December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Obscenity checkpoints
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Maryville-Alcoa (TN) Daily Times, June 3, 1996. `Calvin' Decals Catching Some Heat Auto displays may be deemed `obscene' By Justin Cress Tennessee motorists might need to be more discriminating in the future about the statement their automobiles are making. A recent warning issued to a South Carolina woman for displaying an "obscene" bumper sticker has caused some controversy about that state's obscenity laws. Decals portraying Calvin, of Bill Waterson's popular "Calvin and Hobbes" comic strip, urinating on assorted objects of ridicule are sweeping the Southeast. The decals' increased visibility prompts the question: Is it obscentity or simply bad taste? Patti Redden of McConnells, S.C., was surprised to find, while being stopped at a highway patrol checkpoint, that the reproduction displayed in her rear window was considered offensive and illegal according to state ordinances. Her version depicted the letters "IRS" receiving the Calvinesque treatment. Like South Carolina, Tennessee's obscenity laws prohibit the use of "patently offensive" stickers, window-signs, or other markings on a motor vehicle. An opinion handed down in 1989 by the state defines patently offensive as "that which goes substantially beyond customary limits of candor in describing or representing such matters," especially when pertaining to excretory functions. Sharon Curtis-Flair, public information officer of the Tennessee Attorney General's Office, expects to see renewed interest in the state's laws. "We went through this before in 1988 with (another questionable bumper sticker)," said Curtis-Flair. "The law has really not been tested yet. It's just never been challenged." (...)

1 0

Re: Why PGP isn't so ubiquitous (was NRC Session Hiss)
by jamesd＠echeque.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:43 PM 6/3/96 -0700, Joel McNamara wrote: > (I'm sure the name "wizards" is trademarked by MS, so they won't be called > that). You are free to use the word "wizard" provided that they look, feel, and work much like what Microsoft calls a "wizard" -- see the Microsoft UI guidelines. This demand by Microsoft is pretty reasonable. Now if it had been Apple or lotus they probably would have declared that you could not write anything that looked, felt, or worked much like a wizard. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | 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

COST CA/WWW Security
by sead＠cost.se 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To whom it may concern: This message is based on some questions recently posted at this mailing list concerning the issues of certification technology, certification authorities and related security applications, especially Secure WWW syste, combined with usage of certificates. For all interested, I would like to invite you to visit our WWW server (http://www.cost.se) where you may find all the information about our current security products. You may also browse our CA infrastructure. In case of any further question, please contact me directly. Regards, Sead Muftic ____________________________________________ Sead Muftic COST - Computer Security Technologies CST AB E-mail: sead(a)cost.se Tel: +46-8-16 16 92 Fax: +46-8-471-7722

1 0

Re: Electronic Signature Act Of 1996
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 04:24 PM 6/5/96 -0400, Black Unicorn wrote: >Please remember that the UCC's application is generally restricted to the >sales of goods or acts between merchants. I'll "remember" this only insofar as it reminds me to read your other messages with a more skeptical eye. I hope you pay more attention to accuracy when you're at work. -- Greg Broiles |"Post-rotational nystagmus was the subject of gbroiles(a)netbox.com |an in-court demonstration by the People http://www.io.com/~gbroiles |wherein Sgt Page was spun around by Sgt |Studdard." People v. Quinn 580 NYS2d 818,825.

2 1

New Type2.list/Pubring.mix
by John A. Perry 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hello Everyone, I've created a new type2.list/pubring.mix combination on jpunix.com. The most notable change is that the q(a)c2.org has been removed from the list. After several spot checks over the weekend I noticed the ncognito remailer producing sporadic pings so I left it on the list. Also, please note that the middleman remailer has changed nym servers from alpha.c2.org to nym.jpunix.com. The files are available by WWW at http://www.jpunix.com as well as by anonymous FTP at ftp.jpunix.com. John Perry - perry(a)alpha.jpunix.com - PGP-encrypted e-mail welcome! WWW - http://www.jpunix.com PGP 2.62 key for perry(a)jpunix.com is on the keyservers. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMbv9H1OTpEThrthvAQEyewQAqHY5duExLgUQBSf/EQOshXCevQReOKY4 LyVJ4GODBY626OxSUNvi+9+mlJs/0oW2tQ0iSuz3EeEBLrZw0m02wsCPtyGgojd+ hJd+T717sUX9xQ8lsiZHWZ27+Hvb0a8Y2yJ0ugYAKg5jTFfbSkxgpodSXdorqi7c Mlt6fLof080= =QCge -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

NYT on Crypto Policy
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The New York Times, June 10, 1996, p. A10. The New Encryption Universe [Editorial] The development of inexpensive computer programs and hardware that scramble telephone calls and computer messages to prevent eavesdropping is rapidly transforming the world of cryptography. Once largely the domain of governments and their intelligence services, encryption technology is now commonly used by corporations, banks, securities firms and individual computer operators. It is time to revise Government encryption policy to fit this new universe. A panel of the National Research Council makes a convincing case for doing just that after a careful review of encryption issues. The panel calls on the Government to abandon its effort to limit the development and availability of advanced encryption technology. The Clinton Administration has fought to preserve the Government's ability to access commercial and individual communications for law enforcement purposes by encouraging adoption of a single encryption standard that Government agencies could track and decipher if needed. The Research Council panel leans the other way, urging the commercial development of powerful encryption software even though it would make wiretapping more difficult. It also recommends that Washington ease restrictions on exports of encryption technology. The Government has long framed the debate over commercial encryption around its need to fight crime through wiretapping. The panel recognizes the usefulness of court-authorized wiretaps. But the panel suggests that a more important issue is the ability of the private sector to transfer confidential financial and other data over telecommunications pathways without interception. The Clinton Administration wants the private sector to adopt a type of encryption technology, known as key escrow, that would give the Government the ability to unscramble private phone or computer messages with court authorization and thereby preserve its wiretap capability. But the policy has so far failed several practical tests. The private sector has not voluntarily adopted a Government-controlled technology. In addition, encryption programs are already available that allow almost anyone with a computer and modem to work around Government-controlled technology. One sophisticated system would allow two strangers -- people who had swapped no private passwords -- to read each other's encoded messages. It seems likely that the Administration approach will not succeed. If so, the danger is that Washington might move to outlaw encryption technology it has not approved, a step that would grossly violate American civil liberties. The best way for the Government to protect its ability to eavesdrop on domestic and foreign criminals is to stay technically ahead of them. The panel recommends vigorous Government research programs to that end. The Research Council group would permit American computer companies to export more powerful encryption software than currently permitted. Foreigners already have access to encryption systems that are more powerful than those American companies are allowed to sell. The export restrictions do nothing to keep encryption software out of the hands of criminals and hostile governments, but needlessly drive American exports out of foreign markets. The panel's conclusions are especially credible because its membership was not tilted against the Government. The 16-member panel was led by Kenneth Dam, a former Deputy Secretary of State, and included Benjamin Civiletti, a former Attorney General, and Ann Caracristi, a former deputy director of the National Security Agency. The Clinton Administration should take notice. It needs a new encryption policy. --

1 0

TWP on Crypto Policy
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Washington Post, June 10, 1996, p. A18. Global Village Cops? What will be the long-term effect of Internet technologies on global law enforcement? The amazing story of Bill and Anna Young, a k a Leslie Rogge and Judy Kay Wilson, offers one possible scenario. The pseudonymous Youngs, residents of Guatemala who the FBI says have been on a decade-long run from U.S. justice since Mr. Rogge was convicted of a string of bank robberies and other offenses, turned themselves in to authorities after a neighbor recognized Mr. Rogge's face on the FBI home page's Most Wanted list. According to a story first told in the Guatemala Weekly, the person who recognized him was a newly Internet-wired 14-year-old. The vision of the future evoked by this story, of a world in which the familiar "global village" becomes a place not just of instant communication but of neighborly nosiness and where no one can just melt into the crowd, is reassuring and unnerving in about equal proportions. (What if it were a network of hit men or an authoritarian government seeking a dissident, rather than the FBI, making use of this powerful technology?) But it's also worth keeping in mind that, other than the romance of the technology, it doesn't represent that great an advance on current global media that have made celebrities or fugitives' faces familiar to a vast public -- just ask Salman Rushdie. The Rogge nabbing is the first that the FBI credits to its home page specifically, but TV's "America's Most Wanted" has scored similar coups. The impossibility of predicting the exact shape of these extensions of policing is relevant as well to a report that the National Research Council recently issued on another computer technology issue -- the vexed matter of whether to ease export controls on encryption software, which encodes information sent electronically so that only a user with a key can decipher it. The government until now has resisted lifting controls on "uncrackable" encryption software -- that is, codes that are too complex to be broken by brute force -- unless the industry agrees to deposit keys in an escrow arrangement with a third party so the government can seek and obtain a warrant to read encoded communications if necessary. Software makers, meanwhile, are pushing hard to have these restrictions eased. The research council, an arm of the generally neutral National Academy of Sciences, sought to bridge the gap between industry interests and such government agencies as the FBI and national security agencies, whose case, they say, is based largely on classified matter that can't be publicly discussed. Part of the report's conclusion, which favors the easing though not the abolition of current restrictions, is that wider use of encryption technology will actually *help* national security and law enforcement because more data, economic and otherwise, will be secure to begin with. But if the news of the changing terrain tells anything, it is that it is far too soon to base arguments on such a premise. Our own sense on encryption is that the national security and law enforcement questions remain too important to be sacrificed lightly, despite the considerable economic interests of the parties on the other side. But the world of Internet law enforcement is still taking shape. Whatever the public conclusion on encryption, the debate should not rest on any assumptions about what that shape will be. --

1 0

New signature
by Blake Wehlage 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ok you all happy now i made my signature 4 lines. After god knows how many people were bitching at me to change it. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Blake "Pokey" Wehlage Gaa- 3.69 (for ice hockey goalie) <jwilk(a)iglou.com> President of Revolution Software Quote- Does whiskey count as beer? -Homer Simpson Current Girlfriend - Lindsey Wilcox ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Re: [NOISE] I swear I am not making this up. (rec.music.white-po
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Received: from toad.com [140.174.2.1] by alcor.process.com with SMTP-OpenVMS via TCP/IP; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 23:37 -0400 Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA15816 for cypherpunks-outgoing; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 18:38:51 -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 SAA15811 for <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 18:38:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from ghio@localhost) by infinity.c2.org (8.7.4/8.6.9) id SAA18545; Fri, 7 Jun 1996 18:30:38 -0700 (PDT) Community ConneXion: Privacy & Community: <URL:http://www.c2.net> Date: Fri, 7 Jun 1996 18:30:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199606080130.SAA18545(a)infinity.c2.org> X-Plug: Community ConneXion offers privacy on the internet. http://www.c2.org/ From: ezundel(a)alpha.c2.org (E. Zundel Repost) >From: bb748(a)FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Milton Kleim) >Newsgroups: news.groups,alt.skinheads,alt.politics.nationalism.white, > alt.politics.white-power >Subject: Statement Regarding rec.music.white-power >Now that the results for our newsgroup proposal have been issued, we wish >to make a statement concerning our objectives. > >Three objectives were sought in the rec.music.white-power project: > [...] > >#3: Create a newsgroup for discussion and promotion of Aryan music. [...] You mean those wonderful ragas and songs from the Vedas, don't you? I ust *love* sitar music. Check out The Aryan Pages at http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~pateld/aryan_dir/aryan.html Peter Trei

3 2

Re: Anti-Scientologists
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

James A. Donald wrote: > > At 07:13 PM 6/9/96 +0200, Anonymous wrote: > >Truth #1: It is a religion > >Truth #2: It is no longer a cult, since the leader is dead. > > Truth number 3: It charges fifty thousand dollars or so for > secrets of "religous technology" that are available free of charge > on the internet. So? Declan wrote: > Truth #2: Cults can exist in the absence of a charismatic leader. Would you describe Christianity as a cult? If not, why not?

2 1