December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

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

17 Dec '03

>>>>> John Gilmore writes: JG> Sandy has agreed to continue moderation through the end of the JG> original 1-month experiment (through Feb 19). And it's a good JG> thing, too, because the "cypherpunks community" had better get off JG> its whining butt in the next ten days, or it will no longer exist. [...] JG> This is a "put up or shut up" to the cypherpunks community. This appears to be as good a time as any to announce that I'm "putting up". I've already taken steps, along with Jim Choate, to start a network of majordomos hosting a Cypherpunks mailing list. I didn't intend to announce this until Jim and I had gotten the first pair of 'domos working properly, but this means that we'll need to speed things up. 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. As the resulting mailing list from each 'domo will be identical, periodically (initially weekly), the subscriber lists of all of the participating majordomos will be compared, with any duplicate subscribers being removed from the 'domo(s) with the longest subscriber list. There will be no filtering done of any mail to the collective list, although anyone interested in providing a filtered list will be welcome to subscribe to the list. Anyone interested in joining the 'domo network with the conditions described (duplicate subscriber checking and no filtering) is welcome. John, I'd appreciate your permission to use your Cypherpunks welcome message as the basis for the welcome message of this new list. Also, while we will make every effort to have this new list available for subscriptions by Feb 20, I'd appreciate it if you could consider making the current list available for a short period longer if we encounter unanticipated difficulties. -- #include <disclaimer.h> /* Sten Drescher */ ObCDABait: For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses. [Eze 23:20] ObFelony: President Clinton, you suck, and those boys died! Unsolicited bulk email will be stored and handled for a US$500/KB fee.

1 0

Digital Signature Legislation (MN)
by Kevin L Prigge 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Minnesota Legislature has a bill pending in both houses regarding digital signatures, defines certification authorities, and provides for licensing of authorities. http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/cgi-bin/bldbill.pl?bill=H0056.0&session=… http://www.revisor.leg.state.mn.us/cgi-bin/bldbill.pl?bill=S0173.0&session=… A quick read looks good, although I am not a lawyer. This only affects digital signatures used in financial transactions, AFAIK, and does not prohibit non-licensed cert authorities. -- Kevin L. Prigge | Some mornings, it's just not worth Systems Software Programmer | chewing through the leather straps. Internet Enterprise - OIT | - Emo Phillips University of Minnesota |

1 0

Recommendation: Creation of "alt.cypherpunks"
by Timothy C. May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(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."

5 4

Spamming the list
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

When Derogatory Virus K]ankersore[OfTheMoment's mother gave birth to him after fucking with a bunch of sailors, she didn't know who the father was but decided to tell him that he was a Russian as the Russian sailor was the one who satisfied her the most. o/ Derogatory Virus K]ankersore[OfTheMoment <| / >

1 0

Suggestion for the future of the list
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

o Make the list a newsgroup "alt.cypherpunks". This will alleviate any concerns about one party taking control of the list. Good filters exist and the newsgroup can be read via Deja News, etc. o For those using remailers or those unable to post to newsgroups, create a mail-to-news gateway at cypherpunks(a)toad.com. OK, how will take the fist step and newsgroup alt.cypherpunks? -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred "I do believe that where there is a choice only between cowardice and violence, I would advise violence." Mahatma Gandhi

1 0

Pending Attack on Mailmasher and Pseudonymous Posting
by nobody＠wazoo.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

One of the denizens from alt.flame (wotan(a)databasix.com / wotan(a)netcom.com) is on a personal crusade to get the Mailmasher pseudonym server shut down, claiming that it was "abused" by accepting "forgeries". As you'll recall, the pretext of "abuse" was conveniently used my the CoS to get several remailers shut down. Let's not let the enemies of privacy win this one! Here's how William McClatchey, aka "Wotan", concluded his post: > Well, I was nice and polite when the forgeries began. I sent toxic a > nice message asking that he disable the abitlity to forge wotan@databasix > and wotan@netcom. That appears to be too hard for him. He gets his > access from mci. > > I encourage anyone who is being forged due to the deliberate negligence > on toxic's part to write hotwired and MCI asking that mailmasher be shut > down until it can longer be used to commit forgeries. Mr. McClatchey (Wotan) is certainly well aware that you can't detect "forgeries" without positive proof of a person's identity, which would defeat the entire purpose of posting anonymously/pseudonymously. And to "disable the ability to forge" e-mail addresses is well beyond the scope of Mailmasher, since it's as easy to do as changing the settings in Netscape, Eudora, etc. His demands are like asking the USPS to make sure that the return address you put on each envelope you mail is your own!

1 0

FREE CASH GRANTS
by antony＠mail99.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We Have Over 150 Private Foundations In Our Program All Over the United States. WE ARE A FINANCIAL FINDER & MATCHING SERVICE ..."INTEREST - FREE CASH GRANTS - NEVER PAY BACK!"... FOUNDATIONS CAN BE A BETTER SOURCE FOR FINANCE, THAN BANKS ___________________________________________________________ Foundations give away billions of dollars every year to individuals. Most are non-profit organizations dedicated to the betterment of society. A foundation is exempt from income tax because of its non-profit status. Private foundations have been giving out cash-grants to people for over 100 years. You can check with your attorney or local chamber of commerce. ARE YOU BEING REJECTED FOR THE MONEY YOU NEED SO BADLY? _________________________________________________________ Then Why Not Try A Private Foundation? Interest Free Cash Grants From $500.00 & Up to $25,000.00. No Collateral. No Cosigners, No Security Deposit, No Mortgages. No Credit Check. No Pay Back. The Money May Be Used For Any Worthwhile Purpose; Business, Personal, Medical, Real Estate, Education, Religion, Etc. ANYONE CAN GET AN INTEREST FREE CASH GRANT! ____________________________________________ As long as they have a genuine reason for needing money, & as long as the foundation guidelines are met. Dear Applicant, This letter tells you HOW YOU CAN GET AN INTEREST-FREE CASH GRANT. Take a few minutes to read it. You'll be suprised to see how easy it is to get a grant. From time to time, everyone needs to borrow. The problem is that for most people, getting a loan is a big hassle. Going to banks or finance companies in person takes a lot of time. In most cases, there is endless paperwork. And Unfortunately, in many cases all that you end up with is a rejection notice. ABSOLUTELY NO CREDIT CHECK ________________________ Getting a Grant by mail is probably a lot easier than you think. In your area, there are usually only a small number of places that will provide you with the money, that you need. On the other hand, there are literally hundreds of private foundations who donate money to people who have genuine reasons for needing the money. Chances are that most banks in your area have very stringent loan requirements. On the other hand, most foundations who give GRANTS BY MAIL are more lenient. Persons who have poor credit, no credit, or even those who have gone through bankruptcy are able to get the money that they need - sent to them by a check payable to them. This is because foundations are NOT interested in CREDIT RATINGS. GETTING A GRANT BY MAIL IS CONFIDENTIAL ____________________________________ There are no embarrassing interviews. Neither collateral nor cosigners are required. The main requirement is that you have a legitimate need for the money and are willing to use it for whatever reason that the foundation agrees to. We are not associated with any of the foundations in our program, therefore all money will go directly to you, payable to you. As a Financial Finder & Matching Service, we know where the money is and which private foundations may be most likely to approve your grant. There are hundreds of foundations with money to donate. It is our job to put you in touch with them. PLEASE REMEMBER: CASH-GRANTS are FREE of any interest, & they DO NOT NEED TO BE PAID BACK! ________________________________________________ Foundations give out money for a wide variety of needs as long as it is something LEGAL. This means that you obtain the money to pay off old bills, meet emergency needs, or to buy anything that you might need, as long as the foundation agrees to it. YOU DECIDE HOW MUCH MONEY YOU WANT TO OBTAIN. ________________________________________________ The amount can be as little as $500.00, and up to $25,000.00 is possible. And remember, there is NO CREDIT CHECK. As a Financial Finder & Matching Service, we'll review your service application form and determine which foundations may be most likely to provide you with the money that you need. Keep in mind that we have only reputable foundations in our program. You are protected by the fact that these foundations are regulated by the laws of the United States. No matter how much you want to obtain, no matter what you want to use the money for; we feel confident that we can help you to get it with the service we are offering. ____________________________________________________________________ Our Application fee is $19.95 for Personal & Business Grants. There are absolutely no other fees to pay. All that you will have to do is complete the service application form below, and mail it with payment as indicated on the form. We will process your service application within 10 days. We will match your FINANCIAL NEEDS & REQUIREMENTS with the most suitable Private Foundations in our program. ______________________________________________________________________ Unless we help you with our service, your application fee of $19.95 will be refunded. The sooner you apply, the sooner you are likely to have the money you need! Mail the APPLICATION TODAY! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ APPLY WITHIN 24 HOURS & GET 10 FREE PLACES TO ADVERTISE ON THE INTERNET! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Service Application Form: (circle one) Money Order Check Credit Card (Circle One: VISA, M/C, Discover) Credit card # ________________________________________ Expiration Date____________________ Signature_________________________________________ Guaranteed Fee $19.95. I need you to RUSH processing. Please add $10.00: Total $_______ TO EXPEDITE, FAX TO (619) 682-1021 We also accept checks by fax! Simply tape your checks on the bottom and fax!! It's that easy!! After faxing, simply void your check out and keep it for your own records. If you don't have a fax machine available, you can go to your nearest Kinko's, Officemax, Staples, or Mailboxes etc. and they will let you fax from there. (For check payments, tape check to the bottom and fax) PLEASE MAKE CHECKS PAYABLE TO: C.N. Enterprises or MAIL TO: C.N. Enterprises 5450 55th St. Suite #19 San Diego, CA 92115 Checks Take 5 Days to clear at the bank. Please Print Clearly For Our Office Staff Grant Purpose:____________________________________________________ Amount Needed $___________.00 Yearly Income $___________.00 Name_____________________________ Occupation __________________ Address___________________ City ___________ State _____Zip __________ Signature______________________________ Phone #(___)____ -________ [form#:EL2] Please match my financial needs & requirements with the most suitable private foundations in your program. > C.N. Enterprises PO Box 15131 San Diego, CA 92175 (619) 685-5550 Office ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ----------------------- Headers -------------------------------- >From antony(a)mail99.com Mon Feb 10 16:04:52 1997 Return-Path: antony(a)mail99.com Received: from mail.mail99.com (mail.mail99.com [208.134.170.5]) by emin30.mail.aol.com (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA28987; Mon 10 Feb 1997 16:04:29 -0500 From: antony(a)mail99.com Received: from localhost (mail99.com [207.155.244.15]) by mail.mail99.com (8.8.2/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA24129; Mon, 10 Feb 1997 16:08:41 -0500 (EST) Message-Id:<199702102108.QAA24026(a)mail.mail99.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is <antony(a)mail99.com> To: antony(a)mail99.com Date: Mon, 10 Feb 1997 13:02:42 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: FREE CASH GRANTS Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.42a)

1 0

GAK
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim C[ocksucker] May is just a poor excuse for an unschooled, retarded thug. <o o> Tim C[ocksucker] May /-+-- --+X /> <\

1 0

RE: Recommendation: Creation of "alt.cypherpunks"
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Timothy C. May - 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.) ........................................ In regards to the newbie questions, it occurred to me that it would be useful to have a FAQ, much shorter than the Cyphernomicon, which would get some basic questions answered and contain many collected references & web sites for all the other questions which typically have come up on the list and would certainly show up in a newsgroup. Maybe LD could be prevailed upon to write it (he's probably not occupied doing anything useful, anyway).... :>) .. Blanc

1 0

re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut up"
by Martin Minow 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

*** This is for Sandy and John, not for the list itself *** Damn. Another example of the Tragedy of the Commons. I'm sorry you decided to pull the plug -- but I fully understand your reasoning. As I mentioned in an e-mail (and/or conversation a while back), I'd be happy to help with the moderation as long as (a) it doesn't prevent me from doing my "real" job and (b) we can figure out a solution to the obvious logistics problems (I'm on a Mac, not a Unix box). In any case, thanks to John and Sandy for all the hard work. Martin.

1 0