the entire believer population of Islam does not have = respect for life. Just who is "we"? Americans? Europeans? All = industrialized nations? Every country except those Third World ones? Uh... = I don't see your point very clearly here... The only culture I can think = of that might now have respect for life are cannibals, and they DO have = respect for life in a way, they don't kill each other (I don't think), and = they do it because it's their lifestyle, but they don't perform = cannibalistic acts out of malice. Correct me here if I'm wrong. = let me phrase it another way: there are circumstances where the lives of 'n' innocent people are of less consequence than the enemy --in other words, try to keep collateral damage to a minimum, but get the target before he executes more harm (this applies to hostage situations, as well) in general, this does not mean wipe out an entire 100 story building to find a single sniper, but sometimes a commander is faced with the choice: send a team in with a 10% chance of accomplishing the mission (i.e. the team is killed or the target escapes) or waste the village. until you have experience the death of men in combat, you will never understand this principle. I certainly did not, and even as a graduate of Harvard and an active member of the LDS Church, I found it only takes once to _clearly_ understand that it is 'to kill or be killed.' don't sit in your ivory tower and pontificate until you walk the mile in my shoes. I also had the responsibility for as many as 1600 additional 'black shirts' in a fire zone --think about it. oh, sure, I (or anyone else) will never convince you --but maybe you will think about it. war is hell, son; and war zones are somewhere beyond. if you go, just pray that you come back understanding that and not with scrambled eggs for brains. -attila -- "Don't hunt wild game, hunt lawyers! They provide better sport, suffer from severe overpopulation; and, they taste just like chicken!!

1 0

Re: I confess [Was: Who was that Masked Cypherpunk?]
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:25 PM 7/5/96, Duncan Frissell wrote: >Since no one has mentioned exactly what happened at the LP Convention, I >will relate it from memory and JR can correct me. > >They were going to vote on adopting a platform plank that upheld the right >of everybody to use any crypto they wanted and export it an everything and >also opposing the proposal for a requirement that people use a key escrow >system set up by the government. I'm now watching the LP convention on C-SPAN, and taping it for a friend (who may have a book contract to do a book related to something along these lines). The one LP event I ever attended was the California LP annual convention, some years ago, and found it crushingly boring. This looks a bit more exciting. I suspect the LP will continue to get 3-4% of the vote, maybe a tad more this year due to widespread dissatisfaction with Dinton and Clole and with the obvious charisma of Harry Browne. --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: Noise: Re: Those Evil Republicans
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C'punks, At 04:05 PM 7/5/96 -0400, hallam(a)Etna.ai.mit.edu wrote: >A parasite is omething that lives off a host to its >detriment. It is easy for a small island nation to be >parasitic off larger ones...In short someone, somewhere >has to do some work. Maybe I missed something here, but only small nations that are on the dole (i.e., foreign aid) can be said to be parasitic, and even they may be giving something in return (e.g., land concessions for military bases). The service industries in these little countries--banking tourism, etc.--are free traders giving value for value. This is not parasitism by any stretch of the imagination. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

RE: The Net and Terrorism
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Timothy C. May If there's any meta-point I'm making is that people are best served by making their own security arrangements, be it home protection, financial security, health security, or the security from rioters, criminals, and terrorists being talked about here. Turning over increased powers to a government to do these things is a recipe for failure, at very high costs (economic and civil liberties costs). ...................................................................... This is what I also understood Tim's point to be. As long as transforming the whole world into a "kinder, gentler", safer, mix of countries, economies, politics, races, religions, recipes for living, etc., is but a remote possibility in a far-off future galaxy, and knowing that governments are typically unprepared to deal with the dangerous states of mind incited by their very own policies, then (as always) it is wise and adviseable that a person take up some responsibility for preparing themselves, mentally and otherwise, for dealing with threats of terrorism, the kind of which we are all aware of by now. This is not fatalism; it is facing the facts. .. Blanc

1 0

New Member Registration
by coryt＠rain.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Requested Account Name: whitney Requested Password: elbows THIS MEMBER HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE UPDATE LIST

1 0

Announce: Ecash(tm) Software Developer's Kit Beta 2 release
by bryce＠digicash.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The Ecash(tm) Software Developer's Kit is available now for download from "http://www.digicash.com/api". The major improvement it that it now _accepts_ payments as well as makes them. Accounts at the "Beta Research Bucks" Bank (dc.digicash.com:9666) are available upon request. Here's the README: - ----- begin included README ----- Announce! This is the second beta release of the Ecash(tm) Software Developer's Kit. It includes: * the beta 2 release of ecashlib * a simple test client with source code for reference * a simple TCP/IP library for use with the test client Changes since the last release: * Importantly: The EC_pocket_begin_accept_payment() function works. * Unimportantly: Some internals got upgraded. EC_main_get_ver_string() implemented. Some parameters moved from EC_pocket_new() to EC_pocket_begin_open_account(), which is their natural habitat. A small bug or two was squelched. How to download: Option 1: Menu Visit the directory structure at "http://www.digicash.com/api/distrib" and take whatever you like. Option 2: MRE For Windows (Win32 DLL): "http://www.digicash.com/api/ecashlib.zip" For FreeBSD (static lib): "http://www.digicash.com/api/ecashlib-freebsd.tar.gz" For Linux (shared ELF lib): "http://www.digicash.com/api/ecashlib-linux.tar.gz" For others: e-mail us What do I do next? Visit: "http://www.digicash.com/api" for the latest release. Subscribe to: "ecash-dev(a)digicash.com" for news and views. Send e-mail to: "bryce(a)digicash.com" for developer support. Withdraw from: the BRB Bank dc.digicash.com:9666. You'll have to send us e-mail explaining why we should allocate any of our precious Beta Research Bucks to you, and what you want your account name(s) to be. Create: innovative net applications using Ecash(tm) -- the only secure, privacy-protecting, token-based digital payment system! - ----- end included README ----- Bryce Ahoy! PGP sig ahead! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2i Comment: Auto-signed under Unix with 'BAP' Easy-PGP v1.1b2 iQB1AwUBMd2iNkjbHy8sKZitAQEGbgMAkDRKou6yt5ESqtAvJUsgDpf5xGBw0S8A zTPnC4mwVIFbyo0P8rGaiR434OkmqwkZYtkcg3Bt+6QU5b3lVx7qD0JFNp31PGyn Yn8F7dLmTr8yJhU1aCHHkZjPvwt1IcM5 =iTG3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Shrink-Wrap Lic. uphelo by courts. From Edupage, 4 July 1996
by Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Deranged Mutant wrote: > >The latest > ruling found this suggestion to be an onerous burden, but did say the box > must have a notice saying there's a licensing agreement inside, and that > buyers should be able to return the software if they don't agree to the > license once they read it. (Investor's Business Daily 3 Jul 96 A5) Perhaps Prof Froomkin could provide an opinion. It sounds to me however as if the defendants were simply ripping off the copyright of the plaintif and attempting to get arround it by claiming to have "bought" rights to resell along with the software by wrangling over the shrink wrap agreement. Or were the defendants reselling the software unopened to foreign customers via the Internet? Seems to me that that might well be open to further challenge. If a "contract" clause is expressed in a manner that means that it would not be encountered by a party which it attempts to bind there might be argument as to whether acceptance was possible. I suspect that the claims the plaintifs were making lay very definitely within the range of what people in the trade would usually expect to be the licensing terms for software purchased off the shelf. Just as there is an expectation when purchasing a book that one has purchased an instance and not the rights to the copyright. Consider the analogy with purchasing a book that is wrapped in shrink wrap film and that consequently one was unable to read the "all rights reserved" legend. The question that I am interested in is whether someone could claim that a shrink wrap license can bind a user to terms that are less widely expected in the industry. For example clauses which prohibit reverse engineering, transfer to other users etc. Might be interesting to know the precise rulling made and its terms. Phill

3 2