December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

NSA News
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"National Cryptologic Strategy for the 21st Century": http://jya.com/nsa-ncs21.htm "UFO Documents Index" http://jya.com/nsa-ufo.htm "NSA's FOIA/PA Home Page" http://www.nsa.gov:8080/docs/efoia/ "National Vigilance Park" http://www.nsa.gov:8080/display/c130/ "During the Cold War period of 1945-1977, a total of more than 40 reconnaissance aircraft were shot down. The secrecy of the reconnaissance programs prevented recognition of the slain military personnel at the time of the incidents. Their loss was mourned by their fellow soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines in similar programs, but the fallen could not be accorded public honors. The end of the Cold War has allowed the United States to lift some of its security restrictions concerning the reconnaissance programs, permitting us at last to accord due recognition of the achievements and sacrifices of these intrepid military personnel, and to tell their stories. "

1 0

FIVE QUESTIONS THAT COULD CHANGE YOUR LIFE
by rem＠jaguar.dal-tek.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Should you wish to be removed from our list, please follow simple instructions at the end of this short message. FIVE QUESTIONS THAT CAN CHANGE YOUR LIFE Can you answer these 5 questions with a simple "Yes" or "No"? 1. Do you want to legally reduce your business and or personal taxes up to 95%? - Yes or No 2. Would you like to protect any and all assets from any form of judgement, which also includes IRS liens and levies? - Yes or No 3. Would you like to preserve your personal privacy? - Yes or No 4. Would you like to create a six figure income in the next four to six months? - Yes or No 5. Would you like to earn 5%-20% per month on your money? - Yes or No If you answered "Yes" to any or all of the five questions, then I urge you to call the number below. You can listen to either the 5 or 12 minute message, which will give you an overview of our unique strategies. You owe it to yourself to be fully informed. Phone: 1-800-937-5377 Ext. 9300 for a 2 minute Company Overview Access our 5 and 12 minute messages at 1-512-505-6880 Then simply email me at: rich(a)jaguar.dal-tek.net and ask for the URL and Autoresponder addresses for further information. Please place "URL6" as your message subject or use the hyperlink, below. HyperLink: mailto:rich@jaguar.dal-tek.net?subject=URL6 ASK ABOUT OUR HOLIDAY SPECIAL!! Price reduced thru Dec. 15th. To your future, Richard NOTE: To be automatically removed from our mailing list simply hit REPLY to this message.

1 0

Cantsin package
by Steffen Zahn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello, I have updated my package for Cantsin No. 2 signatures to the new version 0.3. New things: - faster key generation - a mechanism to allow the storage of the private key encrypted with an external encryption program. Example included. - it is possible to sign only a part of a document. Url: http://www.snafu.de/~zahn/cantsin.tar.gz (86 Kbytes) SHA1: 0EBF0D27794D800AB405C2857D7E05A35AFBDA43 -- home email: user@domain where domain=berlin.snafu.de, user=zahn Use of my address for unsolicited commercial advertising is forbidden. "Where do you want to crash today?" 25BA1A9F5B9010DD8C752EDE887E9AF3 [Cantsin Protocol No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antsin Protocol No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

1 0

Re: 'Off' the parking pigs! (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 14:45:46 -0500 > From: Eric Seggebruch - NYC SE <eric.seggebruch(a)East.Sun.COM> > Subject: Re: 'Off' the parking pigs! (fwd) > Actually it is possible for the government to get more than one shot at > a defendant through the doctrine of dual sovereignty (state and > federal). That is how they got the police officers involved in the > Rodney King incident. When the state court (California) jury let them > off, the feds prosecuted them for civil rights violations in federal > court. > > There you have it. We got nothing here. The fact is that the charges that were used at the state and federal level were different charges relating to the same incident. This is *not* double jeopardy in any sense of the word. Further, other than the Feds deciding to wait until the outcome of the state trial there was nothing that would have prevented them from filing in tandem. Furthermore, this rampant equating of federal and state rights is a real disservice to understanding the correct functioning of a democracy. State and federal government agencies are supposed to be equal and indipendant within the guidelines of the Constitution. As a result for a given act it is perfectly reasonable and actualy desirable for the state and federal agencies to file in parallel and indipendently. Re-read the 10th with this case in mind and perhaps it will clear the confusion up for you. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | | | We built your fort. We will not have it used against us. | | | | John Wayne - Allegheny Uprising | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: Burnore & Databasix
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

gburnore(a)netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) wrote: > :> >We'd expect no less. I do wonder how long it will take before those who > :> >believe remailers are a good thing start to realise this asshole has > :> >it in for them. Everything it posts could be used by the anti-remailer > :> >front as a reason to shut them all down. > : > :Much of this "anti-remailer front" works for DataBasix. > > Another lie from the anonymous asshole. Prove it. Of course, you can't. You're denying that you, Belinda Bryan, and William McClatchie are staff members of DataBasix? Are you denying that McClatchie used unproven allegations of "forgery" as his excuse to campaign to get the upstream providers of Jeff Burchell's "Mailmasher" server to disconnect him? Do you remember McClatchie's post which said: -> > 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. Did you catch that -- "asking that mailmasher be shut down"? Have your forgotten the time McClatchie was asked this question: -> >>If that was done, then a complaint to the operator would have gotten -> >>that particular pseudonym making the postings locked out. But your -> >>agenda seemed to be to get the entire server shut down. Why? To which he replied: -> > Becuase the shithead running it pissed me off with his responce that "He -> > had better things to do" and "Maybe i should learn mmail filtering" to -> > avoid the abuse. And then there's Jeff's account of what followed. Do you remember when you asked him: -> > : So are you suggesting that McClatchie did that all by himself? Just -> > : curious, I don't know the details. And his response: -> > Nope. McClatchie posted a spammed message that was offering Pirated -> > CD-ROMS for sale. He just happened to send it to a number of companies -> > that had software products included on the CD-ROM. They in turn handed -> > the matter over to the Software Publisher's Association, which then -> > took their usual witchhunting activities to a new art form (including -> > using a personal contact at Wired for professional "gain") You said that it was the "anti-remailer front" that was using this alleged "abuse" to get remailers shut down, but McClatchie was the one named by Jeff of playing that very role. I'd like to hear more about this "anti-remailer front" you speak of. Thus far, you've claimed that all the anonymous posts that have criticized you have all come from the same person. That doesn't sound like much of a "front". How about some more NAMES? Who else is involved in this "front"? > : Notice the classic > :disinformation tactics that Gary Burnore is engaging in here. > > Engaging in? You post disinformation after disinformation and post no proof > of your aligations. Posting REPORTS of disinformation is not disinformation. You have posted no proof for any of your disinformation. For example, your unsubstantiated claim that someone (you actually accused someone by name) of sending abusive e-mail, via a remailer, to an unnamed "teenage girl" who supposedly had a web page at DataBasix. Where is your proof of that accusation? Saying that an anonymous person "abused" an unnamed victim is pretty flimsy, don't you think? Then Belinda Bryan came along and claimed that this same person had supposedly forged posts through an anonymous remailer in the names of "every known email address of DataBasix staff and customers". Again, no evidence that it even occurred, nor even an explanation of how someone OUTSIDE of your company would get ahold of that kind of confidential information! > : But notice > :that Gary was part of this "anti-remailer front" that used ALLEGED forgeries > :and "spam baiting" to get two remailers shut down. > > Again. PROVE IT. Now it's TWO remailers? Before you said it was one. Again, > Burchell said he shut down the remailer after hundreds of complaints. You're > suggesting that those hundreds came from DataBasix? PROVE IT. You're forgetting Mailmasher and McClatchie's hissy fit to get it shut down? > : It is interesting that > :he now attributes the activities of himself and his associates at > :DataBasix with this unnamed "anti-remailer front". > > No, it's closer to the facts than your posts. You consistantly post harass > from a remailer your tactics are obvious. You won't win though. Too many > people WANT remailers. Your lies are not working. Free speech is now "harassment"? (Only in the world of DataBasix!) If you didn't want people talking about the things you've done, you shouldn't have done them in the first place. Exactly what "harassment" are you alleging? You mean posting replies to you and answering the questions you asked? You whine for "proof" then scream "harassment" when it is posted. Cute. > So what are YOU doing it for? It's obviously not a privacy thing. You were > attacking me long before I complained to Burchell to get my name blocked. You > obvously have other reasons for your attacks. You obviously have a short memory. Your letter to Jeff Burchell demanded that he turn over his logs to you identifying everyone who had sent and received anonymous e-mail through his remailer. This was MONTHS after you whined about alleged "forgeries" and were told about having your name blocked upon request. Unless you deliberately avoided taking the advice you had been given then blocking your address would have been a non-issue by June, since you were whining about "forgeries" in February. Or are you talking about your attempt to get posts that even MENTIONED your name in the body blocked? > :Which makes one wonder why Gary and Belinda wanted to get ahold of the logs > :from the Huge Cajones Remailer which would have identified anyone who ever > :sent or even received anonymous mail through that remailer. Gary and Belinda > :have consistently stonewalled that question. My guess is that they were > :counting on Jeff keeping that dirty little secret of theirs hidden. > > Which makes one wonder what else your demented little mind will think up next. > Your claims are false, NO PROOF, none. Claims? I asked a QUESTION. What use did you have in mind for Jeff's remailer logs which you demanded? Since you refuse to answer, let me repeat Jeff's theory. If it's incorrect, please feel free to correct it: -> Subject: Re: DataBasix vs. the Remailers -- Gary Burnore's Dirty Tricks Exposed (was: Jeff's Side of the Story.) -> From: toxic(a)hotwired.com (Jeff Burchell) -> Date: 1997/07/02 -> Message-ID: <5pc9mb$omg$1(a)re.hotwired.com> -> -> [...] -> -> : > Mr. Burnore requested a copy of my (non-existant) logs. -> : > I told him to get me something in writing, signed by his lawyer that -> : > stipulated that the logs were confidential, and not to be revealed to -> : > anyone outside of the lawyer's office. -> : -> : He requested the logs of the messages of *EVERYONE* using Huge -> : Cajones? What was his rationale for such a fishing expedition? -> : (Cases like this are a good reason for remailers to NOT keep logs.) -> -> I have no idea of his rationale. And I don't know of any remailer -> operator who keeps logs that would identify a user. I had my machine -> configured to log in a fairly standard way, but I used a different -> sendmail configuration for the remailer, that had all logging (except -> for certain error conditions) turned off. -> -> Part of me thinks he wanted the logs so he could tell if I was going -> to be able to identify him when he started his attacks. [...] > Yet, according to you I got his remailer shut down. Which is it? You claim I > got his remailer shut down but then you claim I didn't have the power to do > it. Go back and reread the post. It was the power to demand that Jeff turn over (non- existent) logs to you and Belinda that you didn't have. The rest makes no sense, because it's quite obvious that the remailer is SHUT DOWN.

1 0

CITI conference:The Impact of Cybercommunications on the Law:Criminal,
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anyone on the list planning to attend? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Impact of Cybercommunications on the Law: Criminal, Tax, Securities, & Antitrust 20 December 12, 1997 - Dag Hammarskjold Lounge, Columbia University To register: email: citi(a)research.gsb.columbia.edu web: www.citi.columbia.edu Law in the Electronic Age - It's a Whole New World The questions of how to prevent and how to detect computer crime are just the start. Equally nettlesome are the legal questions which are just beginning to be confronted. For example: -How does one define a computer crime or tort? How does one prove it in court? How does one handle conflicts of laws issues when the locus of the "crime" is the internet? What remedies are available or useful - as a practical matter? How effective is criminal prosecution in this area? What happens when the "criminals" are foreign and their activites are lawful in the host country? -Who can tax electronic commerce? How do they do it? What is the territorial source of income generated in cyberspace? -How does one prove (or avoid) price collusion under the anti-trust laws when everyone's prices are instantly available to competitors online? What are the antitrust implications of network economic effects? -What does the SEC do regarding investor protection when foreign unregistered securities can be purchased from your desktop PC? What are the implications of cyberspace for the future of traditional distribution channels for IPO's. What is the future of traditional exchanges? This conference is the beginning of what may prove to be a series of events which will begin the exploration of these and related questions with experts active in this arena. 8:30 - 9:00 Continental Breakfast 9:00 - 9:15 Introductory Remarks 9:15 - 10:30 Computer Crime and Fraud, I Presentations: Electronic Evidence Recovery and its Use in the Courtroom" Jason Paroff, Kroll Associates, Inc. "Computer Crime: The Threat to the Net" David E. Green, Senior Litigation Counsel, U.S. Dept of Justice "International Schemes and Corruption" Don Sussis, Interested Inc. 10:30 - 10:45 Coffee Break 10:45 - 12:00 Computer Crime and Fraud, II Panel Discussion: Moderator:=20 Thomas J. Fox, Fordham Law School Discussants: James Doyle, NYPD Richard Field, Esq. Chris Hansen, Senior Counsel, ACLU David Sobel, Electronic Privacy Information Center Fred Trickey, Academic Computing, Columbia University 12:00 - 1:00 Lunch 1:00 - 2:20 Impact of the Internet on Tax Law "Electronic Commerce: Are The Current Tax Rules Adequate, Or Even Relevant" Howard Levine, Roberts & Holland Moderator:David L. Robbins, Columbia Business School Discussants: Jeffery Colon, Fordham Law School Elvin Hedgepeth, Director, Office of International Programs, IRS Robert Wood, Coopers & Lybrand 2:20 - 2:30 Coffee Break 2:30 - 3:50 Impact of the Internet on Securities Law "Securities Regulation and the Internet: Can Gatekeepers and Intermediaries Survive in Cyberspace" Robert B. Thompson, Washington University School of Law Moderator: Dr. James Armstrong, Director, Fundamental Family of Funds Discussants: Dr. Andreas J. Junius, Resident Partner, Puender, Volhard, Weber & Axster Elizabeth King, Senior Special Counsel, SEC Andrew Klein, President, Wit Capital Group 3:50 - 4:00 Coffee Break 4:00 - 5:20 Impact of the Internet on Antitrust Law "That the issue be decided: Cooperation and Competition on the Internet" David McGowan, Howard, Rice, Nemerovski, Canady, Falk, & Rabkin Discussants:=20 John Kasdan, Lecturer, Columbia Law School Laurel Price, Deputy Attorney General of New Jersey Lowell Williams, Vice President, Bull HN Information Systems 5:20 - 6:30 Reception Directions to Dag Hammarskjold Lounge The Dag Hammarskjold Lounge is located in the School of International Affairs. Enter at 118th Street between Amsterdam Avenue and Morningside Drive. Take the elevator to the 6th Floor. The local subway (#1/9) stops at Broadway and 116th street. Parking is available at Riverside Church on 120th Street, between Broadway and Riverside Drive, or on 114th Street betweenBroadway and Amsterdam. A full map of the campus and more detailed directions can be found at the website. Registration Fee (lunch and breaks included): Industry: $195; Gov't/Academic/Non-profit: $50 tel: 212-854-4222 fax: 212-932-7816 email: citi(a)research.gsb.columbia.edu web: www.citi.columbia.edu mail: C.I.T.I 3022 Broadway, 809 Uris Hall Columbia Business School New York, NY 10027-7004

1 0

Brilliant Anti-Armor Submunition: Opportunity Exists to ConductCritical Test Prior to Production Decision
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The following item was added to GAO's World Wide Web site in Portable Document (PDF) format. - Brilliant Anti-Armor Submunition: Opportunity Exists to Conduct Critical Test Prior to Production Decision. NSIAD-98-16. 13 pp. plus 1 appendix (6 pp.) October 30, 1997. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/ns98016.pdf Abstract The Army is developing the brilliant antiarmor submunition, with acoustic and infrared seekers working in tandem, to autonomously search for, track, and destroy moving armored targets. This submunition is to be carried deep into enemy territory by the Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS) Block II missile, which is still in development and is a modification of the in-production ATACMS Block IA missile, which carries a different submunition. The brilliant antiarmor submunition and the ATACMS Block II missile are a $4-billion system designed to support the Army's "deep fires" mission, which calls for the destruction and/or disruption of enemy forces at ranges exceeding 100 kilometers. Each Block II missile is to carry 13 submunitions that will be dispensed over large clusters of high payoff targets to attack and destroy individual targets. The advantage of the submunition is that it can cover a large area when dispersed, which allows it to compensate for target location errors.

1 0

Cybercrime Summit, from Netly/Afternoon Line
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

************* http://cgi.pathfinder.com/netly/afternoon/0,1012,1626,00.html The Netly News / Afternoon Line (http://netlynews.com/) December 10, 1997 Big Eight Ball At a briefing at FBI headquarters today, top police officials from eight countries outlined a 10-point action plan calling for greater cooperation, joint training and a revision of national laws to combat malicious hackers and "cybercrime." Anne McLellan, Canada's attorney general, said her country wanted to crack down on "old crimes using new technology -- for example, child pornography or hate." Left unsaid was how, for instance, the U.S. could follow Canada's lead and ban racist web sites, which are permissible under the First Amendment. Among the virtual crimes listed were the "cyber-offenses" of money laundering and... H-bomb smuggling? (In response to a reporter's question, the Russians denied they had misplaced 84 of their nuclear weapons.) Heinz Lanfermann, Germany's state secretary, added to the list of Internet undesirables "all those who are organizing slave trading and drug trafficking and car theft." U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno pointedly declined to address encryption, saying "it was generally not a topic" discussed. She did, however, applaud the Internet industry for offering to "work together in a collaborative manner" to track "computer criminals." But she clearly intends to do more than collaborate: The joint principles call for the government "to continue providing the public and private sectors with standards for reliable and secure telecommunications and data processing technologies." Like the Clipper Chip, maybe? --By Declan McCullagh/Washington [More Afternoon Line stories are at http://netlynews.com/ ]

1 0

Re: Remailer Trivia / Re: Singapore & Freedom (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:54:26 -0800 > From: Steve Schear <schear(a)lvdi.net> > Subject: Re: Remailer Trivia / Re: Singapore & Freedom (fwd) > > At 3:43 PM +0000 12/9/1997, jonathon wrote: > >On Mon, 8 Dec 1997, Jim Choate wrote: > > > >> analogous situation you would need to use a *listed* phone number registered > >> to anonymous in such a way that ANI displayed the number but any directory > >> search resulted in anonymous w/ no address or other tracing info even for > >> the phone company. To the best of my knowledge no phone company anywhere > > Third party, anonymous, telephone services are available. One in Las Vegas (at least it used to be) is Private Lines, which is an anonyous re-dialer using 900 number billing for payment. Yeah, and the way it works is that some 3rd party buys a trunk from the local RBOC and then sets up their PBX and then re-sells the lines. Here's your test for them. Buy a line and have them list it in the RBOC directory under 'anonymous'. Not the same thing as going directly to the RBOC and having them list your number under 'anonymous'. THAT is the litmus test for true anonymous phone service *and* to make it equivalent to an anonymous remailer with address persistance. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | | | We built your fort. We will not have it used against us. | | | | John Wayne - Allegheny Uprising | | | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Clinton in the doghouse (humor)
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

LAUGH TRACK The Clintons' new dog -- Bill Maher: "This dog is going to live in the White House, so it's going have to go outside if it's going to make fund raising calls" ("PI," ABC 12/9). David Letterman: "And now they've got him working on training him to dig cemetary plots at Arlington National Cemetery" ("Late Show," CBS 12/9). Jay Leno on VP Gore: "New movie coming out called "Digging to China' It's all about Al Gore's search for campaign donations" ("Tonight," 12/9). For more on the complicated family tree of Mick Jagger and Jerry Hall, who just had a baby (his 6th, her 4th), click Back Bench. TOP TEN COMPLAINTS OF PRESIDENT CLINTON'S NEW PUPPY 10. Whenever you bury a bone, president digs it up and eats it. 9. Late-night walks always end up at local Hooters. 8. Much too easy to mistake Al Gore for a tree. 7. Keep getting yelled at for "fetching" Sam Donaldson's hairpiece. 6. When the president says "Roll over," he's usually talking to his date. 5. Roger hogs all the best chew-toys. 4. If you so much as look at Janet Reno, you get an assfull of size-13 pump. 3. Leash not as nice as the one Hillary uses on Bill. 2. Unfair having to get "fixed" when Clinton's the one who really needs it. 1. Fighting with Bill over the last snausage (CBS, 12/9). TV SOUNDBITE "This story's not going to die." -- ABC's Cokie Roberts on the fundraising scandals, "GMA," 12/10

1 0