December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Who's Censoring Who?
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To Thorn and Cuckoo (great juxtaposition): Your exhortation and rhetoric are deft, but I'm not ready to take sides just yet. In fact, I can't figure what the sides are, if any, in this anti-herd of caterwauling anarchic cats. Instead, I'm relishing and laughing at the spitting and farting contest, and hoping this gameboying will prepare for the genuinely tough battles in high stakes info-wargames. There, wipe and sniff that exhort and rhet.

1 0

Interesting Survey on Computer Security
by Derrick Storren 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This artilce has some interesting info on how bad infosec on the web is. <http://www.infowar.com/infosec/introduction.html> ---DS

1 0

ping
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ping -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred "I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence." Mahatma Gandhi

1 0

Modified Clipper chip - HA!
by Rick Osborne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

For all of you who didn't see the last X-Files ... Mulder made a visit to The Lone Gunman about breaking into some impenetrable system. Byers points out that "Yeah, that system is pretty hard to get into." Mulder then inquires "well how did you guys get in?". Byers replies cooly: "We used a modified Clipper chip we bought back from the Chinese." I didn't stop laughing for 5 minutes ... :) _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ "Women. You can't live with 'em. . . and yet they're everywhere."

1 0

Re: New X-Ray Imager
by Three Blind Mice 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Tue, 4 Feb 1997, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Let's remember though that perception of security applies not > only to passengers, but also to potential terrorists. If they *think* > that they would not be able to bring a bomb easily, they would be less > inclined to do so. Do you seriously believe that a terrorist who wishes to take an explosive device on board a plane fears the security of an airport? It's not possible to put such a thought into anyone but a prole; we are not proles, and they are not proles. The real effect and intent is obvious. --3bmice

1 0

Re: this has gone on long enough
by Sean Roach 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:00 PM 2/10/97 -0800, I wrote: >As of sometime in the last 96 hours I have been forcefully unsubscribed from >this list. This action was not of my free will and not one that I think was ... I forgot to check my mail before sending this. This is not to say that there was mail there, merely that eudora verifies mail by password. Since I had not checked my mail, the last message was unverified. This is to verify it. I sent it, I admit it.

1 0

You guys/gals oughta get a kick outta this guy
by Rick Osborne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yet another person who needs a good stern talking to by the nearest cypherpunk --- this guy posted to comp.lang.perl.misc with the following blasphemy, which I luaghed at until I had tears in my eyes. --BEGIN COMPLETE STUPIDITY-- I want to make it executable to protect the source code from being read. I don't want the source code available because I don't want people looking for security holes. --END COMPLETE STUPIDITY-- If anyone wants to spam this guy, or at least show him the error of his ways, his sig explains the necessary info: David K. djk490s(a)nic.smsu.edu _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ If the ionization rate is constant for all ectoplasmic entities, we could really bust some heads! In a spiritual sense, of course.

2 1

Re: Metzger, Denninger square off
by snow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> At 01:24 PM 2/7/97 -0500, you wrote: > [the proposed new TLDs] > .web Actually a good idea :) A lot of the .com congestion is > from companies that are virtually-hosted for the sole > purpose of running a Web site with the www. prefix. This one might not work. There are a lot of people who seem to think that you need a www.---.--- to get netscape to work. > .nom Nah. Just not classy enough. Now, a .nym TLD... :-) I think they should use .vain.

1 0

Codebreakers delivered OK
by Peter M Allan 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Gary, Thanks for the book, which arrived safely (last week, when I was on leave and tiling my bathroom). Cypherpunks, In mid-December I asked on this list whether people would recommend buying books from Gary Rasmussen. Message-Id: <9612131954.AA28856(a)clare.risley.aeat.co.uk> Subject: Would you send money to Gary Rasmussen ? I got several replies for, and none against. Thanks to those who replied. I am now pleased to add my data point. He has sent my copy of Kahn's Codebreakers. The delay from mid-December was almost entirely caused by banking issues. Money transfers are not as fast or cheap as I think they should be in 1997. Gary tells me he may in future get equipped to take credit cards. His catalogue contains stuff sure to interest anybody with plenty of time. Here is his comment: > NOTE: An additional benefit of ACA membership is eligibility for discounts > on a selection of new (unused) books on the history and practice of > traditional ciphers, codes, and signals intelligence from Classical Crypto > Books. For a free catalog, send email to RagyR(a)aol.com. -- Peter Allan peter.allan(a)aeat.co.uk

1 0

Re: Who's Censoring Who?
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

John Young wrote: > To Thorn and Cuckoo (great juxtaposition): > Your exhortation and rhetoric are deft, but I'm not ready to take > sides just yet. In fact, I can't figure what the sides are, if any, in this > anti-herd of caterwauling anarchic cats. > Instead, I'm relishing and laughing at the spitting and farting contest, > and hoping this gameboying will prepare for the genuinely tough > battles in high stakes info-wargames. > There, wipe and sniff that exhort and rhet. I don't want to make any suggestions about having a clue or whatever, but just in case you didn't know, John, I'm not censoring anything, nor is cuckoo, nor is Dr. Vulis, nor are 1300-plus other subscribers to this list. It is all being done by a central "authority". Now you can't figure out who's on what side? Or you just can't decide who to line up with? In case you hadn't noticed, the censorship has been admitted a failure, although the denial from the central "authority" is so thick that some folks on the list will be hoping for Santa to come save them for some time to come.

1 0