December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

BOM_ban
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks to DL for noting this report. 8-31-96. WaPo: "New Airport Bomb Plan Considered. Computer Profiles, High-Tech Detectors Central to System" A presidential commission on aviation security is considering a bomb detection plan that would require U.S. airlines to scrutinize all passengers at U.S. airports using massive computer files to identify potential terrorists or other suspicious individuals. The plan would require creation of a computer profiling system that would examine passengers' bill-paying records, flying habits and much other data to determine which checked baggage should undergo examination by sophisticated explosives detection equipment. Numerous legal issues still need to be resolved, including thorny civil liberties questions such as whether the airlines would be given access to information from government computer systems like those containing criminal records. Would the airlines store information on individuals? Would they go out and seek information from credit bureaus and other private sources? ----- http://jya.com/bomban.txt (10 kb) via anonymizer BOM_ban

1 0

"Security risks" vs. "credit risks"
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The news that airports/airlines (more on this difference in a bit) may be establishing a data base of security risks sounds Big Brotherish. But, how is it so much different from credit risks and credit reporting data bases? If, for example, private airlines (and the U.S. has only private airlines, not any "public" or "national" airline) wish to check the data bases on their customers, is this not quite similar to checking credit risks and ratings before lending money? There is great danger, to be sure, especially if one's writings and public utterances become entries into a "threat data base." But I see nothing unsurprising in, say, American Airlines expressing more interest in Jim Bell or Tim May, both of whom have written publically about terrorism and "soft targets," and both of whom have written about how to make pipe bombs, than in Marianne Smith, retired school teacher from Peoria. And there is even more danger--even unconstitutionality--in *government involvement* in such data bases. It's unclear from what I've seen if this data base is to be run like the private credit ratings agencies or if it is to have inputs from the FBI, NSA, Interpol, SDECE, etc. Remember, private airlines are just that: private. Surely we do not support laws which limit a private airline from using data it has acquired to decide whom to pay closer attention to. This is the essence of what knowledge is. (So long as none of this is mandatory. If Tim's Pretty Good Airline wishes to not bother screening customers, this should not be illegal. Nor, to my mind, should TPGA be exposed to negligence lawsuits, so long as his policies are clearly spelled out.) I find the notion that one's speeches and Usenet utterances could "harm one's security rating" a distasteful idea, but so long as such security ratings are handled by private players, and used by private players, I see no illegality. (Of course, the major credit reporting agencies--TRW Credit, Equifax, and TransUnion--already collude with the government. They collude to falsify credit ratings, to create identies and histories that never existed when they say they did, and to provide government with data bases for various purposes. Obviously a "TRW Security" function would be at least as corrupt, maybe more so.) --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I 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."

4 3

No Subject
by patrickbc＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am planning to make a list of hacker's of america and would appreciate it for your help. please send me your handle e-mail address city, state (optional) your mailing address and url whether or not you would like to recieve hackers list type of hacking you do Thank You for your cooperation

4 3

"Douglas R. Floyd" <dfloyd@io.com>: Re: File System Encryption
by patrickbc＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--------- Begin forwarded message ---------- From: "Douglas R. Floyd" <dfloyd(a)io.com> To: drifter(a)c2.net (Drifter) Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Re: File System Encryption Date: Tue, 27 Aug 1996 09:01:03 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <199608271401.JAA04116(a)xanadu.io.com> > > I'm aware of the three main disk encryption programs SFS, SECDRV, and > SECDEV, but I need to find a solution that works with Windows 95 32bit > or Windows NT 4.0. > > I'm currently using SFS 1.17 and Secure Drive under Win-95, but am > unable to continue to work in dos compatability mode due to severe > performance hits. I am open to commercial products that have passed > peer review, but know of none. > > If anyone could suggest a solution (outside of switching OS's), I > would be *most* gratefull. > > Please respond to the list, as I am a subscriber under another > account. If you have another 386 or 486 lying around, you could install Linux and Ian's encrypted loopback code on a remote box, then NFS or Samba the filesystem over. For protection, you could modify the vlock command to lock the console (and not unlock it), and disable inetd. Then, unless someone has the permissions to access the files through the network, the files are inaccessable ;-). > > The Drifter > --------- End forwarded message ---------- You could find some programers on the net and make a new one that is windows 95 compatible.

1 0

re:hackerlist
by patrickbc＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am planning to make a list of hackers and would appreciatte it if you would e-mail me with the following information. handle e-mail city,state url whether or not you would like to recieve the list when finished thanks for your help P. Cummings Patrickbc(a)juno.com

3 2

Re: DON'T Nuke Singapore Back into the Stone Age
by stewarts＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:35 AM 8/31/96 -0700, tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) wrote: >The point is to make clear to them that the Usenet and similar Web sites >are global in nature, not subject to censorship without a very high local >cost. If discussions of Lee Kwan Yew's dynasty are considered illegal, then >Singaporans will have to choose not to carry the various newsgroups into >which *I* post such messages! [.....] >To be blunt, if Singapore wants to stop me from discussing the dictator Yew >and his feeble son, they can't. Except by pulling the plugs on forums in >which my posts are carried. Or they'll have to implement per-article filtering, whether done by bots (easy to evade) or by humans (normally much harder.) It's easy to have bots get rid of all postings/email/web mentioning Tim May or Klaus von Future Prime, though tougher to do so if you start posting anti-government-slander from your various Tentacles. And they don't have to use humans to filter the whole web - have bots identify any material containing the words "Singapore" or "Yew" and forward it to the humans, though that makes web proxies a bit slow :-) Reuters reports: R>Contents deemed objectionable include those ``which tend to R>bring the government into hatred or contempt, or which excite R>disaffection against the government,'' an SBA statement said Disaffection? Everybody loves Lee Kwan Yew (or else) - he's like a Big Brother to us! # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # <A HREF="http://idiom.com/~wcs"> Reassign Authority!

1 0

Got to be kidding right?
by pomp pood thai 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:54 PM 8/31/96 EDT, patrick b cummings wrote: >I am planning to make a list of hacker's of america and would appreciate >it for your help. please send me your > handle > e-mail address > city, state > (optional) your mailing address > and url > whether or not you would like to recieve hackers list > type of hacking you do >Thank You for your cooperation $ $ See ya soon... $$ $$ $$ $$ | $ $$$oo oo$$ X $ X^^'$$$$$$^^'$ | X | $ $$$ $ XXX^^^$$^^^$$$ X X X ``$$$'' XX^^^'$$'^^^$$ X%X%X $$$$o XXo o$$ o X $$$$$$ $$$ $$$ oOo o$$$$^ `$$$$$$ $$oo$$ o$$$$$$$'^$$^ $$$$$$$ $$$$ $$$$$$$^ X $$$$$$ $$ $$$$$ ^ X $$$$$$oo$$$$ X $$$$$$$$$$^ X o$$$$$$$$$$^ X o$$$$$$$$$^^ X ^$$$$$$$^ X $$$$$$o | ``$$$4$$ ``$$$ $ Tormentia

2 1

Mail OnNet
by Joel McNamara 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In my never-ending search for the perfect PGP e-mail client, I just stumbled on to a beta of a product put out by FTP Software called Mail OnNet. Unlike the Pronto Secure and Pegasus, this client actually has PGP code (licensed from PGP Inc.) built directly in. No shelling out to DOS! Very nice interface and almost complete idiot-proof encrypting/decrypting/signing. Extremely powerful rules based processing too. Check out: http://www.ftp.com/mkt_info/onnet32/try.htm IMHO, this is getting very close to transparent secure e-mail for the masses. Joel Two notes. (1) It only runs under Win95 and NT. (2) It's ITAR restricted.

2 1

wardialer
by patrickbc＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does any body know where I can get a half decent war dialer.

2 1

Re: BoS: Re: your mail
by drose＠AZStarNet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jan Koum wrote: > Well, I think we all seen and heard what type of people use >phrases like: "Thank You for your cooperation". Yowsuh! We sho' nuffs be all done seen 'em. Stanford, hmm?

1 0