December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Again, disappointed in Gingrich
by camcc＠abraxis.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:17 PM 8/1/96 EDT, you wrote: : Again, I'm disappointed in Gingrich. This amplifies the earlier :comments. : -Allen I have never been disappointed in Gingrich; he has always been what he seems--just another politician, albeit a front for the "religious" right. Why expect anything different? Alec (from Ga.)

1 0

Re: Tolerance
by camcc＠abraxis.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:46 PM 8/1/96 -0800, you wrote: :Just a comment to all of the 'true libertarians' out there, especially :the "defend to the death" types: How many of you defended Mr. :Sternlight's recent membership? : Beautiful. Alec

1 0

The Halifax Explosion
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:11 AM 8/5/96 EDT, Paul J. Bell wrote: >"picric acid is indeed more powerful than TNT. it was the primary explosive >used in WW-I. it was also the primary cargo on a ship, i think it was the >"Montblac", that exploded in Halifax harbor and nearly wiped-out the city. this >was in the 1917 - 1919 timeframe. > > -paul > The Mont Blanc carried quite a lot of fun stuff. "Stored in the holds, or simply stacked on deck, were 35 tons of benzol, 300 rounds of ammunition, 10 tons of gun cotton, 2,300 tons of picric acid (used in explosives), and 400,000 pounds of TNT." Thursday December 6, 1917. The greatest conventional explosion produced by mankind. See: http://ttg.sba.dal.ca/nstour/halifax/explode.htm Governments shouldn't be trusted with high explosives. They can't be counted upon to handle them properly. >From 1889-1989 the governments of the world murdered 160 million people. >From 1889-1989 the private individuals of the world murdered fewer than 20 million people. See Death by Government by R. J. Rummel http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=1560001453/1372-7724803-532789 DCF

1 0

Re: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:11 AM 8/5/96 EDT, Paul J. Bell wrote: >"picric acid is indeed more powerful than TNT. it was the primary explosive >used in WW-I. it was also the primary cargo on a ship, i think it was the >"Montblac", that exploded in Halifax harbor and nearly wiped-out the city. this >was in the 1917 - 1919 timeframe. > > -paul The molecular difference between TNT and picric acid is a methyl group, weight 15 (on TNT) substituted for a hydroxyl, weight 17 (on picric acid.) If there is a difference, it is a very small one. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Email Confidentiality and Malpractice?
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text X-Sender: oldbear(a)pop.tiac.net Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Mon, 05 Aug 1996 12:48:12 -0300 To: Bob Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> From: The Old Bear <oldbear(a)arctos.com> Subject: Email Confidentiality and Malpractice? Bob: I always feel funny passing along items like this from usenet. This was posted to nine of the alt.business newsgroups dealing with law and insurance investigation. It seemed reasonably interesting, contains some useful information, and is not overly offensive for a self-promotional spam. (And, at least it was posted in appropriate places.) If you see any merit in all or part of this being reposted to dcsb or elsewhere, feel free to do so. Cheers, Will --- Forwarded message follows --- Newsgroups:alt.business.insurance From: syr(a)netroplis.net (Bill Fason) Subject: Email and confidentiality: Are you committing malpractice? Organization: Serves You Right Civil Process & Investigations Date: Sat, 03 Aug 96 17:57:54 GMT Lines: 74 If you're discussing cases through email and you're not encrypting your correspondence, then you could be committing malpractice. See: http://www.gsu.edu/%7Elawppw/lawand.papers/bjones.html Client Confidentiality: A Lawyer's Duties with Regard to Internet E-Mail by Robert L. Jones August 16, 1995 Contents: 1. E-Mail v. Snail Mail 2. Hacker, Cracker, Phracker - Sniffer, Spoofer, Spy 3. Encryption to the Rescue? 4. Bad Things That Happen to Good Lawyers 5. Ethical Considerations 6. The Attorney-Client Privilege 7. Negligence Anyone? 8. Conclusion 9. Endnotes Bob's homepage is http://www.mindspring.com/~bobjones/my1sthom.html And here is the website for Georgia State Univ. Law School. It has one of the best collections of cyberlaw resources I've seen. GSULaw is at the cutting edge of the field. http://www.gsu.edu/~lawadmn/gsulaw.html While Bob's brilliant article specifically addresses attorney-client confidentiality, his insights apply to any professional using email. In fact, anyone who uses email for internet or intranet communications faces the same fact of life: unencrypted email carries no expectation of privacy. It's like dropping a postcard through the mail. In fact, it's even worse. Important discussions of cases, clients, patients, bids, negotiations, strategies or anything requiring confidentiality needs to be securely encrypted. Sending unencrypted sensitive email invites nightmare scenarios. Viacrypt is the answer. It combines the essentially unbreakable strength of Phil Zimmerman's PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) with the user-friendly interface of Windows. Easy to install and use, Viacrypt allows the user to quickly encrypt and decrypt email. It also allows the user to sign messages, and to check the signature of other electronic messages. Viacrypt also allows the user to encrypt files on one's own hard drive. A user of PGP can leave the office knowing that sensitive files will remain confidential regardless of who is on the evening cleanup crew. Regular PGP for DOS is free. If you want to find out more about where and how to get your free copy, then visit the Encryption Policy Resource Page: http://www.crypto.com/ And if you need help getting it up and running, feel free to contact me. Viacrypt, on the other hand, costs money. I offer it for $125 plus shipping. I suggest that you get your copy fast while it is still legally available. Both FBI Director Louis Freeh and Vice President Al Gore have both spoken out against allowing US citizens to use encryption this strong. They want everyone to register their private encryption software keys with the federal government, thus allowing the feds to read anyone's email. It is reminiscent of the old communist governments' laws requiring citizens to register their typewriters with the police. Widespread use of PGP will hamper government efforts to ban it. PGP is so strong that the federal government has declared it a weapon and banned its export. Bill Fason Serves You Right Civil Process & Investigations * Skiptraces 1436 W. Gray #272 * Background Checks Houston TX 77019 * Asset Searches 713/524-4767 * PGP Encryption Consulting 713/942-8165 fax * Financial Fraud Detection SLN A-8111 --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "'Bart Bucks' are not legal tender." -- Punishment, 100 times on a chalkboard, for Bart Simpson The e$ Home Page: http://www.vmeng.com/rah/

1 0

The Myth of Flat Rates and Infinite Bandwidth
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 4:40 PM 8/5/96, Martin Minow wrote: >Arun Mehta <amehta(a)giasdl01.vsnl.net.in> writes: > >> >>True, though even better would be simply to charge you a flat >>rate. If billing is that expensive, why bother? >> > >Tragedy of the Commons. > >Flat rate works only if no single user can use more than >a tiny fraction of the total bandwidth. > This was also the fallacy of the "dark fiber" vision of George Gilder, who, as an economist of sorts, should've known better. --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: Corporate e-mail policy
by James C. Sewell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:22 PM 8/3/96 -0400, Rabid Wombat wrote: > What you >publish as a use policy, and what you actively enforce do not have to be >the same. > Unfortunately this is a problem in many companies. There are policies which are enforced to the letter, guidelines which are just suggestions, and fake-rules which are not even attempted to be enforced. The problem comes when the employee and employer can't distinguish them from each other. Personally I think I would approach it as the privacy we have with the eontents of our car's trunk. If an officer has probable cause to search the trunk then he can, otherwise he can't. It's not a perfect system but it does work better than other alternatives I can think of. Write into your policy: "Electronic mail may be monitored if there is sufficient reason to believe that it is being improperly used which includes, but is not limited to: mail to competitors, more than 20 recipients (spam), and incoming mail from questionable sources. If such monitored mail is encrypted the employee must provide a clear text version of the mail which is to be unencrypted under supervision to avoid substitutions. Any employee refusing to make available such mail will be ...." Just remember, as was said, once you make a policy it becomes precedence and will stick with you forever... longer if it's a bad one. Best Wishes Jim Jim Sewell - jims(a)tansoft.com Tantalus Incorporated - Key West, FL

2 1

Confirmation Needed: American(s) hack into Euro systems ...
by Ernest Hua 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anyone knows the details behind this? Ern ------- Forwarded Message CDA96-L Digest 48 Topics covered in this issue include: 1) Who's infringing whose privacy? by MichaelP <papadop(a)peak.org> - ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Topic No. 1 Date: Sun, 4 Aug 1996 01:31:45 -0700 (PDT) From: MichaelP <papadop(a)peak.org> Subject: Who's infringing whose privacy? Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960804010241.24125B-100000@kira> London Sunday Times August 4 1996 American spies hack into Euro computers to steal trade secrets AMERICAN intelligence agents have hacked into the computers of the European parliament and European commission as part of an international espionage campaign aimed at stealing economic and political secrets, according to investigators. The European parliament has called in British communications experts to improve its security and to block further attempts by American govern ment agents to spy on its workings. Security officials at the parliament's Luxembourg offices say they have discovered several recent instances in which its communications system was compromised by American hacking. They have also found evidence that the Americans used information obtained from hacking to help them in negotiations last year on the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). Lord Plumb, leader of the British Tory MEPs in the European parliament, said he was shocked by the disclosure. "I will be taking this up directly with the American ambassador [to the European Union]," he said. The CIA has already been accused by the Japanese and French governments of hacking into their communications networks in an attempt to obtain confidential trade secrets. The European parliament's computer network links more than 5,000 MEPs, officials, researchers and other staff to each other, and to the European commission headquarters in Brussels and the council of ministers. Traffic across the network by telephone and computers includes details of the private medical and financial records of many MEPs and officials, and discussion documents on confidential issues, including trade, tariff and quota agreements. The records of closed committees of inquiry into BSE and fraud are also stored on the system. European parliament sources say the Americans accessed the network by compromising the information exchanges that link the parliament's internal networks with the Internet and external users. The devices, called "routers", filter entry to the European parliament's network. It is understood the Americans were able to obtain access to what is called the simple network management protocol (SNMP), the language that enables the networks to talk to each other. They were able to exploit the fact that parts of the system were manufactured by two American firms. The breach came to light when officials believed that American negotiators had been given advance warning of confidential European Union positions in last year's trade negotiations. "It was established that the system had been penetrated just days before the talks," an EU source said. "Our principal concern is not to establish what has already been copied but to ensure that it does not happen again. This is an on-going problem." A spokeswoman for Antonio Cavaco, director of data processing at the commission, confirmed that allegations of hacking had been investigated. However, she said she was unable to provide any details. - ------------------------------ End of CDA96-L Digest 48 ************************

1 0

Integrating PGP 3.0 Library with INN
by ichudov＠galaxy.galstar.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Has anyone thought of integrating PGP 3.0 library with INN? I was thinking along the lines of having PGPMoose support built right into INN: if an arriving article is posted to a moderated newsgroup for which a PGP key is available in the INN's keyring, INN verifies existence and correctness of a PGP signature. An article that fails this verification will be dropped. Same thing can be used for authenticating newgroup and rmgroup messages, in the spirit of true freedom on usenet -- anyone would be sent _their own_ newgroups and rmgroups but no one will be impersonated. For those not familar with PGP Moose, it is a program that was written by Greg Rose. It is used for signing approvals on usenet articles. It takes message body, several important header fields, signs them with PGP and places the signatures in the headers, in order not to clobber the text. If moderators choose short enough keys (512 bits for example), this verification will not take any significant amount of CPU time. igor

4 3

viruss'
by Zero Cool 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anyone know where thre is good virus page???? I know that there is one out there, but dont have the add. Zero Cool

2 1