December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Cool Website Check it out
by Wolf 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Check out my cool website at http://members.tripod.com/~wolf16

1 0

(no subject)
by Wolf 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

unsubscibe cypherpunks

1 0

Re: testing
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 3 Dec 1996, Eric Murray wrote: > Phiberelic Phreaker writes: > > > > PhReAkInG iS a ViOlEnT pOiSoN. iT cAnNoT Be ApPlIeD > > eXtErNaLlY tO aNiMaL oR hUmAn TiSsUe WiThOuT sErIoUs InJuRiOuS > > rEsUlTs. It CaNnOt Be TaKeN iNtErNaLlY wItHoUt InDuCiNg VoMiTtInG, > > bLiNdNeSs, AnD GeNeRaL pHySiCaLlY uLtImAtElLy ReSuLtInG iN dEaTh. > > PhReAk ThE pLaNeT--http://www.angelfire.com/ne/PhreakThePlanet/index.html > > > Evidently "PhReAkInG" causes uncontrollable ourbursts of CaPiTaLiZaTiOn due > to horrible shift-key spasms... > > > > PhIbErDeLiC PhReAkEr > > You probably want alt.2600, it'll be more your style. > BTW, you've posted the same fucking message 4 times now. > Plonk. 4 only? We have received over 30 copies of this shit.

1 0

RE: IP address
by Internaut 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Even greater than denial of service I believe that there are other threats. Like I just found this file on c2.org (I believe it was) on using an IP address to explore somebody's hard drive under certain conditions. EXPORTING YOUR ENTIRE FILESYSTEM Samba When a Windows for Workgroups or Windows 95 machine shares any folder, bugs in Microsoft's SMB implementation over all network protocols allow access to the whole drive, with whatever permissions the sharename was given. These resources are advertised on a browse list that is made available to anyone on the local network by default, and to anyone on the Internet who knows the machine's IP address. Any user sharing any folder over TCP/IP without a password is opening the whole disk to the whole Internet (for those that can locate the machine) and those with a password should be aware that Windows has no protection against brute force attacks. SMBCLIENT, an ftp-style browser for any UNIX, plus a complete file system for Linux and a few UNIX versions, are available from the Samba web site. Please note that Samba's exploitation of this fundamental bug in Microsoft file sharing was unintentional, and was immediately reported to Microsoft. It could have happened with any client over any protocol. An alleged fix for Windows for Workgroups was quietly released in early October, and Microsoft publicly announced a fix for Win95 on October 20th. It has not been rigorously tested, but it appears to fix the problem. The fix for Windows for Workgroups might not be a complete fix, but rather a patch for one way to exploit the problem. (The release version of Win95 prevented cd .. below the shared folder "root," but not cd ../) The patches and Microsoft press releases (which have been corrected at least twice, but which still erroneously identify Samba as shareware, neglect to credit the people who notified Microsoft of the problem, and neglect to mention that this is a fundamental bug in Windows, not a problem specific to TCP/IP or Samba) are available on Microsoft's Windows 95 Updates Page. The patch only works on the US/English version of Windows 95; at this writing, all non-English versions of Windows 95 are still vulnerable. Troy Varange wrote: > Well, the "danger" of posting a static IP must be even > greater than with a temporary IP. > > Just call the police if you uncover a bonafide case of a > denial of service attack. From what I gather, they take > this shit seriously, and have better capacities of > getting lazy admins to reveal the relevent data in their > logs. I just have this gut feeling that sitting out here without any protection somebody could write something that could hook into a program, or even worse the system (i.e. Explorer). Perhaps my fears are totally unfounded (besides above problem w/ samba), but I have not heard anyone say that one *is* secure. -- Internaut PS: I am running win95 but feel free to answer this question for any os.

1 0

Sorry for the "TWIT" messages
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Well seems I had a rather intresting morining. :) After receiving several "Phreak messages I went to modify my "twit" scripts. Unfortunatly the changes I made caused ~50 "twit" messages to go out. My appologies to anyone who received these messages. Thanks, -- ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting WebExplorer & Java Enhanced!!! Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of PGPMR2 - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice Look for MR/2 Tips & Rexx Scripts Get Work Place Shell for Windows!! PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii(a)amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info ----------------------------------------------------------- *MR/2 ICE: OS/2: Logic, not magic.

1 0

PRIVACY: X-No-Archive and mail.cypherpunks
by varange＠crl.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Igor Chudov @ home <ichudov(a)algebra.com> writing [ 1422] bytes in <$m2n26165-.199612031615.KAA03400(a)manifold.algebra.com> said: > This is primarily addressed to the person who supports cypherpunks > mail-to-news gateway. If you know who such person is, please send > his/her address to me. > > Please modify your reposting program so that it does not remove the > > X-No-Archive: yes > > header line from email messages. This particular header line is an > indication to USENET search engines that the author of the message would > not like it to be stored in these engines. It preserves the author's > privacy and enforces the copyright protection. "X-No-Archive: yes" is for idiots. Who wants to censor their own posts? -- Cheers!

3 2

No Subject
by logos 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

An anonymous poster wrote: >Timothy C[*] May, a product of a* birth, appeared with >coathanger through his head. >/o)\ Timothy C[*] May >\(o/ I respectfully ask that the author of this post contact me. I am curious about his or her motives and would appreciate it if he or she would address these questions: 1) Why are you attacking Tim May? Has he harmed you in some way? 2) Do you think such posts harm Tim May or help you in some fashion? 3) What do you hope to accomplish by these posts? 4) Do you favor the use of strong cryptography to preserve privacy? 5) If Yes, do you think such posts are constructive to that end? If No, is it your intent that your posts harm the cause of strong cryptography and privacy? 6) Why have you chosen to hide your true identity? Logos out

4 3

Angel and Javier can't unsubscribe!
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:46 PM -0400 12/3/96, Angel Luis Ortiz Ruiz wrote: > > Friend: Thank's for your asnswer but I already do that. The server say >that I'm not in the list but I still reacive the messages. Thankx And then there was another message: At 6:00 PM -0400 12/3/96, Javier Rivera wrote: > Friend: Thank's for your asnswer but I already do that. The >server say that I'm not in the list but I still reacive the messages. >Thankx again! Both seemed to come from "zeen(a)caribe.net". One under the Ruiz name, the other under the Rivera name. And similar messages, both in broken English. I suggest Angel and Javier get together and decide which one of them is the name they or it subscribed under, and use that. Oh, and I have a sneaking suspicion they sent in the increasingly-canonical "unsuscribe" or "unscribe" misspelling. I'm beginning to think that Cypherpunks appeals especially to morons. --Tim May To subscribe to the Cypherpunks mailing list: -send a message to: majordomo(a)toad.com -body message of: subscribe cypherpunks To unsubscribe from the Cypherpunks mailing list: -send a message to: majordomo(a)toad.com -body message of: unsubscribe cypherpunks

2 1

Re: The Rise and Fall of Cypherpunks WAS [Re: the Dennings]
by Dave Hayes 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

attila(a)primenet.com writes: > > we, and I mean all of us, who contribute the bulk of the > > "opinions" to cypherpunks gave the mainstream press the biggest > > possible hole to run straight over us, declaring us anarchists > > and wild-eyed fanatics. unless we as a group mend our ways, and > > turn out intelligent reasoning for the advance of cryptography as > > a mainstream way of life, we will be forever consigned not only to > > the dustbin, but subject to the ridicule of both the press and the > > government. Quite surprising. This proves (to me) that cypherpunks is nothing more than lipservice, covertly contributing to the death of the human spirit which most people seem to want. "Unless we as a group mend our ways", indeed. By whose standard of "mending"? If they construct the proper standard can they not control you by that choice? Is your goal in life to be controlled by the press and the government? > > None of us are above a little sarcasm --but let's get the > > vituperative effluent out of the system. do whatever you wish in > > private mail, but keep the profane rantings off the list. The very existance of the "profane" keeps the "sacred" in existance as well. If you cannot see that, then John Grubor's lesson is wasted on you. ------ Dave Hayes - Altadena CA, USA - dave(a)jetcafe.org Freedom Knight of Usenet - http://www.jetcafe.org/~dave/usenet It is only knowledge that will destroy bias.

4 4

(no subject)
by Andrew Fairbanks 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

unsuscribe cypherpunks

2 1