December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Moderation, Tim, Sandy, me, etc. * Strong crypto == DES?!
by Jason Vagner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Re: the below. Easily the best and most intelligent suggestion so >far. Why couldn't Sandy and John with all their experience think >of this? Actually, I've been sitting on the sidelines, somewhat bemused, that this far into online living the cypherpunks have to rehash this themselves. I've seen this entire exchange at least three times in the last two years. None of the lists survived. Good luck.. >> If I might make a suggestion: >> Some people want moderation. That's fine, I've never been very big on >> letting other people choose what I read, but some people want it. >> For those who want it, let someone moderate the list for as long as >> they care to do it. Approved messages get a "X-sandy-approved" >> header. The responsibility for setting up a filter to toss everything >> that doesn't have the header is the responsibility of the end user. >> Toad will need to filter incoming posts to make sure they don't come >> "pre-approved", but that's the only hole I can think of. >> Everyone gets all of the Cypherpunks list. Those who want moderation >> filter the unapproved posts, those who want all of it get all of it. >> Hopefully, this will make (almost) everyone happy. --- Jason Vagner <jlv(a)sig.bsh.com> Resist KRAP and GAK. Police States Are Bad. "All that one can give is what is going to happen, which may have little to do with a present that you can grasp." - Avital Ronell.

1 0

Re: Getting into MIT is impossible
by P.J. Westerhof 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 18:12 4-02-97 -0800, you wrote: >Erland van Lidth de Jeude is a MIT grad. He played the big badass in "Stir >Crazy." Computer science major, BTW. > He is quite a singer too (at least he was some years ago on Dutch TV). Perhaps that made the difference. ;-) Gr. Peter _________________________________________________________ P.J. Westerhof LL.D e-mail P.J.WESTER(a)NGI.NL | Computerlaw voice +31-347-375400 | Legal informatics fax/data +31-347-375400 | IT - consultancy Web: www.ngi.nl/cr/ | Soaring _________________________________________________________

2 1

No Subject
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

IDEA vs DES vs Blowfish vs RSAREF Which of these symmetric algorithms are the hardest to break and what are their characteristics. //Anon

1 0

Re: Cypherpunks FOIA request
by pdh＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:40 AM 2/5/1997, Greg Broiles wrote: > On 1/18/97, I sent freedom of information act requests to the FBI (main and > San Francisco offices), CIA, NSA, and Secret Service, asking them for copies > of information in their files relating to or referring to the cypherpunks > list, the cypherpunks meetings, and copies of any messages sent from or to > "cypherpunks(a)toad.com". > To date, I have received three responses: one from the SF office of the FBI, > indicating that they have no records responsive to my request; one from the > NSA, indicating that they are processing my request, and one from the Secret > Service, asking for a copy of my signature. (I've got no clue why they want > that; unless I screwed up, I believe my initial request was signed.) Have these organizations been known to lie? What penalties does the organization or its employees face when they do so? Have these penalties ever been applied? Also, which exceptions in the FOIA law would allow them to respond dishonestly? Inquiring minds want to know! Peter Hendrickson pdh(a)best.com

2 1

No Subject
by Huge Cajones Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

IDEA vs DES vs Blowfish vs RSAREF Which of these symmetric algorithms are the hardest to break and what are their characteristics. //Anon

1 0

Re: My Departure, Moderation, and "Ownership of the List"
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:20 am -0500 2/5/97, Matts Kallioniemi wrote: >Another way to get rid of the totally clueless and involuntary subscribers >would be to require subscription requests to be PGP signed and acknowledged >by the subscriber. Now, this sounds familiar... Everyone remember Eric's attempt to force signed messages? Herding cats, indeed. Cheers, Bob ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by stupidity." -- Jerry Pournelle The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/

1 0

Re: "alt.cypherpunks" people?
by Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anil Das <das(a)sgi.com> writes: > Adam Back wrote: > > > > What do people think of starting an alt.cypherpunks USENET newsgroup? > > > > I have only one objection. I will never post to an Usenet group > under my real email address for fear of ending up in spammer > databases. > > -- > Anil Das > Learn to use an anonymous remailer. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

4 3

Re: Ireland: Bid To Ban "Tamper Proof" Phones
by Phil Karn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks for the info about the origins of the European GAK initiative. It would still be interesting to know how much of a hand the US has had (and continues to have) in influencing the crypto policies of other countries. Thanks also for the correction regarding divorce in Ireland. My sincere apologies if I offended anybody over there with my "socially backward" comment. Ireland is by no means unique even among western nations in having certain restrictive laws and practices regarding private social behavior. In general the US is not much better, and parts (especially the southeast) are probably worse. It is interesting that you would mention political terrorism and drug smuggling as prime factors pushing towards GAK in Ireland. The forces at work in the US government push towards GAK are quite similar. I am fond of saying that "national security" and "drugs" have become the root passwords to the US Constitution... Question: have there been any problems with the use of strong encryption (PGP, SSH, etc) on the Internet in Ireland? Is it widely used over there? Phil

1 0

Re: Cypherpunks FOIA request
by Peter Hendrickson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:40 AM 2/5/1997, Greg Broiles wrote: > On 1/18/97, I sent freedom of information act requests to the FBI (main and > San Francisco offices), CIA, NSA, and Secret Service, asking them for copies > of information in their files relating to or referring to the cypherpunks > list, the cypherpunks meetings, and copies of any messages sent from or to > "cypherpunks(a)toad.com". > To date, I have received three responses: one from the SF office of the FBI, > indicating that they have no records responsive to my request; one from the > NSA, indicating that they are processing my request, and one from the Secret > Service, asking for a copy of my signature. (I've got no clue why they want > that; unless I screwed up, I believe my initial request was signed.) Have these organizations been known to lie? What penalties does the organization or its employees face when they do so? Have these penalties ever been applied? Also, which exceptions in the FOIA law would allow them to respond dishonestly? Inquiring minds want to know! Peter Hendrickson pdh(a)best.com

1 0

Re: John's: In anarchy -everyone responsible
by Attila T. Hun 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- on or about 970204:2343 jim bell <jimbell(a)pacifier.com> said: +At 09:05 PM 2/4/97 +0000, Attila T. Hun wrote: +> In a "popular" anarchy, Jim Bell's assassination politics make +> perfectly good sense; but, a "popular" anarchy is not an _anarchy_. +I guess I don't understand the distinction you are trying to make, +between a "popular anarchy" and an "anarchy." Maybe you were trying +to distinguish between "dictatorship of the few (or one)" and +"dictatorship of the many (perhaps a majority)" but it didn't come out +very understandably. +Put simply, "anarchy is not the lack of order. It is the lack of +_orders_." disagree. pure anarchy is not the lack of "orders" --pure anarchy implies that everyone is imbued with that perfect sense of responsibility. +> anarchy is only possible in an ideal world where _everyone_ +> assumes not only responsibility for themselves, but for the common +> good. no malice, no greed, no need for assassination politics.... +No, that's traditional thinking and that's wrong. See AP part 8. +Freud believed (as "everyone" else believed, even myself, before AP) +that anarchy was inherently unstable. But it ISN'T, if the tools of +AP are used to stabilize it. And no, no altruism is necessary for AP +to work as well; no individuals are being asked to sacrifice +themselves for the common good. Rather, they are given the +opportunity to work to achieve a reward offered, cumulatively, by a +number of citizens. aah, but that is the difference between a _pure_ anarchy and a _popular_ anarchy. A pure _anarchy_ is sufficiently idealistic in that _noone_ lacks the necessary resonsibility to keep society moving, each individual in their own niche. As long as there is perfect responsibility in a perfect anarchy, then there is no need for AP. AP is a negative, or _punative_, influence; I might liken it to the Catholic Church which is a religion of fear, and an instrument of political control. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: latin1 Comment: No safety this side of the grave. Never was; never will be iQCVAwUBMvixAL04kQrCC2kFAQECsQQAlPSQRpEE2dAKkqrWSlPf79QhSBtYbjXa rEyAlOrmi8NOxgyb8hGF/VwVkURUKnPr4gGJW9JvwuPB2x/AQeT11ZEQyVqeFGNF 0W6WR7yv3XsOT9UM6JCP9hFLWU33BumcPd26w8f/Z5mx87qEUoXeJD4ApLv5QNI3 WlyL0xDT1PM= =sfD3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1