December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:40 PM 1/27/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > >jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> wrote in article <5ch9f2$cuu(a)life.ai.mit.edu>... > >> Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to >> prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see >> any recognition of this fact. > >Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility >or consistency. "I love you too! B^) Question: What is a "whacko solution"? Why do you believe AP qualifies? Can you list any other "solutions" which are, indeed, "solutions" which are NOT "whacko" by your definition? (I'm trying to determine whether or not you even agree that there is a problem!) Let me pose an issue here by counterexample: Suppose there was a plantation, containing a master and his slaves. You are told that the slaves are "unhappy". (They're unhappy because they're slaves!!!) That's a "problem." Okay, let me propose that there are at least two broad "solutions" to this "problem": First, change the working conditions just enough to make the slaves acceptably happy. Or, second, eliminate the slavery altogether. Both are "solutions". The first, obviously, is only a "solution" from the stanpoint of the master. The second appears to be only a "solution" from the standpoint of the slaves, since the master obviously doesn't want to lose his slaves! Could you legitimately call the second solution a "whacko solution"? (It would be, from the limited standpoint of the master.) How about the first? That's the problem with using such a poorly-defined term as "whacko" to describe anything, particularly when many people don't agree. And here's a question: What do you mean by "credibility"? I've explained it in enough detail to convince a rather substantial number of intelligent people that it is likely to be possible, and to some it sounds like it is desireable. >If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out >on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be >dead as a doornail in a week. A claim which doesn't disprove the functionality of AP one whit. In fact, quite the opposite: If AP was, indeed, non-functional, then nobody would bother with me at all. The fact that you think they would shows that you believe AP threatens SOMEBODY. This means that your arguments, as minimal as they are, are internally contradictory. They simply don't hold together. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: Cats Out of Bags
by atb＠purple.reddesign.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> David Aaron seems to make lying out of his ass a hobby. His >talk at the RSA conference was such a load of bullshit it wasn't even >funny. > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export >allowance. They said it was going to undermine their national >security." I'm sure a few countries are upset because the US policy may in some way impede their citizens ability to adopt STRONG cryptography and secure their information infrastructure, thus injuring their national security. Remember, Aaron is employee of the government. He talks in doublespeak, Angooki Taipu atb(a)purple.reddesign.com

3 2

Re:re : Best Computer School?
by ja94a08＠tdi.itm.edu.my 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

what about purdue and caltech ? anyone has Carnegie Mellon University (C.M.U.) in Pittsburgh www ? he he man > From owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Wed Jan 29 14:57 SGT 1997 > Date: Tue, 28 Jan 1997 20:23:53 -0500 > From: Matthew Toth <mst114(a)psu.edu> > To: SpyKing <spyking(a)thecodex.com> > Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Subject: Re: Best Computer School? > > MIT is one the best schools in the country for C.S. > Close behind is Carnegie Mellon University (C.M.U.) in Pittsburgh, > PA. (the folks who put out CERT.) Not sure how much Crypto they do, though. > >

1 0

Re: New export controls to include code signing applications
by pgut001＠cs.auckland.ac.nz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The Men in Black made Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> write: >[Listing specific software prohibited from export] >"c.2. "Software" to certify "software" controlled by 5D002.c.1; " > >And, btw, virus checkers are also prohibited from export. Makes you wonder. > >"c.3. "Software" designed or modified to protect against malicious computer >damage, e.g., viruses;" > >That includes every firewall product, every virus checker, every data security >product, and this regardless if the product uses crypto or not. The new >regulations go way beyond controlling crypto. The USG, in a massive power >grip, has put data security as a whole on the export control list. These aren't new regulations, they're old regulations which have resurfaced. I've managed to obtain a copy of part of the old pre-Wassenaar COCOM regulations, which contain the magic lines: 5.D.2.c Specific "software" as follows: 1. "Software" having the characteristics, or performing or simulating the functions of the equipment embargoed by 5.A.2 or 5.B.2. 2. "Software" to certify "software" embargoed by 5.D.2.c.1. 3. "Software" designed or modified to protect against malicious computer damage, e.g. viruses. This is from the October 1991 version. By October 1996 this had changed to: 5D002 c Specific "software" as follows: 1. "Software" having the characteristics, or performing or simulating the functions of the equipment embargoed by 5A002 or 5B002. 2. "Software" to certify "software" specified in 5D002.c.1. It looks like someone used the old COCOM regs as the basis for the EAR rather than the newer Wassenaar ones. The two are almost identical anyway except for a few minor points. It's likely that the anti-virus clause is due to bureaucratic bungling rather than malicious intent. Peter.

1 0

DES challenge status?
by Ben Byer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- What exactly is the status of RSA's DES contest? I understand that at least two of the smaller contests have already been cracked, but I haven't seen much beyond theoretical discussion on the list on the topic of the DES contest. What work has been started on this contest? I am aware of Peter Trei's excellent deskr software for win32, but at the moment it chokes on RSA's real contest data as distributed. Has anybody yet worked on porting a version to x86 Linux, with nice, fast, inline assembly? How about a keyrange-server? This contest is so huge that any procedural innovations will probably be much more helpful than getting an early start. Has anybody started work on this yet, or is everyone else waiting for someone else to do it? - -- Ben Byer root(a)bushing.plastic.crosslink.net I am not a bushing -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQB1AwUBMvAb/LD5/Q37XXHFAQFxtQL/b7PeoWoO8gW0R35eOcA7yDmNOzg5IbIX xbrWkX0D7Tnj+8BxeQkRs2lOhhB6D6V/oh7RO6zMUwbNVaPDng0vjZXEmHAUVPnL XwSfekx47rgc43mVuXJoyval1zZuKDjE =h76F -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: c2 internet accounts
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM" <dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com> writes: > Sandy Sandfort <sandfort(a)crl.com> writes: > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > SANDY SANDFORT > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > > > C'punks, > > > > On Tue, 28 Jan 1997, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: > > > > > does c2net still offer internet accounts? I liked their > > > offer for internet accounts with a 5 mb web site via > > > telnet. does anyone else know of a place for cheap > > > telnet only accounts? > > > > C2Net no longer offers new shell accounts and we are phasing out > > pre-existing accounts. We still offer virtual web hosting. > > > > > > S a n d y > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > > > > Check out Sameer's net.scum web page for some important information on C2. > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps The above article was highly crypto- and cypher-punks relevant and not a flame. Sandy Sandfort tossed it in the "flames" bucket because Sameer is Sandy's employer. Sandy won't permit any criticism of his employer on the censored list - an obvious conflict of interest. Sandy even refers to C2Net as royal "we". Recall also that Sandy Sandford published an ass-licking article about Sameer in _Wired magazine without revealing that he works for Sameer. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: Physician, Heal Thyself!
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

OKSAS <oksas(a)asimov.montclair.edu> writes: > On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > SANDY SANDFORT > > . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . > > > > C'punks, > > > > On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Anonymous wrote: > > > > > This is the stuff Sandy would presumably dump into > > > his "not fit for True Cypherpunks" pile, except that he wrote it, and so > > > is by definition approved. > > > > It was not approved for the moderated list. I sent my comments to the > > flames list where they belonged. (It went to the unedited list too, > > but that's fair game as well.) Sorry you didn't understand that. > > > > > And I urge our Enlightened Leader to take his own medicine. Stop flaming > > > the list and calling it mere commentary. > > > > So let me see if I've got this, this list should be open to all flamers > > EXCEPT me? Curious. At any rate, I am going to take anonymous' advice. > > I will largely refrain from addressing any of the garbage that ends up on > > the flame and spam lists. You guys are mostly just talking to yourselves > > anyway. > > So how would you define a flame??? Seems more REASONABLE minds > want to know???? Oksas, as you see your innocent question was classified as "flame" and dumped into "cyperpunks-flames", as are most questions about the moderator's abuse. Like many homosexuals, Sandy Sandford harbors a pathological hatred of women and is always glad to shut one up. I hope he gets AIDS soon. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Re: Cats Out of Bags
by Angooki Taipu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> David Aaron seems to make lying out of his ass a hobby. His >talk at the RSA conference was such a load of bullshit it wasn't even >funny. > "Other governments were upset with the 56-bit export >allowance. They said it was going to undermine their national >security." I'm sure a few countries are upset because the US policy may in some way impede their citizens ability to adopt STRONG cryptography and secure their information infrastructure, thus injuring their national security. Remember, Aaron is employee of the government. He talks in doublespeak, Angooki Taipu atb(a)purple.reddesign.com

1 0

Re: Best Computer School?
by Erp 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 29 Jan 1997, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ichudov(a)algebra.com writes: > > > moscow state university in russia is not bad also. > > > > they teach lots of theory... which is good. > > > > - Igor. > > > > Do they have a master's program in computer science? :-) --- I looked up on Moscow State University the other day, after having seen the message which brought this question. So yes, they do have a Master's program in Computer Science, at least they claim to have one. Erp > > --- > > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM > Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps >

1 0

Re: Fighting the cybercensor
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:40 PM 1/27/97 -0500, Phillip M. Hallam-Baker wrote: > > >jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> wrote in article <5ch9f2$cuu(a)life.ai.mit.edu>... > >> Look, I've proposed what I consider to be a remarkably consistent method to >> prevent the kind of political tyranny that you criticize, and I don't see >> any recognition of this fact. > >Thats because its a whacko solution that has no credibility >or consistency. "I love you too! B^) Question: What is a "whacko solution"? Why do you believe AP qualifies? Can you list any other "solutions" which are, indeed, "solutions" which are NOT "whacko" by your definition? (I'm trying to determine whether or not you even agree that there is a problem!) Let me pose an issue here by counterexample: Suppose there was a plantation, containing a master and his slaves. You are told that the slaves are "unhappy". (They're unhappy because they're slaves!!!) That's a "problem." Okay, let me propose that there are at least two broad "solutions" to this "problem": First, change the working conditions just enough to make the slaves acceptably happy. Or, second, eliminate the slavery altogether. Both are "solutions". The first, obviously, is only a "solution" from the stanpoint of the master. The second appears to be only a "solution" from the standpoint of the slaves, since the master obviously doesn't want to lose his slaves! Could you legitimately call the second solution a "whacko solution"? (It would be, from the limited standpoint of the master.) How about the first? That's the problem with using such a poorly-defined term as "whacko" to describe anything, particularly when many people don't agree. And here's a question: What do you mean by "credibility"? I've explained it in enough detail to convince a rather substantial number of intelligent people that it is likely to be possible, and to some it sounds like it is desireable. >If anyone tried to set up such a market and a price went out >on any of the heads of state fantasized about Mr Bell would be >dead as a doornail in a week. A claim which doesn't disprove the functionality of AP one whit. In fact, quite the opposite: If AP was, indeed, non-functional, then nobody would bother with me at all. The fact that you think they would shows that you believe AP threatens SOMEBODY. This means that your arguments, as minimal as they are, are internally contradictory. They simply don't hold together. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0