December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Privacy Issues
by Lurker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am writing a paper for a computer ethics class about privacy and technology. I was wondering if anyone could suggest some good books, periodicals, or (of course) reliable web sources. Thanks...

1 0

Re: silly putty
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Would anyone be interested in 50 pounds of silly putty? A >friend of mine would be grateful if I could help him get rid of 50 >pounds of silly putty. It would be $500. Dear Mr. Parekh: I represent the Comic Publishers Association, a trade group formed to combat the illict theft of our members' intellectual property. Your message has come to the attention of our "flexible media" section, which licenses the duplication of our members' creative efforts in flexible media, such as Silly Putty (tm). Many people do not realize (or, more likely, merely pretend not to realize) that the duplication, even in mirror image, of portions of protected comic strips in flexible media infringes upon our members' exclusive rights as granted by the Copyright Acts of 1909 and 1976, 17 USC 101 et seq. Further, the irresponsible distribution of this flexible media by fly-by-night retailers and distributors compounds this problem. Many of the wrongdoers who violate our members' rights do so as part of an informal social framework, utilizing aliases like "Junior", or common first names such as "Billy" or "Tommy". You can imagine our members' frustration when we must enforce our rights against six and seven year old defendants known merely as "Jimmy" or "that big kid from soccer practice". The fact that flexible media can be used to make illicit copies of visual art is well known; in fact, it is one of the selling points used when flexible media is sold at the retail level. It is our position that distributors and retailers selling flexible media do so knowing full well that their juvenile purchasers intend to irresponsibly flout the Copyright Act; and that such sales constitute contributory infringement. Sellers of flexible media are the linchpins in the deadly chain of comic book copyright infringement via "Silly Putty (tm)". We realize that some retailers do not wish to be complicit in this serious injustice. Therefore, we have drafted the "flexible media code of conduct", which we are asking sellers of flexible media to sign. We are asking you to sign this code of conduct as a demonstration of your good will and responsibility towards copyright owners worldwide. If you do not sign our code of conduct we'll make some stuff up and then sue you and send out lots of press releases. --- FLEXIBLE MEDIA SELLER'S CODE OF CONDUCT As a seller of "Silly Putty (tm)" flexible media, I agree to: 1. Maintain records of the first name, last name, parent(s)' names, school's name, teacher's name, and grade level of every purchaser of flexible media. 2. Present an educational program which will sensitize my customers to the grave responsibilities that the Copyright Act imposes upon each of us. 3. Police my customers' use of flexible media, including but not limited to in-store use of flexible media, simultaneous purchases of flexible media and comic books such that illegitimate use can be inferred from the circumstances, and the structuring of transactions to obscure what would otherwise be simultaneous or contemporaneous purchases of flexible media and comic books. 4. Cooperate with the Comic Publishers Association by providing customer lists and transaction detail logs so that suspicious purchase patterns at multiple retail location may be tracked by the CPA. 5. Agree to allow the CPA to audit my records and record keeping procedures, at any time, without notice or right to refuse. --- Please print out a copy of our agreement, sign it, and mail it to me via postal mail by the close of business tomorrow. Flexible media copies are not acceptable. If you don't, we'll kick your ass. Have a nice day. /s/ L. Itta-Gator (#65535) for DEWEY, CHEATHAM, & HOWE, P.C. Counsel for Comic Publishers Association

1 0

Re: Q.E.D (fwd)
by cypher＠cyberstation.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following was sent to an individual in response to a private inquiry. I am forwarding the response since it seems to be germane to the subject at hand. Have you looked at the algorithm. A brief explanation is disclosed in the other posting being made to you. However, a much more detailed disclosure and explanation is set out at our web site: netprivacy.com The algorithm is at: netprivacy.com/algo.html If you know cryptography, you will discover that it produces quite a remarkable PRNG stream, one that when submitted to any statistical analysis, including Shannon to a degree, reveals itself to be random, though we know it is not because it was generated by the algorithm. At first blush, it may appear as some form of a linear congruential generator. However, that is a misconception as you can quickly determine. There are nonlinear congruential generators, somewhere between 49 and 79 separate ones, of a sort used in the algorithm, but they serve only as a seed, to every block of 4 or 8 characters, to the main algorithm. The nonlinear congruential generators are modulo 16384, which produces a staccato stream of the set 0,..,16383, which in the case of the disclosed algorithm are further used to make a three dimensional table lookup in the Displacement Table, the Determinate Table, and finally the Diffusion Table. The nonlinear congruential generators run at different speeds, that is in C iterations, they are used only C mod 16384 times, and since all of them are unique, out of say a message length of 20,000 characters, they will each be used at a different number of times, and with different message constituents, that is they cannot be blocked, as seeds to the table lookup procedures. The three tables are dynamic, undergoing constant modification, the Diffusion table only at the completion of an 8192 byte cycle, as the stream is generated. Furthermore, the indexes into the three lookup tables are accumulative and are being constantly switched so that they too are always dynamic. A close examination of this will reveal that the output stream is a statistical random appearing stream, as a result of the staccato nature of the seeds combined with the fact that the sum of seeds start asymptotically approaching an even distribution of the values 0,..,16383. The Displacement Table and the Diffusion Table, are both tables of the integers 0 through 4095 respectively and the Diffusion Table is a table of 16 sets of the ASCII decimal values, 0,.., 255. All three tables are scrambled using a random key generated by the user. The process of doing that is explained in the aforementioned web page: netprivacy.com/algo.html An user may also uniquely customize their own initial Displacement, Diffusion and Determinate tables, some 10^34000 possibilities. Also 200 million bytes of raw encryptor stream output are at our web site, using the same key and other parameters. Can you determine the key? The algorithm is quite simple to implement for testing purposes, and you can use the table values set out as the basis for doing your own testing. You will find that it produces an incredible random like PRNG streams, each unique, if you look at it. With kindest regards, Don Wood,

1 0

$ NEED CASH?
by lazaris 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

TAKE ONLY 2 MIN. TO READ THIS AND YOU'LL TURN $5 INTO $50,000 IN ONLY 1 MONTH!! ======================================================================== --->> NO CATCH <<------------------------------------------------------- 1) 100% legal and legitimate. 2) Nobody gets scammed. 3) Everybody wins. --->> THE SIMPLE 5 MIN. PROCESS <<-------------------------------------- 1) Write your name & address on five (5) pieces of paper. 2) Below that, write the phrase, "please add me to your mailing list". 3) Fold a $1.00 bill inside each piece of paper & mail them to the following 5 addresses: 1. David Watkins 409 N.E. 107 St. Miami Florida, USA 333161 2. David Phillips 321 Felder AV. Montgomery, AL. 36104 3. Robert Haar 1628 Hillcrest St. Mesquite, Tx. 75149 4. K. Keoki Pelfrey PO Box 384971 Waikoloa, HI. 96738-4971 5. HI-TECH 6910 W. Brown Deer Rd.Suite 251 Milwaukee, WI. 53223-2104 4)Remove top name from list & move other names up one, placing your name &address @ #5 of the list. 5)Post article on at least 200 newsgroups. (Remember there are 1000's more groups==more $$ 6)Returns should come in 7-10 days and all you have to do is keep the $ for yourself and put the persons name on a list w/ the rest of the respondies addresses (makes it legal). --->>HOW THE SYSTEM WORKS<<--------------------------------------------- $55,555.00 in one mo. 1)Your 200 newsgroups posting==average 5 responses==$5 CASH with your name @ #5 2)Each person who sent you $1.00 makes 200 More postings==avg. 50 responses= $50 CASH with your name @ #4 3)These 50 people make 200 More postings==10,000 postings with your name @ #3==avg. 500 responses==$500 CASH 4)They then make 200 More postings==100,000 postings with your name @ #2==5000 returns @ $1.00 each==$5,000 CASH 5)Finally 5,000 people make 200 postings==$50,000 CASH with your name @ #1 NOTE: All this happens with only making 200 postings each time...imagine what it's like when people do more than that, like me. --->>AFTER 1 MONTH<<---------------------------------------------------- 1)No longer on the list. 2)Take newest publication & start cycle all over again. ALL IT TAKES IS $5, 5ENVELOPS, & 5 STAMPS!!! REMEMBER HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY YOU DON'T NEED TO CHEAT THE BASIC IDEA IS TO MAKE THE $ GOD LUCK TO ALL AND PLEASE PLAY FAIR AND YOU WILL WIN.

1 0

Re: UNSUBCRIBE CRYPTO
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

paratama(a)idola.net.id wrote: > UNSUBCRIBE [CRYPTO] Well, if it were up to me, I'd "unsubcribe" you all right, but it's not. I don't think you realize who you're dealing with. I've crossed the wrong people now and then, posting messages I shouldn't have, and I've been lucky so far. If I were in your position, I'd get some advice from one of those guru-types who know their way around these places.

1 0

Why waste your money? Save big on long distance
by Brian Hale 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

Why waste your money? Save big on long distance
by Brian Hale 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1 0

2nd edition Puzzle Palace?
by William I. MacGregor 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Applied Cryptography references a 2nd edition of The Puzzle Palace by Bamford and Madsen, 1995, but I can't seem to find it in any of the bookstores in Austin. Has it been published? Thanks, - Bill ...... "Do, or do not. There is no try." - Yoda ..... William I. MacGregor Austin Product Center - Research phone (1-512) 331-3733 P.O. Box 200015 fax (1-512) 331-3760 Austin, TX 78720

3 3

Re: WWII & Japan
by Benjamin Grosman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Sir, >Japanese Ambassador Kichisaburo Nomura and Special Ambassador Saburo Kurusu >were to present Secretary of State Cordell Hull a Declaration of War at 1pm >Washington time on Dec. 7th. To achieve technical compliance with >international rules it was intended to be delivered approx. 30 minutes prior >to the actual attack. There were decoding difficulties however and it was >delivered after the attack. Neither of the Ambassadors is thought to have >had any knowledge of the actual attack and therefore did not understand the >criticality of delivery. Japan intended to go to war with the United States, >Great Britian, and Holland over their policies concerning the Japanese >presence in China and Manchuria. This is totally true, except that the American forces actually knew that an attack was coming, and the Japanese ambassadors definitely had an inkling of what was going to happen. Communicades to the Japanese ambassadors were being made sparse as the attack came, and details of actions to come were broken up into a 14 part message. On the USA side, the even knew that the attack was coming on a Sunday. They had broken the Japanese codes, and had been distributing the information from the communicades to pertinent authorities. However, a copy of a communicade was found in a rubbish bin in the hallway of a military building, and so distribution was reduced to fewer people. But nobody wanted to take any notice. This begs the question of the illegal lend-lease agreements between the Americans and the British which could have had Roosevelt impeached if the details had come to light in congress. However, as to the reason why the Japanese wanted to go to war, your explanation is a little basic. It is true that the Japanese wanted to go to war over the aforementioned countries policies concerning the Japanese invasion and occupation of Manchuria, or Manchukuo as they called it. However, this was not simply the reason. The aforementioned countries policies barred export of vital natural resources to the Japanese, who live in a naturally mineral poor country. Their original invasion was actually staged (see "The Manchukuo Incident") in the hope that they could gain more natural resources from Manchukuo. Another reason why the Japanese wanted war is a rather complicated one, and it dates back to the end of World War I. At the end of the war most countries in a position to have colonies in the pacific/orient area were under severe financial stress. The French had borrowed so much money from the USA that they had doubts of ever being able to count so high, and Clemenceau, the "French Tiger", was determined to extract as much reparations under the War Guilt Clause of the Versailles Treaty as possible. The British had also borrowed phenomenal amounts of money. However, these two, after taking all territorial possessions of the ex-German Empire, and the ex-Austrian Empire, had in fact huge amounts of possessions. The British Empire spanned roughly a third of the world in both population and size, and the French were roughly two thirds as big as the British. But how to pay for this massive Empire? Maintance of ships, particularly the newer Dreadnought class Battleships, was incredibly expensive, and enough were not in possession at the end of the war to defend pre-war borders, let alone the newly expanded ones. Thus the British Empire, and the USA decided that it was best to maintain the status quo. They had "run the race" and won. They had their colonies (the USA had the Phillipines, and a few other pacific islands, although the USA has always had a policy against Colonialism), and they decided to end the possibility of another arms race via an agreement. Thus it was that the Washington Naval Conference was formed. This conference limited certain countries to certain ratio's of certain classes of ships, to help maintain the status quo, and all measurements were done against the British Navy. It was this conference and the forged agreement that came out of it that greatly crippled Japan, in desperate need of Colonies and the natural resources that could be exploited from them, for Japan was limited to a navy roughly half the size of the British Navy, but consisting of mainly smaller ships overall, for their quote of battleships was less than half. Holland and France were also participating countries in this pact. However, whilst it limited ships in the pacific regions, it did not limit ships in other regions. This crippled Japan, but left _all other players_ with other waters in which to build ships (hence the large buildup of Atlantic sea forces by the USA that facilitated the lend-lease agreements later on). This in itself a heavy blow to the Japanese, but added to this was the failure of the British to renew their alliance. Not only was the most powerful empire in the world now not an ally of the Japanese, but the Japanese could not even compete to provide what they needed. And the other countries, naturally, liked this just fine. Therefore, whilst your comments are true, they are only true in part. The Japanese ambassadors certainly had a general idea as to what was following due to the 14 part message, and the Japanese had more motive to attack than a simple "policy of other countries" explanation warrants. Yours Sincerely, Benjamin Grosman

1 0

Montgolfier was a JOKE
by c62op27＠ibx.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>The Montgolfier post sent anonymously >was a joke and I thought quite a good one. >(It wasn't me and I don't know who it was.) >It was poking fun at the QED pest at cyberstation >who really was writing drivel. >So far 2 people have missed the point and let >us know about it. > -- Peter Allan peter.allan(a)aeat.co.uk Thanks for the enlightenment, Peter. The problem is that it resembled the real "drivel" that passes through here far too often. So, I did not bother to read the whole piece. Kudos to the author for getting a biting satire by a person who writes them for a living.

1 0