December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: whine politics again
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Monique Lamont wrote: > on the subject of wine-importing restrictions in florida: > tcmay wrote: > > Every day that passes, I'm more convinced that McVeigh did the right > thing. > > Some innocents died, but, hey, war is hell. Broken eggs and all > that. > it's illegal to ship wine to floridans now, so therefore it is okay > to execute the responsible officials and blow up innocents. > > HELLO PEOPLE! buy a clue from the Discount Clue Store, and > while you are out, stop by the Jiffy Lube and get your > common human decency refilled. > alice0 > --------------------------------------------------------- > Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com > --------------------------------------------------------- aliceO wants the innocents to live so that she can spam them to death from her account at hotmail.com. They're better off dying quick and painlessly... SpamMonger

1 0

The Interlinked Cypherpunks Lists?
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've recently had some of my articles sent to "cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net" bounce (more precisely: "<cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net>... Deferred: Connection timed out with rigel.cyberpass.net. Warning: message still undelivered after 4 hours"). And I've received no Cypherpunks list traffic more recently dated than Saturday morning. (I'm subscribed to cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net.) I surmise that something is wrong. So I've subscribed to one of the alternates, cypherpunks(a)algebra.com. Some thoughts: * Is it possible for the interlinked lists to send out announcements of list problems to subscriber of all such lists? (Each list owner could do a periodic "who cypherpunks" of the other lists, then use this list to send a message if a problem comes up. More sophisticated cross-processing could eliminate duplicates, etc.) * Alternatively, if one of the sites goes down, such as "cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net" seems to have done, could the other sites automagically pick up the task of distributing articles until the site comes back up? * How feasible is it to have a single "virtual subscription address" which gets traffic from one of the various list sites? (To avoid having to subscribe to two or more lists and thus getting duplicates.) I'll resubmit a few of my recent articles to cypherpunks(a)algebra.com. --Tim May There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of laws. Only one response to the key grabbers is warranted: "Death to Tyrants!" ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- 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."

4 3

Re: Applauding Violence (was: Re: Wine Politics Again! (fwd))
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Peter Trei wrote: > >> On Fri, 9 May 1997, Tim May wrote: > >>Every day that passes, I'm more convinced that McVeigh did the right > >>thing. Some innocents died, but, hey, war is hell. Broken eggs and all > >>that. > I'm getting progressively more turned off by > Tim's developing survivalist/confrontationist stance. I fear that > journalists and other casual readers will mistake his positions > for common 'cypherpunk' viewpoints. If they don't know shit from shinola, then let them base their beliefs on any mistaken notion they wish. Every cypherpunk who wants to edit their posts out of fear that some dweeb will mistake them for the God of Cypherpunks raise your hand. (Looks like you're the only one, Peter.) > The type of armed, ingrained bitterness towards all aspects and > manifestations of government he displays is hazardous to himself > personally; I can envisage a simple traffic stop turning violent. It certainly did for Rodney King. > Worse, he's demonizing his opponent. This is counter-productive. > It's better to try to understand the actual underlying goals of > your opponent - it gives you a much better chance at turning > him into your ally, or avoiding a conflict if you cannot do that. > If he can be neither turned nor avoided, the minimum action to > change the status quo should be used. Precisely. The level of minimum action needed to change the status quo is increasing by leaps and bounds. If the average citizen was not complacently allowing the government to run ramshod over the rights and freedoms of the citizens, then the individuals who choose to battle this oppression would not have to take such drastic action in retaliation. > The policies of the current gang in power are bad, and may well > get worse. But terrorism is not yet an appropriate response, and > I pray that it never will be. Everyone has their own threshold of pain which they can endure before they feel compelled to take steps to counteract the actions of the source of that pain. For some that threshold is a slap, for some a punch, and for some it is a beating. Those who cause pain to others will suffer the consequences of their actions. This applies to the people who are lowest on the totem pole in the oppression of the citizens just as much as it applies to Timothy McVeigh. I didn't notice any great cries of outrage when the U.S. attack on Saddam Hussein resulted in the death of innocents. It seems that some lives are deemed more expendable than the lives of others. When U.S. forces slaughtered retreating Iraqui troops a great cheer of victory sounded throughout the nation. Had the opposite scenario been the case, the nation would have been calling for the heads of the Iraquis for their callousness. If those who participate in the unjust persecution of a plethora of the nation's citizens become so comfortable with their ability to remain insulated from the consequences of their actions that they feel free to place their children at the scene of the crime, then they face the same responsibility as someone who takes their child along on an armed robbery. The terrorism was not instituted by the citizens against their government, but the other way around. TruthMonger #2

2 1

`careerpunks'
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[This post cc cypherpunks(a)algebra.com & cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net to aid propogation which seems to be struggling.] In trying to figure out which lists were working, I noticed that there are now many more people on coderpunks and cryptography than there are on cypherpunks... take a look at these figures: 713 cryptography(a)c2.net 713 coderpunks(a)toad.com 245 cypherpunks(a)algebra.com + cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net - duplicates Seems to me many of the `cypherpunks' have become `careerpunks' and are now more interested in trading crypto tips, trade gossip, than in cypherpunks projects. They went through the phase of buying kewl domain names (take a look down the subscriber lists), tinkering with remailers, and have now graduated to making money from crypto consulting, and lost interest in the issues where they don't add to the bottom line. Oh yeah, I know you might argue that selling crypto is a good thing, and it is, but the two are not completely focused in the same direction: corporate, or consulting interests want to sell crypto, to export crypto, cypherpunks want tools to increase the power of the individual. An example of this different focus is perhaps the SAFE bill. Lots of corporates seem keen on SAFE, because it increases their market place. Individuals right to use crypto in the US can go to hell. Before anyone leaps down my throat, the above is a gross generalisation, and is intended as food for thought only. I know plenty of you who are involved in the crypto business and who haven't lost your ideals, and think SAFE is a bad deal, etc. However, I think the trend exists. Adam (btw coderpunks won't give you it's subscriber list unless you're subscribed) -- Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

2 1

RE: RSA, PGP IN LEGAL FLAP OVER ENCRYPTION TECHNOLOGY
by Chris DiBona 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This really came as no surprise to anyone who deals with RSA. Note I am only talking for myself when I write this, but there is a LOT of money to be made by someone (certicom?) if they can give a cross-platform rsa type solution. I mean RSA has a fairly good product,but I can name at elase two other companies who've had this exact same problem with cross-licensing. Really, does RSA expect Netscape or Microsoft to re-license every time they allow an oem to repackage thier products into or as part of a suite of programs with a third party vendor? RSA has a bunch of bullies at thier helm. They should realize that pulling this kind of crap will only make people jump ship faster when another company comes calling with a similar product and less restrictive licensing. I think that RSA should also realize that without PGP, their market would be much smaller, I think every time RSA licenses thier (now renewed) patents, they should think of Phil. I don't mean to saint the guy here or anything, but they owe him a debt that is difficult to quantify. By suing PGP they are basically saying , if I can extrapolate in a rather extreme manner, "privacy is okay, but only if we make money at it." And keep in mind , I don't begrudge RSA thier right to make money off thier intellectual property, but suing your customers except in the most extreme situations should be seen as a warning sign to the industry that to deal with RSA as a vendor is to take a risk that may be dangerous. Chris DiBona dibona(a)acm.org

2 1

Re: Disinformation in L.A.
by jimbell＠pacifier.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:14 5/11/97 EDT, Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: >I bet the NCSA folks are kicking themselves for missing the opportunity >to have Jim Bell speak at InfoWarCon 96 :-) Hey, there's always 1997! Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

cyberpass.net got a problem?
by Adam Back 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hardly any traffic at all today. Is cyberpass.net ok? I sent a `who cypherpunks' to majordomo(a)cyberpass.net and got a response back instantly from sirius.infonex.com, so it's _there_. Most of the small amount of traffic that there is, seems to be from algebra.com and toad.com. I've just subscribed to algebra.com, in case I'm missing out on articles (my procmail will kill duplicates if any). How are people on algebra.com finding the traffic? (2 articles dated 12th in total as of 21:40 GMT (+0)). Adam -- Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

3 2

Announcing: a new John Wiley book on Web Security
by Avi Rubin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Announcing: The Web Security Sourcebook (John Wiley & Sons, Inc.) by Avi Rubin, Dan Geer, Marcus Ranum foreward by Steve Bellovin A new book on all aspects of web security. More information can be found at http://www.clark.net/pub/mjr/websec/ ********************************************************************* Aviel D. Rubin rubin(a)research.att.com Secure Systems Research Dept. Adjunct Professor at NYU AT&T Research Labs 180 Park Avenue http://www.research.att.com/~rubin/ Florham Park, NJ 07932-0971 Voice: +1 973 360-8356 USA FAX: +1 973 360-8809

1 0

VideoWorld Justice
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From "Video Justice" TV show: "The video camera has evolved from passive observer to active participant" (in the war on crime). Golly gee, government wants to use video cameras to monitor citizens everywhere, all the time, and now we have a primetime TV show dedicated to convincing the citizens that the surveillance camera is their best friend. What a coincidence! With a dozen TV shows already championing law enforcement personnel with neatly pressed uniforms saving the citizens from bad guys wearing T-shirts, its refreshing to see fresh propaganda which informs us that surveillance technology is our new best friend. It was so enlightening to hear criminologists and prosecutors praise the emotional charge generated by seeing perpetrators "laugh" as they "terrorized" people by shooting them with paintball guns resulting in their receiving four years in prison instead of the one year that the prosecutor expected. ( 4 perps x 4 years x $65,000/year = > $ 1,000,000.00 of taxpayer money spent to incarcerate people who splatter someone with paint and laugh about it. If Tim May owns a paintball gun, then I guess that he can add to his list of potential felonies.) We also learn that surveillance cameras are "Invaluable weapons of enforcement in government stings" and that "The evidence they provide is incontestable." It sounds like we will no longer need judges and juries once the citizens are fully monitored. We are told that John Law is protected from claims of entrapment by the irrefutable evidence provided by their video taping of the government sting. Naturally, we only see a selective two minute tape of the entire operation. No video/sound recording of the setup of the victim/criminal is shown. There was no video shown of police brutality (ala Rodney King) and no questioning of why the technology is only geared toward showing what goes on in front of the camera, leaving the citizen unprotected once the officer takes him or her out its visual range. (Of course, any deviation from the "Sainthood of Authority" script would result in the show's producers losing access to the cheap source of their video propaganda.) Where is the legislation being put forth to require law enforcement personnel under video surveillance to prevent them from engaging in crimes against the citizens? Harassing them, beating them, becoming the source of crack flowing into their neighborhoods, spending hours and days manipulating them into a two-minute video scene which is staged to provide "incontestable evidence" of their guilt. Video cameras are commonplace to watch the citizens in banks in case someone tries to "steal" a few hundred or a few thousand dollars. Where are the video cameras that watch the bankers in order to provide evidence of their possible criminal actions? Video surveillance technology is the same old story. Provide a few emotionally charged scenes to scare the citizens, offer them a form of "protection" and then institute the technology in a one-way vector which points only at those on the bottom of the food chain. Same technological shit, different day. TruthMonger

1 0

Re: War & InfoWar
by Blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

frissell(a)panix.com wrote: >But Blanc,what if "It Takes A Village to Raise a Child" and the village is trying to raise my child against my will. In that case, the only way to handle things is to destroy the village. Not to save it,but to save my child. > >Think about it. ...................................................... Well, I thought about it, while the list was on vacation. You're right, Duncan. Where should we start? Truthfully, I don't think you've stockpiled any explosives to use for such an act, and even if you had, I don't believe you would use them. You'd have to pay someone else to do the deed, and even so you'd probably start reflecting on all those other people's itty bitty children who would have to lose their lives in that total destruction, and chicken out. .. Blanc .. Blanc

2 1