December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Lucky's right on Bell's undue incarceration. There's more to the story than tax avoidance. Declan perhaps should look beyond the government's citations of law to examine the other allegations of intent to harm federal officials which did not receive substantiating cites. The affidavit which prompted Jim's arrest was a potpourri of disingenuous spleen and bile and unintentional humor. This appears to be another instance of the USG patchworking public menace and phlegm (the Kallstrom syndrome) when it's in its self-preservative and -promotional interest to do so. As Tim and cie often note, the syndrome's fountainhead is DC and world centers of ambitious regulators, enforcers and promoters for "public security." Which is fast replacing national security, via dual-use sleight of hand, as a career trajectory. Counterterrorism is the fastest growing governmental subculture at the moment, and no longer aimed overseas. Secret laws, courts and committees are burgeoning, anticipating that the public cannot be trusted to protect itself against the enemy within, ahem, the Beltway.

1 0

Re: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May wrote: > > I suppose I am developing a reputation amongst the Inside the Beltway Cyber > Rights Groups (tm) as a pain in the ass A polite, mild-mannered person such as yourself? I can't imagine. > The latest quote is from Marc Rotenberg, on a CNN piece on spam and > anti-spam legislation, saying that what the legislators in Congress really > need to look into is how the spammers develop their data bases..... > > Incredible. Does he propose investigations of private data gathering? > Perhaps search warrants served on those who take public postings and > construct data bases? > > Look, I'm annoyed by getting 5-10 "unwanted" spam messages a day. But I > realize I'm certain you also realize that enough of our rights and freedoms are being taken away in order to save us from "dangerous threats" from every conceivable source, that we have little use for even more of them being taken away to protect us from "annoyances." I think I'll email Rotenberg and suggest that he enlist Tim May's support by promising legislation to support warrantless searches for the purpose of stopping the ASCII art slams of Tim. Knowing how our "saviors" end up walking with the Devil *over* the bridge once they become enmeshed in the D.C. mentality, Rotenberg will probably thank me for the idea. To save the citizenry from the "annoyance" of unregulated sidewalk traffic the city of Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan, passed a law requiring people to walk on the left side of the sidewalk. I sent in a facetious letter to the newspaper supporting the law, saying things like, "Use of the sidewalk is a privilege, not a right." etc. I couldn't believe the number of lunatics who took my letter seriously and supported my position. One of my goals in life is to hunt down, mutilate, maim and torture the individual who coined the expression, "There ought to be a law." TruthMonger

1 0

Remailer Follies
by nobody＠huge.cajones.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jeff Burchell wrote: > > I have added your address to my block list, this remailer won't send > anything directly to you in the future. > -Jeff > Operator... Huge.cajones.com I have a friend who used to operate a remailer and he told me a story about receiving an abuse complaint and request for blocking from an acquaintance who was unaware that he was the operator of the remailer. The person making the complaint was also a user of the remailer. My friend composed a highly officious reply which indicated that he had logged and read the remailer messages of both parties and had reached the conclusion that the complaintant was indeed a fascist, asshole, etc. and thus did not have a valid complaint according to the policy of the remailer. He included enough personal details regarding the complaintant to indicate that he had actually been snooping through the messages. The complaintant was dumbfounded and responded with a message asking, "Are you crazy? Do you have any fucking idea what the concept of anonymity implies?", etc. He concluded by stating that in the future he would be using encryption in his remailer activity and send them via other remailers. My friend enlisted the aide of another remailer operator who was a close friend of the complaintant and was known by him to be the operator of the second remailer. The second fellow emailed his friend to announce that a group discussion between remailer operators had resulted in the decision that his friend would only be allowed to send plaintext messages through the remailers since it was standard policy to monitor the messages to and from "troublemakers" in order to protect the operators from unfounded accusations against them. At this point the complaintant was slightly suspicious of being the butt of a joke but he was still gullible enough that the two remailer operators had a bit more fun before copping to the fact that they were just yanking the complaintant's chain. They had the decency to promise not to use the complaintant's real name when telling the story of their prankery. > P.S. Besides... aren't ad hominum attacks on Tim May a Cypherpunks > tradition? A day without a Tim C. May attack is like a day without moonshine. MailMonger

1 0

Re: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Robert A. Costner wrote: > At 10:13 PM 5/30/97 -0700, Tim May wrote: > >The latest quote is from Marc Rotenberg, on a CNN piece on spam and > >anti-spam legislation, saying that what the legislators in Congress really > >need to look into is how the spammers develop their data bases..... > ... > >Incredible. Does he propose investigations of private data gathering? > > I'd agree here. Rather than have Congress blindly pass a law, some > investigation of the matter should be done first. While I am not supporting a > law, any such law should have three parts: I don't support a new Holocaust, but if we are going to build gas chambers for killing Jews, they should be... When you are on a car lot "just looking" at the new models, the sales person quickly gets you deciding on the color and other features that you would want if you *did* purchase a car. You end up driving home in a car you can't afford and with a vague feeling that the sales person might be the one who is responsible for all that legislation that keeps getting passed for your benefit. > For good or for bad, the current movement in lawmaking is to plug these > loopholes that exist for email. Judging from the governments past success in plugging the "loopholes" that allow people to exercise their right to Free Speech, I am certain they will be able to "save" us from the incredible danger that spam represents to our well-being. > >Look, I'm annoyed by getting 5-10 "unwanted" spam messages a day. > > Then you miss the point. For all practical purposes, the spam industry does > not exist in the US. > The current > spam bills are meant to address the actions of about five people in the entire > United States. If the small number of people affected is the basis for justifying the action taken on the issue, then we could just kill them. If you are going to rob a bank, take *all* of the money. If you are going to rape someone, then put it *all* the way in. {"Your honour, I would like to point out that my client only raped five women, and he didn't even stick his schlong all the way in. That hardly puts him in the same category as a *real* rapist.} > The manner in which the information is collected is invasive. People feel > their privacy is being violated. The right to be left alone is a fundamental > right. Somebody forgot to tell the government. > -- Robert Costner Phone: (770) 512-8746 > Electronic Frontiers Georgia mailto:pooh@efga.org If you are in any way profiting from the EFG, whether monetarily or by increased reputation capital, etc., then your post is an Unsolicited Commercial Email. If not, then it is spam. I can say this with absolute authority, because I am the person who decides which of my mail is spam and which is not. Encryption businesses sometimes post announcements of new releases and the like on the cypherpunks list and I don't usually consider it to be spam. DataETR posted an announcement on the list and then complained mightily when cypherpunks asked serious questions about their product. In my mind, that made their announcement just another commercial product spam. Now that they have made an effort to actually participate in the list by "listening" to the list members I no longer consider them to be just another commercial spammer. A few list members who have a product or cause to push do so without adding any real input to the list. In my mind, their posts are usually as interesting as reading about how someone is making "BIG $$$" by spamming me. Tom Weinstein, of Netscape, actually "participates" in the list by discussing the pro's and con's of his product and others, and being generally realistic about his company's product. If his posts were nothing more than claims about how Netscape would get those nasty stains out of my shorts, then I would consider them spam. Jim Bell beat his "Assassination Politics" drum to the point where he beat it to death and his posts became unwanted spam to some on the list. I read privacy related announcements and the like from organizations which are theoretically in alliance with the general aims of the list and consider many of them to be useless spam. "XXXX Organization Fighting For Legislation That Only Fucks Over Five People!" "YYYY Organization Supports Bill That Lets Government Cut Off One Of Each Citizen's Fingers, Instead Of Two!" As far as I am concerned, any organization that is "fighting" for "my" rights by getting involved in political lobbying/activism, etc., holds no interest for me as a cypherpunk. There is not a mother's son among them who isn't soon knee-deep in self-serving "deals" and "compromise." I don't participate in this list to read self-serving missives which attempt to justify career activists' participation in the government's dark comedy. If Bill Clinton posted his announcements in regard to government crypto policy on the cypherpunks list, I would consider it to be spam. If he sincerely solicited my opinion on the policies, then he would be a list participant. There are some list members whose posts are so knee-jerk and unthinking that they amount to nothing more than an unsolicited commercial advertisement for their precious self-image. Please! Don't fight for legislation to protect me from their posts. I would be tempted to support legislation requiring certain list members to put "BORING AND STUPID" in the Subject header, but then I would probably be forced to put "CYNICAL AND PESSIMISTIC" in my own Subject headers. My failure to include a donation to your organization with this post is not an oversight. C&P

1 0

Re: There's something wrong when I'm a felon under an increasing number of
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Kent Crispin wrote: > > > > A major nail in the coffin of Justice for any accused in the U.S. > > > was when the justice system promoted the concept of guilt by virtue > > > of "circumstantial" evidence to the point where people can now be > > > convicted as a result of speculation rather than evidence. Prosecutors > > > now seem to need only to convince the sheeple that it was "possible" > > > for the defendant to have commited the crime and that circumstantial > > > evidence points *only* to the accused. > I don't understand the animus against circumstantial evidence, > frankly. Some circumstantial evidence is extremely good evidence. The problem is the addition of a mountain of bullshit which is presented as "evidence" in most prosecutions in order to throw enough crap at the defendant to ensure that some of it will stick. For example, do we really need to have a forensic expert tell us that a paramilitaristic individual (McVeigh) has traces of things such as gunpowder, etc., in his clothing? This has about as much meaning as producing "evidence" that McVeigh took a crap while he was in custody to "prove" that he ate the food delivered to the motel room in question. Do we need a series of people to bend over backwards to produce evidence that a telephone calling card PIN number that could have been used by anybody *might* have been used to place certain calls? Perhaps the above examples couldn't be used to support *real* evidence of McVeigh's guilt, but there seems to be precious little of that. In contrast, there is even stronger evidence that precludes McVeigh having been driving the truck used in the bombing. And what kind of "evidence" is a mountain of horrific examples of dead bodies, etc? It is "evidence" that "somebody has to pay" for the bombing. Would McVeigh be "innocent" if the prosecution showed only *one* picture of dead bodies? What we see in the justice system today is reflective of the same mentality that pervades legal and social issues surrounding the development, implementation and use of technologies which relate to our privacy and freedom. The government "encryption prosecutors" use the same techniques as criminal prosecutors to plead their case. They smear you and I with the same brush used on drug dealers and child pornographers so that use of cryptography is now "circumstantial evidence" of our being guilty of "something." We are being prosecuted for use of encryption on the basis of circumstantial evidence that someone, somewhere is using cryptography and commiting crimes. I don't have any evidence that places Kent Crispin at the scene of the OKC bombing, but we do know that use of PGP was involved in the crime. Combined with Michael Fortier's testimony about Kent's involvement, I think we can get a guilty verdict. As I said previously, the problem with circumstantial evidence is that it is increasingly being combined with emotional rhetoric to convict people who "could have" commited a certain crime, instead of those "proven" to have commited the crime. I have no doubt that the government could replicate much of the evidence against Jim Bell in a similar case against more than a few cypherpunks, as well as producing even stronger evidence of a similar nature in a full investigation of us. Anonymous and Nobody would be in big, big trouble. In McVeigh's case, I wonder how many others the government could find similar or stronger evidence against in the OKC crime? Regardless of the answer to that question, it is McVeigh who is the one prosecutors are pointing at when they put up yet another picture of dead bodies and say that "somebody has to pay" for the crime. TruthMonger {Who has been proven to be Kent Crispin, by a plethora of circumstantial evidence.}

1 0

Decryption Contest Details (Updated)
by DataET Research 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Host: DataET Research (http://www.dataet.com) Contest expiration date: July 1st, 1997 Encrypted file location: http://www.dataet.com/public/source/vsacmv20/crackit.dat Applied encryption algorithm: VSA2048 Encryption algorithm source code: http://www.dataet.com/public/source/vsacmv20/ Applied key size: 120 bits (15 bytes) Key byte value range: 0 to 255 (decimal), 00 to FF (hexadecimal) Encrypted (secured) file size: 50,000 bytes (binary, Intel) Decrypted (unsecured) file size: 50,000 bytes (binary, Intel) Key and message post location: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Contact: info(a)dataet.com Limitations: U.S. residents only Prize: Two free basic Web site packages and $200.00 U.S.

1 0

Censored pages
by root 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Message to prolife alliance, CCd to Cypherpunks list: I noticed an article in .net a few days ago detailing how the prolife alliance, a UK anti-abortion group, had been required to remove images of aborted foetuses <sp?> from their web site. Clearly this is another incident of jackbooted motherfuckers censoring images that happen to contradict their particular brand of thuggery. I am sending this message to the prolife alliance to ask them to send a .zip or .tar`d file of their pages to me along with the censored images, I am also of course CCing this to cypherpunks to see if anyone out there not in the UK is also interested in mirroring these pages, if so send me email, or send direct to prolife(a)enterprise.net, who will, hopefully, provide us with a copy of these pages. Note please cypherpunks that if there is any thread I do not wish to start it is a pro/anti abortion thread, therefore, I am making no judgements whatsoever, merely suggesting action to prevent censorship... Datacomms Technologies 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: FC76DA85 "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

2 1

You've got to be kidding....
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Someone forwarded this item to me. As he didn't cc: the list on it, I'll protect his identity. Could be he's understandably worried about who's reading the list. This item indicates that the same team that busted this "gang" could indict several of us as "co-conspirators" (isn't this a redundancy?) along with Bell. Lock and load. --Tim >Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 21:23:20 -0700 >To: tcmay(a)got.net >From: xxxxx >Subject: You've got to be kidding.... > >Tim -- > >For your grist of stupid, selectively enforced laws: >(from comp.risks 19.20) > >>Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 03:45:10 -0400 >>From: David Kennedy <76702.3557(a)compuserve.com> >>Subject: Florida "Computer Gang" Members Arrested >> >>Courtesy of United Press International via CompuServe's Executive News >>Service: >> >>> Florida computer gang members arrested >> >>> LECANTO, Fla., 22 May 1997 (UPI) -- Florida authorities have arrested two >>> alleged leaders of a so-called computer "gang" they say set up a Web site >>> that accused a teacher of having a homosexual affair with a student. The >>> Web site displayed a photograph of the student's prom picture with the >>> teacher's head superimposed onto the head of the boy's female date. >> >>:: Two 19 year olds were charged with "publication of material that exposes >>a person to hatred, contempt or ridicule." Because they worked together, >>anti-gang laws apply upgrading the charges from misdemeanors to felonies. >> >>:: The victim-teacher has been the target of harassment before, another >>former student was sentenced to 6 months' probation last December. >> >>Dave Kennedy [CISSP] Research Team Chief, National Computer Security Assoc. > 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."

2 1

Economist on Net.Auctions
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Date: Sun, 1 Jun 1997 00:04:02 -0700 To: dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu Subject: Economist on Net.Auctions From: nobody(a)huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) Comments: Please report misuse of this automated remailing service to <remailer-admin(a)cajones.com> Sender: bounce-dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: nobody(a)huge.cajones.com (Huge Cajones Remailer) no earth-shattering revelations, but tuesday's audience should do their class reading for the pop quiz.. Going, going . . . THE Internet may have been the playground of the geeks for the past few decades, but its future belongs to an even more child-like tribe: economists. The network is becoming the ideal marketplace, where legions of buyers and sellers, both armed to the teeth with relevant information, can set prices as efficiently as any trading floor. As a result, market theories that have long been confined to business-school computer simulations can now have their day of reckoning as real people exchange real goods and money on-line. Nowhere is this better seen than with the economists' favourite sort of market: auctions. More than 150 auction sites are now open on the Web, selling everything from industrial machinery to rare stamps. Airlines such as Cathay Pacific and American have auctioned spare seats on their Web sites. AuctionWeb, which is a mixture of a classified-ad service and an auction room for people selling everything from rare Barbie dolls to barbecue grills, conducted 330,000 auctions on-line in the first quarter of this year alone. Onsale, the largest on-line auction service and one of the few profitable ones, sells $6m worth of computer equipment and electronic goods a month. Last month it became the first on-line auction firm to hit the stockmarket, going public at a valuation of nearly $100m. The Internet's chief advantage for auctioneers is the size of its audience. Its global reach brings a critical mass of buyers and sellers to the most popular auction sites, avoiding the problem of insufficient trading that bedevils many of their cousins in the physical world. Indeed, quick, easy virtual auctions carry a hint of the sort of hyper-efficient capitalism that Internet fans have long been promised. read the rest at http://www.economist.com/issue/31-05-97/wb8772.html For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "dcsb-request(a)ai.mit.edu" with one line of text: "help". --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) Philodox e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' The e$ Home Page: http://www.shipwright.com/

1 0

Tell the Fans, Not the Players / Was--Re: Rotenberg as the Uber Enemy
by lucifer＠dhp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 7:27 PM -0700 5/31/97, Marc Rotenberg wrote: >I don't mind the criticism if you think we're saying or >doing something that really is bad for privacy, but >a bunch of political rhetoric isn't worth much. And if >you don't think we're not busting our butt to protect >the rights of people to use strong crypto, you have no >idea what's going on. I think it would be more appropriate to say that you are *selling* your ass. Excuse me all to hell if my heart doesn't bleed purple piss for your heroic efforts for the "rights of people" but I would prefer for all of the time, money and effort people are putting into trying to get the government *not* to fuck me, when they are going to do so anyway, be put instead into developing technology to enable myself and others to route around the damage caused by government. If the same amount of money that is spent on lobbying to get the "least-bad law possible" passed was put into cypherpunk projects, then before the President proposed crypto regulations he would have to decide if it was really important enough to him to put up with the whithouse.gov site receiving 10 billion emails with "Fuck Clinton" in the subject header. Most of the "rights" lobbyists are like hostage negotiators who tell the hostage taker, "We'll let you kill two people without charging you if you let the rest go." Don't hold your breath waiting for me to join in the applause for your support of legislation compromising my privacy and freedom. As far as I am concerned, most organizations with the word "Freedom" in their name are a worse scourge than the politicians. They end up becoming self-important whores that the government uses to get a showcase stamp of approval on bad legislation. In short, "Tell the fans, not the players." I am certain that you can find a forum which will proclaim your sainthood for "almost" accomplishing something useful, but the cypherpunks list is not it. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out. TruthMonger

2 1