December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Crypto Rules
by silly＠ugcs.caltech.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> writes: >Federal Register: December 30, 1996: >Page 68572-68587 >Bureau of Export Administration > >Encryption Items Transferred From the U.S. Munitions List >to the Commerce Control List >... >Note to paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this section: A printed >book or other printed material setting forth encryption source code >is not itself subject to the EAR (see Sec. 734.3(b)(2)). However, >notwithstanding Sec. 734.3(b)(2), encryption source code in >electronic form or media (e.g., computer diskette or CD ROM) remains >subject to the EAR (see Sec. 734.3(b)(3)). >... It's curious that they're still making this distinction. I've got to wonder, if push came to shove, how they'd differentiate between, say, a book and a TeX document of the same book, on a CD. Unfortunately, the person testing this may go to prison for a long time. I saw no mention of prison time or fines for breaking these provisions -- I can only assume that the teeth are buried in other Commerce regulations. Does anyone know offhand what penalties are involved? Also, the choice of the Commerce Department to play gatekeeper is an interesting one, tactically. Is the addition of a few "or import" clauses likely? "One small step..." as they say. (me)

1 0

Happy New Year!!!
by multi＠manybiz.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, Please do not flame me, or respond with anger. If you want your name removed, send a *blank* email with the word REMOVE in the subject field and you will be permanantly removed from my mailing list. ***************************************************************************** Hello friend, as a fellow opportunity seeker, I recently came accross a brand new FREE Downline Club that I feel I must share with you. Its name is the "Auto-Compounder" and we have a state of the art management team dedicated to insure that everyone who gets involved will succeed. I'm offering you a FREE instantaneous Web Page, FREE enrollment, and FREE information to help you get started in promoting your business. In a few weeks, when you have a large downline, you will have the option to enter an MLM program along with your downline. This will insure you that you will make money right from the start. Since all this is FREE, you have nothing to lose but the time it takes to go to my web page and fill out the online application. Take a look at it now so you don't waste any time. In the first month of existence, there have been several thousand people join the program and there will be thousands more to come. Act now so you don't miss out on this incredible opportunity. Getting in a program like this near the top can bring you much prosperity and financial success. Thanks, Tom http://www.alliedsystems.com/compounder/TH07746.html

1 0

New Web Site - Pass It On
by teralee＠hotmail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There is a new web site for people going to college and needing financial aid. The site has downloadable software for electronic filing of the FAFSA for free. There is even software for increasing your financial aid eligibility. Check it out and pass this message on if you or someone you know is going to apply for financial aid and attend college in the United States. http://www.procps.com

1 0

LAW_dno
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

12-29-96. "Cybercash at risk/Money laws lacking" The laws that govern digital money are unclear, partly because governments have failed to revise finance rules to include the online realm explicitly. However, the feds want to be able to trace funds in some way in order to guard against online money laundering. Although no one wants interference from the government, some clear statements from lawmakers might help. ----- LAW_dno (10K)

1 0

[ADMINISTRATIVIUM] PGP
by mixmaster＠remail.obscura.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The arrival of warm weather is heralded by the pig shit (or whatever kind of shit Intel swines have for brains) getting soft in Tim C. May's mini-cranium and the resulting green slime seeping through his cocaine- and syphilis- damaged nose and onto his keyboard. )_( [@ @] Tim C. May |/ \| \O/

1 0

FCC Access Charge Proceeding
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Date: Sun, 29 Dec 1996 10:19:56 -0600 >Reply-To: telecomreg(a)relay.doit.wisc.edu >Originator: telecomreg(a)relay.doit.wisc.edu >Sender: telecomreg(a)relay.doit.wisc.edu >Precedence: bulk >From: NJF <NJF(a)commlaw.com> >To: Multiple recipients of list <telecomreg(a)relay.doit.wisc.edu> >Subject: FCC Access Charge Proceeding >X-Comment: Requests (UNSUBSCRIBE/HELP) to: listserver(a)relay.doit.wisc.edu >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Status: U > > I have placed on our Web site at: > > http://www.commlaw.com/pepper/Memos/InfoLaw/access.html > >an analysis of the FCC's Notice of Inquiry on whether ISPs should be >required to pay access charges. We also have available the full text of >the NOI (long) for downloading in Word and WordPerfect formats. > > This is an extremely important proceeding for anyone doing business >online. If the RBOCs get their way, the cost of connecting to the Net >could go through the roof. Pepper & Corazzini is preparing to file >comments and reply comments on behalf of interested parties. This will >be a very time-consuming effort as we anticipate voluminous comments to >be filed by a large number of companies. We are prepared to file joint >comments and replies on behalf of companies supporting the present >policy of exempting ISPs from access charges. This will enable a large >number of firms to participate at a nominal cost. Please contact me if >you are interested. And please feel free to circulate this to any list >that may be relevant. > >Neal J. Friedman >Telecommunications and Information Law >Pepper & Corazzini, L.L.P. >1776 K St., N.W. >Washington, DC 20006 >njf(a)commlaw.com >Voice: 202-296-0600 Fax: 202-296-0600 >Web Site: http://www.commlaw.com >> >

1 0

Random ITAR violations
by Blake Coverett 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I was looking through the current rfc index for something else a few minutes ago when I noticed rfc2040 from the end of October. Machine readable C code for several modes of RC5.

1 0

Re: "Structuring" of Communications a Felony?
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>At 10:57 PM -0800 12/28/96, Lucky Green wrote: > >>IMHO, this closes the door on the foreign contracting loophole used by C2 >>and others. It is now illegal for US persons to finance or contract out >>overseas crypto development, since doing so will obviously assist in >>proliferation. While not unexpected (I offered a bet on Cypherpunks that >>this would happen. Nobody took the bet.), this provision sets a dangerous >>precedence. The technical assistance prohibitions of the past have been >>transformed into general prohibitions against "financing, contracting, >>service, support, transportation, freight forwarding, or employment". >> >>Again, IANAL. > >Nor am I, but I have a "prediction" to make in the spirit of Lucky's types >of predictions of doom. > >I predict that we will see within two years a law making it illegal to >"structure communications" with the intent to avoid traceability, >accountability, etc. > >This would be along the lines of the laws making it illegal to "structure" >financial transactions with the (apparent) intent to avoid or evade certain >laws about reporting of income, reporting of transactions, etc. > [snip] > >How long before the U.S. Code declares "attempting to obscure or hide the >origin of a communication" to be a felony? That would rule out orninary >mail without return adresses, but I think there are ample signs we're >already moving toward this situation (packages that could be bombs >putatively require ID, talk of the Postal Service handling the citizen-unit >authentication/signature system, etc.). > [snip] >You heard it here. > >--Tim May Tim, I think that this is highly unlikely. The SC has ruled repeatedly that anonymous speech is a foundation of American politics (e.g., the Federalist Papers). Care to make this prediction a bet? -- Steve

8 10

VIB
by roland＠internetfleamarket.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Fuck_God_Up_The_Ass, This is a VIB (Very Important Bookmark)! The Internet Fleamarket is available now to all Internet users locally, nationwide and worldwide. Sell what you don't need, offer your service and reach out to all. Or just visit us! http://internetfleamarket.com . Happy New Year!

1 0

cypherpunks suggestion
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

John -- Just got back after vacation... It is my understanding that cpunks list has been attacked by several clever tricks. I have a couple of suggestions on how to improve protection of this list: # Use the following recipe in .procmailrc for cypherpunks (or majordomo) # account: :0 * ^TOcypherpunks * !^X-Loop: * !^FROM_MAILER * !^FROM_DAEMON * !^X-Mailing-List: { # get rid of duplicates :0 Wh: msgid.lock | formail -D 65524 msgid.cache # add X-Loop:, etc :0 fhw | formail -I "X-Loop: cypherpunks(a)toad.com" \ -I "X-Mailing-List: cypherpunks(a)toad.com" \ -I "Precedence: list" \ -I "Errors-To: cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com" # this recipe finally passes the submission to majordomo :0 | majordomo .... } The rest is not really anything for cypherpunks, and should go to /dev/null. - Igor.

1 0