December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Fw: Police on the Net
by Charley Sparks 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To: EALLENSMITH(a)ocelot.Rutgers.EDU, cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Tue Aug 13 05:55:50 1996 If any of us find the address, please post the addresses here..... - -----Begin Included Message ----- Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 19:08 EDT From: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH(a)ocelot.Rutgers.EDU> To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Cc: First, I'd be interested in knowing some of those online reporting addresses, and how much limits they place on what can be mailed to them... persuading these cops to deal with the improper use of another's computer (i.e., spam) would seem to be a distinct possibility in diverting them from other activities. Second, it would appear possible (unless they're encrypting it) to intercept some of these email lists of theirs - if necessary, by forging a subscribe to an _overseas_ nymserver that isn't too well known (unlike, say, anon.penet.fi). That's about on the same grounds as their mention of "know thine enemy." (It is, of course, pretty certain that various libertarian groups are among those monitored, such as cypherpunks.) Third, this gives additional reasons not to give out one's address to anyone. What people know about me is a post office box and my old address. -Allen - ---- End of forwarded message ---- Cut to save space.... -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCXAwUBMhBRJ+J+JZd/Y4yVAQHjYgQKAiBzkv0iVGlG1wNn3QLJwR/KymkzFeej ByxF4uLs/IuQ9Np7Y0MZ64rmO7O85z6yoL0iZUegmwfQFuoVX+A3XrN0gtMzA3YR dyTaOS63IJ5kyBggrSt0Yx6kVT5FtAIELbb3KVC7+oqa2nsc9/DuC24S3uKsSoDm KZ7/qnHd1nM+Mw== =2i9v -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption Technology
by Bart Croughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Perry Metzger wrote: >Bart Croughs writes: >>When economists say that wages are determined by the amount of >>capital >> invested, they mean on a regional/national level, not on the level of >> individuals. >So, you are saying that if everyone in the country spent their life >savings on building giant green pylons, the capital investment would >drive up everyone's wages? Wow! In fact, we could borrow money >from >other countries to build more green pylons and drive up wages so >fast >we could pay off the resultant debt! >Perry >(PS Please stop posting these things -- you may kill everyone >watching >with laughter.) No, I am not saying that if everyone in the country spent their life savings on building giant green pylons, the capital investment would drive up everyone's wages. You are suggesting that I'm saying this, but it's simply not true. This is called 'setting up a straw man'. I am saying that the fact that American workers are better paid than workers in Third World countries, can be explained for a large part by the fact that there is much more capital invested in the US than in Third World countries. If you still don't understand this, I suggest you study my other posts on this subject, or better still, you study the works of the Austrian economists I've quoted before. Bart Croughs

3 2

PGP...
by sasa.roskar＠uni-lj.si 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'm confused.... if you don't want people to be able to read your email, you code it with PGP or other encoders... but why give away your key on your website to everyone? That makes your email readable to everyone... doesn't it? Oh well... I hope someone can explain this to me... Roki

4 3

Re: Read; NOW
by pjn＠nworks.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> >> Hi I'm Unix Code and have a few things to ask...(it may not go >> with Cryptography but go ahead and read) > Sad. You read my mind. P.J. pjn(a)nworks.com ... Smell The Roses And Eventually You'll Inhale A Bee. ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR]

1 0

thank god and phil...
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

All I can say is thank God and Phil for PGP... My next X was using the 'puter last night and opened my email folders and was rooting around... I had to "fumble" my pass phrase and finally "give up" saying that the damn PGP was broke again... we all know it don't break !! This could have cost me a fortune in divorce court !!

1 0

Re: National Socio-Economic Security Need for Encryption Technology
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:02 PM 8/11/96 -0400, Perry E. Metzger wrote: > >I failed to note obvious counterexamples. Well known authors get giant >advances for books written with manual typewriters. Minimum wage >workers routinely operate expensive equipment. Workers doing the same >job in different places using identical equipment that cost identical >sums earn different salaries. > >Clearly, wages are defined by supply and demand -- not by "capital >investment". In the long run, employers will bid wages up to the level of discounted value of marginal product of the labor -- the present value of the future "price" of the increase in output ascribable to the added worker. It never ceases to amaze me that there are people in this country who actually believe that the average American in poorer now than in 1970. I can only be those who were unconscious in 1970. DCF

1 0

Re: "X-Ray Gun" for imperceptible searches
by Charley Sparks 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I thought metal collanders on the cranium were to prevent space aliens from reading our thoughts and controlling our minds.... Guess I'll have to come up with a better solution... mine seems to have worked thus far, though Charley > >"Erik E. Fair" (Time Keeper) <fair(a)cesium.clock.org> writes: > >> I wonder how well the imager works through mylar or gold lame' clothing (or >> other high-metal content clothing)? > >Have you ever wondered why Tim May wears a protective layer of aluminum >foil on his head? (And lead foil wrapped around his balls.) > >--- > >Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM >Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps >

1 0

Re: [NOISE] "X-Ray Gun" for imperceptible searches
by Peter Trei 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim writes: > I don't see how "remote scanning" of the population at large, without > probable cause, is much different from the cops listening in from a > distance with parabolic antennas. Both cases involve detection of signals > emitted from the target. And yet such long-distance interception is not > allowed without a warrant. I vaguely remember another possibly relevant precedent, where a judge ruled that a warrant was required before a thermal imager could be used to look at a house suspected by the police of being a (pot) grow house. Peter Trei trei(a)process.com

1 0

Fw: 1024-bit keys
by David.K.Merriman＠toad.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To: spencer(a)luckman.com, cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Tue Aug 13 10:36:48 1996 Absent any ability to cite a chapter-and-verse for making such a statement, and considering the vagueness of it, I would suggest that it either be clarified, justified, or removed. I would think that, in it's present form, that statement leaves Luckman in no small amount of jeopardy: if true, but misunderstood because of lack of reference, anyone violating it may seek redress against Luckman in the event of prosecution by some law enforcement agency. If untrue, Luckman could be considered equally liable for any real or perceived lost income because of an erroneous limitation, when it's incorrectness is discovered. - -----Begin Included Message ----- Date: Mon, 12 Aug 1996 17:00:42 -0700 From: Spencer Yuen <spencer(a)luckman.com> (by way of Technical Support via Heidi <heidi(a)luckman.com>) To: merriman(a)shiner.amaonline.com Cc: David, to my knowledge- it's the latter. U.S. prevents Verisign from deploying keys greater than 512 bits to Web servers outside the U.S.. And no, I can't tell you the Federal Regulation, Title, Section. >"Also, please note that you cannot send keys longer than 512 to servers >outside the United States." > >I would like to ask for clarification on this point. Is this meant to say >that a server inside the United States is not allowed to use a 512+ bit key >with a client outside the U.S., or that a Web Commander server outside the >U.S. may not employ a key of greater than 512 bits? In either case, what is >the justification for such a statement/restriction? If a Federal >regulation, could you please cite the Title and Section? > ===================================================================== | Spencer Yuen | Luckman Interactive | | spencer(a)luckman.com | (213) 614-0966 | | Quality Assurance | ext. 145 | ===================================================================== ________________________________________________________________________ Heidi Lou Bailey (h) 213.664.8669 (w) 213.614.0966 ext. 137 The world is stinky and the world is smelly. That makes for a nice day //// (0 0) **ooO*(_)*Ooo** ________________________________________________________________________ "To affect the quality of the day, that is the highest of the arts." * * * * * * >>--- * * NICK--> * * * * * - ---- End of forwarded message ---- - -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- PGP Email welcome, encouraged, and PREFERRED. Visit my web site at http://www.shellback.com/p/merriman for my PGP key and fingerprint "What is the sound of one hand clapping in a forest with no one there to hear it?" I use Pronto Secure (tm) PGP-fluent Email software for Windows -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMg/qSMVrTvyYOzAZAQGTtgQAr0TQQs7hkR8VvjhFUvOoLY4eScAI86Z7 qJ4HLHtniZExAueAYrL/fyh1tRi5RbuwtL49KdzhWF8d9nYNddzqc8O1ybb4yt3O 2TU96gDOfjFmv6mLTlWv+LfWIiYBXzNvGT1DYSeZO8atyPTW1BOX7ES/y3t1XPco FDwfFR9NUM4= =V0EI -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Rumors of death of Anguilla Data are greatly exaggerated
by Vincent Cate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Greg Kucharo <sophi(a)best.com> > In the Swiss system, who dictates to the banks thier policies about who > and what they can store? Do the banks have enough influence to sway > lawmakers? It is not that any banks have something on some politician or anything sneeky like you suggest. It is just that in a taxhaven, the government and the country are making good money from the industry. For example in Anguilla there might be 3,000 companies with the government averaging maybe $300 each per year, or $1 mil/year (not sure of the real numbers). Also, the lawyers, accountants, bankers, etc all make up a sizable part of the economy. If the Anguilla government ever make someone give information to the IRS it would destroy this industry. This would be bad for both the governments revenue and the voters income, and so it is very doubtful they ever would. Also, the British want Anguilla to be a taxhaven. They realize it is a good way for a small country to make money. They currently send money to Anguilla every year, and if Anguilla can make plenty of money from the taxhaven industry they won't need to. So the British are actually helping in a number of ways to get Anguilla established as a taxhaven. -- Vince ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Vincent Cate vince(a)offshore.com.ai http://www.offshore.com.ai/vince/ Offshore Information Services http://www.offshore.com.ai/

1 0