December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

http:--cnnfn.com-digitaljam-wires-9702-11-hackers_wg-
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Click here to download the shareware YOU want at ZDNet [INLINE] Digital Jam hackers graphic Hackers victimize firms Experts tell House panel breaking into networks is too simple February 11, 1997: 6:17 p.m. ET [INLINE] Hackers and Feds in Vegas - July 31, 1996 Internet firms make hacking pay - April 12, 1996 WASHINGTON (Reuter) -- Hackers are finding it easier to break into computer networks and steal money, partly because companies are reluctant to admit that they are vulnerable, security experts said Tuesday. [INLINE] "If I want to steal money a computer is a much better tool than a handgun," Daniel Geer, engineering director for Open Market, Inc., told a House of Representatives technology subcommittee hearing on computer security. "They start out stealing $1,000 a day and figure they can get away with $2,000 a day and then they get greedy and hit some figure which sets off alarm bells." [INLINE] A panel of experts assembled by the subcommittee said many companies refuse to report breaches in their security because they want to avoid negative publicity and embarrassment. [INLINE] "Most computer crimes are not reported," Eugene Spafford of Purdue University told the panel. He estimated losses run into "hundreds of millions of dollars" but said no one really knows since so much goes unreported. [INLINE] Daniel Farmer, a security consultant, said penetrating a computer system is relatively easy. "Just using simple tests, I could break into two-thirds of the systems I tried," he said, adding that he could easily raise that figure to three-quarters if he wanted. [INLINE] Farmer said that during his tests he even discovered a problem with the White House World Wide Web site and told the system manager about it. He said he never received a reply. [INLINE] "Defensive programs have been overtaken by offensive programs" developed by hackers, he said. [INLINE] Spafford said law enforcement has kept pace with advances made by hackers who are able essentially to take over entire networks and run them by remote control. [INLINE] In addition to banks and corporations, the experts said, government secrets can be stolen and used to threaten national security. They cited recent computer network tampering at the Justice Department and the CIA. [INLINE] A General Accounting Office study recently found that there were 250,000 "hits" aimed at the Defense Department's computer networks last year and 65 percent were successful. Link to top home | digitaljam | contents | search | stock quotes | help Copyright 1997 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Copyright © 1997 Cable News Network, Inc. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

1 0

Computer break-ins
by Lynne L. Harrison 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Tue Feb 11 22:14:30 1997 U.S. Experts: Computer Break-Ins Go Unreported U.S. Experts: Computer Break-Ins Go Unreported February 11, 1997, 4:19 PM EST WASHINGTON (Reuter) - Security experts said on Tuesday hackers are finding it easier to break into computer networks and steal money, partly because companies are reluctant to admit that they are vulnerable. ``If I want to steal money a computer is a much better tool than a handgun,'' Daniel Geer, Director of Engineering for Open Market, Inc., told a House of Representatives technology subcommittee hearing on computer security. ``The only way they get caught is if they cross some threshold,'' he said. ``They start out stealing $1,000 a day and figure they can get away with $2,000 a day and then they get greedy and hit some figure which sets off alarm bells.'' A panel of experts assembled by the subcommittee said many companies refuse to report breaches in their security because of they want to avoid negative publicity and embarassment. ``Most computer crimes are not reported,'' Eugene Spafford of Purdue University told the panel. He estimated losses run into ``hundreds of millions of dollars'' but said no one really knows since so much goes unreported. Daniel Farmer, a security consultant, said penetrating a computer system was relatively easy. ``Just using simple tests, I could break into two-thirds of the systems I tried,'' he said, adding that he could easily raise that figure to three-quarters if he wanted. Farmer said that during his tests he even discovered a problem with the White House World Wide Web site and told the system manager about it, but never received a reply. ``Defensive programs have been overtaken by offensive programs'' developed by hackers, he said. Spafford said law enforcement had not been able to keep up with advances made by hackers who are able essentially to take over entire networks and run them by remote control. In addition to banks and corporations, the experts said, government secrets can be stolen and threaten national security. They cited recent computer network tampering at the Justice Department and the CIA. A General Accounting Office study found that there were 250,000 ``hits'' aimed at the Defense Department's computer networks last year and 65 percent were successful. =A9 Reuters Ltd. All rights reserved. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMwE1lz5A4+Z4Wnt9AQHlrAQAi4X7MTb8CbWTaQZfdLIfwzkMkzT1g/gi QPcdaPedbgG6tU8SBS5trqyXu5JvwaVomEUpW+qrKT0JzD8a1Lyf23dgK5qLM+/+ fDWz08KaxsW3uymTRNBZo2gl/ZwpdU7DeQoReOkAqQyBXPWeoBRwYbyGu1pDlHBB yK3hRY2MrEk= =Ht0R -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --j0geb1id6lkzfrn2of7klxdtm3pg8j--

1 0

Cypherpunks-resources FAQ for alt.cypherpunks
by omegam＠cmq.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I am under the assumption that alt.cypherpunks or alt.privacy.cypherpunks or some such will come into existence shortly. With that in mind, I have decided to create a FAQ of pointers to resources on cypherpunk issues. The goal is to help eliminate the "What is PGP?" and other newbie-questions that are bound to come up even more frequently in a newsgroup scenario. A FAQ such as this has probably long been appropriate, but it didn't really occur to me until just now. Not being a cryptologist or adequate coder, this is one way I feel I can contribute. It's hard to have discussions when people haven't even looked at the background information before piping in. I don't pretend that a FAQ can prevent this, but it's worth a shot anyway. I started typing away about two hours ago and came up with the following. It's pretty shaky since it's late and it's Mardi Gras. Feel free to comment in public or private. Please, Please, Please make suggestions and provide relevant pointers. Obviously, I will be doing a lot of research over the next few weeks to fill in this very bare outline. If you disagree with this or feel its useless... fine. Please tell me and explain all your reasons why. Besides, I'm doing it regardless. Here's what I'm chewing on so far.... ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Cypherpunks Resources FAQ version 0.000000001 This document lists resources for readers interested in Cypherpunk issues and goals. The primary intention of this document is to get new readers to the group to explore the background issues which cypherpunks attempt to address. It also includes pointers to many common cryptographic implementations and tools. Furthermore, pointers and instructions for various mailreaders are provided to help users filter out some of Usenet's inevitable noise and glean the most useful information they can from this newsgroup. This FAQ does not attempt to explictly define who the Cypherpunks are or answer questions about the philosophy. That is an exercise for the reader who utilizes the pointers within to find the answers on their own. After exploring these resources, the hope is that the reader will become a more effective and insightful contributor to alt.cypherpunks -- even if he/she is opposed to the goals of the group. This FAQ is propagated monthly to alt.cypherpunks. It can also be obtained be sending email with the subject and/or body "get cpunks faq" to omegam(a)cmq.com. When information in the FAQ is updated, I will also post a "what's new" message for those who are interested in reading additions/corrections without wading throught the entire FAQ again. -------*********------- Author's Note/Disclaimer ---------*********--------- I maintain this FAQ solely on a voluntary basis. I am doing this because I think it is necessary. It would be contrary to the anarchic nature of the Cypherpunks to attempt to call this an official FAQ of the Cypherpunks group. Anyone who disagrees with the editing decisions and pointer selections I have made in this FAQ is free to. What this means is that you are encouraged to send comments, suggestions, corrections, new questions, and answers to me. I may or may not include them in future revisions of the FAQ. I do ask that somewhere in the subject of your mail redarding this FAQ you include the text "(CFAQ suggest)", so procmail can file such comments appropriately and I can address them in a more efficient manner. If I use your suggestion or answer to a question, I will attribute the reference to you unless you request that I do not. You are free to create your own Cypherpunks-resources FAQ if you don't like mine. - Scott _______________________________________________________________ Omegaman <mailto:omegam@cmq.com> PGP Key fingerprint = 6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2 59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63 Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:" field to get a copy of my public key _______________________________________________________________ -------*********--------*********---------********--------*********------ Premliminary Outline Section 1 Introduction and General Information? Q1.1 Does this newsgroup have a charter (No but, Tim's "official" charter. Eric's note at end of original toad.com welcome message) Q1.2 How did the group get started? (Need a brief history of group as well as any pointers to early history information and posts, also include pointer to early wired article) Q1.3 What do Cypherpunks want? (May's Cyphernomicon, CSUA Berkely site, Others?) Q1.4 What happened to the toad.com mailing list? Are there archives? (Brief explanation, quote Gilmore's message? point to the usual archives? Note: check and note if arhive site still prevents IE usage) Q1.5 Are there other groups besides Cypherpunks who share these goals. (point to Epic, EFF, etc sites which all have good archival information on political crypto causes even if many cpunks have strong disagreement with some of these groups. also point to Cryptography(a)c2.net and coderpunks lists) Q1.6 What have the cypherpunks done to advance their goals other that merely talk about them?(Pointers to anon remailers, Linux-IPSEC project, Mykotronx scandal--really need a good pointer here, more. Mention of course that many who call themselves cypherpunks are professionals in the computer security field.) Q1.7 Im interested, what can I do? Pointers to current projects, i distributed DES crack Q1.8 Quick n' Dirty Glossary: ie. GAK, TLA, etc. Section 2 Crypto in Action Q2.1 Pointers galore to PGP resources. Q2.2 Point to Schneir's site and include biblio info on Applied Crypto Q2.2 Point to cryptlib toolkits Q2.3 RSA, of course. Q2.4 pointers to disk encryption utilities for various platforms Q2.5 pointers to Raph's remailer site and other remailer info sites. remailer software. software to make remailer usage simpler (premail, PIdaho) Q2.6 pointers to the various digital cash purveyors and to explanations of how Chaumian digital cash works. Q2.7 pointers to Apache-SSL site and info, Stronghold, Q2.8 SSH Q2.9 Pointers to sites describing how various types of crypto actually work Q3.0 But how do I know if it's good crypto? Point to snake Oil FAQ? Schneir's essay. Use your brain. Section 3 Crypto and the Law Q3.1 Froomkin's site obviously.. John Young's also obvious. EFF has a good archive too. Karn case, others. Q3.2 Pointers to government's current position on crypto. ie. EAR, ITAR Q3.3 Pointers past Clipper failure info. Section 4 Who's who & (recent) History of Crypto. Q4.1 A couple of good general history sites exist. also Codebreakers bibliographical reference. Q4.2 Enigma is a common question, point to relevant sites. Q4.3 Whit Diffie--some interviews etc are available Q4.4 Bruce Schneir same Q4.5 Phil Z and PGP history and interviews. Q4.6 Jim Bizdos Q4.8 Dorothy Denning (go to include the enemy too) Q4.7 Pointers to news on breaks of ciphers Q4.8 NSA site. (Others? I'm getting sleepy, names escaping me at the moment) Question 5 Help! I want to know more but I'm drowning in noise Q5.1 Point to filtered lists in existence Q5.2 news2mail gateways as source of list. mail filtering tools come into good use. point to a bunch of them. Q5.3 Point to kill-file info for various newsreaders and platforms. Possibly include generic examples from own experience and list user's experience who wish to contribute. Specific names will be ommitted of course. Also score information for those interested Q5.4 point to information on other utilities and verification-type schemes _______________________________________________________________ Omegaman <mailto:omegam@cmq.com> PGP Key fingerprint = 6D 31 C3 00 77 8C D1 C2 59 0A 01 E3 AF 81 94 63 Send e-mail with "get key" in the "Subject:" field to get a copy of my public key _______________________________________________________________

1 0

Mac-Crypto 1997 session Schedule
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Sender: mac-crypto(a)thumper.vmeng.com Reply-To: Vinnie Moscaritolo <vinnie(a)webstuff.apple.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Precedence: Bulk Date: Tue, 11 Feb 1997 13:43:19 -0800 From: Vinnie Moscaritolo <vinnie(a)webstuff.apple.com> To: Multiple recipients of <mac-crypto(a)thumper.vmeng.com> Subject: Mac-Crypto 1997 session Schedule hey all; I have posted a preliminary list of sessions for the 1997 Mac-Crypto conference at the Mac-Crypto conference at the webpage http://www.vmeng.com/mc/conf.html if you haven't registered, please get your name in now! if you want to give a talk, please drop me a line asap. Vinnie Moscaritolo http://www.vmeng.com/vinnie/ Fingerprint: 4FA3298150E404F2782501876EA2146A ------------------------------------------------------- ...I know what probably happened. A new high-level manager at Apple picked up some old dusty videotape off the shelf, labelled "Super Bowl 1984", played it and said, "Yah know, that guy on the screen was making a hell of a lot of sense until that trouble-maker smashed it!" --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "Never attribute to conspiracy what can be explained by stupidity." -- Jerry Pournelle The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/rah/ FC97: Anguilla, anyone? http://www.ai/fc97/

1 0

Re: Network of majordomos
by Greg Broiles 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:08 PM 2/11/97 -0800, Peter Hendrickson wrote: >At 1:09 PM 2/11/1997, Greg Broiles wrote: >>At 10:45 AM 2/11/97 -0600, Firebeard wrote: >>> [...] I've already taken steps, along with Jim Choate, to >>> start a network of majordomos hosting a Cypherpunks mailing list. >>> [...] Our intention is to have a set of majordomos which >>> are intersubscribed to a cypherpunks list on each one, with measures >>> taken to ensure that mail loops don't develop. > >> I still think you're just rediscovering Usenet technology.... > >> And, if you must, run mail-to-news gateway(s) which send the newsgroup to >> people who want it as E-mail. > >> Usenet technology does exactly what you're describing:... > >How about this? The people who like Usenet should race ahead and set >it up. The people who like networks of majordomos should race ahead >and set those up. Just so long as the tracks meet somewhere in Utah. As I understand the creation process for an alt. group, someone posts a proposal to alt.config explaining what's being proposed, waits a week or so to see if there's a general sense of approval or disapproval or [...] and then they send a newgroup control message. Individual systems will choose to add the new group, or not, depending on local policy, administrator whim, and so forth. I sent a proposal to alt.config last night (a few hours before I got John's message indicating that the list is going away, so I wasn't able to include that fact in my message; it was also ~ 10 hours before I saw Tim's message re alt.cypherpunks so I was unable to include his more useful statement of the group's purpose) and intend to newgroup alt.cypherpunks in a week or so, absent a clear indication from the people in alt.config that it would be rmgroup'ed or otherwise have a poor chance of success. I don't think a "charter" is especially necessary or useful in the alt. hierarchy. One feature of the "alt." groups is that there's no real control over what happens there. If someone creates a one-way or two-way gateway between one or more mailing lists and alt.cypherpunks, there's nothing anyone else can do about it. (modulo cancelbunny/NoCeM, both of which are optionally honored on a site-by-site basis) So, the tracks will meet in Utah if someone decides to hook them up. Perhaps this will be you? As far as I'm concerned, nobody owns the word "cypherpunks" and we're all free to use it in any way we please - e.g., Igor can suggest "comp.org.cypherpunks", eight people can run "cypherpunks(a)foo.com" mailing lists, and so forth. Looking for one unified acceptable-to-everyone solution is pointless on this list. Let "n" flowers bloom. -- Greg Broiles | US crypto export control policy in a nutshell: gbroiles(a)netbox.com | http://www.io.com/~gbroiles | Export jobs, not crypto.

1 0

Re: alt.cypherpunks
by Eric Cordian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Robert Hettinga writes: > Hey, folks, > I thought all you had to do to create an alt.group was to have a news admin > somewhere just make a group; send out a control message of somekind. I > thought that alt groups didn't have to go through a charter, or voting > process, or anything else. They just happened. > Then, everyone just has to tell their local news admin that they went to > see it, or they can wait until their news admin sees it flying by, and adds > it to the available groups list at his own discretion. In theory, and according to the alt FAQ, anyone can create an alt group. In reality, control messages are merely advisory, and greater weight is lent to control messages which have the imprimatur of the Alt Cabal than to those issued by mere peons. The typical news admin finds that if he honors all rmgroup messages issued by Cabal members, when they disapprove of a newsgroup not previously discussed in alt.config, his life is made simpler, and he no longer has to weed the wheat from the chaf by hand. Since most people are inherently lazy, and most newgroups created outside of the alt.config process are trash, the path of least resistance is to only automatically honor newgroups and rmgroups issued by Cabal members. This is of course the exact antithesis of how alt was supposed to work in the first place, but with the large number of users on the Net at present, it is not practical to create every single newsgroup a person might want automatically. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

If the people decide for creation of a new USENET newsgroup, we need to think very hard about actually moving it to a different hierarchy from alt.*. I would propose comp.org.cypherpunks, comp.cypherpunks, sci.crypt.cypherpunks or something like that. A comp.* or sci.* newsgroup, if created, has the following advantages over an alt.* newsgroup: 1) There is usually less spam in sci.* or comp.* 2) There are virtually no completely irrelevant flamewars 3) The propagation will be a lot better 4) More people will be able to read it because of the issue of providers not carrying alt.*. I see nothing that would make a sci.* or comp.* newsgroup worse than alt.* newsgroup. igor Timothy C. May wrote: > > > (Please leave my name in any replies to ensure I see your comments.) > > I talked to Hugh Daniel at the Saturday meeting about the creation of an > "alt.cypherpunks" unmoderated (of course) newsgroup as a possible > alternative (or supplement) to cypherpunks(a)toad.com. Greg Broiles and John > Gilmore were there for part of the discussion, too. > > (We did not, unfortunately, get to the "future of the list" topic at the > physical meeting...the excellent presentations ran way over the expected > time and we never got to this topic. Sort of too bad, given John's edict > that we have 10 days to find and implement an alternative....) > > A Usenet newsgroup has many advantages and disadvantages. Whether it might > be gatewayed to other mailing lists--perhaps even the list(s) which > survives "cypherpunks(a)toad.com"--depends of course on the decision of those > hosting others lists. > > A charter statement is needed, and then the issuance of a creation message. > A better charter statement will increase the chances of more sites carrying > the newsgroup. While many sites carry essentially all newsgroups--more than > 30,000--, some sites do not and only carry some of the alt.heirarchy. And > some sites do not carry _any_ of the alt newsgroups. > > At Hugh's suggestion, I'm suggesting a "first cut" at a charter statement. > Suggestions for additional language or changes are welcome. > > Charter for alt.cypherpunks: (suggested) > > "Alt.cypherpunks is for the unmoderated discussion of cryptography and the > political, social, and economic implications of unrestricted, strong > cryptography. The Cypherpunks grpup has existed since 1992 and has been > central in the debate about strong crypto, government restrictions, crypto > anarchy, and in showing weaknesses of various ciphers and security > products. The mailing list has had as many as 1500 subscribers, plus > gateways to newsgroups and Web sites. It is expected that "alt.cypherpunks" > will be a free-wheeling forum for many viewpoints. As it is unmoderated, > readers are strongly advised to learn how to use filters and other tools > for making virtual anarchies manageable for their own tastes." > > I invite your comments, editorial suggestions, etc. Perhaps when enough of > the "collective mind" has made inputs (ughh!), the charter can be submitted > with the creation message. (I'm not knowledgeable about the process, but > I'll bet many of you are.) > > There are of course disadvantages to such a newsgroup, as any Usenet user > certainly knows. However, there are advantages as well. Here are some of > each: > > > * Advantages: > > - Usenet is set up to automagically propagate articles across tens of > thousands of sites. > > - there is no "nexus" of control, no chokepoint, no precedent (in the U.S.) > for halting distribution of Usenet newsgroups. (Canada stopped some > Homulka-Teale newsgroups a few years ago, other countries have blocked > entire sections, but note that the Scientologists have been unable to block > "alt.religion.scientology"...I surmise that a mailing list version of > a.r.s. would have faced lawsuits against the list.owner, if reachable in > U.S. or European courts...a lesson to think about with the current > imbroglio over certain claims about certain products and the possible > liability of Sandy and/or toad.com.) > > - fairly sophisticated newsreading software already exists. > > - no "unsuscribe" and "unscrive" messages! (It makes it easy for newcomers > to discover the group, read it for a while, then stop. It also, of course, > increases the number of "What is crypto?" sorts of messages.) > > - persons cannot be unsubscribed from an unmoderated list > > - with a Usenet group, there is no ability to impose notions of "order" on > the list (e.g., requirements for PGP-signing, demands for "on-topic" posts, > removal of "illegal" posts, etc.). Thus, people must deal with a virtual > anarchy by using proper tools, by ignoring what they don't want to see, or > by contracting out the role of "nanny" to others. > > > * Disadvantages > > - Usenet newsgroups are easy targets for spammers, even more so than are > mailing lists. > > - crossposting often gets out of hand. (With 30,000+ newsgroups, even > well-intentioned posters often pick the "three or four most likely" targets > for their posts). > > - propagation is often spotty, and some sites have no access at all to the > "alt.*" hierarchy. (Many corporate sites block the alt heirarchy. Many > academic sites block just the alt.binaries.pictures heirarchy. Etc. A news > to mailing list gateway is possible for these readers.) > > - propagation may be slower than mailing lists. > > - Usenet is of course archived and easily searchable via Alta Vista, Deja > News, etc.. This bothers some people. (However, the CP mailing list is now > also archived and searchable, so the disadvantage is becoming moot.) > > - persons cannot be unsubscribed from an unmoderated list (this is also an > advantage, of course) > > - there will be more newbie-type messages, as casual browsers of Usenet > discover alt.cypherpunks and ask questions. This is both a disadvantage and > an advantage. > > > * Discussion of some of these points: > > 1. The issue of slow- or non-propagation can be handled by having mailing > lists which bounce the traffic (from a well-connected site) to folks who > get slow distribution, or no distribution at all. News to mail gateways, in > other words. Traffic in the reverse direction (end reader back to > alt.cypherpunks) can be handled either by "blind posting" to the a.c. > newsgroup, via one's newsreader, or through mail-to-news gateways, or > perhaps via the distributor described here. > > 2. And the services of "moderators," such as Eric Blossom's and Ray > Arachelian's "best of" lists, or even Sandy's list, are of course still > possible. A newsgroup does not change this, except for the latency in > getting messages out to newsgroup sites. > > 3. The advantages of a "no nexus, no chokepoint" distribution are huge. The > Usenet carries huge advantages in terms of having no place to attack it. > > 4. Some have raised the point that Usenet is "inefficient" and should not > be used for this reason. Well, it may indeed be ineficient, but the costs > have already been incurred, and alt.cypherpunks would only be 1/30,000th of > additional load (very roughly speaking). In other words, might as well use > what's out there. If a "second Usenet" ever comes into existence, fine. > > 5. Some of us discussed the creation of alt.cypherpunks back in '92-93. At > that time, we thought the mailing list had some major advantages. In my > view, the situation has changed dramatically since then. The mailing list > has become huge, the volume of noise has increased, majordomo is allowing > the list to be used for spamming (any 'bot system will probably have this), > and the list is already gatewayed to many sites as a _newsgroup_ anyway. > > So, I think the time has come to just create it. The "activation energy > barrier" of a mailing list, where people would have to make the effort to > subscribe, has long since become irrelevant. > > It may be a target for spammers, but it's hard to imagine it being much > worse than what we have now. > > Usenet is an anarchy. We might as well use it. > > I've never created an alt group, but I presume many of you have (and I know > of one currently fed up Cypherpunk who created the entire alt.* hierarchy a > decade or so ago). I presume some of you can thus help in such an effort. > > --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." > > > > - Igor.

1 0

Crypto: Job Opportunity
by Carol Anne Cypherpunk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The Mining Co. (http://www.miningco.com) is looking for "siteguides". There will surely be a guide needed for cryptography. Pay is commensurate with hit volume, but it isn't too shabby, at about 3K per month after about a year. There is the original posting from Sideman's Online Insider following this post to acquaint you with the particulars. Good Luck to whomever from this list (for I'm sure someone will) takes the aformentioned position. I would, but I'm applying for a different site in the Culture/Beliefs section. On one other note, the PGP Plugin for Eudora is MARVELOUS! THIS I can even teach a clueless newbie! Carol Anne Cypherpunk -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Uncensored from heavily.censored.org iQCVAwUBMwAfd4rpjEWs1wBlAQG3YwP/XXgJfqD06KTLfdDfj2mAweBrFAASsRR8 q37l43InJU/AVhRJ0MKkcmxto7sfO1jHNW6O0+0HjrnMRZAmnw7YH806+mCCerUG CeTT5U97Cp/V5Yud6r6f0vqP/BPk8etGIZnGgWKajJ49rFTGlk01AgQz1xE49mmI i962UdPbyVs= =69D8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ========================================================================== Seidman's Online Insider - Vol. 4, Issue 6 Brought to you by NetGuide Magazine< http://www.netguide.com > ========================================================================== Copyright (C) 1997 Robert Seidman and CMP Media Inc. All rights reserved. May be reproduced in any medium for noncommercial purposes as long as attribution is given. Kurnit is Back and Mining the Internet ====================================== "Like Arnold, he'll be back. I've been listening to what he has to say for a long time. If you listen to him, you'll hear how the Web is the way and that the proprietary services are a dead model. If you listen between-the-lines, you'll hear a modified version of that vision. A best of both worlds vision. You'll hear that he wants to develop easy to use, functional services on the Web. Like easy to use chat. Like easy to use bulletin boards. Like AOL, but on the Web." -Thoughts on Scott Kurnit in a piece regarding the failed MCI/News Corp joint venture from Seidman's Online Insider for the Week Ending February 9, 1996. Kurnit's back, and almost exactly a year to the day since the clip above was written. On Monday February 10, the new company Kurnit founded, The Mining Company, will announce their plans to basically build AOL on the Web. I'm not sure about the choice of February 10 as the day to announce this. It is a day with special significance for me. On February 10, 1972 I had a dilemma. I was hungry for breakfast and wanted some cereal. I had cereal, but no milk. So I called my mom at work and asked her if I could run across the street to the convenience store. My mom said no because "the street" was more like a highway and because I was 9 years old. "You'll get hit by a car," my mom said. As you might imagine, I went anyway. And as you also might have guessed by now my mother was right, except no car was good enough for me. I had to face off with a ten-wheeler (it was an Amoco < http://www.amoco.com > Oil tanker.) Twenty-two stitches in the head, a healed broken wrist and 25 years later, I'm still hanging in there. I don't remember anything about it, including seeing the truck. I've always wondered if I was pushed. What I do remember was waking up in the ambulance with quite a headache. But since then, seeing how I lived and all, I've always viewed February 10 as a GOOD day. The Mining Company may not be a truck setting its sights on running down AOL or even other Web content aggregators (even to some degree NetGuide Live), but it is an interesting model. *What It Is* In effect, The Mining Company wants to be the biggest online service on the Web, ultimately offering 4,000 special-interest areas in an integrated, easy-to-use interface. Whether you call these special areas channels, departments or categories -- it's all the same thing. Kurnit wants to capitalize on the fact that it takes too long to find what you want on the Net. He wants to put it all in one place with one consistent interface so that you can easily find what you're looking for and interact with those who have common interests. Each "channel" will have content, bulletin boards, online chats, links to other good stuff on the Web in the particular area of interest. You'll also be able to search a site via Verity's search engine or search the entire Net via Digital's Alta Vista. While they are currently testing another chat product, they have decided to move to the iChat chat client. In the test system I had access to, the bulletin board system was very easy to use, but painfully slow. I'll cut them some slack since they are still in beta, but users will need to be able to move around the boards quicker than what I experienced or they will likely be put off. *And Now for Something Really Different* When Kurnit first ran the vision by me a couple of weeks ago, I said "To me it seems like this is..." "AOL on the Web," Kurnit interrupted. "Not exactly," I said, "It's like AOL on the Web with a hint of Amway thrown in." One of the problems with providing editorial context for the Net is that it winds up costing a lot of money. Kurnit's previous venture with MCI/Newscorp was iGuide. They built a great guide to the Net, but ultimately they scaled it back to just become a guide to entertainment on the Net. You've read the reports all over the place about scaled back editorial efforts and rightsizing. Good editorial doesn't come cheap, at least not when done traditionally. The Mining Company isn't going after the traditional model of hiring a bunch of full-time editors and bringing them in house. They plan to use folks already out there on the Net. Once upon a time while I was at IBM, I helped recruit Chris Locke, of MecklerWeb notoriety away from the MCI/News Corp effort Kurnit was running. While there are many things Chris and I do not agree on, I was very much in synch with Chris when it came to the idea of communities of interest on the Web. Give remote people the tools to produce the content, Locke would say, and you'd be able to easily build hundreds if not thousands of communities of interest very inexpensively. Locke who is now with a hardware company in Colorado will no doubt take interest in what Kurnit and the gang at The Mining Company are up to, because they are all about providing the tools to produce the communities of interest inexpensively! If your chosen as one of its forum moderators (they call them Guides), you'll be given access to all the tools you need to build a site on the service. Now you may be thinking, "Ah, GeoCities does that already!" GeoCities < http://www.geocities.com > gives free web pages and is organized around certain communities of interest. But their homesteader program is not about setting up an all-encompassing online service. And while it is a great place to create a free web page, there's no real business model for the person creating the page. If you build a great site there, GeoCities gets the revenue on all the traffic that goes there. Because it has a lot of traffic, GeoCities can send some traffic to your Web site. But in the end, the model for GeoCities is one to give you a free page on the Web. This is good for you if you're just in it for the fun of it, and good for GeoCities too. I think GeoCities is great, but if I am looking for something in particular, I wouldn't think to look there first. The Mining Company wants to create a space that no matter what it is you hope to find, you'll look there first. *They Call them Guides* The Mining Company wants to create quality communities of interest. And for every community (channel) created, there will be a unique moderator/editor. The Mining Company calls them Guides. It's looking for more than just a few quality folks to become Guides and form their service. Starting Monday, they will begin accepting applications to become Guides on the service. There could be multiple sites about the same thing during the start-up phase, but ultimately it will be whittled down to one Guide/site per special interest. To ensure quality, they'll be a review committee set-up to make sure quality standards are up to snuff, including some folks from the community of Guides. Kurnit believes between that, the natural inclination for other Guides to point out areas of, um, weakness and user feedback, they'll have a good handle on quality. Additionally, there will be some in-house editorial to oversee major groupings (like Technology, Personal Finance, etc.) "The Mining Company is dedicated to serving the needs of its Guides and users," said Kurnit. "We give the tools and support to the Guides to help users find what they want, trust what they find, and connect them with the most valuable sites on the Net and with other interesting people." "This model is now only possible because of the team effort at The Mining Company to integrate the latest improvements in Internet technology and the newly identified needs of users and independent Web producers," adds Kurnit. *Getting the Guides* Will it be easy to get the ultimately thousands of Guides necessary to run this service? "How much talent is out there," asks Kurnit. "We look at the thousands of pages out there on AOL, GeoCities, etc., and the rest of the Internet," Kurnit said. "All we think we need to get is 2%-3% of the talent pool." In certain areas it will likely be very competitive. Everyone will want to get there first. "First there's the application process," said Scott Kurnit in a phone Interview. "You're going to show us your bio and you're going to write some columns so we can see your writing style. If you make the grade, you make it to our orientation process," Kurnit said. The Mining Company places its focus on training the Guides and giving them the tools they need to make a site. If you "make the grade" you basically have 3 weeks (2 of which are the "orientation") to get a site up-and-running on the service. "The fact is, if you can't get it done in a reasonable time then you probably don't have the dedication or time to get it done," says Kurnit. Just how much time will it take for Guides to put together sites? "We're not looking for anyone to quite their day jobs," said Kurnit. "We're looking at about a 10 hour a week commitment to produce the sites." But Kurnit also says that though there will be only one Guide per site, the Guides will be able to line up assistants. *What's in it for You?* So why The Mining Company then? Why not GeoCities or doing it on your own? Well, there are a couple of reasons. One is the promise of exposure, the other is the promise of MONEY. There is a model here, especially if you're not looking to quit your day job. While I imagine it will have to shift its model somewhat, there are some opportunities to make a buck or two for the Guides. It might not be much money, but if you're already throwing 10 hours or so a week towards maintaining a Web page that lines up around a special interest or two, any money is better than what you're probably getting now. Basically, The Mining Company is looking to allocate 40% of all advertising revenues back to the Guides themselves. The real pool here is 30%, with the additional 10% being used for things like bonuses. So, how does it work? Kurnit is looking to get quickly to a million or so page views a day (each of the pages I saw had 2 advertisements. By the end of the year, Kurnit hopes to be in the 10 million - 15 million page views. It sounds a little ambitious, but if they're successful lining up quality Guides, it could become a reality. So let's say they're getting 5 million page views per day. Based on what I saw, that would net out to be about 300 million ads running per month. Lets say ad sales average out to $30/1000 (a $30 CPM). Based on that, you're looking at a cool $9 million a month in advertising revenue. So $3.6 million is in the Guide pool, but only $2.7 million is for the true revenue split. Now, let's say you're a Guide who got one-tenth of 1 percent of The Mining Company's overall traffic. You'd make a cool $2,700 a month for your efforts. If you happen to be a guide in one of the "killer categories" whether it be a parents site or a kids site or a computing site, it's not unreasonable to think that you might get as much as 1%. That would be $27,000 per month!! Some people will balk at the 40%-60% share, but I think that's pretty fair. Where I'd predict the model will have to change, however, is in the cases where the cost per thousand (CPM) view being charged the advertisers is much higher than the average of the overall site. If the overall site average is $30/1000, but your site is generating a CPM of around $90, you're probably not going to want to be paid based on averages. *Will it Work?* In short, I think this could work quite nicely. The premise of a front door that links to content that is all packaged with a consistent look and feel is a winning premise. With AOL's recent move to flat-fee, one big advantage a Net service has over a proprietary model like AOL is the ability to create content far more easily and inexpensively. Much coverage has been given this week regarding AOL beginning to charge its partners in its Company Connection a $55,000 fee each year to participate. Some in AOL are saying its reasonable since the areas amount to "free" advertising for the companies, but realistically speaking, I think it is a maintenance fee AOL is charging to offset the cost of dealing with these forums. I think it is reasonable to expect to see AOL begin to charge similar fees for any content that isn't "must have" for them, now that the hourly charges that once subsidized these areas are gone. There is a cost of throwing in-house support at these online areas and much of the cost is due to the fact that it's a proprietary system. Setting up new "forms" and new looks just isn't easily accomplished by the content providers themselves. So, the timing may be good for The Mining Company. There are at least two tricks Kurnit and Co. must pull off. First, they have to get the Guides. That starts on Monday, when they begin accepting applications. The next will be to market the site in a way that gets people to the front door. Internet of the people, for the people and by the people, it has a nice ring to it... I'm sure we'll hear more about this when the site officially launches in April. For more info, check out < http://www.miningco.com >, sometime on Monday, they will make a lot more information available there than the "coming soon" that was there as of this writing. Member Internet Society - Certified BETSI Programmer - Webmistress *********************************************************************** Carol Anne Braddock (cab8) carolann(a)censored.org 206.42.112.96 My Homepage The Cyberdoc ***********************************************************************

1 0

New group
by Paul Bradley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi all, 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!... Best regards... Paul Bradley

3 2

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by paul＠fatmans.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Sandy hit a pothole in the moderation experiment when Mr. Nemesis > submitted a posting containing nothing but libelous statements about > Sandy's employer. He never anticipated that he wouldn't be able to > follow his announced "post it to one list or the other" policy because > to do so would make him legally liable (in his opinion; he's a lawyer, > I'm not). His gears jammed, and the whole machine came to a halt for > a few days. No, I think you are mistaken. If you take this as a pothole then there was very little road throughout the entire "moderation experiment". At the end of the day Sandfort discarded articles he didn`t like without posting them to either list and routed all criticism of his censorhip to the shit can. > Now each of these posters will get their chance to do it "right" -- > on their own time and with their own resources. As I said, you have dragged the lists name down with you. It is better that you close the list down now so it is no longer associated with a fascist such as yourself. > A large fraction of the list seems to think that "freedom of speech" > means that everyone is required to listen to everyone else at all > times. That there can't be focused, topical conversations in a > society that has freedom of speech. I would say the opposite; part of > freedom of speech is the freedom to choose to whom we speak and to > whom we listen. This is part of what cryptography does: lets us > control who can receive our speech, and lets recievers determine who > the speaker is. This is accepted by many members of the list including myself, However, I prefer to choose for myself who I listen to and converse with rather than having you or Sandfort decide for me. > To paraphrase Zappa, you wouldn't know censorship if it bit you on the > ass. You think you're being censored when you're just being excluded > from a forum because what you're saying isn't interesting to that forum. And you wouldn`t know an anarchist if he bit you on the ass. Toad was supposed to host a list the purpose of which was to allow people to speak freely and without "moderation". You have censored it and you have fucked up. Face it, you are a fascist. > So anyway, I'm tired of it all. I'd much rather focus on getting my > crypto work done than babysitting majordomo, tracking down attempts to > subscribe the entire US Congress to the list, and debating the seventy > or eighty "obvious right ways" to handle the list. The obvious right way to handle the list, and the way you advocated until your greed for power and fear of criticism warped your judgement, was to run it as a totally free and open list. > This is a "put up or shut up" to the cypherpunks community. This is a "fuck off" to John Gilmore. > The next ten days of moderated discussion, through the end of the > original experiment, will give the community a chance to discuss > whether and where it plans to host the list after the experiment is > over. My feeling is that the stalkers who have been trying to shut it > down (Dimitri, etc) will be out in full force, trying to disrupt the > process of finding a new home. It would be very hard to make progress > along that line in an unmoderated list. Cypherpunks-unedited readers > are welcome to try. Eh? - Dimitri supports fully the aims and idealogies of crypto-anarchy as far as I can see. What he takes issue with is censorship, elitism and hypocisy. I happen to believe the same but I suppose that makes me a "stalker". > Sandy reports that he's changing his criteria for moderation for the > remainder of the experiment. It was his idea, and I approve. The > criteria now are: > > * The topics of the list are: > cryptography > setting up replacements for cypherpunks(a)toad.com Add praise of Sandfort, Gilmore (fart)(spit) and Sandforts employer to that. > * On-topic, legal, posts will go to the list. Apart from the ones Sandfort doesn`t like. > * Postings with any hint of legal liability (in Sandy's opinion) > will be silently ignored. So will posts which cricise Sandfort (spit), Gilmore (fart), Sameer (piss) or c2net (belch). > * Legal but off-topic posts will go to cypherpunks-flames. Ie. None, because they will all be "silently ignored" by Sandfort. > Sandy will apply these criteria retroactively to the backlog (of about > 140 messages), which means that most recent criticisms of the > moderation (which don't invove someone volunteering to do things for > the list) will go straight to the flames list. If you don't like it, > I recommend that you start your own list. Soon. I shall, and on topic posts shall include those declaring John Gilmore is a cocksucker. And off topic posts will not be censored, so fuck you. Datacomms Technologies web authoring and data security Paul Bradley, Paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk Paul(a)crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul(a)cryptography.uk.eu.org Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/ Email for PGP public key, ID: 5BBFAEB1 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

1 0