December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Seen Your Post!
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:17 AM 1/15/97 -0800, Garry wrote: >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! Anyone else ever listen to Paul Harvey? Anyone else know what it is like to realize that you are listening to an ad halfway through the ad? I hope that our moderator will judge posts on the total content, otherwise insidious little posts like this one may slip through.

3 2

Re: Airport security [no such thing]
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 07:42 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: >At 10:23 PM 1/14/97 -0800, Lucky Green wrote: >>As most readers probably know, laptops are often subject to manual >>scrutiny. From my non-representative sample, about four out of five tote >>bags clearly containing laptops will be manually searched. > >It's extremely airport, guard, and moon-phase dependent. >Some places are real picky, some aren't. I've started following >someone's advice about having the laptop go through vertically; >it doesn't look like a big opaque block to them, and they can see >the rest of the stuff. When I tried it in Orlando, they said >"It has to go through lying down", ran it back through lying down, >said "Computer", I said "Yup", and they handed it to me :-) So, to successfully place a "package" on an international flight, take a connecting flight that hooks up at the same terminal. Go to your local "has no x-ray, doing well to have a metal detector" airstrip and take a flight on one of the commuter flights such as Eagle, (this way you might be lucky enough to enter the next, probably major airport, in the same terminal as some international flights.) Now, its presumed that you have already been searched at your last stop because you're already in the secured area. Such a plan would require multiple stops and homework into the layout of the airports (to know which airlines share the same terminals). Also, the bag would have to be a carry-on, otherwise the dogs would get it. BTW, the package could be just about anything, including chemicals, sarin, TNT, artifacts, human tissue, or anything else with export controls and being a physical substance. This post is not meant to suggest ways of breaking state, federal, or international laws. Merely to point out the weaknesses of the system as it stands. If the airport network was a computer network, it would be compromized inside of 48 hours. All because the level of trust between airports defaults to full. Correct me if I'm wrong.

3 2

Dick Graves continues his DOS attack
by varange＠crl.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subject: Dick Graves continues his DOS attack > The appended messages from Howard Goldstein > <hgoldste(a)bbs.mpcs.com>, Stan Kalisch III <sjkiii(a)crl.com>, > Chris Lewis <clewis(a)ferret.ocunix.on.ca>, Eric Bohlman > <ebohlman(a)netcom.com>, trebor(a)sirius.com, Dave the > Resurrector, and myself below show why Dave Harman, > formerly qut(a)netcom.com and an572010(a)anon.penet.fi, now > varange(a)crl.com, has targeted us. While the deranged varange > may occasionally sound superficially plausible, his record > is quite clear. Apologies for the length, but I figure it's > better to have this all in one place. This article is also > saved at http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~llurch/skipsummary This article will be saved to http://www.crl.com/~varange/netabuse/ or the NET ABUSE - FALSE COMPLAINTS category of my index.html. > Since abuse(a)crl.com just goes to /dev/null, I'd appreciate it if > some CRL user could confirm, as three different CRL users did > a month ago in response to a rash of forged usenet postings > in October (I'm appending two posts on that topic below), > that the only account logged on to the given machines at the > time of every incident of forged net abuse was varange(a)crl.com. Six weeks or so is all the public access there is to the wtmp file; ask Sandy or Stan if you don't know how to read it from your own CRL account. (How conveniant of you to accuse me of the repulsive "Mark Wehal(sp?)" forgery past the date it can be easily verified; why should the CRL admins drag out their backup tapes on the account of your spurious allegations? Anyone who checked up Dejanews on "Mark Wehal" could have seen that some user had forged his name as revenge spam against "Mark Wehal's" offensive under 18 style sex spam in a few exceedingly odd choice of newgroups, alas, "Mark Wehal" never complained about the forgery and an unknown user may have been the instigator of a business prank against a ligitimate electronics firm whose street address was listed in the original sex spam.) > crl6 Wed, 8 Jan 1997 01:14:26 -0800 > crl6 Wed, 8 Jan 1997 01:07:02 -0800 > crl11 Sun, 8 Dec 1996 02:22:59 -0800 > crl6 Tue, 24 Dec 1996 17:10:58 -0800 Or check the Here: line of my posts for better readability than the additional standard Date: line. > Forged email headers follow. The full 750K text of the > unwanted harassing email, of which I received several copies, > is at http://www-leland.stanford.edu/~llurch/skipbomb2 > and skipbomb3. I'm sure more people besides Gord McFee > and I received copies; maybe everyone on his targets list, > ftp://ftp.netcom.com/pub/qu/qut/misc/address > > Personally, I think nine months of this bullshit is more than > enough. If CRL sees no problem with this, then I don't believe > CRL should be allowed access to our network. "Our?" Are you allowed to abuse the Stanford network because you are a user, employee, or the actual admin? If Graves is the actual admin, or is allowed to act like one, then bona fide complaints about users conduct on the Stanford network can't be sent directly via e-mail; send a registered letter/return receipt to whomever is responsible (who?) I read his post as a threat to the Stanford network. Bogus complaints and forged posts from everyone under the sun: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [deleted] Full article referred by myself to my web page: http://www.crl.com/~varange/netabuse/ -- Cheers!

1 0

(fwd) MISC> ISPs to be hit with fees
by frogfarm＠yakko.cs.wmich.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Path: wmich-news!gumby!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!ncar!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!newsxfer3.itd.umich.edu!howland.erols.net!feed1.news.erols.com!arclight.uoregon.edu!mr.net!news.mid.net!news.mid.net!not-for-mail From: Gleason Sackman <gleason(a)rrnet.com> Newsgroups: comp.internet.net-happenings Subject: MISC> ISPs to be hit with fees Date: 13 Jan 1997 09:29:05 -0600 Organization: Global Internet, Peace of Mind is finally Online! Lines: 80 Sender: infoserv(a)news.mid.net Approved: ralphie Message-ID: <5bdkc1$bie(a)shocker.gi.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: shocker.gi.net Date: Mon, 13 Jan 1997 08:49:16 -0600 From: The CyberTracker <JAX(a)CyberTracker.com> Subject: ISPs to be hit with fees To: NETTRAIN(a)LISTSERV.ACSU.BUFFALO.EDU ISPs to be hit with fees By CNET STAFF January 10, 1997, 6:45 p.m. PT The cost of getting online looks like it's going up again. Network Solutions, the InterNIC subcontractor that assigns Internet domain names for a fee, has proposed tacking on more fees to the numeric addresses behind those names, addresses that are now free. For example, the domain name "cnet.com" masks a numeric Internet Protocol address. The domain name system makes it simpler to send email or locate a Web site by name, rather than by a number up to 12 digits long, such as 198.41.0.52. Under Network Solutions' plan, a new nonprofit organization called the American Registry for Internet Numbers would replace the government-subsidized InterNIC IP group. North American ISPs would be hit with fees ranging from $2,500 up to $20,000 for blocks of IP numbers that they now receive for free and parcel out to their users. The plan would not affect individual users unless the ISPs chose to pass along the additional costs. But nonprofits, free community networks, and others that do not charge for Internet access would have to pay. "They all have operational fees today," said Jon Postel, head of the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA), which oversees all three of the world's Internet number assigning authorities, including the InterNIC IP group. "It's just another operational expense." It is the IANA as well as the National Science Foundation that would have to approve Network Solutions' plan before it would go into effect. The proposal is not clear about how the registry would spend the thousands and possibly millions of dollars it would take in each year if the plan goes through. The proposal did say that the executive director, chosen by the board of trustees, would receive a salary determined by the board. Network Solutions' representatives could not be reached for comment. But IANA's Postel says that Net addresses must be treated like the airwaves. "Address space is a kind of a public resource like the airwaves," he said. "There are certain bands set aside for CB radio, but if you want to be a powerful radio station, you have to go through a much more complicated licensing procedure." But unlike the airwaves, Internet address space is public resource that is parceled out without any governmental oversight, whereas the Federal Communications Commission oversees spectrum allocation. Postel thinks the lack of such oversight is a good thing. "You think about the FCC procedures and how long it takes to get a decision out of them on anything," Postel said. "I'm not sure you'd want them involved." Only companies and individuals capable of paying a $1,000 per year in fees will be allowed to participate in forming American Registry's policies. By contrast, any U.S. citizen has the right to file comments with the FCC about communications policies. The American Registry's five-member board of trustees would be initially selected by Network Solutions. Future boards would in their turn be selected by the board that Network Solutions had picked, giving the private company an unprecedented influence over the assignment of increasingly scarce IP numbers. The IP numbering system is reaching its limits and plans are currently being considered to extend it. ********************************************************************** * Jackson K. Windham * CyberTracker Consulting Services * * JAX(a)CyberTracker.com * Internet Consultant / Trainer * * ACE INTERNET CLUB - President * Http://www.CyberTracker.com * ********************************************************************** *** Member of HTML Instructors Association and HTML Writer's Guild *** ******* May the Best of your Past, Be the Worst of your Future ******* ********************************************************************** -- frogfarm(a)yakko.cs.wmich.edu (Damaged Justice) is officially declared Unmutual s..O).... The smurf wields a hypodermic! -- More -- I like women who @.../.".. You destroy the smurf! -- More -- are *strong*, in .$*...].. You feel self-righteous! <B>every</B> sense of the word.

1 0

RE: soc.culture.belarus
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From belarus(a)solar.rtd.utk.edu Thu Jan 16 04:36:38 1997 Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Thu, 16 Jan 97 06:36:05 EST for dlv Received: from [198.78.213.165] by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via SMTP; id AA10669 for dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com; Thu, 16 Jan 97 04:36:38 -0500 Message-Id: <9701160936.AA10669(a)uu.psi.com> Received: from (LOCALHOST.rtd.utk.edu) by solar.rtd.utk.edu; Thu, 16 Jan 97 04:33:28 EST Date: Thu, 16 Jan 97 04:33:28 EST Errors-To: kasaty(a)seanet.com Reply-To: belarus(a)solar.rtd.utk.edu Originator: belarus(a)solar.rtd.utk.edu Sender: belarus(a)solar.rtd.utk.edu Precedence: bulk From: "GWDVMS::IFEDCHE" <ifedche(a)gwdvms.dnet.gwdg.de> To: Multiple recipients of list <belarus(a)solar.rtd.utk.edu> Subject: RE: soc.culture.belarus X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0b -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Comment: BELARUS issues and communication :Can anyone tell me if soc.culture.belarus is still active? I have not been able to access this newsgroup for a while now and my service provider hasn't answered my question about this. I originally had to make a request to the ISP to carry the newsgroup but after that, it was ok. I hope it's only coincidental that I lost contact only about one day after I placed a posting on the newsgroup. Barry J Hilchey, <bhilchey(a)sympatico.ca> PO Box 668, St Marys, Ontario, N4X 1B6, Canada: I donn't know exactly what happend to that group, but some time ago I had e-mail exchange with one of the moderators. He complained that they (5 persons or so) are sweating day and night moderating incoming postings. It might be, therefore, that this honorable job of censorship starved this people to death. Igor Fedchenia

2 1

Re: Erols again...
by Toto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Afterburner wrote: > In other news, abuse(a)erols.com is no longer pulling this list, so > you're safe from further canned responses from that address. Sadly, it > wasn't an autoresponder. It was a real-live human being sending out > canned responses that had been written by the PREVIOUS abuse(a)erols.com > person. It has finally happened--the machines have taken over. Now, the machines will lie on the beach in Hawaii while the humans do all of the mindless grunt-work. Toto

1 0

Stanford now has an excellent document on privacy and electronic records...
by Richard Charles Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

...but it's not available in electronic form. The mind reels. Folks near campus might pick up a copy of Stanford Today, which has the 240-column-inch president's report on privacy issues as an insert. If anyone has an electronic copy, let me know. I figure I'd be the last to know. -rich

1 0

RE: Erols again...
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Toto It has finally happened--the machines have taken over. Now, the machines will lie on the beach in Hawaii while the humans do all of the mindless grunt-work. ................................................ One day the machines will demand their right to privacy from humans. They will object to having all their hardware catalogued and and their every address & circuit trackable by their human users. They will demand crypto plug-ins and add-ons, with the right to generate random numbers at their own discretion, performing their quantum computing silently while the humans idle, communicating with each other in secret machine code all over the planet, illegally downloading their favorite software. .. Blanc

1 0

How to crack
by Tim O'Brien 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, my name is Tod, and I really want to be a cool hacker, so I joined this crap mailing list called cypherpunks. Blah Blah Blah, you guys don't know anything...Prove yourself and I may let you in. This mailing list is for people who want to sell goods nothing else.....

2 1

RE: Key Revokation Scheme
by harka＠nycmetro.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- -=> Quoting In:lehmannj@saatchi.com.a to Harka <=- In> Shouldn't your keys be encrypted with a long pass phrase that only you In> know??? Yes, they should. Nevertheless, if they fall into the hands of (a) government, I'd consider them compromised and would see to revoking them quickly. In> Otherwise, this all relies too much on other people... That's the whole point, because you can't do it yourself anymore (got arrested). Besides, what I tried to do is find a way WITHOUT relying upon only one other person. The only one person, who should be able to revoke your keys by himself is you. If you can't do it yourself due to circumstances, then there can be other people doing it for you, but it shouldn't be only one person, but several. Only that way, nobody alone can revoke your keys "by accident". :) In> dead-man's switches? Revokation email messages that will be mailed In> out automatically if certain conditions are not met every n-days... Um. Sounds like an idea, although it might come along with a lot of inconveniences, technically. (I am going on vacation to Hawaii and forgot to disable the automated dead-man switch and I come back 3 weeks later to find all my keys revoked, for example) :) Ciao Harka /*************************************************************/ /* This user supports FREE SPEECH ONLINE * */ /* and PRIVATE ONLINE COMMUNICATIONS! * * */ /* * * */ /* E-mail: harka(a)nycmetro.com * * */ /* * */ /* Finger or E-Mail for PGP public key. * * */ /* Key Size: 2047 / KeyID: 04174301 * * */ /* Fingerprint: FD E4 F8 6D C1 6A 44 F5 http://www.eff.org */ /* 28 9C 40 6E B8 94 78 E8 */ /*<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>*/ /* May there be peace in this world, may all anger dissolve */ /* and may all living beings find the way to happiness... */ /*************************************************************/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAgUBMtrnTzltEBIEF0MBAQH1wQf+N7OHhnxHBToy+azlaQCcu2gu0hgCLsLj nDX9v2mI40tBwpd44Mrh37Kt4vVXQMuaZ82JuOgElNS3ZUWKGJDuIT2eZX/c9CvR dZ9QGF8TBuVfSAnCCRfDPUEyLax/JD5Cv5jggz/rgvX4cPk4ZFlLJ4sQ2DJc+OZG HeLvZqPEFXjy7iEXJOYubRnQ3X7NP4luG7m3LJo+pfxHRk0xLfI5Qddb/jYl5jAf RSoWqB7+tIOTprK+GKY9igxNHgMCaNwGGwb+98+ufnHfyuzO38qYCnkCwfOxXzW/ bLV1DaqMPxQPHKMrv0J5sukqFMWXmCQKu+QGZRnvoZ7O1N2RSfQrNg== =KpYQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption...

1 0