December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: What else do I need for an Internet Server
by Otto Matic 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Otto Matic wrote: >> What else do I need for an internet server? >> HP Vectra Towers 2 each 486 cyrex chips 50 meg processor Need high >> speed hard drives. These are the Tall Towers that have multiple >> drives, these are server towers. >> I think I have a router Hub. And a couple LAN cards. >> That's all I have. But I just got them, and I want to use them. I assume I >> will be using some kind of UNIX software. > >HP does some strange things to their BIOS software - you may want to >get one of those net analyzer tools and some low-level software that >can monitor what your HP's are sending and receiving, just in case. > >They don't normally use Vectras for UNIX, so what effects you can >expect, I don't know. > Dale, Thanks for your reply. Really I'm not sure about UNIX, I was just guessing. What I really need is a B.O.M (bill of materials). What other 'hardware' will I need to round up in order to get this server up and running. Thanks: otto =-=-=-=-=- Otto Matic "Fuckin' A, Miller!" Bud, Repo Man --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com ---------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Internet Alert! Pay for local dial-up??
by Jerry Basham 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Take me off your list or I will complain to your isp. ---------- > From: Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> > To: freedom-knights(a)jetcafe.org; cypherpunks(a)toad.com > Cc: E-Mail Communications <freedom(a)econopromo.com> > Subject: Re: Internet Alert! Pay for local dial-up?? > Date: Saturday, February 08, 1997 11:09 AM > > E-Mail Communications wrote: > > > See our "Patriotic Quotes That Make Sense" > > at the end of this publication. > > > "We will always remember. We will always be proud. We will > > always be prepared, so we may always be free." > > -- President Ronald W. Reagan June 6, 1984 - Normandy, France > > What Ronald Reagan didn't say (but what he really meant): > > "I come here to Bitburg to honor the fallen Nazis, because I am in > fact an honorary Nazi myself. Just ask my personal secretary Helen, > who used to work for Fritz Kraemer." >

1 0

Re: POST: The Frightening Dangers of Moderation
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jerry Basham wrote: > Ok...this is the fourth junk e-mail I've received that I don't want. Your > account is in jeapordy, and my advice is for you to just stop sending me > this junk. Take me off your e-mail list, NOW. > If this e-mail from me, being mad at you, is what makes you happy, and is > how you have fun, then you just have a personal problem and I feel sorry > for you. > Do what you can to heal yourself...meanwhile, don't send me anymore...your > isp provider is next on my e-mail list. Jerry, my provider is GTE, and if you think you can make a dent in them, go ahead and butt your head against the wall. No sweat offa my ass. OTOH, if you stop bitching and groaning long enough to figure out who is doing the remailing etc., then you'll be miles ahead. I'm not optimistic.

1 0

Fw: Internet Alert! Pay for local dial-up??
by IconOfSin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- > From: E-Mail Communications <freedom(a)econopromo.com> > To: you(a)alberta.sallynet.com > Subject: Internet Alert! Pay for local dial-up?? > Date: Saturday, February 08, 1997 7:09 PM > > > ***************************************** > > INTERNET USERS ALERT!!! It has come to our attention that several > local telephone companies have petitioned the FCC for permission > to charge Internet Users by the minute for LOCAL dial-up telephone > service. This would affect every Internet User, including those > using AOL dial-up. > > For more information, see the FCC site: http://www.fcc.gov/isp.htm. > Please send an E-Mail to isp(a)fcc.gov > to express your outrage at the idea of allowing telephone companies > to charge by the minute for LOCAL dial-up service. E-Mail comments > must be sent by Feb. 13th, 1997. This affects every Internet user!! The question is.... "what can *WE* do. IconOfSin Fly DALnet! /server irc.dal.net 7000 Msg IconOfSin :)

1 0

Re: META: Censorship is Going Way too Far
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <v03007800af225b8581dd(a)[207.167.93.63]>, on 02/08/97 at 11:22 AM, "Timothy C. May" <tcmay(a)got.net> said: >They have _not_ appeared, on either of the two lists, the main list and >filtered list. I don't know if they have appeared on the "unfiltered" list, as >I don't have access to an archive site for that, and don't subscribe to it. >Some of these articles are now more than 18 hours old. Hi Tim, All 4 of your post made it to the unfiltered list. I don't know what made it to the moderated/flam list as I had switched to the unmoderated list yesterday morning. - -- - ----------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. Finger whgiii(a)amaranth.com for PGP Key and other info - ----------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: You're throwing it all out the Windows! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Registered User E-Secure v1.1 0000000 iQCVAwUBMvy70Y9Co1n+aLhhAQEJLAP+PfEKyvsLsqNWAnNYKt628w2PUtfIOxiR H0La2l3tOX6eyXNiQFtmhQA7czJOm2FxMQOwagkA9qQcaJAj6vOiRfA6vganHmVY VBFEfKQxSaSLov4cjZYyK5e1uWWrsJnU+irZyXDXXBxk8P4rA1kvwGChMPpJmeIK eybgP/vYvz8= =1brw -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Enlightened commentary on Netizen.
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:41 PM 2/6/97 -0800, Anil Das wrote: >First, Rebecca Vesely has a special report, the main thrust >of which is that three firms being allowed to export 56 bit >encryption indicates flexibility on the part of the >government. >http://www.netizen.com/netizen/97/05/special2a.html >To top it off, here are two gems from the followup discussion. >http://www.netizen.com/cgi-bin/interact/replies_all?msg.37387 > >2. 56 ONLY A SLIGHTLY SMALLER JOKE > Ric Allan (ricrok) on Wed, 5 Feb 97 11:53 PST > > If it takes a college student four hours to break > a 40bit code it should take him/her about six > hours to do the same to 56bits. Then what excuses > are the government and its butt-kissing companies > going to give us for not allowing *real* coding? Ironically, we (the good guys) are going to be the beneficiaries of an ignorant public, for a change! We all know that difficulty is not linear with bit-size, but hearing that "40 bits is crackable in four hours!" will be interpreted by non-technical people as a strong level of suspicion directed at DES as well. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

FCC may impose per minute charges on internet
by Reply to 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> >>I am writing you this to inform you of a very important matter currently >>under review by the FCC. Your local telephone company has filed a >>proposal with the FCC to impose per minute charges for your internet >>service. They contend that your usage has or will hinder the operation >>of the telephone network. >> >>It is my belief that internet usage will diminish if users were required >>to pay additional per minute charges. The FCC has created an email box >>for your comments, responses must be received by February 13, 1997. Send >>your comments to isp(a)fcc.gov and tell them what you think. >> >>Please forward this email to all your friends on the internet so all our >>voices may be heard. >> >>Thanks for your time, >> >>Brian >> >>______________________________________________________________________________

1 0

Re: Waiting for Mac version [was Re: Full strength Email Clients]
by Joe Chou 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Meanwhile, a beta version of "Pretty Safe Mail" ><http://www.highware.com/highware/PSM/safemail.htm> is available from >Highware in Belgium. It's PGP compatible, and its user interface is a >great leap forward from any Mac PGP front end I've seen. But, it still has >some deficiencies, it's very slow (25 seconds to sign this message on a 25 >MHz 68040 vs. 4 seconds for ViaCrypt PGP 2.7.1), and (as was recently >discussed on a couple of these lists) its source code hasn't been published >or externally audited. I've been testing Pretty Safe Mail on 68k and PPC platforms, and I completely agree with you for the 68040 slowness. But on a Powermac 7600 (604/120Mhz), it took less than 3 seconds to sign the same document. Highware claims that a faster 68k is in the works. They've offereed to have PSM externally audited, but I haven't heard of any volunteers. Joe -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2, by Pretty Safe Mail 1.0 iQCVAwUBMvzAT7WqygGLsQD9AQF+RwP+IbLejl0wMKQzPJmHbIOann+KUB0zsXps 36bjfsyjIYZwkcbhjqCh2lFpljlmeMMVtPX90bPLRb0J+Bgbmcv7h24BN2Q5sInr AFFk4ST07uLZ8ICJzwtkHYgNwgMmdba2QeDQ0SZCH8FYMQiLpkf45TTIIger8MXt Rkkv3V23nts= =MgGH -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- | Joe Chou <jchou(a)cgl.ucsf.edu> | http://devbio-mac1.ucsf.edu/joe.html | Bargmann Lab, UCSF Department of Biochemistry | PGP KeyID 0x8BB100FD: at web page or public key servers | PGP Fingerprint [4194 EBC6 EEB0 7B1A F18F 2185 D406 EDFF]

1 0

Re: NETLINK_IPSEC
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 04:21 PM 2/7/97 -0800, Jeremey Barrett wrote: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >When running 'make modules', NETLINK_IPSEC and IPFWD_NOTTLDEC are >undeclared. I added NETLINK_IPSEC to include/net/netlink.h, >but IPFWD_NOTTLDEC is not to be found. I'm running kernel 2.0.0, >the INSTALL.txt file in the ipsec distribution mentions 2.0.24, >is that the minimum kernel to run on? Is there any specific reason for staying with the 2.0.0 kernel? (I would think you would want to upgrade just for the "Ping O' Death" fix alone.) Has anyone tried IPSEC with the 2.1.x kernels? Are there a logcation that describes the differences between 2.0.x and 2.1.x? (I have not been able to find one...) Then again, I have yet to find a list of what was fixed from kernel to kernel... (Probibly in some directory of the tar file...) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 4.5 iQEVAwUBMvytcOQCP3v30CeZAQHL5gf/RVBzl8nunBPg7wCiS4qGSo+M/BsBrBNM bKowgWaZI5UNtMgmxnxadrd7O6uvQv15+U9XO5qhbXNKm0ZoDpBF1hLY4jk2sx4i AH3VQE2YQayIkMbYMvjA7A4tYyXEay8KwGKgqYLsVkhMQ2HDo7CFS6xwD3N5jJ7V Ln/GWLfhd6uK3sPtWYkX6BcM0gNs2l6gJOojcfwghqwgXGVc4ooY8SyWweJgT4OK lGQNmzEeNDDCRXfa6pE5BnSYeAgRPqPvltIwgutpcVGq3KPJ0UuiTHpiYt7A+GYa yT6r+IN9T6O/ws53dUAlIJZZ73cG1Me6Q15z/8uLbzD7WsAP6ifWVw== =pZed -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- | "Mi Tio es infermo, pero la carretera es verde!" | |"The moral PGP Diffie taught Zimmermann unites all| Disclaimer: | | mankind free in one-key-steganography-privacy!" | Ignore the man | |`finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key | behind the keyboard.| | http://www.ctrl-alt-del.com/~alan/ |alan(a)ctrl-alt-del.com|

2 1

Passphrase generation
by Internaut 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, I am wanting to learn how to generate a passphrase that is at least as strong as the IDEA algorithm. I have looked several other places on the web for an answer to this, but they all had different things to say that didn't add up (no pun intended :). The IDEA algorithm it seems is 2^128 = 3.402823669209e+38 = 16 bytes (charactors). The charactor count seems kinda small (I am presuming the 16 charactors are truely random). Indeed, 128(ASCII charactor set)^16 = 5.192296858535e+33. Is my thinking right here? Is it better to do this- 94(printable ASCII set)^20 = 2.901062411315e+39, yielding 20 charactors? Also, if you come up with a phrase and put enough (perhaps 5 or 6) ASCII nonsense in there for it not to be in any crack dictionaries, how random is that? Is it only as random as the extra charactors you put in? How would you calculate that? Also, how many charactors do you have to add of a set to add its permulations (i.e. Does gibber&sh add all ASCII symbols to the equation)? Thanks, Internaut

1 0