December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Germany Passes Sweeping Cyberspace Legislation 01/06/97 (fwd)
by wb8foz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

BONN, GERMANY, 1997 JAN 6 (NB) -- By Sylvia Dennis. The German government passed a major round of legislation in the runup to Christmas that aims at regulating the Internet and protecting user privacy. No surprise there.... {} The law also prohibits the use of "cookies," software applets that trace a user's path across the Internet and recording the data they view. This is, to me! -- 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

2 1

RE: The FAGGOT list
by Brett Carswell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Aga Wrote: > >That is another FAGGOT coming out of the woodwork! >> > Just how many KNOWN faggots are on this list? [snippo] > >Most of the above men are apparently FAGGOTS, since they >conspire to censor Freedom Of Speech on the InterNet, under >the guise of "spam elimination." Actually, is all a front >for censorship by homosexuals on the InterNet. >[more snippo] >> > All of these who are faggots must be labeled >> > and watched, as we know that faggots are the worst censors. Could someone please forward me the URL of the FAGGOT (are the caps manditory?) detecting software for mailing lists. I feel pretty left out as almost everyone else know who the FAGGOTS are. Is this the same software that detects Cocksuckers or does Dr Dimitri have something of his own. Maybe we could all band together and come up with something that detects Nazi moderators as well. Brett

2 1

Re: Moderation
by Bovine Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim C. May's sexual life is not the business of the cypherpunks mailing list. o)__ (_ _`\ Tim C. May z/z\__)

1 0

re: Free Money!
by anonymous＠miron.vip.best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks for the dough! I just love cyber technology. Will spend it wisely.

1 0

[STATS] Cypherpunks subscriptions on and off
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following table shows cypherpunks subscription activity for the period 12 Oct 1996 thru 07 January 1996. Date ~Days #Subs Gain Loss Gain / day Loss / day ----- ----- ----- ---- ---- ---------- ---------- 10/12 n/a 1361 n/a n/a n/a n/a 11/04 23 1353 211 219 9.2 9.5 11/30 26 1299 173 227 6.7 8.7 12/18 18 1262 120 157 6.7 8.7 01/07 20 1291 151 122 7.6 6.1 ----- ----- ---- ---- ---------- ---------- Totals: 87 655 725 7.5 8.3 Interpretation: Unless the reversal of gain/loss in the 5th data row is permanent, c-punks are losing 0.8 bodies per day, or 294 subscribers per year. Actually, the constant high turnover suggests something else: Many people join the list and get back off again due to the high volume and their own personal time constraints. Unless Sandy can cut *way* back on the number of posts to the list, i.e. excise a *lot* more postings than just the blatant Spam and "Timmy is a....." posts, it won't make any difference to those people who come and go. In effect, Sandy is going to have to cut the number of daily posts (to the moderated list) from, say, 100 per day down to, say, 20 or 25 per day. This would certainly be a goal of his, since most of the subscriber comments I've heard indicate that even 50 posts per day of "relevant political/social commentary" is way too high for them. As to the net loss in subscribers, the moderation of the list could have a substantial effect on the number of subscribers short-term, but whatever trend we have here will continue regardless, since the real value and character of the list is not determined by the posts which are removed (unless it were that some of the character and value is going to be removed), but by long-term factors which are to be expected when the principals get older, less involved, and less contentious (like Sandy, wanting to avoid conflict).

4 6

Copyright loophole?
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

While doing research at a law library, I came across what appears to be a legal loop-hole in the copyright law. It seems a famous author's publisher had a substantial number of unbound and unsold copies of his works sitting around. Another publisher purchased them from his publisher, without the author's knowledge, and printed an anthology which included an index which was not part of the purchased (copyrighted) items. In Kipling vs. G.P. Putnam & Sons (1903, CA2 NY) 120 F 631, the 2nd circuit found that (from 17 USCS § 501) "Publication of an index to accompany copyrighted volume of author's work although containing words and phrases found in text, does not constitute infringement." From the original opinion: "They were also at liberty to make and publish an index contained in their volumes even though the index, as necessary must, contain words and phrases found in the text." Q1: Could this decision (which has stood since 1903) support the creation, storage and distribution of "standalone" on-line indicies to copyrighted works without infringement? (I could not find a direct reference to "fair-use" in the portion of the opinion referencing the index nor a related ruling, using the 1976 Copyright Act, which overturned the "index' provision.) Q2: How much content can an index contain and still not infringe? Q3: What would be the legal standing of these indicies, or several unrelated "indexes", if they can jointly (but not separately) be used to reconstitute the original copyright work by a private citizen? (Anonymous index posting, especially via a Ross Anderson style Eternity Service, might "practically" circumvent government enforcement.) -- Steve

1 0

What about postscript?
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

What if somebody wanted to publish the source code of an encryption program in book form, but make the book dowloadable freely from an ftp site using postscript or PDF format. Surely, the government will be hard pressed to argue the difference between paper media and electronic media here, since the files downloaded cannot be used to encrypt or decrypt data, without somebody first typing in the source. Maybe MIT or PGP should convert at least part of the PGP book into postscript and then request Commerce Department clearance to make it publically available. That should make for a nice court battle. If somebody argues that sophisticated programs can extract the text out of postscript files, what about providing JPEG images of pages of the book?

1 0

Lane Stipes
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bob Hawbaker wrote: > ____________________________________ > Remember, the people who paint lane stripes on the road > of life probably have different objectives than you do.

1 0

Re: The Upcoming DES Challenge
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:49 PM 1/7/97, pgut001(a)cs.auckland.ac.nz wrote: >Orbital mind control lasers made mpd(a)netcom.com (Mike Duvos) write: > >>Peter Trei (trei(a)process.com) writes: >>>1. I'm astonished at the low level of reaction RSA's announcement that they >>>will be sponsoring a DES Challenge, with a $10,000 cash prize. >>I'm certainly jumping up and down and cheering. I said a while back that the >>life expectancy of DES would be about two weeks if anyone forked over serious >>cash. > >I'm still a bit nervous about what the reaction will be though - won't the >US government (and anyone else pushing DES) be able to say "It took 10,000 >Pentiums several weeks, noone would bother doing that, so it's safe" (with a >possible side order of "Safer-SK64 is 256 times as secure, anyone we really >like can use that provided they hand over the keys in advance"). This was exactly my concern months ago. PC's are remarkably _inefficient_ systems for attempting to crack codes. I recall estimating, quite approximately, that it might take somewhere about $500,000 of electricity cost alone to check all 2**56 possible decrypts, most of which is going to power unnecessary components. (monitors, hard drives, sound cards, modem cards, etc, etc, etc.) By doing the decrypts on PCs (term used generically; it applies just as well to Mac's, PowerPC's, DEC Alpha's, etc) we make it look like DES is better than it really is. But I'm under no illusion. As the saying went, "When the only tool you have is a hammer, you treat every problem as if it were a nail.) People have PC's, and will use them. Let me suggest, however, that somebody familiar with the details of DES and FPGA's (or other kinds of high-density programmable logic) figure out a ballpark estimate of how much it would cost to implement a minimalist DES-cracker in hardware. Don't do it, just estimate it. Then, when somebody has finally cracked that DES message and someone the news media is trying to suggest that this was an expensive effort, a more economical figure will be quotable. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Commercial Encryption Packages
by AwakenToMe＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

How much word has there been on any commercial encryption packages (such as point n crypt..etc) of any types of backdoors installed in them? Any comments or knowledge about this would be good edition to the list :) Adam

2 1