December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Blessing in Disguise? (H.R. 98, the "Consumer Internet Privacy Protection Act of 1997")
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>--- begin forwarded text >Date: Thu, 6 Feb 1997 11:24:09 EST >Reply-To: Law & Policy of Computer Communications > <CYBERIA-L(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM> >Sender: Law & Policy of Computer Communications > <CYBERIA-L(a)LISTSERV.AOL.COM> >From: "Jonathan I. Ezor" <jezor(a)NEWMEDIALAW.COM> >Subject: Congressional Bill worse for 'Net than CDA? (crosspost) > >Sorry for the crossposting, but I felt this one might be important enough >to do it. The following is a shortened version of an article I've written >for my firm's client newsletter about H.R. 98, the "Consumer Internet >Privacy Protection Act of 1997", introduced by Rep. Bruce Vento (D. MN) on >January 7, 1997. [snip] > >Jonathan I. Ezor >New Media Attorney, Davis & Gilbert, 1740 Broadway, New York, NY 10019 >Tel: 212-468-4989 Fax: 212-468-4888 E-mail: jezor(a)newmedialaw.com >-----------------------------Cut here------------------------------- > >Congress Tackles Internet Privacy > Recently, there has been significant press coverage over real and >rumored revelations of personal information such as Social Security numbers by >online services, including the alleged availability (later shown to be untrue) >of mothers' maiden names and Social Security numbers on LEXIS' P-Trak database, >and various governmental bodies have held hearings on issues of online privacy. >On January 7, 1997, Representative Bruce F. Vento (D. MN) introduced the >"Consumer Internet Privacy Protection Act of 1997," (H.R. 98) This bill >provides that "an interactive computer service shall not disclose to a third >party any personally identifiable information provided by a subscriber to such >service without the subscriber's prior informed written consent." Gee, this sounds great! Sounds like it would become illegal for ISPs to "cooperate" (aka: getting strongarmed) by the local thugs (cops) to reveal information about subscribers. Except, as is so often the case, they seem to always figure out ways to explain that cooperation with cops was somehow not covered in the law above. One of the non-obvious dangers of having laws such as this apply to ISPs is that they increase the likelihood that legal force could be applied to them in order to get them to sell-out their customers. And, obviously, the average citizen isn't going to have a lot of luck getting these laws ENFORCED unless he has friends in the prosecutor's office. One of the numerous advantages of an AP-type system is that a person will be able to make a violation of his privacy a crime regardless of whether the powers-that-be agree. Also, he can enforce that "law" on anyone, including government agents, without the cooperation of the prosecutor. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

No Subject
by huilam 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

How to get off this mail-listing ?? Regards, Hui Lam Email:huilam@pl.jaring.my Homepage:<http://www.geocities.com/heartland/8642/>

1 0

Which list am I on?
by Against Moderation 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I thought I was on the cypherpunks edited list. However, I appear to have seen some of the messages that Tim says got lost. Moreover, I keep getting ASCII art messages flaming someone with the initials DLV (though I haven't seen any more of the TCM flames [I haven't looked too hard, either]). My mail headers have: >From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com <date> >Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Now I'm really confused. Which list am I on?

1 0

Re: Sphere packings
by WinSock Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dickhead Vermin K[ondom]OTM has been a source of endless embarassments to his sympathizers on and off the net. _ O O _ \-|-\_/-|-/ Dickhead Vermin K[ondom]OTM /^\ /^\ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^

1 0

Re: ANNOUNCEMNT: February 1997 Cypherpunks Bay Area Meeting
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Could someone who is planning to go tomorrow's cpunks physical meeting provide a short account of the interesting news to the list? Thanks, Adam > What: San Francisco Bay Area Cypherpunks monthly physical meeting > > Agenda: 11:++ setup, gossip, face feeding etc. > 12:00 USG Export 'Laws' of the week, Roz Thomsen, PGP inc. > 13:00 PGPmail & PGPdisk overview, Dave Del Torto, PGP inc. > 14:00 Break > 14:30 Announcements, late breaking news, etc. > 15:00 The 3 hour 40bit challenge, Ian Goldberg, UCBstudent > 16:00 Why bother killing the list?, Hugh Daniel > Future Meeting Planing, IPSEC Update, etc. > 17:00 This hour left bank for future expansion...

1 0

Re: ANNOUNCEMNT: February 1997 Cypherpunks Bay Area Meeting
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A couple things need underscoring: On Wed, 5 Feb 1997, Hugh Daniel wrote: > Agenda: 11:++ setup, gossip, face feeding etc. > 12:00 USG Export 'Laws' of the week, Roz Thomsen, PGP inc. ^^^^^ Thomsen needs to leave early, so we will make every effort to "start on time." > We have a wonderful space to do demos in this month, Turing > Auditorium has Internet, projections screens, audio amps and ^^^^^^^^ I.e., Ethernet, either 10BaseT or coax, no firewall. Please show up by 11:30 if you want an IP address. Hooked up to the projectors are a PowerMac, a Windows 95 box, and I might lug my Linux box over, too. One analog phone, in case anyone wants one. I suppose we could still do live RealAudio and/or CU-SeeMe iff someone feels they have something to say of such earth- shattering importance that the whole net must hear. Otherwise, I'd rather keep the distracting toys out of the way. -rich www.stanford.edu/~llurch

1 0

Re: Geiger and long, unreadable lines
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dimitri Vulis <dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com> writes on cpunks-unedited: > Adam Back <aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk> writes: > > [DH key gen questions] > > > > (this isn't cpunks, this is cpunks-flames, so your non-crypto pledge > > shouldn't hold, besides Sandy has a stated policy of killing the whole > > thread, so I thought it amusing to continue your crypto relevance in > > moving on to technical topics rather than political) > > My advice is to stay clear of any cryptosystem that relies on factoring > being hard. I'll send you pointers to some very interesting new work > based on the zeta function in private e-mail when I dig it up (please > remind me if/when I forget this promise). > I'm reluctant to say anything crypto-relevant on this defunct > mailing list because last time I did, the moderator repeatedly cited > it as evidence that his moderation works. I agree, Sandy said something like "look see even Vulis has started posting crypto relevance therefore moderation works" in one of his defenses of the moderation experiment. Adam -- print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

1 0

Re: WANTED: Tolerant, anonymity-friendly news admins
by aga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Thu, 6 Feb 1997, ISP_Ratings wrote: > lcs Remailer Administrator wrote: > > > > Because of recent attacks on the remailer network and mail2news > > gateways, I may loose access to at least one of the news servers I > > currently feed news to from my mail2news gateway. > > Who attacked the network and for what reason? > > If you are a news administrator, believe in free speech and anonymity, > > and you would like to help the cause, please consider giving transfer > > (aka "IHAVE" or "hosts.nntp") privileges to this machine. You will > > not be the only server, and so do not need to worry about being the > > point of entrance of mail2news articles to Usenet. > > > > Please contact me if you can help. Thank you. > > Well, just who is cutting you off and for what reason? And what is their telephone number? > > For those who oppose the existence of mail2news gateways, you should > > know that we are taking steps to limit the abuse. Just what is your definition of "abuse?" However, doing so > > without in any way limiting articles that abide by the usage policy is > > tricky, and must be done carefully. Please be patient. > > > I'm writing from the Freedom Knights list but am in no way > representing them. > > What exactly do you mean by 'taking steps to limit the abuse'? > Personally I think much of what is called abuse is nonsense and > that all posts, with the exception of cancels/NoCems should be > propogated regardless of content (including what is currently > referred to as spam). > > Also--could you forward to the Freedom Knights list a copy of > your 'usage policy' and impressions on the Freedom Knights two > FAQs. > > Thanks, > > Steve >

1 0

Re: My messages not appearing on either of the lists?
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:57 PM -0800 2/6/97, Sandy Sandfort wrote: >On Thu, 6 Feb 1997, Timothy C. May wrote: > >> My posting seem to be going into Limbo, being sent neither to >> the Cypherpunks Heaven Sandy administers nor to the flames of >> the Cypherpunks Hell. At least this is how things now appear. > >It doesn't look familiar. I don't have any idea what happened. >Can anyone tell me if they saw it on the unedited list? That's >where I would have read it. I reproduced the message in my message earlier tonight. Although there are no headers to show routing, since I sent it but never received it, I can assure you it was marked by Eudora as "Sent," and my ISP has reported no delivery problems of any sort. Thus, based on past experiences with thousands of such sendings, I surmise with great certainty that my message was mailed successfully to cypherpunks(a)toad.com. What happened to if after that I cannot say, but I suspect something related to the "Moderation" process, by Ockham's Razor. There seem to be more "lost" messages than before this "Moderation" thing began. I literally sent thousands of messages (maybe tens of thousands...) and cannot recall a "lost" message. Now, it's happened to me a couple of times that I can recall, and to at least some others, based on recent messages. I thought the basic equation was: UNEDITED = MAIN + FLAMES, with MAIN and FLAMES being disjoint. It's looking now more like: UNEDITED = MAIN + FLAMES + DROPPED/LOST Possibly the fault lies in the software Sandy is using to sort the messages, possibly elsewhere. Whatever, this needs to be fixed immediately, or the experiment abandoned immediately. --Tim May Just say "No" to "Big Brother Inside" We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1398269 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

alt.cypherpunks (was: Re: My Departure, Moderation, and "Ownership of the List")
by C Matthew Curtin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>>>> "Adam" == Adam Back <aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk> writes: Adam> Perhaps it is time to reconsider the benefits of Adam> alt.cypherpunks. (As an aside, it is ironic that John Gilmore Adam> was the guy who started the alt.* USENET hierarchy, specifically Adam> to facilitate freedom of speech). This would have another benefit. More sophisticated tools exist for filtering usenet than for filtering email in a voluntarily cooperative way. For example, I use a fairly extensive .procmailrc file to filter my email, and blow away stuff that's either spam or a post from someone I consider a blathering idiot. There are some other folks on the list who likely do the same thing, and there are some whose .procmailrc files I'd like to see, and likely include in my own. But there's no easy way to do that. With alt.cypherpunks, anyone who wishes to "help kill noise" could simply issue a NoCeM report, and those of us with reasonable newsreaders would be able to "listen" to the reports from people with whom we want to cooperate. And we can ignore the rest. The beauty of this scheme is that the control of the list is in the hands of the individual reader, without requiring huge amounts of redundant effort. It's also occurred to me that there can be folks who NoCeM the NoCeM reports :-) - -- Matt Curtin Chief Scientist Megasoft, Inc. cmcurtin(a)research.megasoft.com http://www.research.megasoft.com/people/cmcurtin/ I speak only for myself Hacker Security Firewall Crypto PGP Privacy Unix Perl Java Internet Intranet -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Have you encrypted your data today? iQEVAwUBMvtAVX6R34u/f3zNAQEFBQf9F6K+47WukspV3BU3E5+/hR9ARVc0cGt5 1zTwkipAqGOZeXMm4//vPYh/q9DyKzV2VLLr/sY7cRiBCypv2BP8y8e8dqkK0eYq LGaLpmF5IGomJA2iCLYmgQAWJrdhKIBxwyuX0hyDwjTvOF/S4BSV2x1b0dR3q1RB goV/3vqvxpEan/iy53M+rMAaYffb4s+TRslIJY5ct1ddx+5aeQGOAmgnGWToK1Ja 5ZLYUwkLQ1By14FxC4451uJDHxARNZcKVuu/dcfH+oWYQFrTo9CPi+7Ykpyyxz8X 0v68Gj57xEdnVgz6XshMY3NHOhiIcCuQQSJ1LjkLSfuV9ZzXuiMKQw== =2ckb -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0