December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Bombs & bomb threats in LA
by pjb＠ny.ubs.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"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 > From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Fri Aug 2 19:04:53 1996 > Date: Fri, 2 Aug 1996 13:12:30 -0500 (CDT) > From: Sean Walberg <umwalber(a)cc.UManitoba.CA> > To: Conrad Walton <conrad(a)walton.com> > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Subject: Re: Bombs & bomb threats in LA > Mime-Version: 1.0 > Content-Type> : > TEXT/PLAIN> ; > charset=US-ASCII> > Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Content-Length: 1357 > > I remember seeing an item on TV that had mentioned an acid bomb (it was a > news report about a public access TV show that was showing people how to > make bombs). In this example, some common chemicals were mixed together, > tightly closed, and moments later an explosion occured. They never said > the chemicals, for all I know it could have been lemon juice and baking > soda in a sealed container, a la Dry Ice bomb... It didn't look like a > bomb of mass destruction, more of a loud bang and a smallish explosion... > > Sean > > > On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Conrad Walton wrote: > > > >and everyplace else all the news.answers FAQs are stored. What, precisely, is > > >an acid bomb? Also note the standard blame-the-Internet (not, say, increased > > >irritation with government after the Republicans failed to reduce it) > > >rhetoric. > > > > i'm not exactly sure what an acid bomb is, but according to my book, The > > Anarchist Cookbook, that I bought in 1972 (was the internet around back > > then?), there is a compound called "picric acid" that is "more powerful > > than TNT, but has some disadvantages". > > ------------------------------------------------------------------ > Sean Walberg umwalber(a)cc.umanitoba.ca > The Web Guy http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~umwalber > UNIX Group, U. of Manitoba PGP Key Available from Servers > >

1 0

The Dining Cryptographers in the Disco
by Laszlo Vecsey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There is a protocol for anonymous message broadcast which supposedly detects disruption, can someone tell me how it works? Applied Cryptography lists a reference to "Advances in Cryptology, Crypto '89 Preceedings" (page 690) but I dont have a copy of it, I'd appreciate it if someone could fill me in on what it says. Thanks! - Lester

2 1

Re: Freeh slimes again: Digital Telephony costs $2 billion now ...
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:52 AM 8/2/96 -0700, Brock N. Meeks wrote: > >On Thu, 1 Aug 1996, Ernest Hua wrote: > >> Louis Freeh is now asking the Congress for $2 billion to fund >> Digital Telephony. Yes, that is FOUR TIMES what he said it >> would cost the taxpayers to give up their own privacy. Score >> one for the cynics who said $500 million was not enough. > >I broke the story about how much Digital Telephony would *really* cost in >CyberWire Dispatch more than two years ago. The price tag in my piece: >"... at least $2 billion..." In that Dispatch I wrote that the Clinton >White House had made the decision to support the bill based on a flawed >cost/benefit analysis study the FBI had done. Which should remind us... While the costs are going up, so far undetermined is the "benefits" that are supposed to accrue from this bugging ability. How many crimes, approximately, are going to be solved or prevented by the expenditure of this $2 billion dollars? One hundred? A thousand? Even if it were 10,000, that would still be $200,000 per crime. Is there no cheaper way to prevent those crimes? And, moreover, do we REALLY want to prevent those "crimes"? If they are attacks on an illegitimate government that is violating our rights, as far as I can see we want to see those "crimes" succeed, not fail. Let's put their feet to the fire: They should be required to show a reasonable estimate of the benefits as well as an apparently phony initial estimate of the costs. If they respond that they can't estimate the benefits, then why do they want us to incur the costs. However, the real answer is even simpler. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

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

Re: fbi, crypto, and defcon
by Arun Mehta 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:10 04/08/96 -0400, Robert Hettinga wrote: >At 2:06 AM -0400 8/4/96, anonymous-remailer(a)shell.portal.com wrote: >> As long as they are doing any kind of usage-based >> charging, that actual act of charging will continue to cost >> considerably more than the data transmission. > >Ah. So, why settle the transactions for digital cash and skip all that >overhead? Yet another application for micromoney. True, though even better would be simply to charge you a flat rate. If billing is that expensive, why bother? What happened to the proposals asking for flat-rate pricing before the FCC? Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta(a)cpsr.org http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/ finger amehta(a)cerfnet.com for public key

2 1

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: Internal Passports
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 15:48 8/4/96, Bill Stewart wrote: >I wonder if they'll still accept an American passport; the country >has obviously been taken over by Pod People while we weren't looking.... A US passport is not considered valid ID by the State of Oregon. If somebody here doesn't belive this, send someone who looks like he might be under 21 into any liquor store in Oregon with just an US passport. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November. Vote Harry Browne for President.

7 7

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

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