December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Openmarket/128 bit export?
by Adam Shostack 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just saw a newswire about Openmarket exporting 128 bit ssl for OM-Transact. Anyone have any details? Adam -- "It is seldom that liberty of any kind is lost all at once." -Hume

1 0

Transmission of Crypto material and ITAR
by Benjamin Grosman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear All, I have a question regarding the impossible enforcement of ITAR/EAR: Naturally I cannot download crypto software from the US, but most of these sites have mirrors in other countries, such as the UK for PGP, and sweden and finland for lots of things. However, with the way that information is routed throughout the internet from these sites, whenever I, in Australia, request packets containing this data from the UK etc, it invariably passes through the US from coast to coast! Therefore, if ITAR/EAR tries to govern that, aren't they really trying to enforce something totally unenforcable? Surely they cannot expect all gateways operated by, say, Sprint and MCI to packet sniff 'n' search? Can anyone tell me what the ruling is with regards to this? Yours Sincerely, Benjamin Grosman ---------------------------------------------------------------- Benjamin Grosman - Programmer, Magna Data Internet Solutions Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. [Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.] ----------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Recommendation: Creation of "alt.cypherpunks"
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > ichudov(a)algebra.com writes: > > > 1. A newsgroup like comp.privacy.cypherpunks will be carried on a lot of > > > corprate news servers that don't carry alt.* (or even soc.*). Note that > > > soc.org.cypherpunks is inappropriate since cp is *not* an organization. :-) > > > Another possibility is sci.crypto.cypherpunks. (True, people whose corporat > > > newsservers don't carry soc.* and talk.* can use dejanews - provided their > > > firewall lets them.) > > > > > 2. It takes more work to create a comp.* newsgroup than an alt newsgroup. > > > It takes a vote. I'm willing to be one of the proponents and generally help > > > with the process. (Both I and Igor have been co-proponents of major Usenet > > > newsgroups - don't know about other people onthis list. :-) > > > > Not only it takes a vote. What is more important is what a vote gives: > > a good discussion of the newsgroup and the formal RFD/RFD/CFV process > > ensures that, on average, a good balance is found between various groups > > of readers. > > > > I am not concerned as to what the name of the group will be, it is > > not important. What is important is that it should be in a more or > > less flame-free zone. > > I'm concerned about smart people stuck behind corporate firewalls > and able to see comp.* and sci.*. Nearly every big Wall St firm > is that way. Did I ever relate to you the story how I had to > break through the firwall at GS to accomplish mywork? Would be interesting. > > It is too late to stop alt.cypherpunks, but if I had to make a > > prediction again, I would predict that soon posters will BEG to help > > them create comp.*.cypherpunks, because of spam and alt.flamage. > > Timmy has a valid point: the reason why a comp.* newsgroup might have less > cross-posted and "off-topic" crap is because net.cops would be more > likely to complain to posters' sysadmins. Having a charter state that > cypherpunks have technical means to ignore traffic they don't like, > and don't need anyone forging cancels or complaining to sysadmins > or otherwise getting silenced, is a good idea. It is not only because of that. There are two categories of people who simply do not visit com.* groups: sex spammers and trollers (who post articles like I RAPED A NIGGER CHILD to tens of newsgroups). If the group is created in a space that is isolated from them, that is already good. As for net.cops, check out what Scott Nudds does in comp.lang.c++ > What's going to happen when (not if) someone posts something in > alt.cypherpunks that Chris Lewis (spit) judges to be "spam" > and forges a cancel? Or someone posts a binary and Richard > "little dick" Depew forges a cancel? Chris Lewis can exclude newsgroups from his spam watch. I think that if cypherpunks put something forbidding third party cancels into the charter, he will not cancel stuff posted there. > > > 3. An unmoderated Usenet newsgroup would have even ore crap than this maili > > > list. I've been thinking of how to deal with crap, and with the obvious des > > > by some people to delegate their decision what to read and what not to read > > > to other people. > > > > It is alt.* and soc.* that has most crap, sci and comp are way better. > > There's a bunch of net.cops in e.g. comp.lang.eiffel that complain to > sysadmins of anyone posting to that newsgroup who's in a member of the > "in" crowd". It may or may not cut down on the crap, but is it worth it? Yes, there is a notorious net.cop The Right Reverend Colin James III (spit). A sample of his stukachestvo is attached at the bottom of this letter. >From ares.csd.net!cjames Fri Dec 8 00:00:29 1995 Return-Path: <cjames(a)ares.csd.net> Received: from ares.csd.net by espcbw.stat.ncsu.edu.stat.ncsu.edu with smtp (Smail3.1.29.1 #5) id m0tNxjG-000EDPC; Fri, 8 Dec 95 00:00 PST Received: by ares.csd.net (5.65/DEC-Ultrix/4.3) id AA08055; Thu, 7 Dec 1995 22:02:44 -0700 Message-Id: <9512080502.AA08055(a)ares.csd.net> From: cjames(a)ares.csd.net (Colin James III (The Rt Rev'd)) To: ichudov(a)espcbw.stat.ncsu.edu (Igor Chudov), postmaster(a)espcbw.stat.ncsu.edu, postmaster(a)stat.ncsu.edu, postmaster(a)ncsu.edu Subject: Re: Nauseating typedefs -- pros and cons Date: Fri, 08 Dec 1995 03:13:53 GMT Organization: CEC Services Reply-To: cjames(a)ares.csd.net References: <461dph$ske(a)saba.info.ucla.edu> <48np3j$1b4(a)solutions.solon.com> <4a 7rpv$fj(a)taco.cc.ncsu.edu> X-Mailer: Forte Agent .99b.112 Status: RO On 7 Dec 1995 23:02:23 GMT, ichudov(a)espcbw.stat.ncsu.edu (Igor Chudov) wrote with possible deletions: | Douglas Evan Cook (cookd(a)bert.cs.byu.edu) wrote: | * The real question comes down to: when do you need to | * use INT32 or INT16? Usually, you only need it when you are saving info | * to a disk or when you need to make sure that your numbers won't | * overflow. A little bit of hardware control is also given. But when you | * don't get those advantages, a plain int is just great. | | It is NOT great at all. Each variable is associated with a range of | values. This range of values comes from the requirements of external world. | Say, some program _must_ be required by business rules to store | $$ amount as an integer value, and it may be specified in the | requirements that $$amount cannot be more than $1,000,000. If I, | as a careless programmer, program variable dollar_amount as int | just because my RS6000 has 32-bit ints, this program will NOT be | portable to 16-bit computers. | | You can invent an untold amount of such situations. If I defined | DollarAmount_t as UINT32, I would effectively avoid this trouble. | | * So for your scanf | * vars, just use ints. Then do range checking and then assign them into | * the UINT16 type or whatever only if you need to. | | The solution is very simple and cool (IMHO). | | In the same file where you define INT16, UINT32, etc, add the following: | | #ifdef AIX | typedef long INT32; | #define F_INT32 "ld" | | typedef unsigned short UINT16; | #define F_UINT16 "u" | #endif | | #ifdef YOUR_FAVORITE_MACHINE | typedef short INT32; // Maybe for 64-bit machines, never worked with them | #define F_INT32 "d" | ... etc etc ... | | Then you define your user types: | | typedef INT32 DollarAmount_t; | #define DollarAmount_f INT32_F // You make it a rule to define | // formats right along with types | | Usually, in scanf (and printf) people write things like this: | | printf( "%ld is the dollar amount for customer %4.4d\n", | amount, cust ); | | Instead, you write | | printf( "%" DollarAmount_f " is the dollar amount for customer " | "%4.4" Cust_f, | amount, cust ); | | It is a totally portable code. All you need to port primitive types | is to recompile it. | | -- | - Igor. (My opinions only) http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov/index.html | For public PGP key, finger me or send email with Subject "send pgp key" | | You know you have achieved perfection in design, not when you have nothing | more to add, but when you have nothing more to take away. | - Antoine de Saint Exupery. Kindly remove comp.lang.eiffel from distribution of this thread. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Colin James III, Principal Scientist cjames(a)csd.net CEC Services, 2080 Kipling St, Lakewood, CO 80215-1502 USA Voice: 303.231.9437; Facsimile: .231.9438; Data: .231.9434 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - Igor.

1 0

FW: I would like to be out of your mailing list
by Robert Nadra 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I would like to get out of your mailing list , please indicate the correct procedure. Thanks.

2 1

N.Y. judge rules for Planned Parenthood in web site case
by Vipul Ved Prakash 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

*** N.Y. judge rules for Planned Parenthood in web site case A federal judge has temporarily stopped an abortion foe from identifying his web site as belonging to Planned Parenthood and selling an anti-abortion book from that home page. The temporary restraining order, issued Wednesday, stops Richard Bucci from identifying his home page as "Planned Parenthood's Home Page" and using "plannedparenthood.com" as a domain name. Planned Parenthood, which has its own web site, sued Bucci for trademark infringement. The next hearing is slated for Feb. 20. For the full text story, see http://www.merc.com/stories/cgi/story.cgi?id=1426121-b7e -- Vipul Ved Prakash | - Electronic Security & Crypto vipul(a)pobox.com | - Web Objects 91 11 2233328 | - PERL Development 198 Madhuban IP Extension | - Linux & Open Systems Delhi, INDIA 110 092 | - Networked Multimedia

1 0

FW: I would like to be out of your mailing list
by Robert Nadra 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I would like to get out of your mailing list , please indicate the correct procedure. Thanks.

1 0

Dale-Further proof
by Huge Cajones Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yet another Dale day (blah): :Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:37:58 -0800 :From: Dale Thorn <dthorn(a)gte.net> :To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com :CC: dlv(a)bwalk.dm.com :Another blood stain on Gilmore's shroud, as it were. As further evidence that Dale is unworthy to participate in any socially interactive behaviour other than grinding (that is, grinding) his nose in the naysayers, collective ass, I submit that he posts mixed and otherwise unclear metaphores. Ipso facto. As difficult as the good doctor can be, Dale is not intellectually worthy to lick his boots, though he tries. And, cc: Doctor V., no less. What cabal is this with cc's in the clear? Love you, fella. (You can tell, can't you.)

1 0

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Against Moderation 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 11:24:57 -0500 (EST) > From: aga <aga(a)dhp.com> > > Well, the fact remains that the homos are instrumental in creating and > forming a cliquish and censored usenet. There is just no question > about that. Remember the previous cypherpunk who stated that the > gays "created and run usenet." No. Who said that, and why do you think the person was serious, let alone telling the truth? > Your assumption that I am a "bigot" makes it you appear uninformed. > Sexism is good, but racism is bad. A sexist is not a bigot. > > The only one who qualifies as a "bigot" is a racist. According to the American Heritage dictionary: bigot n. One who is strongly partial to one's own group, religion, race, or politics and is intolerant of those who differ. According to Webster: bigot n. One obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his own opinions and prejudices I see nothing that limits bigotry to racial intolerance. > It is very logical and wise to discriminate on the basis of sex. Most would disagree, and decide based on that and other statements you have made that you must be an extremely unpleasant person. If you want to fight censorship effectively, going around telling people "You're a shit-eating faggot you fucking cock-sucking homo censor" in public forums is not going to win you many points. Instead, it will quickly land you in many people's killfiles, and will eventually lead some people with bad client software to wonder if it wouldn't be worth giving up some freedom of speech for the benefit of not having to see your rants any more. I'm not saying you don't have a right to express your opinions. I'm just remarking that you appear to be more in the business of inducing censorship than fighting it. If that's the case, so be it; someone has to get censored in order for people to fight censorship, and exposing people's willingness to censor is not necessarily a bad thing in itself. Unfortunately, it sort of makes life harder for those who actually fight the censorship when you pretend to be one of them. Your argument seems to run something like, "To protect freedom of speech, bad all faggots from the net, and especially don't let them run any mailing lists." If this offensive and highly noticeable argument eclipses many of the important, fundamental ones as the censors would like it too (why do you think your articles make it to cypherpunks- flames while mine only get as far as -unedited), you will end up not only inducing censorship but also seriously hampering the efforts of those who are legitimately fighting that censorship. > I am not a racist, so therefore I can not be a "bigot," regardless of > my views on homosexuality. See above.

5 9

Keep it Simple and the Cypherpunk Way
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(A copy of this message has also been posted to the following newsgroups: alt.cypherpunks) At 11:42 AM -0500 2/13/97, Derek Atkins wrote: >Unfortunately, the messages that make it through to the cypherpunks >list have their MessageID changed when they get approved. So, >checking for duplicates by MessageID fails, given the current approval >mechanism. :( > >I've informed Sandy of the problem, but he doesn't know how to >preserve the original MessageIDs. I will phrase my message here as respectfully as possible vis-a-vis the goals of the moderation experiment. That is, I will only deal with one aspect, the one of _costs_ of the moderation experiment. To wit, the _costs_ of the moderation experiment--Sandy's time, our time spent debating moderation, and now the issues raised by Michael Froomkin and others about dealing with the chaos of multiple, overlapping lists--greatly exceed the relatively small amount of effort it took anyone to simply delete the insult posts, the ASCII art posts, etc. I respectfully submit that the huge costs incurred on several parties have cumulatively far exceeded the minor savings of not having a handful of the 'bot-generated insults of the day and some of the ASCII art generated. As to the "comity" of the list, the moderation experiment has clearly had just the opposite effect, predictably. (Imposing comity is rarely easy, especially given an independent bunch of folks who are suspicious of moderators screening their words for evidence of non-comity!). And the ill will generated toward certain folks has been regrettable, and vastly more costly than any minor savings in not having to see a few messages. "Keep it simple, stupid," the oft-quote KISS principle. A moderation scheme--except perhaps those run very tightly a la Peter Neumann's RISKS list--almost always bogs down into debates about the moderation criteria, the acceptability of certain posts, and so on. Now we see another effect: multiple lists and a confusing array of cross-posts, mail-to-News gateways, News-to-mail gateways, etc. The "Cypherpunks Way" is to encourage and empower people to filter their own stuff, or to hire outside contractors to do it for them. Failing that, to let them twist slowly in the wind. "Think of it as evolution in action." The Cypherpunks Way is also the simplest system. I hope this episode has reminded us of this lesson. --Tim May -- Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we 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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: distributed mailing list architecture
by pdh＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:11 PM 2/7/1997, Adam Back wrote: >Igor Chudov <ichudov(a)algebra.com> writes: >> I'd suggest a simplier solution: to connect each server with a couple, >> or maybe three, other servers. This scheme is rather robust, does not >> consume too much CPU time and bandwidth, and is easy to implement. > I'm not sure what the architecture you are suggesting is, but this is > what I suggest as the simplest to set up. > Have one main majordomo. > Have many mail-exploders. > You subscribe to the main majordomo request address, and it forwards > your subscription request to a random mail-exploder. > You unsubscribe to the main majordomo request address, and it forwards > your subscription to all the mail-exploders request addresses > (unsubscribe traffic is low anyway, keeping track of who is subscribed > where at the main major domo doesn't seem worth it). > Each person who wishes to run an exploder is subscribed (manually) to > the main majordomo. > You submit articles to the main majordomo, and it sends copies of the > articles to it's subscribers (the mail-exploders). > The mail-exploders send mail to the address on their subscriber lists. > (John Gilmore suggested this architecture, as a simpler alternative). This mostly solves the performance problem, but performance was not the only choke point. It is important to have many machines which accept posts and which send them to other machines. (Also, many interconnections means that few messages have to go through more than two machines which should make message distribution extraordinarily fast and highly redundant. Standing in the way of the cypherpunks list will be like standing in the way of the wind.) I suggest we consider the problem of subscriptions to be independent of the problem of posting and distributing messages. Some machine owners may wish to pool subscription activities. The fast and easy approach is to have an official cypherpunks subscription page which lists all of the mail servers which will accept new subscribers. (The person who maintains this page would ideally not be somebody running a mail server.) The interested person looks at the page and then picks a majordomo to subscribe to. It seems beneficial to me from a technical and social standpoint to have a web of relationships between list managers and subscribers. If as a subscriber you have some sort of problem (technical or social), it will work better if there is just one person to talk to rather than a loose network of volunteers. Peter

1 0