December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

PGP & Zimmerman on Tonight's CBS News
by David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I caught only part of a LONG (by network news standards) piece on crypto with PRZ, Jimmy SuperFed Kellstrom and Scott Charney. If CBS news is yet to air in your area, it is well worth your time to see, and perhaps record. Phil came off very well. -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

1 0

Re: Why PICS is the wrong approach
by Phillip M. Hallam-Baker 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> wrote in article <58q40v$k22(a)life.ai.mit.edu>... > Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > If Firefly is an example of what PICS is or could become, the hell with > PICS. Firefly encourages and rewards group behavior and suppresses > individuality. Firefly would reward the discussion of the latest album > by a Columbia or Capitol artist, and discourage discussion of material > from independent (real independent) labels. I know because I've been > there and spent quite a bit of time trying to get a rating. I think there are two issues here, Firefly and PICS. Confusing one with the other is a bad thing. PICS is simply one way of applying labels to content. Its sole reason for being was to head off the CDA. Now that the judicial route has been taken I see little likelyhood that PICS can succeed since either the supreme court will uphold the CDA and we have the Singapore scenario or the CDA gets booted out and the matter is over. If the US congress had wanted to do any good instead of making itself look good then the voluntary approach of PICS with the multiple rating schemes was the one most likely to work. I don't think that it would stop 16 year olds from seeing pornography but since children of that age are in most jurdisdictions permitted by law to engage in sex on their own account it seems a bit bizare to prohibit them from seeing pictures of sexual acts. The problem with Firefly is that its a good(ish) idea baddly implemented. The much vaunted "agent" technology uses only a very primitive nearest neighbour type match. There is no attempt to draw structural inferences from the material, such as abstractions. For example if I enjoy Dire Straights and Peter Gabriel then a shop assistant would peg me as a late 70s rock fan and point me towards the Fleetwood Mac and such. Firefly has 50% of the structure needed to produce interesting matches but lacks the ability to make inferences. At least if it is the same technology as Ringo, the previous generation. This shortcomming of Ringo means that it is very slow work training it. To get a useful measure it needs hundreds of data points. When I visited I was faced with page after page of US 90s chart bands which I've not heard of and have no interest in. Phill

1 0

sorry for the spam!
by Psionic Damage 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I apologize 4 the spam, not my doing, Haven't figured out who waz responsible, but I will understand if I amd kicked off this list. Once again, I am sorry. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------- Zer0 Faith Inc. H/P/A/V/C UNDER-WORLD www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Heights/2608 MEMBERZ: GATEMASTER, VIRIZZ, KRASH, EVIL TWIN, PHONEHAZORD, PSIONIC DAMAGE, MANTIKORE, ERADIKATOR, PSYCHODROME, SONIK, kOBRA, & KRYPTIK! EMAIL:zerofaith@nlights.net (headquarterz) hakker1(a)hotmail.com (Delious's Haus!) hackerz(a)juno.com (The Gatemaster'z palace) zerofaith(a)geocities.com (delivery/help/requests/suggestions)

3 2

Re: ITARs effects
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Adam Shostack writes: > >: Peter D. Junger wrote: >: | >: | : This implies that putting something up for FTP == export. Holy >: | : shit. >: | >: | That has always been the position of the Department of Defense Trade >: | Controls with respect to the ITAR, the only difference is that now >: | it is going to be in writing. >: >: My understanding is that they choose not to continue >: per^H^Hrosecuting Phil for putting the code up for FTP. Thus, this is >: a change. Or did Phil not put the code up for FTP? > >Phil probably did not put up the code, [snip] > In my case the >government's lawyer has made it quite clear that they would consider >putting cryptographic software on a web site as a violation, and I >don't think that for this purpose there is any distinction either in >the government's mind or in reality between an FTP site and a web >site. > These changes are all aimed at making it harder to make money from strong crypto and therefore reduce its common availability worldwide. They do little to keep it from circulating worlwide, what ever its country of origin as anonymous posting to a newsgroup is still straightforward. Look for more shareware and commercial crypto source to circulate in printed, rather than machine-readable, form to take advantage of freedom of speech rules. -- Steve

1 0

Re:chek it out
by jamie＠comet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thank god for procmail. jamie ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ jamie(a)comet.net | Comet.Net | Send empty message | Charlottesville, Va. | to pgpkey(a)comet.net | (804)295-2407 | for pgp public key. | http://www.comet.net | "When buying and selling are controlled by legislation, the first things to be bought and sold are legislators" -P.J. O'Rourke. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: ASM vs portable code [WAS: Re: Java DES breaker?]
by John Poole 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dale Thorn wrote: > I remember sitting down with some ASM programmers in the mid 1980's > (using x86 PCs), and at that time, looking at the Codeview tracings, > it occurred to me that ASM would nearly always run 2x faster than 'C', > something that is inherent in the processes. This discussion sounds similar to the "C vs. Assembler" thread that's been raging on comp.lang.c for the past couple of months. The general consensus seems to be that on an x86 processor, using C for most of your program and using assembler sparingly is the best way to go. Plus, most compilers will produce code that runs about 1.2 - 1.5 times slower than your average assembler code. You mileage, of course, will vary. ----------------------------------------------- John Poole, 2A AM/CS, University of Waterloo http://www.undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca/~jfpoole "I've gone too far, for too little."

1 0

Van Eck articles
by Joel McNamara 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Looking for: "Electromagnetic Radiation from Video Display Units: An Eavesdropping Risk?" by Wim Van Eck, published in "Computers & Security," 1985, Vol 4 and "Protective Measures Against Compromising Electromagnetic Radiation Emitted by Video Display Terminals" by Professor Erhard Moller, Aachen University, 1990 (no source citation) Haven't found an electronic version of either of these yet, and will visit the good old "paper-based" library next week if no pointers show up. Thanks in advance... Joel

1 0

No Subject
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>admit that HP (for example) is the best, reliability-wise, yet I have >purchased quite a few of their computers and major peripherals over the >past 20 years, and I have experienced an approximate 40% (!) defective >rate during the one-year warranty period, more than 30% falling within >the first three months. Dale, perhaps it's time for you to seek out a new career. Check that LA "Not a real paper" Times for things like "car wash assistant needed" and good luck.

2 1

Re: sorry for the spam!
by msprague＠ridgecrest.ca.us 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

as of Sunday 23:00PST 12/15 he was using a mailto IP of 206.129.116.5 and http's to 192.41.31.20/thatguy/upyours.zip >Psionic Damage enscribed thusly: > >> I apologize 4 the spam, not my doing, Haven't figured out who waz >> responsible, but I will understand if I amd kicked off this list. >> Once again, I am sorry. > > The individual is a little shit operating a windows system on >IP address 206.129.116.108 as of Sunday evening. While the messages >where poping up on cypherpunks, one of the Received-By headers was >indicating his IP address. I was able to confirm his presence on the >network and determine it to be a windows system operating with the workstation >name of "MARLAEST" and a workgroup name of "ESTES ADVENTURE". He's not >operating a windows messaging pop-up or I would have sent him an appropriate >message of appreciation. Since it IS a windows system (and not running >sendmail) I think it is safe to assume that he IS the end point of this >bullshit. > > 206.129.116.108 is in a block assigned to Premier1 Internet, >Coordinator Michael Heuerman, mikheu(a)PREMIER1.NET (360-793-3658), who is also >getting a copy of this... > > This individual is still on line as of 22:43 EDT 12/15/96 > > Can someone kindly track this little asshole down and dump his sorry >ass in the nearest toxic waste dump? > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> ---------------------- >> Zer0 Faith Inc. H/P/A/V/C UNDER-WORLD >> www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Heights/2608 >> >> MEMBERZ: >> >> GATEMASTER, VIRIZZ, KRASH, EVIL TWIN, PHONEHAZORD, PSIONIC DAMAGE, >> MANTIKORE, ERADIKATOR, PSYCHODROME, SONIK, kOBRA, & KRYPTIK! >> >> EMAIL:zerofaith@nlights.net (headquarterz) hakker1(a)hotmail.com (Delious's >> Haus!) hackerz(a)juno.com (The Gatemaster'z palace) zerofaith(a)geocities.com >> (delivery/help/requests/suggestions) > > Mike >-- > Michael H. Warfield | (770) 985-6132 | mhw(a)WittsEnd.com > (The Mad Wizard) | (770) 925-8248 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ > NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all > PGP Key: 0xDF1DD471 | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it! > >

1 0

Re: Van Eck articles
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Looking for: > >"Electromagnetic Radiation from Video Display Units: An Eavesdropping >Risk?" by Wim Van Eck, published in "Computers & Security," 1985, Vol 4 I OCR'd this and have it as either an 895K Word 5.1a (Mac) or 705K Acrobat document. I'll email a copy to anyone that's interested. > >and > >"Protective Measures Against Compromising Electromagnetic Radiation Emitted >by Video Display Terminals" by Professor Erhard Moller, Aachen University, >1990 (no source citation) I seem to have misplaced this document. However, I don't recall OCR'r it. -- Steve

1 0