December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

CDA II
by President 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear CypherPunks, I will shortly have one of my schills introduce CDA II to Congress, with provisions for declaring martial law on the InterNet and bombing any country which allows terrorists to fight for freedom, liberty and the right to privacy. Please be assured that our dictatorial powers will only be used to meet the legitimate needs of Fascism. Our first step will be to eliminate the scourge of drug dealing the same way we eliminated the scourge of gambling--the government will take over the industry. Our second step will be to eliminate child pornography by eliminating all the children. (It's so simple that I find it amazing that we hadn't thought of it before.) Originally, all we wanted was Poland, but lately we've had so many corporate lipstick marks on our butts that we've decided to go for the (Netscape) gold and require all future computers to contain our newest facistechnology, the "Slip'er A Dick" chip. In the past, the CypherPunks have been a pain in the ass during our attempts to subvert the Constitution, but we are willing to forgive and forget. Accordingly, we are adding an amendment to CDA II which provides $10,000,000 in funding for the continuation of the CypherPunks list. The amendment will put Kent Crispin in charge of moderating the list, and in return for this small compromise we are willing to add another amendment which makes it legal for CypherPunks to import and export air from their lungs. {This major concession is the result of the efforts of the EFF on your behalf.} I realize that abandoning your beliefs in order to feed at the public trough will lessen your reputation capital, so I am also willing to institute a bonus system for those who maintain the party line. I am certain that this will more than compensate for any loss of reputation you may suffer by becoming beltway lackeys. Example: You load 16 tons. What do you get...? Bad Billy C.

1 0

Verisign gets export approval
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded from PGP-USERS list: > First PGPInc and now VeriSign? Hmmm. Is this telling us something? "VeriSign on Monday said it received permission from the U.S. Department of Commerce to export 128-bit strong encryption software and issue digital identifications to approved organizations based on that software. " "Under the 128-bit scheme approved by the U.S. government Monday, companies will not need to place their encryption keys in escrow, or submit to U.S. government key-recovery requirements in order to use VeriSign's software, company officials said." # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com # You can get PGP outside the US at ftp.ox.ac.uk/pub/crypto/pgp # (If this is a mailing list or news, please Cc: me on replies. Thanks.)

13 22

Re: Censorware Summit Take II, from The Netly News
by geeman＠best.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I can't wait until the tags include information on *political* content, or *credibility factor* (i.e. sanctioned by medai conglomerate or not) etc... At 02:06 PM 7/16/97 -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >*********** > >http://pathfinder.com/netly/opinion/0,1042,1173,00.html > >The Netly News (http://netlynews.com) >July 16, 1997 > >At The Censorware Summit >by Declan McCullagh (declan(a)well.com) > > If you host a web page or publish online, be >warned: soon your site might become invisible. Search >engines won't index it and web browsers won't show it. >Unless, that is, you agree to attach special labels to >your web pages identifying how violent, sexually >explicit, or inappropriate for kids your site is. > > This was the thrust of today's White House >censorware summit, where President Clinton sat down >with high tech firms and non-profit groups in a >private meeting to talk about pressuring the Net >community to make cyberspace childsafe through labels. >"We need to encourage every Internet site, whether or >not it has material harmful to minors, to rate its >contents," Clinton said after the meeting. Vice >President Gore was there, too, giving a quick >demonstration of how labeling works. > > Spooked by the threat of a revised Communications >Decency Act, high tech firms are seriously backing >labels for the first time. Joining Clinton in coercing >Internet users and businesses to label all their web >pages were Yahoo, Excite, and Lycos. "I threw a >gauntlet to other search engines in today's meeting >saying that collectively we should require a rating >before we index pages," Robert Davis, the president of >Lycos, told me. Translation: if you don't play ball, >and label your site, search engines will ignore you. > > As will future users of Microsoft's Internet >Explorer browser. The next version of IE will default >to displaying only properly labeled web pages, >according to Ken Wasch, the president of the Software >Publishers Association. Since many users won't turn >off that feature to reach unrated sites, many large >web sites now are facing hefty pressure to self-label. > > Other high tech firms rushed to join the >presidential limelight. Netscape promised to join >Microsoft and include label-reading software in the >next version of its browser. America Online's Steve >Case thanked Clinton for "backing industry's efforts >to make cyberspace a safer place." IBM announced a >$100,000 grant to RSACi, a PICS-based rating standard >originally designed for video games but adapted for >the Web. The industry giant also pledges to >incorporate RSACi into future products. > >[...] > > > > >

16 23

de minimus non curat lex
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

frissell(a)panix.com wrote: > At 11:16 AM 7/16/97 -0700, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >As for Lucky's point #2 -- Yes, I've read drafts of bills that would make > >it a Federal crime to misrate. --Declan > What ever happened to "de minimus non curat lex." The social damage from a > misrated website is too trivial to be believed. Punishing it is like > executing you for farting. The correct translation of "de minimus non curat lex" is: "No fart, no foul." In order for order to prevail, society must have the authority to punish those who fart in a crowded theater. On the other hand, if someone farts in a forest and nobody smells it... Never mind. I was having an AOL flashback. FartMonger

1 0

Re: All of my fucking material is suitable for children of all ages
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May wrote: > my posts should be read by children of all ages, no matter what > fucking language I use. Children should be exposed to language and images > of all types, so all of my material would of course be "suitable for > children." I have to agree with the rat-bastard, cocksucking, motherfucking sack of shit, Tim May, on this one. Having Tourette Syndrome, I object to anal retentives who would criminalize my God-given verbal predelictions. Neither would my receiving an exception on the grounds of being disabled be remotely acceptable to me, since I sincerely believe that my TS is a "gift" that allows me to say anything that others say to a judge, *plus* being able to call him or her a Nazi ratfucker. (Anyone who thinks this is a "disability" is fucking crazy.) On the other hand, it would be kind of neat to launch a class action lawsuit demanding that ratings systems incorporate a label such as: "Suitable (FUCK!) for children (COCKSUCKER!) with Tourette Syndrome" FUCKMonger > -- > [This Bible excerpt awaiting review under the U.S. Communications Decency > Act of 1996] > And then Lot said, "I have some mighty fine young virgin daughters. Why > don't you boys just come on in and fuck them right here in my house - I'll > just watch!"....Later, up in the mountains, the younger daughter said: > "Dad's getting old. I say we should fuck him before he's too old to fuck." > So the two daughters got him drunk and screwed him all that night. Sure > enough, Dad got them pregnant, and had an incestuous bastard son....Onan > really hated the idea of doing his brother's wife and getting her pregnant > while his brother got all the credit, so he pulled out before he > came....Remember, it's not a good idea to have sex with your sister, your > brother, your parents, your pet dog, or the farm animals, unless of course > God tells you to. [excerpts from the Old Testament, Modern Vernacular > Translation, TCM, 1996]

2 1

Re: Fuck You Rating Systems, Inc.
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anonymous wrote: > > ANNOUNCEMENT: Fuck You Ratings Software Escapes Beta-Test! ... > {Offer not valid in states where having sexual relations with animals > is against local ordinances.} Are there any cypherpunks in Montana who are willing to serve as a mail-drop for the rest of us?

1 0

EuroEnglish
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-------------------------------------------------------------------- ANNOUNCEMENT FROM THE EUROPEAN UNION COMMISSIONERS An agreement has been reached to adopt English as the preferred language for European communications, rather than German, which was the other possibility. As part of the negotiations, Her Majesty's Government conceded that English spelling has some room for improvement and has accepted a five-year phased plan for what will be known as EuroEnglish (Euro for short). In the first year, "s" will be used instead of "c". Sertainly sivil servants will resieve this news with joy. Also, the hard "c" will be replaced with "k". Not only will this klear up konfusion, but komputers and typewriters kan have one less letter. There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year, when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced by "f". This will make words like "fotograf" 20 per sent shorter. In the third year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kan be expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkorage the removal of double letters, which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horible mes of silent "e"s in the languag is disgracful, and they would go. By the fourth year, peopl wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v". During ze fifz year, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou", and similar changes vud of kors be aplid to ozer kombinations of leters. After zis fifz yer, ve vil hav a reli sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubls or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi to understand ech ozer. ZE DREM VIL FINALI KUM TRU. ---------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

i miss carol anne cyphergrrl
by Zooko Journeyman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

or whatever her name was. A dangerous radical named Steve allegedly typed: > Seems to me that having only a few, heavily trafficed, NAPs is a > topological weakness in the Net which needs to be delt with soon. The problem is economic. During info-peace-time non- robust networks are cheaper. Redundancy and other robustness techniques are an expense that doesn't pay back. During info-peace-time. Under duress-- be it accidents, load, or info-war-- such designs are inadequate. What's the solution? I dunno. Here're some options: A. Make design which is robust under attack but still cheap for everyday use. Not sure if it is feasible. B. Convince people to spend more on robustness of systems. But this is infeasible on a huge scale and in anarchic and uncoordinated social system e.g. Internet. C. Hire info-warriors to attack systems, hopefully doing as little permanent damage as possible but achieving enough penetration to convince even the most thick-headed manager that his system is weak. Hence I propose a fund, The Randall Schwartz Memorial Cracking Reward Fund, which will regularly award dcash payments to the cracker who most illustriously exposed the weaknesses of system. Scaring the pants off of the managers and leaders is a plus. Enlightening the public about the dangers of a specific system or technique is a plus. Scaring the public into thinking that all systems/networks/computers/software are dangerous is arguably a plus or a minus. :-) Doing permanent damage or unnecessary disruption of service is a big minus. Usually a calling card saying "Soo Do Nym was here" is sufficient. The pay-off could be instituted by way of an "Assassination Systemics" scheme (which is merely an application of Idea Futures, of course), in which the bettor who most accurately predicted the time and other details of the target system's penetration receives the bulk of the winnings. I hereby bet 10 cyberbucks that no clever hacker will be able to redirect "www.internic.net" to point to AlterNIC. Zooko Journeyman "We are an internation of code and not of laws."

1 0

Re: VeriSign Granted First Federal Approval to Issue CertificatesEnabling Export of Strong Encryption
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:16 PM -0400 7/15/97, ptharrison wrote, on e$(a)thumper.vmeng.com: >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >At 11:49 AM 7/15/97 -0400, VERISIGN PR wrote: >>--------------------------------------------------------------------- >>...allowing approved organizations to use 128-bit encryption >>... U.S.-based companies -- with servers located in the U.S. -- >> and international banks -- with servers located in the US and abroad -- >>... was granted approval after review and consultation >> from the National Security Agency (NSA) and Federal Bureau of Investigation >> (FBI). >> ...Companies will not need to escrow their keys in order >> to take advantage of this program. >> ...VeriSign...can ensure that...Global Server IDs will only be granted to > >> > legitimate businesses that meet the necessary U.S. government >qualifications >> Thanks to the cooperation of the U.S. government, we are now able to offer >>law-> abiding companies a legal alternative for secure communication and >>commerce." >> ... >> MICROSOFT >> said Mike Dusche, "The U.S. government is sending a strong message to the >world >> by approving these applications and we're happy to be working with them... > >Yes, and what might that message be? With this announcement, it has become clear to me what the US government is attempting to do. They are relaxing the export of strong crypto -- if you use a US-based certification authority. Why does this matter? Look at the Kerry bill. My guess is that they already know that Verisign will go along with a key escrow requirement, in exchange for protection from liability, and so their goal now is to put Verisign in the loop as much as possible. I started to think of the loopholes this could create -- US companies outsourcing web sites for foreign companies, etc. Then I realized: IT DOESN'T MATTER, as far as the US government is concerned, because they're going to have those keys escrowed. The Kerrey bill may not pass this go-around, but they are counting on something like this. The hard part, now, is to figure out how to explain this to industry, public and the press, without sounding like raving lunatics. We meed to make it more concrete. Remind people that certificates expire every year, and point them at the Kerrey legislation. Ask foreign banks how they feel about their transactions being fully accessible to the US government -- or anyone capable of bribing a low-level functionary in the US government. --Steve PGP mail preferred, see http://web.mit.edu/network/pgp.html PGP Fingerprint: FE 90 1A 95 9D EA 8D 61 81 2E CC A9 A4 4A FB A9 --------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schear (N7ZEZ) | Internet: azur(a)netcom.com 7075 West Gowan Road | Voice: 1-702-658-2654 Suite 2148 | Fax: 1-702-658-2673 Las Vegas, NV 89129 | --------------------------------------------------------------------- God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; The courage to change the things I can; The weapons that make the difference; And the wisdom to hide the bodies of the people that got in my way;-) "Surveilence is ultimately just another form of media, and thus, potential entertainment." --G. Beato "We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true." -- Dr. Robert Silensky

1 0

Re: Censorware Summit Take II, from The Netly News
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Spooked by the threat of a revised Communications >Decency Act, high tech firms are seriously backing >labels for the first time. Joining Clinton in coercing >Internet users and businesses to label all their web >pages were Yahoo, Excite, and Lycos. "I threw a >gauntlet to other search engines in today's meeting >saying that collectively we should require a rating >before we index pages," Robert Davis, the president of >Lycos, told me. Translation: if you don't play ball, >and label your site, search engines will ignore you. These suggests that Yahoo, Excite, and Lycos might become tempting targets of a Net-wide DoS attack until they repent. --Steve

2 2