December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Hacker list information
by agt387465＠blackhel.fbi.gov 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Patrick: I am interested in a copy of your mailing list. Thank you. David Pfeiffer

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: WARNING vIRuS!
by attila 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

kickboxer is full of shit --or trolling. since when can a jpeg or gif file viewer execute anything --nothing starts automatically, in any operating system. that is expecting a jump call of some sort. we haven't yet fallen into the impending insecure abyss of MS objects. to have a piece of code embedded execute, a "start-up" program would need to be previously passed to the target machine which literally scanned all memory for the startup sequence in the foreign material --and translate it. on unix, the code would need to be sophisticated enough to remove itself from the process table --even in sleep modes. and, in any system, the startup sequence must be readable, and therefore traceable by anti-virus routines. now that kickboxed has baited the hook for trolling, what new wet dream will we have for rebuttals?!? On Sat, 31 Aug 1996, kickboxer wrote: > There is a new and VERY dangerous virus called the HAZ-MAT virus! > it fucks up the sectors on your hd, and really messes up the partition > tables. It does this once a week, picking a random time to do it. 99.9% of > virus scanners and other antivirus programs will not recognize it, for it is > a totally new strain, using a never before seen code.... Be warned! The > HAZ-MAT virus usually resides in JPG, and GIF files... once the files are > viewed, the virus takes effect. > scan all images upon download! > > > -- you can fool all of the people some of the time, you can fool some of the people all the time, but you can not fool all the people all the time. --Lincoln? cc: Paul Penrod <ppenrod(a)earthlink.net>

1 0

Re: hackers texts
by crichardson＠earthlink.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I working on a WWW page for people who want to recieve text articles on hacking/phreaking/etc. It's not very extensive now, but were working on it. Point your browswer to: http://home.earthlink.net/~crichardson/omega.html Also on this page are some files, as well as some other misc indexes. All feedback is apprechiated. -flux

1 0

Re: Esther Dyson on Remailers
by Dave Farber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just for record, Esther's position is NOT necessarily EFFs. At 01:39 PM 9/1/96 -0400, Duncan Frissell wrote: >At 06:52 AM 9/1/96 -0400, Dave Farber wrote: >>EFF does not, to my knowledge, (and I am a Board Member) have an >>organizational view on this issue. There are a lot of different views and >>each member of EFF has their own view that they can and will state as >>private people. The tendency of the Press to label people with organizations >>affiliation ship gives the impression of organizational views. For example I >>certainly don't speak for the University of Pennsylvania when I say thing to >>the newspapers. >> >>Dave >> > > >At CFP in '95 in SF, Esther expressed the view that there was a place on the >Net for an anonymous ghetto (my words not hers) where people could be >anonymous but that most of the net would involve traceability of >transactions so that people could be held accountable and that businesses >and individuals would want to know who they were dealing with for payment >and accountability reasons. > >I am not stating her position well I'm sure but it was clear that she >thought that non-anonymity would be the rule not because it was mandated but >just because Net actors would want it that way. A short quote would not >allow anyone to understand her full position. > >If she believes that anonymity would be rejected voluntarily for practical >reasons then that is just a prediction of a market not a conclusion. Most >on this list would have no objection to making a prediction though we might >disagree with it. > >Just as Esther predicted that the net would end copyright, we might predict >that the net combined with immediate settlement payment systems might reduce >if not eliminate the need for "positive ID." > >DCF > > >

1 0

DON'T Nuke Singapore Back into the Stone Age
by Arun Mehta 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 17:55 29/08/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: >Personally, if this crackdown in Singapore happens, I intend to post >various anti-Singapore and anti-Lee Kwan Yew & Sons screeds to various >newsgroups that Singaporans might like to read. Then, if the Yew Dynasty >decides to pull the plug, it'll be to more and more groups. There are two sides to this: after all, it is the Singaporeans who finally have to sort out this problem with their government, and denying them the Usenet platform for discussion would only hinder that process. Then again, inappropriate postings are the bane of the Internet: the consensus on which the Net functions relies heavily on people not posting inappropriately. Of course, posting anti LKY stuff on a Singapore newsgroup might be perfectly appropriate -- it is the "more and more groups" part I am worried about. I quite frankly disapprove of the mail-bomb suggestions made on the list. Accessing the Internet is hard enough without these additional roadblocks. Mail-bombing one person on a server punishes everybody else on that server too. We need to work with the people in Singapore on this, not make enemies of them. I'm glad that the situation in Singapore is attracting much attention on this list, and that people want to do something about it. China is seriously interested in the experiment, and India will be too: the law here holds the ISPs responsible for ensuring that nothing objectionable and obscene is carried by them, and what simpler way to comply than to simply use the Singapore proxy. Right now, the law isn't being enforced, but soon some headline-seeking politician will point out this out, and the problem will be with us. So, it is important to nip the Singapore experiment in the bud. However, I think that the constructive approach, one which furthers the Net, "routes around", would work better. For instance, I'd love to see some smart venture capitalist fund a project that makes use of surplus, off-peak bandwidth on a transponder on any of the myriad satellites floating over Asia to download Web pages on request. Ideally, I should be able to send via pgp and anonymous remailer a request for a page, which would soon come beamed down unencrypted via satellite. No more waiting hours for the latest version of Netscape to download, and then restarting from scratch every time the line drops. Also, goodbye censorship. Even if the government decided to cut off Internet access completely, I'd still be able to receive what others such as Tim think might be of interest to me. How would this generate revenue? Well, there could be advertising appended to select pages, for instance. In any case, with so much uncertainity about how commerce on the net will work, and in good Internet tradition a la Netscape, it would probably be smarter to start with a free service, and figure out later how to make money from it, once it becomes popular. In a few years, satellite-based Internet access will become widespread and affordable. However, the next few years are really crucial. Governments are still trying to figure out how to deal with the Net, frame legislation, etc. This would be a good time to present them with a fait accompli. Hong Kong will revert to China next year. What better gift to the nervous freedom fighters there, than to help them with their Internet access? Maybe Hong Kong will take over China, instead of the other way around... I remember in Sculley's book "Odyssey: from Pepsi to Apple" he mentions how Steve Jobs finally convinced him to join Apple by asking if he wanted to sell sugared water for the rest of his life, or would he rather change the world. The Internet presents opportunities like that to far more people, and this, IMHO, is one of them: any would-be Sculleys out there? 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

FW: get me off of this list!!!!!
by Herbert Feran 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- On Sun, 1 Sep 96 12:41:21 PDT Herbert Feran <porsche(a)themall.net> wrote: I need to be taken off of this list but I can't remeber the code to desubscribe. Can anyone tell me what the code is? ------------------------------------- Name: Herbert Feran E-mail: Herbert Feran <h7869755(a)themall.net> Date: 9/1/96 Time: 12:41:21 PM This message was sent by Chameleon ------------------------------------- -----------------End of Original Message----------------- ------------------------------------- Name: Herbert Feran E-mail: Herbert Feran <h7869755(a)themall.net> Date: 9/1/96 Time: 12:48:19 PM This message was sent by Chameleon -------------------------------------

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

need more hackers for the list please send following info to me handle e-mail address P.O. Box url type of hacking you do

1 0

Re: FW: get me off of this list!!!!!
by drose＠AZStarNet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>--- On Sun, 1 Sep 96 12:41:21 PDT Herbert Feran ><porsche(a)themall.net> wrote: >I need to be taken off of this list but I can't remeber the code > >to desubscribe. Can anyone tell me what the code is? >------------------------------------- What's the frequency Herbert? Help, I've fallen and I can't remeber the code. Hint: Try consulting "The Codebreakers."

1 0

Re: Los Angeles Times article on Helsingius and anon.penet.fi
by edyson＠edventure.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Before going into the merits of this, let me make two points: One I specifically asked the reporter (Amy Harmon) to quote me as an individual, not as a spokesperson for the EFF. (It was Amy Harmon, and the only address I have for her bounces, but as you can imagine I would like to get in touch with her! Anyone know it?) These are my personal views; EFF has no formal policy on this yet -- precisely because it's a complex issue. Now, speaking personally: I believe there are trade-offs -- which is what I told the LA Times. I assume I was quoted accurately (although the word "enforce" is awkward), but out of context. Anonymity can be dangerous -- as can traceability, especially in/by repressive regimes. Therefore I would favor allowing anonymity -- with some form of traceability only under terms considerably stronger than what are generally required for a wiretap. Anyone who seriously needs anonymity because of a repressive government is likely to use a foreign (outside whatever jurisdiction he fears) server, so that this is not a matter of "local" laws. The tracer would have to pass through what I hope would be tighter hoops than we have now. Please note that this is not the same as the right to *private* conversations and the use of encryption; this is the issue of being accountable for what you publish in public. My assumption is that there will be a wide variety of Net communities with different rules/regulations/attitudes towards anonymity that would apply ex some kind of international sanctions; I think that's appropriate. Yes, I'm aware of the complexities, and of the possibilities for miscarriages of justice. The world isn't yet the way I want it to be. But I wanted to respond reasonably promptly. BTW, I would welcome a chance to read the whole article (or at least a *little* more of the context, under fair use). Speaking for myself, only (and publicly), Esther Dyson At 06:40 AM 9/1/96 -0400, Dave Farber wrote: >>Posted-Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 14:59:53 +1000 (EST) >>Date: Sun, 1 Sep 1996 14:59:53 +1000 (EST) >>From: Charles Senescall <apache(a)quux.apana.org.au> >>To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com >>Cc: declan(a)well.com >>Subject: Re: Los Angeles Times article on Helsingius and anon.penet.fi >>Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com >> >>On Sat, 31 Aug 1996, Declan McCullagh wrote: >> >>> The attached article was reposted to fight-censorship with the permission >>> of the Los Angeles Times, which ran it on the front page today. >>[snip] >>> Note Esther Dyson's comments: >>> >>> "The damage that can be done by anonymity is far bigger" than in >>> any other medium, said Esther Dyson, chairwoman of the Electronic >>> Frontier Foundation. "In the end, you need to be able to get at >>> somebody's identity to enforce accountability, and the question is how >>> do you also enforce freedom of speech and freedom from prosecution for >>> unpopular opinions." >> >>Is this _really_ the EFF policy on anonymopus remailers?? >> >>I will check with our local version of the EFF and see what they have to say. >> >>If the EFF is not for anonymity it needs to be publicised. Perhaps the >>EFF has been in bed with the political pigs too long. *OINK* >> >>-- >> .////. .// Charles Senescall apache(a)quux.apana.org.au >> o:::::::::/// Fuck TEL$TRA >>>::::::::::\\\ Finger me for PGP PUBKEY Brisbane AUSTRALIA >> '\\\\\' \\ <A HREF="http://quux.apana.org.au/~apache/"> >> >> >> >> > > Esther Dyson Always make new mistakes! EDventure Holdings <edyson(a)edventure.com> 1 (212) 924-8800 1 (212) 924-0240 fax 104 Fifth Avenue New York, NY 10011 USA www.edventure.com High-Tech Forum in Lisbon, October 27-29, 1996 PC Forum in Tucson, Arizona, March 23-26, 1997

7 6