December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: subscribe
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate wrote: > > > Hi Igor, > > > I will not impact me negatively. I do, however, suggest very strongly > > that hosts should be subscribed to each other thgrough another mechanism > > and not majordomo, in order to prevent mail loops, header rewriting and such. > > Suggestions? What I had in mind was that any messages that get sent on > cpunks(a)ssz.com get sent over to algebra. One mechanism I would like to play > with is a 'linked list' of remailers. Remailer A sends only to B and > receives only from C... > > > A > ^ v > C < B > Then to stop loops B deletes all outgoing mail from B. Since email can be > forwarded from many sites the search must traverse the entire forward chain > killing the message if B appears as a source. I suspect a simple procmail sort > can accomplish this. My next step is to brush up on my procmail. I hope to > have something in a couple of days that will allow you to subscribe > cpunks@algebra to cpunks@ssz and both ends will be filtering. Here's how I do it (it is pretty close to your proposal): 1) I delete duplicate messages (by looking up the database of message-IDs) right away 2) I bounce all incoming messages to several other list servers 3) I pipe the article to majordomo for distribution. Note that majordomo changes headers and I wuold like to feed other servers with UNCHANGED articles. Here's the .procmailrc that takes care of this: (OTHER_HOSTS will be redefined to include, e.g., cypherpunks(a)ssz.com) # Please check if all the paths in PATH are reachable, remove the ones that # are not. # # NOTE: I use lockfiles extensively (and even excessively) because # I do not want to overburden the system. Since I am on a # PPP link that is not always on, sometimes large amounts of # submissions come in simultaneously and that may impair # performance of the overall system. You do not REALLY need # to use these lockfiles otherwise. ################################################################### PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:$HOME/bin MAILDIR=$HOME/Mail # You'd better make sure it exists DEFAULT=$MAILDIR/mbox # VERBOSE=ON LOGFILE=$MAILDIR/from LOCKFILE=$HOME/.lockmail OTHER_HOSTS="cypherpunks(a)zzzz.com" :0 c $MAILDIR/allmail ############################################################ mailbombing ############################################################ end mailbombing :0 * ^TOcypherpunks * !^X-Loop: * !FROM_MAILER * !FROM_DAEMON { # # This recipe removes duplicates! # :0 Wh: msgid.lock | formail -D 128000 msgid.cache # send it to all other hosts :0 c !$OTHER_HOSTS # add X-Loop: :0 fhw | formail -I "X-Loop: cypherpunks(a)algebra.com" # send it to people :0 c | cypherpunks-send-subscribers # Accounting, logging :0 | cypherpunks-accounting } :0: * ^TOcypherpunks-request $DEFAULT # all the rest is trash :0 $DEFAULT # thats where it should be #/dev/null > Another nice advantage of this architecture is that 'rings' of remailers can > be interconnected by simply sending output to more than one site. Might even > be a good stability rule, "Never have a remailer send to more than 1 machine > in its 'own' ring". I see no limit other than resources that would limit the > number of rings an individual remailer might be in. A very good point. > The address is 'cypherpunks(a)ssz.com' but as alluded to above. I would like > to let it run 1 way for a day or so to get an idea of the stability of our > network link. You might consider creating a bogus username on your end. > Subscribe that user to the SSZ remailer and to your own mail list. Then use > procmail to filter all outgoing mail of that user since its incoming would > be from your list and its outgoing would go to mine, which then forwards > them to your list. We might want to call the bogus user 'gatekeeper'. Yes, we really should make darn sure that no loops are poissible before inviting people to subscribe to our lists. > If its agreeable lets get together on the cpunks-hosts list tomorrow and > discuss this a little more. > > If you don't mind, please forward this to the cpunks@toad list with your > responces. I would like to expose it to a little criticism. > - Igor.

1 0

Cypherpunks Distributed Remailer
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, We have established the first link between cypherpunks(a)ssz.com and cypherpunks(a)algebra.com. Testing will continue for about 24 hours and we hope to have the link going two-way within a couple of days. If testing proceeds at the current pace we should be ready to go for a 3-way link if anyone will be ready this weekend. If we can get a 3-way going we should be ready for prime time. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

1 0

Re: New group
by Rich Burroughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:38 AM 2/12/97 -0800, Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> wrote: >Paul Bradley wrote: >> Well despite the obvious problems of propogation I thought it was time >> someone actually did something to get us a new home, even if it`s only >> temporary. So I have created alt.cypherpunks... See you all over on >> usenet!... > >I pressed the URL alt.cypherpunks and my Netscape server said >"no such thing" or words to that effect. It has to be created on your local server, Dale. Wait a bit, and if doesn't show up speak to someone st your ISP. Rich ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb(a)teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb U.S. State Censorship Page at - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/state dec96 issue "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause

1 0

No Subject
by Mark Krell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--=====================_855820976==_ Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=us-ascii Content-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970212205911.8620J(a)crl8.crl.com> you are forwarding messages to me... stop it. remove markk(a)ra1.randomc.com from your mail list... all of a sudden I'm getting mail from bunches of people i don't know and who don't know me. help me out... go to the place where you got my email address and have them correct their links. Thank you. markk --=====================_855820976==_--

1 0

Re: whois cypherpunks.org ?
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Aleph1 (Levy) is a grey hatted hacker. Amongst other things, he moderates the bugtraq mailing list. Decent fellow. Adam Anil Das wrote: | With all this talk about relocating the home of cypherpunks, I decided to | see if any second level domains are registered under the cypherpunks | name. | | Both cypherpunks.org and cypherpunks.com are registered by one | Elias M. Levy in Ft. Meade, MD. I haven't seen his name on the list | though. Anybody knows more about this? | | -- | Anil Das | -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Re: anonymity and e-cash
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In fact, the Identity Agnostic bits were Doug's, and they were focused on the idea that a bank that did not implement blinding could be used in an anonymous fashion by someone willing to violate the patents. /* Blind(*coin) here would violate Chaum's patent, so we * can't do that */ Adam Tim May wrote: | At 1:19 PM -0800 2/12/97, Lee Tien wrote (on the Cypherpunks(a)toad.com list): | In August of '95, Doug Barnes released a long article on "Identity | Agnostic" systems. (His article is no longer at the www.communities.com Web | site, so I can't refer you to it. Maybe he'll post it again.) | In fact, Ian showed, the Chaum patents on blinding are NOT USED by the | Mint/Bank; only the CUSTOMER uses the blinding patents (and the MERCHANT in | some cases, not in other cases). This means that "anyone a mint" does not | violate any of the Chaum/Digicash patents, and "mint clients" are likely to | be written by third parties. (The _customer_ is presumably on the honor | system to abide by the Chaum patents...except the patents are only being | licensed to banks...go figure.) | | (This is where, as I recall, Doug's "agnostic" system came in...it is | possible his thinking was similar to Ian's...I don't have Doug's paper | handy.) -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Private property rights on cypherpunks
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I forward articles to cypherpunks that are copyrighted by my employers, or magazines like Playboy and Wired for which I write freelance pieces. I like to think these articles have some value. I will not forward any of them, nor would I be able to, if they magically became "public domain." "De facto public domain" is an idea that deserves to die. Now. -Declan On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > > Forwarded message: > > > Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 22:46:03 -0800 > > From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles(a)netbox.com> > > Subject: List for discussing many majordomos > > > Yes, this is a good idea. One of the proponents of the "many majordomos" > > project apparently has plans to impose his own ideas about intellectual > > property on the project, and this seems like a pretty serious thing for a > > setup that's allegedly going to prevent censorship. We need a place to > > discuss this. > > Please explain how making submissions de facto public domain censors > anyone? > > > Jim Choate > CyberTects > ravage(a)ssz.com > > >

1 0

Re: NSA Rainbow Series.
by Moroni 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Zip,NAda,Nothing. And they have more too. They were backlogged so some people haven't gotten their mail since I last posted about. I called yesterday about my videos and posters and lo and behold I received my two tech manuals today. The people who answer the lines are friendly and usually pretty industrious in getting things out or done. By the way there is supposed to be a department split in the near future so I don't know if manuals will be in one department and posters in another or what. On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Tobin Fricke wrote: > Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 18:03:35 -0800 > From: Tobin Fricke <tobin(a)edm.net> > To: Moroni <moroni(a)scranton.com>, Genocide <gen2600(a)aracnet.com> > Cc: Cypherpunks Mailing List <cypherpunks(a)toad.com> > Subject: Re: NSA Rainbow Series. > > > 1-800-688-6115 press 0 or just wait for the operator. My second > > order consisting of posters and video has not arrived either. It has been > > about 6 weeks. The Rainbow order was only 2 weeks. Be prepared that when > > you order the Rainbow series you will be getting a large box.Their are > > something like 30+ booklets in the series. > > There is a set of security posters that include a Santa > > poster.And there is also a video with two films on it (Acess Ins and outs > > adb Acess Control). > > How much does all this stuff from the NSA cost? > > Tobin Fricke > (please reply privately, tobin(a)mail.edm.net) > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx x No success can compensate for failure in the home. x x x xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

1 0

Re: NSA Rainbow Series.
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 9:53 PM -0500 2/12/97, Moroni wrote: > Zip,NAda,Nothing. And they have more too. They were backlogged so >some people haven't gotten their mail since I last posted about. I called >yesterday about my videos and posters and lo and behold I received my two >tech manuals today. > The people who answer the lines are friendly and usually pretty >industrious in getting things out or done. > By the way there is supposed to be a department split in the near >future so I don't know if manuals will be in one department and posters in >another or what. By the way, I say "FORGET IT" to the NSA Rainbow manuals. A worthless pile of crap. I subscribed to them several years ago, got the Big Box of Manuals, and then got new editions every few months for several years. None of them were ever useful to me in even the slightest way. They are written in "bureaucratese," so they're not even fun reading. If they're not on the Web by now it just shows what a sicko government agency the NSA and NCSA is, and if they _are_ on the Web, you'll see what I mean quickly enough. Even for "novelty value" ("Hey, Tim, the mail guy just delivered a package from the National Security Agency!") the books are worth very little. Do a tree a favor and just say No to the Rainbow series. --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

Newgroup -- distributed mailing list on the way?
by Omegaman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following message is a courtesy copy of an article that has been posted as well. It appears that the distributed mailing-list effort is well underway. Experiments by Igor Chudov and Jim Choate are progressing. The next few weeks should iron out the kinks.(over-optimism?) Lance Cottrell (mixmaster author) has also agreed to host the list, the entire list if need-be. Although his posts on the cypherpunks list indicate that he favors the distributed list approach. Lance is also in the unique position of having the computing resources to feed the list to and from alt.cypherpunks. Furthermore, Lance seems to be favorable to this idea as well. However, he needs help in getting up to speed on just how to create and run this news-to-mail/mail-to-news gateway. What this means is that the same list will be propagated through multiple sources, making the destruction or loss of any one source non-catastrophic. It is also the classic net approach of routing around censorship channels. Furthermore, users who cannot access the alt.* hierarchy or easily read newsgroups have the option of subscribing to mailing lists and receiving the same uncensored feed. This also means that users will have a maximum amount of resources at their disposal to better experience the list and eliminate the net's inevitable spam and noise. Users who have access to or prefer powerful newsreaders and NoCeM's can use them at will. Users who have procmail, Pegasus Mail, Eudora Mail and other email-filtering schemes can use those powerful tools. It is likely that the cypherpunks list/group will remain a target of spammers and disruptors. The controversial topics are bound to generate noise. The entrance of unitiated individuals via Usenet is bound to create some interesting and sometimes aggravating discussions as well as the inevitable re-hashing of some old issues. The unfiltered, uncensored, and multi-homed list/group leaves the responsibility where it belongs, in the lap of end-user. Ignore the noise and the noisemakers. Defeat the disruptors by avoiding them. Accept your responsiblity and contribute Signal whenever you can. "Arise! You have nothing to lose but your barbed-wire fences." git along 'lil doggies

1 0