December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Bill Stewart kills babies after he molests them. Honest! /
by Charlie Comsec 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Bill Stewart <stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com> wrote: > > It never fails to amaze me that complainers point out that an > >'abusive' letter started out, "I hate niggersfaggotsjewsyou!" > >and then proceed to list the other fifty 'abusive' things that > >the writer had to say. > > The real problem, besides the emotional distress some people feel > at the abuse they get in response to forged postings, > and the potential loss of reputation capital, is that people > keep trying to call their ISP to get them shut down, > and some ISPs do this sort of thing, squashing abusive-sounding customers > first and asking questions later. Ok, soon-to-be-ex customers... Any ISP that would react that way should probably be avoided, anyway. Knee-jerk censorship like that is one of the best arguments around for posting via remailers. Not to mention the fact that posting anonymously prevents one's e-mail address from being misused in that fashion. But personally, the most persuasive argument is to keep people from compiling a de facto dossier on you based on your public postings, selling it to potential employers, and perhaps keeping you from getting a certain job because of your controversial, unpopular, and/or un-politically-correct opinions. IMO, people who rely on placebos like those "X-No-Archive" header flags are fooling themselves if they think they will be universally honored. Most so-called "forged postings" are rather crudely done, and the ones done using a remailer to paste headers are the most obvious ones of all. I'm not sure what the legal standard for "forgery" is, but if it's anything like that for fraud, it requires that a REASONABLE PERSON would be fooled. Given all the disclaimers present in the headers of remailer output, I doubt that any posts with pasted From: would meet that standard. Yes, I've heard the argument that "people don't read headers", but so what? Most of them probably don't read the fine print on contracts, either, but they're still responsible for what it says. - --- Finger <comsec(a)nym.alias.net> for PGP public key (Key ID=19BE8B0D) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBNIVRpAbp0h8ZvosNAQHcBAf+MCa1DBhmtI4h93zsegO6/fR0RJPko68+ f5ImWOnzxdg1eN4WkbdD4ELn00jLTZC+7+Xw94BkeT9wj1KLmP/BE6NUANdYFzdW YRyAHIK/WsYN6k9dal54TdDviC7SpBUH3IHnQa2USYJjfd9raviYp5NoCpBz5D7s E0+mnfxo8ufTE9Z09qRGmjtxrEfO+gug6lYYCG0h5j7SD+6mVcGuWFmoxbDzhqma IkzngE1dn3xXmwdMTQ5WNvWj+qths52hnszeQ7ZPE/pwrROVobhMevlabM2NYPA0 BLv5L0Te+p12Hj2599znmzJyY5NdqsqBzBbg9yFfaqoavdM/bg4wVw== =4Ppz -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Cypherpunks, PGP Buyout, & Writing Code...
by Nerthus＠server1.efga.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[NOTE: This message was remailed by an anonymous remailing system. The original sender is unknown, and has inserted the From: header. This information has not been verified. As with all mail or news messages, you should examine the headers carefully before responding. Direct questions about this system to <admin(a)anon.efga.org>.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jim Choate wrote: >Perhaps the buy-out of PGP is a good thing. Consider that now there is a >clear and present motive for Cypherpunks to start writing the next wave of >world-class crypto...it really is the *only* shure way that the process >doesn't get subverted...we're no longer able to rely on a single commen >source of crypto tools. Perhaps we should hold a Requiem for PGP, or maybe an Irish wake instead. Let's take a look back at some of the good things PGP did toward furthering the use of crypto. Phil Zimmerman took public key cryptography and brought it to a fairly wide base of users: 4 million people, plus or minus a million or two. :-) That's rather substantial given that less than 100 million people are estimated to be on the Net right now. Think of how many more yet-to-be Net users will demand strong cryptography in their communications, be it personal, financial, legal, recreational...who knows what else? PGP also showed how both a freeware and paid-for version of encryption software can be marketed together. The paid-for version of PGP 5.0 allows users to generate the new El Gamal/DSS keys as well as the familiar RSA keys, while the freeware only allows for the former. The important lesson here, I think, is that the writers of "the next wave of world-class crypto" can make money from the paid-for versions with the extra bells and whistles that some of us like, but they are not stifling the expansion of their software's user base because they are offering a freeware version that implements the basic protocols for communicating with users of the paid-for version, and of course other freeware users. Nerthus -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNIUHwxa1d3zm4nqOEQIG4wCgsDqyMsl64IsDwz814eL9SwdJmu0AoJ9M OaSWiBx2cZZqq97f0GZ1GuJR =Mqbu -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: ATTN: Gary L. Burnore
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

gburnore(a)netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) wrote: > :The remailer help documents I'm familiar with say they will act to prevent > :"harrassment" through the remailer. I presume the above would be viewed by > :the remailer owners as harrassment. > > Interesting presumtion. Hopefully true. The ONLY difference between remailers > and ISP's in this case, is that with an ISP, if you forge another's real ^^^^^ > address there's at least a possibility that you can be held accountable for > it. It's nothing at all to do with the CONTENT of the post. If same can be > said of a remailer, ie if you get UCE based on a post made with your address > as a from line the _real_ poster can be held accountable, then there is no > issue. That argument might have some validity if Netcom (your own ISP) didn't allow its own mail servers to be utilized by spammers and tell people who complain about this practice to G.F.Y. Just read some of the complaints about Netcom on the news.admin.net-abuse.email NG. If you had been "UCE baited" by someone using Netcom's mail servers, rather than those of a remailer, would you attempt to harass Netcom like you did Jeff Burchell who ran Mailmasher and the Huge Cajones Remailer? Would one of your associates at DataBasix demand that Netcom be shut down since they are unable or unwilling to stop the abuse of their servers? Would you threaten legal action to get Netcom to turn over all of their sendmail logs to you? What do you mean by "held accountable"? Having a throwaway Netcruiser account (perhaps one of many), acquired under a phony name, cancelled? You've already been informed, and admitted that it has been effective, that if you don't wish your e-mail address to appear in a From: line from a remailer you can request source blocking. It's sort of like the blocking of a/c 900 telephone numbers. If you are worried about abuse of your phone, you can request that calls to 900 numbers from your phone be blocked. You don't have to insist that they be blocked from EVERYONE'S phone just because they're a problem FOR YOU. Can you point to any equivalent safeguard against someone's e-mail address being forged through Netcom's SMTP servers, either by a Netcom user or by someone else? If not, isn't it time to make sure your own house is in order before meddling in the neighbors' houses? IMO, the remailers are already doing more to prevent what you perceive to be a problem than your own ISP is willing to do -- and this by VOLUNTEERS who are not being paid by you, or anyone, for their efforts. I also note that you're using the word "forge" again. Yet in another post from you within a day or two of this one, you claimed that you weren't concerned about forgery. Which is true? --

1 0

More microsoft monopoly::Re: NT 4.0 Option Pack released (fwd)
by Ray Arachelian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Microsoft has now broken up the Service Packs into Bug Fix and Option Pack (new feechures) packages. However the catch is this: they require you to have Internet Exploiter 4.01 installed *BEFORE* you can install the Option Pack (whose features have little to do with Internet Exploiter, though they are part of the IIS web server. For example RAIDUS Remote Access Authentication has nothing to do with Exploiter.) IMHO: This is a cheap shot at making their browser more "incorporated" with the OS, that way they can get around the Justice Dept. :( Lame. Another message claims VC++ requires IE as well -- can anyone confirm this? =====================================Kaos=Keraunos=Kybernetos============== .+.^.+.| Ray Arachelian |Prying open my 3rd eye. So good to see |./|\. ..\|/..|sunder(a)sundernet.com|you once again. I thought you were |/\|/\ <--*-->| ------------------ |hiding, and you thought that I had run |\/|\/ ../|\..| "A toast to Odin, |away chasing the tail of dogma. I opened|.\|/. .+.v.+.|God of screwdrivers"|my eye and there we were.... |..... ======================= http://www.sundernet.com ========================== ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 3 Dec 1997 08:08:57 -0500 From: Russ <Russ.Cooper(a)RC.ON.CA> To: NTBUGTRAQ(a)LISTSERV.NTBUGTRAQ.COM Subject: NT 4.0 Option Pack released FYI, the final release of the NT 4.0 Option Pack has been posted, you can get full details at; http://www.microsoft.com/ntserver/default.asp For those that aren't already aware, Microsoft has split the old Service Pack into two components. One is the Option Pack, which includes new features and functionality, while the Service Pack will be kept to bug fixes or patches only (or so they say, we still haven't seen what this new SP will look like). Amongst other things, this first release of NTOP includes; IIS 4.0 Microsoft Transaction Server 2.0 Microsoft Message Queues 1.0 Microsoft Certificate Server 1.0 Internet Connection Services for Microsoft RAS (Radius) Microsoft Site Server Express (Web Usage and Content analysis/reporting) Internet Explorer 4.01 These components will now ship on a separate CD included with NT. Its important to note that IE4.01 *must* be installed prior to installing any of the NTOP components. Cheers, Russ ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Wed, 3 Dec 1997 17:05:35 +0200 From: "Juha [ISO-8859-1] Jäykkä" <juolja(a)utu.fi> To: NTBUGTRAQ(a)LISTSERV.NTBUGTRAQ.COM Subject: Re: NT 4.0 Option Pack released > Its important to note that IE4.01 *must* be installed prior to > installing any of the NTOP components. And MSIE must be installed before installing Visual C++.. Soon we hav= e it that MSIE must be installed before TCP/IP is installed... and then befo= re NT in installed! Is there no limit to this??? Is there any way to prevent = MS from *FORCING* us to install MSIE - other than boycott all MS products entirely (with NT5 it would seem that we have to boycott even the OS to= save ourselves from MSIE)??? Sorry the bitter tone - I just don't like programs that require me to install yet another program which I don't want to install. --=20 ----------------------------------------------- | Juha J=E4ykk=E4, juolja(a)utu.fi | | home: http://www.utu.fi/~juolja/ | | pgp-key: http://www.utu.fi/~juolja/pgp.txt | -----------------------------------------------

2 1

Re: Censorial leftists (Was: Interesting article)
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 10:42 AM 12/3/97 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >This is nothing new. Honest (self-identified) leftists like my friend Bob >Chatelle complain about the censors on the left almost as much as censors >on the right. Other fave leftist censorship causes: > Not to forget the CPUSA's long time platform plank that promised to make racisim a crime punished by imprisonment. DCF -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNIWH6oVO4r4sgSPhAQH7YwQAo/vMb7hqDMQ/6GP+gBXtruClj31qstbx mBSrb8VG8+9ZQO8/Tl8zY3h2FzRKea/sOQIlhpVeD2kryQUyqc2D6z79dklru5vu D7b5iJEY1na8xkQW/c3nD3ejsJRQ/5kjcNcZBQ4zxG/jM95B0tt3Wmn4B0/uMmid bJZDE0fMMEQ= =9qf9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Another of Gary Burnore's Lies Exposed (was: Re: not so fast Re: Kudos to NETCOM!)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Sam" <sam-001(a)dpinc.ml.org> wrote: > In article <3485813d.117631170(a)nntp.best.ix.netcom.com>, > gburnore+NOspam(a)netcom.com (Gary L. Burnore) writes: > > > On 2 Dec 1997 14:59:30 GMT, "Sam" <sam-001(a)dpinc.ml.org> wrote: > > > >:Found it: > >: > >:Subject: Re: Burnore forgeries easily solvable > >:From: Sam <sam-000(a)usa.net> > >:Date: 1997/07/10 > >:Message-ID: <5q3ms3$phq(a)chronicle.concentric.net> > >:Newsgroups: comp.org.eff.talk,alt.privacy.anon-server,alt.anonymous,alt.anonymous.messages,alt.censorship,news.ad > >: > >: > > > > > > Nice try Sam but no go. > > Not so fast. In the message that this was a follow-up to, > <gburnoreED2z89.GHs(a)netcom.com>, your own exact words were: > > > This one dated 9 July 1997 > > is a good example. See the forged from line? Ths did not come from > > mmdf(a)databasix.com > > Well, no matter how you look at it, it was. It did came from > mmdf(a)databasix.com. There was no forgery. And that was precisely the > point of my initial post. I cannot believe that someone who is supposed to > administer a mail server cannot recognize an auto-ack generated by his own > machine, instead insisting that the message came from a third party, forged > with his return address. > > This puts all other claimed forgeries from a mail2news gateway, that you ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > have taken an issue with, and used as a basis to form your claims against > UCE-baiting, and such, as suspect. ^^^^^^^^^^ You've noticed that too, huh? Gary Burnore's "big lie" technique depends upon his claims being retold over and over, by himself and his associates such as Belinda Bryan <eridani(a)ix.netcom.com>, WITHOUT SERIOUS ANALYSIS like yours, in order to be believed. Gary's continuous whining about "forgeries" is becoming pathetic. In his haste to falsely claim that something was "forged" he missed the fact that the claimed "forgery" was traceable back to HIS OWN SERVER. He shot himself in the foot trying to frame the remailers this time. What would be the point in trying to forge a Usenet post to make it look like it came from "mmdf(a)databasix.com", anyway? Gary Burnore's forgery allegations against Mailmasher are similarly suspect. First of all, before planning the attack, somebody apparently didn't do his homework, or he'd have realized that Mailmasher was a web-based 'nymserver, not a remailer. Despite being challenged to do so, Gary has never been able to produce a single piece of documentation showing that Mailmasher ever had the ability to paste From: headers. The "evidence" that was posted had truncated Path headers that stopped at the mail2news gateway and contained "X-No-Archive" headers, just as Gary's own posts do, presumably to explain why none of these posts is independently available from third-party archives for verification. If the posts even existed in the first place, they are more likely to have been generated from a Netcruiser account, complete with headers designed to frame Mailmasher, than from Mailmasher itself. --

1 0

Re: CDT and the Threat of Gov't Intervention
by David Honig 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:46 AM 12/3/97 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: >Besides demonstrating that cyberporn is a topic that will >never disappear, the Kids and the Net summit has >highlighted the tensions between the different types of >Net-advocacy groups here in Washington. I'm sure the Feds are happy that their Good Cop (Clinton) / Bad Cop (Freeh) routine is having the divisive effect they planned, and making sacrifices seem acceptable. ------------------------------------------------------------ David Honig Orbit Technology honig(a)otc.net Intaanetto Jigyoubu Information is a dense, colorless, odorless material readily transmitted across empty space and arbitrary boundaries by shaking charged particles.

3 3

Re: Censorial leftists (Was: Interesting article)
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 8:42 AM -0700 12/3/97, Declan McCullagh wrote: >This is nothing new. Honest (self-identified) leftists like my friend Bob >Chatelle complain about the censors on the left almost as much as censors >on the right. Other fave leftist censorship causes: > >-- MacKinnonite antiporn laws (she's a self-identified Marxist, I recall) And her partner, Andrea Dworkin, belies the oft-quoted notion that someone so far to the left comes out a libertarian rightist. No, this chick Dworkin is so far left she's just plain _left_. She argues that porn for womyn (or is it wimmin?) is fine and dandy, because this represents lesbian sisterhood exploring their own blah blah blah, but porn aimed and directed at men, even if containing precisely the same images of naked chicks, is inherently exploitative and should be banned. (How?) Dworkin has clamined, several times, that all heterosexual sex is rape. >-- "Hate speech" bans And "hate speech" laws are already spreading on the Net. Just a day or two ago there was a report that a student is being prosecuted for "hate speech" messages mentioning Asians (or maybe just Japanese?) in a derogatory way. What part of "shall make no law" is not being understood here? What part of "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me" did they not understand? (This being one of the lessons, along with several other crucial memes, that some of us learned early on...apparently this lesson, and the fable of the grasshopper and the ant, has been replaced by the Dworkin-approved "Heather Has Two Mommies" lesbian propaganda.) >-- Sexual harassment "hostile environment" regulations (Give me a break. >This is the justification for at least one library censorware >installation.) This is a fairly old one, at least 15 years old. Girlie calendars, even of bikini girls, are banned in most work environments. GIFs or JPEGs with sexy themes are banned (unless, one presumes, they are "lesbigay or transgender" (!), in which case they must be encouraged by Management so as to provide a nurturing environment for lesbigays...sort of a kind of affirmative action for dykes and fags). The City of Berkeley has floated proposals to ban public reading, in diners, restaurants, etc., of magazines like "Playboy." Not because children might catch a glimpse of a naked breast, but because womyn and other sensitive souls might be offended. (I don't know if this was ever passed into law, let alone challenged in court.) >-- Various FCC regulations aside from indecent stuff Like mandatory voluntary ratings. Like mandatory voluntary "public service announcements." Like denials of licenses for politically incorrect stations. >-- Labeling/compelled speech requirements (Jamie, are you out there?) > Labelled speech will be the touchstone for the next couple of decades of debate about censorship, hurtful speech, and mandatory voluntary self-ratings. "But you can say anything you wish, provided you voluntarily and accurately self-label your words, and provided none of the protected class members are offended or insulted." >>bottom line is that most any political orientation is likely to thrash free >>speech when it appears to be a threat. > >Well, at least the libertarians in the audience are consistently opposed to >government censorship. Such has it always been, such will it always be. --Tim May The Feds have shown their hand: they want a ban on domestic cryptography ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^2,976,221 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

3 3

Khristian Kult Killings
by Canadian Nutly News 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[CANADIAN NUTLY NEWS-Bienfait, Saskatchewan]AN ASSORTMENT OF POLITCAL criminals from Washington, DC, held a press conference at the Coaldust Saloon last night, with the main topic of discussion being the gangland battles between rival Christian cults. Bill Clinton expressed dismay over secret intelligence reports that not only were the Christian gangs widely dispersed throughout the school system, but that there was evidence of involvement by many teachers and school administrators, as well. "Many of these cults have beliefs very similar to the Heaven's Gate cult, with their members involved in preparing to participate in an exiting of the physical plane in a similar manner, and the eventual overthrow of democratic government in all countries, led by their currently exiled guerilla leader." Lying Jackoff Fuck Louis J. Freeh stated that more crimes are committed in America by followers of the Christian cults than even the large number committed by people with Italian names. "The problem is enormous." Freeh stated. "Many of the children are committed to these gangs by their parents, almost from birth. It is not surprising that the kids seldom manage to escape the grip of these cults, even as adults." Murdering Nazi Cunt Janet Reno stated that BATF agents had informed her that Christian cult members throughout the U.S. were in possession of more weapons than members of the paramilitary. "The real threat of having weapons in these people's hands is that, like most paramilitary members, they don't regard the Federal government as being the supreme authority." Anonymous sources at the scene of the recent cult slaughter at a high school in Kentucky confirmed that several copies of a popular cult manifesto were found in the homes of both the shooter and the dead participants in the bizarre ritual. The manifesto, which is vastly more subversive and violent than books such as "The Turner Diaries," is often referred to by cult members in oblique coded-language as simply, "The Book." Bar maids and local drunks at the Coaldust Saloon denied the rumors that the book, known as the Word of God to most cult followers, was actually one of the early manuscripts of the author of 'The True Story of the InterNet,' and that 'God' was nothing more than a thinly veiled anagram for 'Dog', representing one of the author's many nefarious aliases. However, A Sorry Drunk To Be Named Later informed gathered reportwhores that if Christian cult members around the world sent their tithes, in cash, to PO Box 281, Bienfait, Saskatchewan, that they would be assured a space on the spaceship approaching earth in the shadow of comet Khrist-Bop-Shoo-Bop. (When pressed for details as to the time of arrival of the mythical space aliens worshipped by the cult, A Sorry Drunk To Be Named Later merely winked and said, "Let's just say that cult members will be swept up into another dimension on the same day as their computers.") Canadian Nutly News sources confirmed earlier today that the shooter in the ritual slaughter at the high school in Kentucky was wearing a T-shirt with a radical cult slogan often used to whip cult members into a violent frenzy, "He was clothed with a robe dipped in blood, and His name is called The Word of Dog." ~sog~

1 0

Bad Cop, Worse Cop / Bum and Bummer / Re: CDT and the Threat of Gov't Intervention
by TruthMonger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

David Honig wrote: > At 12:46 AM 12/3/97 -0500, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >Besides demonstrating that cyberporn is a topic that will never > >disappear, the Kids and the Net summit has highlighted the tensions > >between the different types of Net-advocacy groups here in Washington. > I'm sure the Feds are happy that their Good Cop (Clinton) / Bad Cop (Freeh) > routine is having the divisive effect they planned, and making sacrifices > seem acceptable. Yes, but Freeh is now positioning himself to be best pals with the incoming Republican President. Would _you_ vote for a politician whom the FBI Director has implied is part of a criminal tag-team that deserves investigation by a special prosecutor? A politician whose previous running mate was embroiled in WhiteWATER and FosterGATE at a time when hard evidence that a former president was GUILTY in WATER-GATE is coming to the fore? "Vote for the manipulated public image of your choice, but vote." Our 'democracy' is run by Information Management Engineers. Or so I would have you believe... TruthMonger

1 0