December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Cellular location...
by Three Blind Mice 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sat, 25 Jan 1997, Mark M. wrote: > I wonder how expensive it would be to put a GPS receiver in a cell phone and > have the option to transmit the coordinates on a separate channel. There > would be little difference between this and forcing cell phone companies to > triangulate every call. The primary motivation for this is almost certainly > "location escrow" to make it easier for the feds to track drug dealers. Of course, one could always follow the ID4 example and triangulate cells from a single location, preferably using equipment that any small-time operator can find in his own car. -- 3bmice

1 0

[noise?] Media
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This was forwarded to me. It was too good not to share... >"Tonight on tales from Encrypt, we have a ghastly little story involving >Congress and your Web page." --- | If you're not part of the solution, You're part of the precipitate. | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com|

1 0

Re: Encrypting ZIP disks
by David Lesher / hated by RBOC's in 5 states 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Proving a crack with revealing how is trivial. Someone sends Paul cyphertext; he returns clear. Proving the opposite without posting the code is a joke. -- 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: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks mailing list
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sandy Sandfort wrote: > On Sun, 26 Jan 1997, Toto wrote: > > I think that anyone who thinks that moderation is, or could ever be, > > anything other than a dance into the arms of the establishment, is > > already crazy. > Apparently, Toto does not know very much about John or me or our > relationships with the "Establishment." It is who are using a > intellectually dishonest smokescreen of "freedom of speech" in > order to disrupt and hamper the work of Cypherpunks who are > dancing into the arms of the "Establishment." [some snip] > This is a voluntary list folks. We tried incivility and that did > not work. Right now we are experimenting with reasoned discourse > in an atmosphere of interpersonal respect and good will. If most > list members like the change, it will continue. If not, then we > can go back to the swill or perhaps try something else. In the > meantime, get over it. If you really like flames and spam, show > John and me how it really should be done. Start another list. > Of course squating and claim jumping appeal to the lazy a lot > more than homesteading. Actually, it is a certifiable fact that the list subscribers can jump to the unmoderated list whenever they want to. It is also a certifiable fact that they (97% or so) have *not* done so. Because of these facts, I must conclude that either: 1. The subscribers have spoken by staying put, or, 2. The subscribers are so lazy and unaware of what's going on that they've just left things as is. Now, in my opinion, we've come to this: Some people here will hold the optimistic view of the bulk of the subscribers, and others will hold the pessimistic view (the bulk will presumably be in-between).

3 2

Re: PGPmail for Windows, Version 4.5
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:45 AM 1/26/97 -0500, Duncan Frissell wrote: >Anyone running Windows 95 who hasn't grabbed the beta of PGPmail 4.5 from >http://www.pgp.com/ is crazy. It works seamlessly with Netscape 3.0 and >Eudora Pro 3.0. The 30-day demo of Eudora Pro is at: http://www.eudora.com/prodemo/. PGPmail 4.5 now has beta 10 available - the download is smaller than beta 9. Eudora Lite 3.0.1 also supports plugins, so it should work. It also supports filters, which has allowed probable flames to quietly vanish from my inbox :-) BTW, from a non-government-user perspective, the questions asked to establish export permission are nicely worded. Rather than asking "Are you a US Subject", and "Do you agree to follow every vague detail of the Export Laws", as some sites do, it asks > - Is the requesting computer located within the United States? [N/Y] > - Do you acknowledge affirmatively that you understand that PGPmail is > subject to export controls under the Export Administration Act and > that you cannot export the software without a license? [N/Y] > - Do you certify that you are not on any of the United States Government's > lists of export-precluded parties or otherwise ineligible to receive this > transfer of cryptographic software subject to export controls under the > Export Administration Act? and then has a button saying "I certify that the above answers are truthful", which is flexible enough that I don't have to feel bad about not being _absolutely_ certain that my packets aren't getting routed through Canada, or that I'm not on some list that bans telephone company employees from downloading cryptographic software on Tuesdays, or whether computers 30 feet above the US are subject to this week's export rules :-), or having to say "No" to Question 2 because I understand that you _can_ export this software without a license (just do it) even though the Feds disapprove.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

1 0

Re: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before....
by Michael Bailey 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yes that would be cool so i could test it out against my decompiler that seems to do great agains encrypted txt. With the realease of the usa policy on encryption do you all think that the 160 level will be increased or will they make new standards. ---------- > From: ichudov(a)algebra.com > To: DataETRsch(a)aol.com > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Subject: Re: If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before.... > Date: Thursday, January 23, 1997 8:06 PM > > Mr. Ramos, > > > You promised to release the algorithm of your program as well as > crypto-relevant source code. You promised to do it atfer a month, and > the time has come. We are eagerly awaiting the promised code. > > Thank you so much for your openness. > > igor > > DataETRsch(a)aol.com wrote: > > > > {If you were unable to download UDCM V2.0 before, we're extremely sorry.} > > {UDCM's web site may have been under construction during the time you > > visited.} > > {UDCM's web site has finished undergoing its changes and will operate > > correctly.} > > {UDCM V2.0 has been extensively modified from its previous variation.} > > {Digital signaturing and public key cryptosystem capabilities have been > > added.} > > {UDCM's DS and PKCS techniques do NOT make use of conventional PN factoring.} > > {UDCM's source code is currently unavailable. PLEASE DO NOT REQUEST IT.} > > {UDCM's on-line help documentation has also been extensively modified.} > > {This advertisement has also been modified.} > > > > Hello, > > > > Greetings! I am Jeremy K. Yu-Ramos, president of DataET Research, Data > > Engineering Technologies. I am sending you this message to let you know that > > DataET Research has recently initiated the distribution of UDCM, Universal > > Data Cryptography Module. UDCM implements a revolutionarily new, extremely > > advanced and sophisticated, digital data encryption algorithm named IMDMP, > > Integrated Mathematical Data Manipulation and Positioning. > > > > UDCM (the IMDMP algorithm)... > > > > o Is a royalty-free Windows DLL module featuring advanced cryptography. > > o Contains more than 150 procedures and functions. > > o Is a very cost-effective size of only 60 kilobytes. > > o Implements the IMDMP encryption algorithm. > > o Allows encryption keys as large as 2048 bits. > > o Includes 18 sub-algorithms. > > o Processes all forms of binary and ASCII files. > > o Allows multiple encryption layer levels. > > o Has absolutely no back-doors or magical keys. > > o Includes time and date locking features. > > o Includes file specific unique encryption features. > > o Includes file authentication guard features. > > o Includes digital signaturing capabilities. > > o Implements the public key cryptosystem method of security. > > o Includes data importance and sensitivity stamping features. > > > > UDCM, being a Windows DLL module, can be accessed through programs developed > > with popular application and database programming languages and environments > > such as: C, C++, Visual Basic, PowerBuilder, Delphi, OOP Pascal, Turbo > > Pascal, dBase, Paradox, Access, Sybase, Oracle, etc. > > > > DataET Research has released a shareware version of UDCM named UDCM V2.0. > > > > To download UDCM V2.0 for free, please go to: > > http://members.aol.com/dataetrsch/udcm.html. > > > > I hope you will consider applying UDCM in the software you develop. Thank-you > > very much for your time. > > > > Sincerely, > > > > Jeremy K.Yu-Ramos > > President > > DataET Research > > Data Engineering Technologies > > > > > > - Igor.

1 0

Humor
by Casey Iverson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Watch out for the Goodtimes Virus Goodtimes will re-write your hard drive, scramble any disks that are even close to your computer, recalibrate your refrigerator's coolness setting so all your ice cream goes melty,demagnetize the strips on all your credit cards, screw up the tracking on your television and use subspace field harmonics to scratch any CD's you try to play. It will give your ex-girlfriend your new phone number. It will mix Kool-aid into your fishtank. It will drink all your beer and leave its socks out on the coffee table when there's company coming over. It will put a dead kitten in the back pocket of your good suit pants and hide your car keys when you are late for work. Goodtimes will make you fall in love with a penguin. It will give you nightmares about circus midgets. It will pour sugar in your gas tank and shave off both your eyebrows while dating your current boyfriend behind your back and billing the dinner and hotel room to your Visa card. It will seduce your grandmother. It does not matter if she is dead, such is the power of Goodtimes, it reaches out beyond the grave to sully those things we hold most dear. It moves your car randomly around parking lots so you can't find it. It will kick your dog. It will leave libidinous messages on your boss's voice mail in your voice! It is insidious and subtle. It is dangerous and terrifying to behold. It is also a rather interesting shade of mauve. Goodtimes will give you Dutch Elm disease. It will leave the toilet seat up. It will make a batch of Methamphetamine in your bathtub and then leave bacon cooking on the stove while it goes out to chase gradeschoolers with your new snowblower. These are just a few signs... Just be very careful! CI

1 0

Re: Rejection policy of the Cypherpunks maiing list
by Rabid Wombat 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Regardless of which side you take on this matter, remember that the issue was forced by the actions of an extremely small segment of the list "population." The decision of that small segment to excercise its rights "in extreme" passed the tolerance thresholds of increasing numbers of list members, and the end result was a "restriction" adopted/elected/forced-on (colour it however you chose) on the entire "population." "Rights" are derived from social responsibility; its either that, or the "law of the jungle." -r.w. On Fri, 24 Jan 1997, Dale Thorn wrote: > Cynthia H. Brown wrote: > > Beauty, flames and censorship are all in the eyes of the beholder. > > However, by providing both "raw" and "cooked" versions of the list, Sandy <SNIP> > I apologize for intruding, Cynthia, but I have a question about "doing > as s/he sees fit". For example, what is the list? Is it the equipment, > is it the software that runs on the equipment, or is it the contents of > the list (my writings, your writings, etc.)? If I had to rank them, I > would rank the contents as being more important than the equipment or > the software. That said, how can those contents be considered the > property of the list owner/manager to do with as they see fit? > > I do understand that they have the right to manage the list as they see > fit, and to move the messages into whatever buckets seem appropriate, > but your phrasing suggested more to me, and I'm puzzled by it. > > >

2 1

Re: Fighting the cybercensor. (fwd)
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:12 AM 1/26/97 -0600, Jim Choate <ravage(a)EINSTEIN.ssz.com> wrote: >stewart> Nonsense - the net doesn't "belong" to "Singapore or China" - > >The part of it that comes out of their pocketbook does. Just like the part of >'the net' that I pay for belongs to me. The net is a bunch of computers, >running software, hooked together over cables and other links. Each and >EVERY ONE of these require installation, upkeep, repair, and utility >support. This costs money. He who pays the money owns the net, everybody >else is along for the ride. For individuals, and voluntary groups of individuals, that's certainly true. But what about taxpayers involuntarily paying for a network run by bureaucrats - does each individual have an equal right to decide what he/she will say or read on the net, or are some individuals more equal than others? And if so, why is it the armed thugs who want to censor people who get to be more equal? It's the usual insoluable problem about how to decide policy for involuntarily-funded services - the government is morally obligated to follow the wishes of everybody paying for them, which are in radical conflict. It's bad enough with schools... The Arpanet had its Acceptable Use Policy, which limited speech on goverment-funded parts of the net to non-commercial use; one of main drivers behind the Commercial Internet Exchange was to allow businesses to send each other email without being limited by it. >ps I also support France's current attempt at forcing the Georgia university > web site on French soil to use French. And then there's the French Telecom Monopoly (until it falls apart) - if you don't like the rules the bureaucrats make for what you can say or read, you're not even allowed to build your own telecom network or obtain services from providers who don't censor what you can say or read. And I also don't support the French government's attempt at forcing its own subjects on French soil to use French. Asking them nicely, or running propaganda against Academically-incorrect French, is something the Academie can do itself. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

1 0

Re: Cellular phone triangulation
by snow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Our prisons are overflowing with drug dealers and drug users who were > put there by quite ordinary means which didn't involve violating or > discarding the rights of the ordinary citizen. Yet we keep hearing Wanna bet? > do so. > Not to mention larger and larger amounts of money. > But, maybe if you became a 'drug dealer'... I'd rather become an "arms dealer".

1 0