December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

automated moderation system
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

here's an idea for a simple "moderation" system with no one-moderator bottleneck/choke point. I'm trying to come up with a constructive solution with cyberspatial spirit. please send me email if you would be willing to try this system. flames ignored. if there is enough support I may be able to persuade a friend to write the code to do this. a new mailing list is set up, one that gets posts from a noisy mailing list. it filters the mail according to user preferences, and sends it out to its own subscribers. the filtering scheme is as follows: a web site is set up that allows people to express their own preferences as to who they wish to listen to in particular, and who they wish to killfile, based on email address. first, they hit the web site and have it send them a secret password to their email address. then they use that password to edit their "pass" and "zap" lists. (the password is for authentication) now, the mailing list works as follows. people always receive posts from people they put on their "pass" lists. mail from entities on their "zap" lists is always trashed. why are the lists kept on the server? the usefulness of this scheme is that now you have information about all entities, the number of votes to "pass" each entity, and the number of votes to "zap" each entity. now lets say that the system is considering sending me mail from someone that is neither on my pass or zap lists. I have no personal info on it, but the system could use the votes in some algorithmic way to decide whether to send it to me or not. various experiments could be tried to come up with a good scheme. my preference is at the moment something like this: every person indicates how much mail they wish to recieve from the list, and how much of a delay is acceptable. the system uses this information and the "pass/zap" ratio (or difference) to send out the "highest rated" messages in a given time window. during low list traffic, the messages that pass through would be ranked lower. or, the system could have a ranking threshold set by each individual user below which it will never pass the email. my feeling is to keep these lists public, although the scheme would allow a system that kept them private. of course I will be flamed for this. the system of course is essentially a reputation system, something everyone here talks about but nobody really seems to know what one is or how to set one up. anyway, I hope to hear from anyone with comments. if you might be able to support a cgi web site for the idea, please let me know. technically the system is pretty straightforward. my experience with these systems is that the great difficulty is getting people to try them, the "critical mass" problem.

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

At 12:59 PM -0800 2/7/97, Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: >> >>(It is true that Vulis uses the phrase "Limey faggots," in reference to >>beer-serving habits, but he does not directly insult any list members with >>this phrase. If Sandy is calling this phrase a flame, then Cypherpunks will >>be blocked from their usual characterizations of Congresscritters and NSA >>stooges.) > >TCM defending Vulis, I think I've died and am in some strange >dreamworld. hehehehe I'm arguing against two things: 1. The basic notion of centralized moderation, with the name "Cypherpunks" now closely associated with a Big Brotherish, "we know what's better for you than you do" sort of censorship. 2. The apparently careless and inconsistent way Sandy is censoring posts. As others have also noted, non-flamish posts are being sent to the Flames list. A censor who will not take the time to read the list traffic on a continuing basis, e.g., by spending the several hours a day on it that many of us spend (or used to spend), is not suited to be a censor. I suggested at the time of his self-appointment to the role of Censor that Sandy would not devote the needed time to this task. (Not that this makes censorship OK, mind you.) I'm not defending Vulis per se, and I continue to think Vulis is a twit. But one of the goals Vulis apparently set out to accomplish (just as you did a couple of years ago, Larry) was to force the list to start censoring itself, even to force the list to shut down. It seems likely that Vulis is quite happy with the outcome here. --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."

2 1

Re: Is Sandy really censoring criticisms of Stronghold, his product?
by Against Moderation 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Okay, I went through my old mail, and I'm fairly sure this is the message. I'm convinced it never went to the flames list, and now that I've found out I'm on the -unedited list after all, I think it probably didn't go to the regular cypherpunks list either. Can people on the various lists confirm this for me? Given the total lack of technical content, the flamey nature of the article, and the fact that it is verifiably false (stronghold source code is available), I can see people arguing it should have gone to -flames (though I would probably disagree). However, I don't want to debate that. What I object to more strongly and think is wrong is the fact that it went to *neither* list. A lot of people out there are subscribing to the cypherpunks-flames and cypherpunks lists thinking that they will see everything that gets rejected (albeit with a substantial delay). If this is not the case, it should be made clear. Otherwise, it's not moderation, but dishonesty. -- >From cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com Thu Jan 30 17:26:50 1997 From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Subject: Security alert!!! To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Thu, 30 Jan 97 16:15:21 EST Organization: Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y. Received: (from majordom@localhost) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA18833; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:17:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from uu.psi.com (uu.psi.com [38.9.86.2]) by toad.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id OAA18824; Thu, 30 Jan 1997 14:16:39 -0800 (PST) Received: by uu.psi.com (5.65b/4.0.061193-PSI/PSINet) via UUCP; id AA02017 for ; Thu, 30 Jan 97 16:57:10 -0500 Received: by bwalk.dm.com (1.65/waf) via UUCP; Thu, 30 Jan 97 16:19:19 EST for cypherpunks(a)toad.com Comments: All power to the ZOG! Message-Id: <aw5c2D4w165w(a)bwalk.dm.com> Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk Lines: 19 WARNING: There's a rogue trojan horse out there on the internet known as the "stronghold web server". It's actually a hacked-up version of Apache with a backdoor, which allows hackers (or whoever knows the backdoor) to steal credit card numbers and other confidentil information on the Internet. Be careful! Always use encryption. Do not send confidential information 9such as passwords and credit card numbers) to any site running the trojan horse "stronghold". In general, beware of "snake oil" security products and hacked-up versions of free software. Please repost this warning to all relevant computer security forums. --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

6 5

Re: IEEE Communications
by azur＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>A friend called this evening to let me know the February issue is dedicated >to electronic cash and its implications. I'm no longer an IEEE member. If >any of the various list members care to excerpt and comment on some of the >more interesting portions, I'm sure it would be appreciated. > >--Steve Correction: It's the February issue of IEE Spectrum, subtitled "Technology and the Electronic Economy." --Steve

1 0

Unix Network Monitor...
by harka＠nycmetro.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- For those, who might be interested... == Forwarded Message Follows ========================================= Subject: SOFT> The Big Brother Unix Network Monitor Date: Wed, 5 Feb 1997 13:26:51 -0600 From: sean(a)iti.qc.ca http://www.iti.qc.ca/iti/users/sean/bb-dnld/ Big Brother is a free web-based Unix network monitoring tool. It watches disk space, CPU loads, important processes, Web servers, and connectivity and can page you if something really horrible happens. Free. Includes all source code. Version 1.03 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEUAgUBMvurZjltEBIEF0MBAQFPiQf3Tj6OUPexsGtM+OPwPzJA0LPnkGjT6xAB qKGDoOXuwbydvg9TQ8WuRqxYau/RucbjjDLeqcx+bsDBZMErsGy2SHN8wScjFsF/ G+60/0SRCFn9nSdqVOic7PL87Djtb9+m4/pPD+f3fWFeJ5o5sOePnkKyqwSKSSpy epxAR6dsb7KZQVsJM3khOqSjQcQf7zaCFYWEqxCft+qw5aaPU9HDXfmjY08uXHa6 DAUCT+gTIfZUdj4KzJKktS6AV+cSQGAPhsn7JrjrVMLcyv7BTcXEJ/yV2I3jEgwx sTP935MvfTYlvfq6dCFgOp/gs9oi2wC6kiQh6nEPHpHJ3yfFu3sv =twyY -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- If encryption is outlawed, only outlaws will have encryption...

1 0

Crack a Mac and win a fortune.
by Martin Minow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A Swedish company, http://www.infinit.se/hacke/crack.html is offering a 10,000 Swedish Kronor reward to the first person to successfully attack (change information on) their web server. See their press release at http://www.infinit.se/hacke/release.html for details and the URL of the system to hack. Martin Minow minow(a)apple.com

1 0

Re: More on Stronghold Charge - 1
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Return-Path: cypherpunks-errors(a)toad.com To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Disappearing articles? From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Comments: All power to the ZOG! Date: Fri, 31 Jan 97 10:39:11 EST Organization: Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y. Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com We already know that Sandy's bot automatically discards submissions from people he doesn't like, irrespective of contents. In the past the rejected articles were tossed to the "flames" list. Now Sandy has gone one step further. The following article criticized the product Sandy is paid to peddle. It showed up on the 'unedited' list, but Sandy hated its contents so much that it hasn't made it to EITHER censored or the 'flames' list! This is the beginning of the censored article: To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: Security alert!!! From: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com (Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM) Comments: All power to the ZOG! Message-Id: <aw5c2D4w165w(a)bwalk.dm.com> Date: Thu, 30 Jan 97 16:15:21 EST Organization: Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y. Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk WARNING: There's a rogue trojan horse out there on the internet known as the "stronghold web server". It's actually a hacked-up version of Apache with a backdoor, which allows hackers (or whoever knows the backdoor) to steal credit card numbers and other confidentil information on the Internet. Be careful! Always use encryption. Do not send confidential information 9such as passwords and credit card numbers) to any site running the trojan horse "stronghold". In general, beware of "snake oil" security products and hacked-up versions of free software. Please repost this warning to all relevant computer security forums. (rest snipped to save bandwidth) --- Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM Brighton Beach Boardwalk BBS, Forest Hills, N.Y.: +1-718-261-2013, 14.4Kbps

1 0

Customers For You!!!
by Quantum Communications 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following message has been brought to you by Quantum Communications. If you would like advertising rates and information, send an email to info(a)quantcom.com or visit our website http://www.quantcom.com If you prefer NOT to receive promotional messages inthe future, send an email to remove(a)quantcom.com Quantum Communications BULK EMAIL ADVERTISING SERVICE OFFERS: * GUARANTEED RESPONSE RATE! * HIGHEST QUALITY LIST (compiled 100% in-house, never bought or re-sold, continuously updated and maintained)! * WE SEND ALL MAIL! (never get shut off by your ISP!) * LARGEST DATABASE (over 5 million email addresses)! * LOWEST RATES IN THE INDUSTRY! * 100% APPROVED FINANCING (no credit checks - you are APPROVED)! * WE OFFER WEB PAGE HOSTING AND OTHER RELATED SERVICES AS WELL * COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES INCLUDED FREE OF CHARGE (email forwarding, flame filtering, autoresponders, copy design assistance)! * COMPLETE RANGE OF SERVICE OFFERINGS (stand-alone bulk email, co-op "MEGA-MAILER", custom-built targeted mailings)! * REFERENCES FROM HAPPY CLIENTS! * VISIT OUR WEB SITE AT http://www.quantcom.com For complete details on our services, pricing, no-nonsense response guarantee, and all other pertinent info, call our sales department @ (603) 772-4096, or send an email to info(a)quantcom.com. When requesting info via email, please be sure to include your voice phone # and best time to call, unless you would prefer not to be contacted via telephone to follow up.

1 0

Re: lead remailer is shut down
by bs-org＠c2.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:58 1997-02-07 -0800, Ed Falk wrote: > >Can't remailers be written with basic spam safeguards? I.e. no mass >crossposts, limited # of posts by each individual client per day, etc.? Can anybody give me the address of reliable remailer which accepts pgp messages. BTW which remailer was shut down and why?

1 0

Re: automated moderation system
by David E. Smith 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 01:15 PM 2/7/97 -0800, you wrote: [... re: a auto moderations system...] >now, the mailing list works as follows. people always receive >posts from people they put on their "pass" lists. mail from >entities on their "zap" lists is always trashed. This much, you can do on your own. Just filter "zap" messages to /dev/null or somesuch. (But I see its purpose; keep reading.) [... using other's pass/zap lists as reputation markers...] It's a good idea in theory, but would put a lot of load on the server. For every message * every list subscriber, it has to _at_least_ look up the pass/zap criteria, and possibly do some number- crunching based on the whole database of pass/zap lists, and keep track of how long each message has been sitting in the queue and its ratings by other people. Also, Mallet could skew the reputations by subscribing with a dozen other addresses (which M. created just to get the extra "votes"), decide to have all of them "zap" Alice, and then Bob might never see Alice's intelligent and thoughtful messages. (Presumably, Mallet keeps the bogus addresses subscribed, just dumping all mail into the bitbucket; any user who leaves the list shouldn't have any weight in the calculations any longer.) This also doesn't even address anonymous remailers; Chuck and Dave might both use the same remailer, even though Chuck only posts good, meaningful messages (in whatever context) and Dave only posts flaming ASCII art :) dave (who doesn't post flaming ascii art, honest) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMvuwDnEZTZHwCEpFAQHZMwf+MNIyeFS53QW4LxZzvitFi259xEso3bXT WXfAqJx7pF8aefZ7U2hBEwPzFyBR5fJWrn4Vekpl6ZK82xJsU2x6Az9+I2D1TYH/ dMAar9S+GcPPlyJ5QegWQ04VopmGzGvDZ69lL1mkJZnl9RT3jWOdVBcmUUUSqrsz LMGdVxrglx1QIkoZu/P69RheK37HJHiTG6pSokQRQPqyU2VVEwg44yJDicPfjlke raBLk6EiA6tJ2azKMshEBLm00EjGSHLmstRDqE8x6kb2WMMgCchL9KIe9XIz7fCN o0L8fTZMME7ZF82/sacnUnzdK6sJ5oAtmgUiT7cZm7Jqo3WU0OmUOw== =mSMn -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0