December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Am I to blame? / "THE INTERNET GOLDRUSH"
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

snow wrote: > > > The "Internet Goldrush" is ON! > > > It's simple! It's quick! It's here! > The funny thing is, most of the "Gold Rushers" wound up broke, or > working for someone else. > Most people are fools. Deliberately so. An interesting observation. The original Gold Rush involved the thronging masses stepping on each other's toes, shooting each other in the back, etc., and the end result was that a few 'lucky' ones got filthy rich, while the people behind the scenes, encouraging this activity, 'all' got filthy rich. If I had a mansion on the hill, with a high wall surrounding it and a guard on the gate, I would be much more inclined to encourage the masses to seek their fortune at my doorstep, and shop at my general store across the street. Toto

1 0

Seen Your Post!
by Garry 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I Seen Your Post! I found your post in one of my favorite news groups. You might find my views are exactly the same. In fact my entire WebSite is right up that alley. Every business Opportunity listed at my sight is FREE! In fact one of the businesses I joined (again free) has an excellent earning potential of over $600 profit per YEAR, per CUSTOMER! The best part is don't do anything except promote the business. The company does everything for me!!! Although I do not have anything against MLM, this is not! In order to even notice this biz you have to look up in the top window frame of my site as its loading the image (read the text). Enough about me! If you can contribute to my sight or have any ideas, I would appreciate it. I'll keep an eye out for more of your contributions to the "Newsgroups"! http://www.angelfire.com/biz/PC2CASH Tons of Excellent FREE Stuff for Entrepreneurs too... PS. If you like what you see or have any questions, or ideas about my site, please drop me an e-mail. But, if you don't mind use "pcplus" as the subject. It helps me weed through my junk! Thanks, Garry pccash(a)sprintmail.com If you should get this message more than twice please forgive me. I may have mis-configured this new e-mailer! Day 3 in use #00377782 ******************************************************************* Garry sent you this message using WorldMerge, the fastest and easiest way to send personalized email messages to your customers, subscribers, leads or friends. For more information, visit http://www.coloradosoft.com *******************************************************************

3 2

Re: Newt's phone calls
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:37 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >At 02:48 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Alan Bostick wrote: >>(Someone mentioned that they thought cordless phone intercepts weren't >>illegal the way cellular phone intercepts are. IANAL, but I recall that >>intercepting both was made illegal by the same legislation.) > >It is illegal to intercept cell phone calls. It is legal under federal law >to intercept cordless phones. The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act of 1994 <ftp://ftp.loc.gov/pub/thomas/c103/h4922.enr.txt> amended the federal wiretap statutes (18 USC 2510 et seq) to make interception of cordless calls illegal. Also, pursuant to the CALEA, the FBI reported yesterday (1/14) that they anticipate the potential need to conduct almost 60,000 wiretaps "simultaneously" (they define "simultaneous" to mean on the same day) by 10/25/98. (They do some handwaving to explain that while they're saying they might need to do 60K simultaneous wiretaps, they're not really saying they *would* do 60K wiretaps, but they're not promising not to, and really, who are we to question, anyway?) There's a discussion of their methodology and other bureaucratic poetry in the Federal Register (62 FR 1902, 1/14/97, try <http://w3.access.gpo.gov/su_docs/aces/aaces002.html> and search volume 62 of the Federal Register for "calea") but the actual estimates (which are apparently broken down county-by-county) are only available from the FBI's Reading Room in Washington DC. Arrgh. (I got the 60K figure from the Murky News' wire service-to-Email gateway.) And Jamie Gorelick is resigning. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. |

1 0

Re: RSA challenge: is it legal to try?
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:35 PM 1/14/97 +0100, Anonymous wrote: >Patents only apply to commercial use. Got a cite for this? I can't seem to find any authority for it. It sounds to me like a simple economic calculation (it's not worthwhile to sue noncommercial users for infringement because they usually don't have enough $ to even pay for the litigation, and "IBM sues 70-year old grandmother" makes for poor public relations) that got turned into "law" by the machinery of urban legend. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto. |

1 0

Re: How to Deal with a Homo Superior Who is on the Make with You
by aga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

It is clear from reading this that all equal employment laws should be eliminated. On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > Path: perun!news2.panix.com!panix!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!grapevine.lcs.mit.edu!anon.lcs.mit.edu!nym.alias.net!mailmasher.com!non-tell > From: Anonymous <non-tell(a)mailmasher.com> > Newsgroups: alt.politics.equality,alt.politics.correct,alt.politics.homosexuality,alt.politics.nationalism.white,alt.politics.white-power,alt.politics.sex,alt.psychology,alt.renewing.american.civilization,alt.sci.sociology,misc.jobs.misc > Subject: How to Deal with a Homo Superior Who is on the Make with You > Message-ID: <199701131555.HAA14303(a)mailmasher.com> > Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 07:55:23 -0800 > Organization: http://www.mailmasher.com pseudonymous service > Lines: 68 > Comments: Please report abuse to abuse(a)mailmasher.com > Mail-To-News-Contact: postmaster(a)nym.alias.net > > How to Deal with a Homo Superior Who is on the Make with You > > The answer is very simple: lobby for a return to employment > "at will" by repealing ALL equal employment opportunity laws > including the provisions of the Americans with Disability Act > which pertain to employment. Filing complaints or lawsuits > is definitely not recommended as this would be the worst kind > of career suicide. > > Years ago when homosexuality was stigmatized and there was > employment at will, the homos kept a very low profile because > if they let loose with their true nature, then they would be > out on their ear, pronto! > > However, pass equality laws in a small minority of jurisdictions, > and the homos get the impression that they can get away with > just about anything even if they are not covered by one of those > laws in their own jurisdiction. > > The behavior at major corporations on the part of homos ranges > from "the look" to outright propositions, to outright vigorous > harassment and even extortion. I thought that the emergence of > the AIDS epidemic would have a drastic dampening effect on this > type of behavior, but boy, oh, boy, was I ever wrong!! It seems > that if you groom yourself to any degree, the elements get the > impression that you are germ-free and highly desirable, and you > will attract their attention like a lightening rod. > > To be fair, the worst perpetrators of this adverse behavior are not > those guys perceived to be homosexuals but bisexuals - you know, > the guys with the wives or girlfriends. Boy, are these guys ever > confused, and boy, are they ever motivated, sex hungry, and on the > prowl! > > Homosexual managers and executives share a trait with females, that > is, they will not tolerate capable male subordinates for long (unless, > of course, the subordinate is extra special friendly - if you get > my drift.) These managers and executives are paranoid about their > job security just as females are, and they cannot stand any competitive > threat. By the way, female managers and executives have an affinity > for gay subordinates. It just goes to demonstrate how sociological > alliances are forming under government enforced equality. > Yes, and this points out how homosexuals and females (who are usually always also homosexual) are the WORST thing that any viable Corporation can ask for. An ALL male heterosexual entity is the ONLY way to survive the business world today. A woman's place is in the home, and a faggots place is NEVER to be superior to any heterosexual person. > Now that the job market is quite tight and very much a buyers' market, > prospective employers get the impression that they can reduce job > candidates and subordinates to sexual slavery since workers have > few, if any, alternatives, and the saddest part of the situation is > that many workers are going along with the extortionate demands thereby > making matters much worse for the workers who refuse to do likewise! > > Now, I know that some detractors in the reading audience will say, > "If you re-stigmatize homosexuality, you will drive it underground," > but what the h-ll is wrong with driving it underground??? This > statement is sophistry at its worse because it doesn't even make > any sense on its surface. > > On a related front: > The Treatise on the Downward Wage Equalizing Effects > of Equal Employment Opportunity is available at: > http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/3982/ > > "Government enforced wage equalization will work only in the > downward direction" - despite any initial appearance to the > contrary! And the most shocking thing of all is that the > least preferred worker does not even have to be awarded a > job for many phenomena to occur. > >

1 0

Re: Airport security [no such thing]
by Joel McNamara 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

US airport security is a joke compared to other places in the world. Contrast Lucky's account with my last trip through Germany. Carry-ons x-rayed. Pat down search by white gloved personnel. Asked to take photo with my camera (to demonstrate it was real). Full power-on of laptop. Laptop weighed and checked against book containing manufacturer's specs. And this is standard, not because I was flagged as an evil Cypherpunk or fit some profile. Everything done very efficiently, with few delays. Your mileage may vary. I've been in other places, where US airport security looks like Fort Knox. The main reason (no matter where you go) is unmotivated, minimum-wage, rent-a-cops placed in a tedious work environment. Joel Ob-Crypto: During some real serious globe-trotting over the past couple of years, no one has ever looked at the contents of my hard drive. Even when I've been detained by customs (non-US), doing a pretty detailed search of my luggage.

1 0

Re: Hi again, and an invitation to kibitz
by amanda＠intercon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > (b) Client sends Microsoft NT authentication response to the server > > (take the password in Unicode form, do an MD4 hash, pad with 0s to 21 > > bytes, split into 3 7-byte groups, use these as DES keys to encrypt > > the challenge three times, send the 24-byte result as the response). > > I think this can be strengthened in a few ways. The third DES key generated > using this technique has an effective keylength of 16 bits. Correct. This is the reason I've been thinking of switching to SHA-1, which gives a 20-byte hash (leaving only one byte of zeros, which can be filled in with some function of the other 20 bytes to arrive at 21 bytes). I haven't found any hole opened by exposing the last two bytes of the MD4 hash, but it's the piece I'm most worried about just on general principles (never expose more than you have to :)). I'm currently using the NT algorithm simply because I had it around and needed to get a demo working for the show. We're not tied to using it, although it would be useful if we end up doing an NT version of the server (since NT stores the MD4 hashes of passwords, not the plaintext). > I believe the D-H patent expires sometime in September or October this year. Yup. April was wishful thinking on my part; we won't adopt D-H until the patent expires. > Any unbroken cipher with a keyspace larger than that of DES would be better. Yup. I started with vanilla DES because I was worried about speed, but as it turns out the cipher step has a negligible impact on performance. I'm considering DES-EDE (the easy option), Blowfish (also pretty easy), or the DES variant Bruce Schneier describes in Applied Cryptography, 2nd ed. (the one with independent subkeys). So far, DES-EDE and Blowfish are the front runners, since they're the ones that have been poked at the most. DES-EDE has the advantage that more people know what DES is (the "buzzword compliance" factor). I'm not inclined to make the cipher a user-configurable option unless customers demand it, just to keep the user interface as simple as humanly possible. Amanda Walker InterCon Systems Corporation

1 0

Re: s/n problems on this list
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:52 AM 1/14/97 -0800, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >I've posted on this subject many times in the past, and its >something I like to brainstorm on. signal to noise problems >on this list. > >generally, the moderator-specific approaches I find less >palatable than techniques that can be automated. here >are some more ideas for automated moderation techniques. > >1. software called "grouplens" I've talked about here (search >yahoo) has been used to rate articles. they found that there >was a very high correlation between how long people spent reading >articles and the "interesting" rating that they gave that article. > >hence, a proposal: cpunks have long advocated and hacked mailer >programs to stick in crypto. how about sticking in a hack that >tracks how long mail messages are being read, and send that >info back to an auxilliary mailing list address. the list >software keeps track of time spent reading articles and >can allow people to screen the list based on the "most interesting >articles". "send me only those articles that go over a threshhold >of 500 combined human attention minutes". I for one would be weary of reading mail if I knew that just which ones I paid the most attention to were known by some computer somewhere. By doing this, cypherpunks would risk becoming big brother. Much as the supermarkets are trying to do now. All they are interested in is demographics also.

1 0

Re: Newt's phone calls
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Date: Wed, 15 Jan 1997 07:59:24 -0800 (PST) > From: Brian Lane <nexus(a)eskimo.com> > To: Eric Murray <ericm(a)lne.com> > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Subject: Re: Newt's phone calls > On Tue, 14 Jan 1997, Eric Murray wrote: > > > Clay Olbon II writes: > > > > > > The congressman (Boehner? from Ohio) whose cellphone was "eavesdropped" > > > stated today that he was parked in the lot of a Waffle House in Lake City > > > FL. The couple said that they just happened to be driving by when they > > > overheard and began taping the conversation. > > > > Interesting. In California, operating a scanner while driving is illegal. > > Of course it was probably the passenger running the scanner. > > Actually in Florida its illegal to even have a scanner in your car! > These folks have broken several state and federal laws, as well as the > congressman who leaked it to the newspapers instead of turning it over to > the head of the Ethics committe as he should have. Everyone involved here > is, or should be, in deep yogurt. > > I don't like the laws they passed, but since they passed them I want to > see them enforce them to the full extent posible. Then maybe people will > start to wonder why the transmission wasn't encrypted. Which also leads to > another question. How much information is in the clear from congressmen > and government employees who are clueless about the security of their > cellphones, cordless phones, etc? > Brian I don't know about Florida, but in most states with anti-scanner-in-car bans, there's an exception for FCC licensed Amateur Radio Operators (aka 'hams'). Peter Trei N1MNV trei(a)process.com

1 0

Re: IMDMP: SOURCE CODE RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENT
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> And how come Paul didn't use the word "fuck" in every paragraph, the way > he usually does? I suppose you want a special censored list where everyone who uses the word "fuck" in relation to your good self or any other member of this list you agree with has their posting cut? Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

2 1