December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Please Beta test my communications cryptography product.
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-- I have produced a program that, like PGP, provides digital signatures and communications encryption. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/Kong/Kong.htm This is the first beta. Please beta test this product. The important difference between it and other products that provide digital signatures and encryption is that it is not certificate based. Instead it is signature based. This eliminates the steep initial learning and management curves of existing products. The user does not need use and manage specialized certificates except for specialized purposes The big complexity and user hostility in existing products is creating and managing certificates. Perhaps more importantly, it also eliminates the threat we saw in England, the threat of the government giving itself a monopoly in certificate distribution, potentially creating the Number-Of-The-Beast system, where you need a government certificate to log on to dirty picture sites, to buy, to sell, to put up web pages. The key feature of the proposed product is that any digitally signed document can be stored in the database, and itself performs the functions of a certificate, just as a normal handwritten signature does. The user usually does not need to check a document against a certificate to see if it was signed by the "real" John Doe. Instead he normally checks one document against another to see if they were both signed by the same John Doe. And similarly when he encrypts a document, he does not need to use a certificate to encrypt a message to the one real John Doe, he merely encrypts a message to the same John Doe who signed the letter he is replying to. At present people have to deal with certificate management problems regardless of whether they really need certificates. For example the most common usage of PGP is to check that two signatures that purport to be by the same person are in fact by the same person. Unfortunately you cannot check one signature against another directly using PGP or any of the other existing products. Instead you have to check both signatures against a public key certificate, even if the authentication information in that certificate is irrelevant to your purpose, which it usually is, which means that you have to download the certificate from somewhere, and the person signing it had to upload it somewhere. As PGP always checks a document against the certificate, rather than against any other document the user happens to feel is relevant to the question, the person signing the document needs to get his certificate properly signed by some widely trusted third party, which is too much trouble or too complicated for many people. --digsig James A. Donald 6YeGpsZR+nOTh/cGwvITnSR3TdzclVpR0+pr3YYQdkG z8/j/L3kF7oCmOp/iF2oh/pwgP/mATjOTUdv1uGy DlPh9Op11Z1CtFuByebVsk8yJo4WuUMuFk4S/TMp --------------------------------------------------------------------- We have the right to defend ourselves and our property, because of the kind of animals that we are. True law derives from this right, not from the arbitrary power of the state. http://www.jim.com/jamesd/

6 5

Re: Superdistribution development/release
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text X-Sender: hutchinson(a)click.ncri.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 09:41:30 -0500 To: dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu From: hutchinson(a)ncri.com (Art Hutchinson) Subject: Re: Superdistribution development/release Cc: brian(a)smarter.than.nu Sender: bounce-dcsb(a)ai.mit.edu Precedence: bulk Reply-To: hutchinson(a)ncri.com (Art Hutchinson) >On Wed, 3 Dec 1997, Declan McCullagh wrote: > >> >> Here an incentive: if anyone breaks this, I'll write an article about it >> and another profiling the person who does. >> >> When you have this kind of "encryption" scheme running on untrusted >> hardware to which the user has access, it's doomed to fail. Even if it's >> custom hardware, it'll probably be broken, but it'll just take longer. To which Brian Buchanan replied: >Should be relatively trivial to break the encryption, since it can't be >over 40-bit (or 56-bit if the company joined the kiss-ass alliance). Uh, its a Canadian company. That John Candy movie about the U.S. invasion didn't really happen. ;-) - Art Art Hutchinson hutchinson(a)ncri.com Northeast Consulting Resources, Inc. phone: (617) 654-0635 One Liberty Square fax: (617) 654-0654 Boston, MA 02160 www.ncri.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ "Working at the intersection of business and IT strategy to help organizations embrace electronic commerce opportunities" 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/ Ask me about FC98 in Anguilla!: <http://www.fc98.ai/>

1 0

Re: Censorial leftists (Was: Interesting article)
by Steve Thompson 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In local.lists.cypherpunks-moderated you write: >In <199712041316.IAA18769(a)Empire.Net>, on 12/04/97 > at 08:16 AM, tom <tom(a)Empire.Net> said: >>First define your terms. Then talk about murder. >Hmmmm well the safest answer to this is at the point of conception though >I would imagine that it is hard for most to consider a couple of cells >life. :=/ Abstinance is murder. Letting just _one_ egg miss fertilization denies that egg the chance to become a human being. I think that the felony charge should be manslaughter for this crime as it's not quite as bad as: Birth control Birth control is nothing more than premeditated murder, though I think that a plea-bargain in most cases should be offered: Drop the charge to manslaughter if the perp agrees to artificial insemination with the eggs of some woman who is unable to get pregnant due to some medical condition. However, I hope that medical research is improved to the point where the male can carry the child in such cases. Just think of all of the wonderful people who won't ever be born because some geek is wanking into a tissue, or some thirteen year old is kept from fucking by their prudish parents. Now _these_ people should be brought up on accessory charges... As for Gays and Lezbians, well, sorry but that's right out. Such unproductive behaviour cannot be tolerated. >William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Regards, -- Steve Thompson Misanthrope System Administrator Spam: bogus(a)myofb.org --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Usenet II -- Because it's time for October. Who knows what the ostrich - Malcolm Ray in n.s.u. sees in the sand. Save the hermetic seals. - Samuel Beckett

3 2

White House humiliates Louis Freeh in public
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- http://www.allpolitics.com/1997/12/04/mccurry/

2 1

Re: Cypherpunks, PGP Buyout, and Writing Code...
by mj＠creative.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>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. > Seems like a crypto module for Linux would be a good start, if there's not one already. As part of Linux, the source would stay public domain, so you could trust it. It also seems security built into the OS would be the hardest to circumvent. And finally, since Linux is free, there's no obstacle besides convenience for people on other platforms to acquire it (and it runs on several types of hardware). Thus, the crypto module could also help Linux, which is also good for keeping people in control of their computers. I'm getting to where I don't trust any program I can't see the source code of.

1 0

Dec 8th SF C'punks meeting: export controls on appeal
by John Gilmore 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

We're having yet another "Cypherpunks Dress-Up Day" on Monday, December 8th. Meet at the Federal Appeals Court in San Francisco, at 7th and Mission Streets (new location!). The hearings will start at 9AM, but several cases will precede ours, so we're guessing we'll start about 10:30. Dress sharp: TV crews, your fellow cypherpunks, and three esteemed judges will all be checking out your duds. Park at the Fifth & Mission garage, or take transit to 7th & Market and walk a block. After the hearing, EFF will have a press conference down the block at the Best Western Motel, 121 7th Street. This will feature commentary from the EFF legal team and local First Ammendment scholars, explaining the significance of what happened in the hearings, and answering questions. Then we'll have a room reserved for lunch a few blocks away, at Annabelle's Bar & Bistro, 68 Fourth Street (between Market & Mission). We expect to get there by about 1:30 pm. It's a flat rate of $14 for lunch, and we can probably send splinter groups into the main restaurant if we overfill the room. The legal team will be there, as well as some of the EFF Board, and some potential donors to the case. (Want to be one?) The original Bernstein case is over. We won it. The government appealed that decision, and is asking the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to overturn Judge Patel's rulings as erroneous. Judges Myron H. Bright, Betty B. Fletcher, and Thomas Nelson have been reading the government's appeal, our response, and the government's reply. They'll hear twenty minutes from each side, and ask whatever questions they like. Then (some days or weeks later) they'll publish their decision. The main issue before the Court is whether the export control laws and regulations violate the First Amendment. The Government is arguing that if their *intent* is to regulate something other than publication, they only need to show that the rules are "narrowly tailored" to serve a "substantial government interest." The government argues that if it meets that test, it does not have to worry about whether the regulations are a "prior restraint" on publication. Bernstein is arguing that what matters is whether the government *actually* regulates publication (no matter what its supposed "intent"), and that the government's export control regime is an unconstitutional prior restraint on Bernstein's speech. Check out the fancy new courtroom, which your taxes helped to build! Proceed with us up the judicial hierarchy! Shake hands with the intrepid lawyers working hard to protect our rights! Banter with NSA representatives specially flown in for the occasion! Talk with journalists who cover crypto! Be quoted talking about crypto freedom! As background, Dan Bernstein, ex-grad-student from UC Berkeley, sued the State Department, NSA, Commerce Department, Justice Department, and other agencies, with help from the EFF. These agencies restrained Dan's ability to publish a paper, as well as source code, for the crypto algorithm that he invented. The judge decided that their regulations are not only unconstitutional as applied to Dan, but in general. We're eating our way up the judicial food chain to see if the ruling is confirmed at each level of expertise. Full background and details on the case, including our legal papers (and many of the government's as well), are in the EFF Web archives at: http://www.eff.org/pub/Privacy/ITAR_export/Bernstein_case. Like Phil Karn's and Peter Junger's cases, this lawsuit really has the potential to outlaw the whole NSA/FBI crypto export scam. We intend to make your right to publish and export crypto software as well- protected by the courts as your right to publish and export books. We have won three times and we're getting closer, though it's likely to require Supreme Court review before the issue is finally settled. Please make a positive impression on the judges. Shine yer sandals and iron your t-shirts, if you can't borrow something from your banker. Break out that fedora, and those elegant but conservative dresses. Show the judges -- by showing up -- that this case matters to people like you -- more than just to a professor and some bureaucrats. Demonstrate that their decision will make a difference to your society and your profession. That the public and the press are watching, and really do care that how well they handle the issue. We'll have to be quiet and orderly while we're in the courthouse. There will be no questions from the audience (that's us), and no photography there (except by pre-arrangement with the court). You can take notes if you like. I haven't run the gauntlet of the guards there yet, but I expect similar suspicious activities (small innocuous metal objects checked before you can enter). The only thing standing between today and the end of the crypto export controls is us convincing about ten people that we're on the right track. Come help woo over three of them. John Gilmore

2 1

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

17 Dec '03

>The cited examples were of restaurants and other businesses in town which >had rules against employees wearing nose rings, tongue studs, spiky hair, >mohawks, lip piercings, tatoos, scarification, and such things. And >"weight discrimination," as in the also-famous case of a Santa Cruz health >food store turning down the employment application of a "person of >poundage." (The grossly obese Toni Cassista, who sued the health food store >citing weight discrimination...I believe she eventually settled out of >court.) Tim, that's only because the city didn't want to remove the ceiling of the courtroom and hire a crane to lower her into the courtroom through the roof. And they were busy trying to file charges against her for something else entirely. See, she had chemicals within her body in a "quantity not warranted by any legitimate purpose" and "which, when mixed, could be used to produce nerve gas." They figured if she ever ate some beans those beans might act as an ignition charge and...well, no more Santa Cruz. It could have been worse (for her) though. They could have charged her with "possession of a gas discharge device with intent to break wind."

1 0

RE: Re: Censorial leftists (Was: Interesting article)
by jay holovacs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This post has a strange deja vu to it. I can remember back in the '60s when revolutionary wannabes would talk of the glorious peoples paradise while living in their comfortable suburban homes. How the workers' education system was open to all, no one was unemployed... Now it has come full circle. Singapore is capitalist, so loss of freedoms can be glossed over. Many of us on this list would already be subject to the law for postings critical of government. People are in jail for looking at Penthouse on the net. Here we worry about filtering in libraries, they have whole country filtering. We worry about hate speech codes, they prohibit anything 'promoting racial or religious disharmony' (don't publish the Bell Curve there..), what good is being able to afford a printing press when you need the government's permission to publish. A few years back, at least, there were pictures in the airport of approved haircuts, you could not enter the country if your style did not conform. No first amandment, no fourth, no fifth, and don't even think about getting a gun permit. It is amazing that people who are so offended by *government action* would gloss over a government that intrudes itself into so many areas of private life. We are appalled by those who would sell their freedoms for perceived safety. Is it less foolish to sell *fundamental* freedoms for a few bucks more income? Jay ========================== >From: frissell(a)panix.com >To: "J. Lasser" <jon(a)lasser.org> >Cc: fight-censorship(a)vorlon.mit.edu; cypherpunks(a)toad.com >Subject: Re: Censorial leftists (Was: Interesting article) >Date: Fri, Dec 5, 1997 5:31 AM > >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >At 03:02 PM 12/4/97 -0500, J. Lasser wrote: > >>And Singapore survives quite well being a totalitarian capitalist >>society. Sure, you can pick nits and claim that Singapore's not entirely >>capitalist, but it's more capitalist than this country and certainly >>less free, too. >> >>The fact of the matter seems to me to be that most people are perfectly >>satisfied to be passive consumers. While they like to be free, that >>means free to make purchasing decisions. They also like to be safe, and >>if they have to lose civil liberties to be safe, then they're all for >>it. Just so long as they can buy what they want. That seems to me to >>describe the essence of the Singapore problem, and I'd bet it holds true >>for the U.S. (and many other places) as well. > >Forty years ago Singapore was poor and at risk of being wiped out by Malays >or Commies or both. (Maylays killed 1 Meg of their own Chinese in the '60s.) > I'm sure that a few decades of being rich and safe will engender in that >population a liking for social freedom. They are currently more economically >free than we are. We rate 5th and they are 2nd or 3rd on the two indices of >economic freedom. They have many personal freedoms as well. They have >speech restrictions but are quite outspoken in any case. The gum and >spitting and smoking restrictions are no different than the smoking bans and >such we are coming to live under. We have one-party rule too. > >DCF >-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 >Charset: noconv > >iQCVAwUBNIdmioVO4r4sgSPhAQGt+AQAuKrTJTWfuUjDSNZO7l0ZyKFJ1UViAU+v >IsnmkcSoFSYok+1Etzo/x7t2z1wY9zVN5Smi2w2kzZRoymLS41LMZW7DvBEob7yw >Ur18j2fLdYG2hIkcXiAkQaTY96SYfmLRnIESc107Xtmgt00OTVBfDyi3QUbwID0v >349sPDAohIs= >=ceec >-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > >

10 11

Re: More microsoft monopoly::Re: NT 4.0 Option Pack released
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:23 03.12.97 -0800, you wrote: > >>Another message claims VC++ requires IE as well -- can anyone confirm >>this? >> > >You must have IE (3+) installed in order to use MS's visual java, FYI. > You must have IE installed in order to use MS's Developer Network Resources CD and soon for all products using their "new" info-browser (IDE's of VC++, VJ++, whatever++...) ----------------------------------------------------- Fate favors the prepared mind. (from "Under Siege 3") ----------------------------------------------------- Remo Pini T: +41 1 350 28 88 Pini Computer Trading N: +41 79 216 15 51 http://www.rpini.com/ E: rp(a)rpini.com key: http://www.rpini.com/crypto/remopini.asc -----------------------------------------------------

1 0

FREE HITS+FREE FEEDS!
by Eureka! 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear Webmaster/Webmistress, * YOUR EMAIL WAS GIVEN TO ME AS AN ADULT WEBMASTER WHO MIGHT * BE INTERESTED IN FREE HITS, AND FREE VIDEO FEEDS. PLEASE * CLICK HERE TO BE INSTANTLY AND PERMANENTLY REMOVED FROM * FUTURE WEBMASTER MAILINGS: MAILTO:REMOVE@WWW.HITBANK.COM INCREASE YOUR HITS FOR FREE! Build your site's traffic, with a tidal wave of hits - FREE from us. Please read to the end of this email to get 3 FREE hardcore feeds for your web site, our gift to you for taking the time to read this email. A QUICK COPY+PASTE EQUALS LOADS MORE HITS FOR YOU! We've got bucketloads of surfers looking to dive into a top sexy site, like yours - just as soon as we link to you. You then sit back, and watch your advertisers write you bigger, fatter checks. Over 400 top adult sites are using us alrea- dy, so you know it's a product that works! WHAT ARE WE GIVING AWAY? We publish Eureka! The daily adult newsletter, packed with FREE porn. Our subscriber base is growing incredibly fast. Why? Because we have 100s of FREE hardcore pix, links to FREE hardcore video channels, FREE competitions, and more. HOW CAN YOU GET YOUR SHARE OF THESE FREE HITS? Easy, just visit our site and signup totally FREE to be sent some html code you copy and paste onto your pages. When a surfer sees the code, they can click on a button to sign up to receive Eureka! FREE, in their email each day. When they click, nothing visible happens. They actually remain on your site where they continue surfing. This is totally unique in traffic generation programmes. HOW DO YOU BENEFIT? For every surfer that signs up you get one Eureka! credit. For each credit your advert will go out on one of our emails EVERY day from then onwards - day in day out. If you get 100 a day, for example, after a week you have 700 credits. Then, after a month 2,800, and after a year 36,500. That's a whop- ping 36,500 FREE impressions you will receive from us, every single day. And just think, what if you got 1,000 people to click the button every day? After a year that would net you 365,000 impressions a day from us! STILL NOT SURE? Remember, It's totally FREE. Just try it. If it doesn't work for you, bin it! But you'll still get daily impressions from those you've signed up for weeks/months, even years to come. SO WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? Get your piece of the action. Sign up now to be in right at the beginning and build up a head start against your compet- itors. Start earning your credits today. And tomorrow we'll be sending out emails with YOUR advertising on - FREE! ============================================================ CHECK OUT EUREKA! ............... http://eureka.abc-web.com/ ============================================================ YOUR FREE HARDCORE FEEDS Thankyou for taking the time to read this email. We hope to see you as a Eureka! partner site soon. As a thank you for taking the time, here are the FREE feeds we promised you. You are given complete permission to link to all these URLs from anywhere on any site. They contain a variety of mater- ial, from weird, to lesbian, pregnant, gay and much, much more and will be a great puller for your site. Thanks again! ============================================================ HARDCORE VIDEO FEED SET 1 ........... http://207.168.184.26/ HARDCORE VIDEO FEED SET 2 ............ http://204.244.215.7/ HARDCORE VIDEO FEED SET 3 .......... http://207.136.152.129/ ============================================================ - Robin.

1 0