December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Fwd: Confiscation is here, Make the most of it. (fwd)
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Mime-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 10:06:17 -0800 To: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> From: <snip> Subject: Fwd: Confiscation is here, Make the most of it. (fwd) Status: U >Date: Tue, 20 Jan 1998 07:45:01 -0800 (PST) >From: <snip><snip> >Subject: Confiscation is here, Make the most of it. (fwd) >Mime-Version: 1.0 >To: <snip> > >Daryl Davis, author of the letter forwarded by Schrader, is the range- >master for the Santa Clara County Corrections Department and <snip> > >---------- Forwarded message ---------- >Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 09:46:37 -0800 >From: Mike Schrader <bay2a(a)webnexus.com> >To: ca-firearms(a)lists.best.com >Subject: Confiscation is here, Make the most of it. > >The following text was written to be presented to our (Santa Clara >County's) Republican Central Committee, to wake up the moderates, that bad >laws have unintentended consequences. Feel free to use it to do similar >work. > > Also see the advice at the end, and add my own that now is the time to >turn the heat up on both Lungren the candidate and your local >representatives to the state houses that voting for more bad laws will >never get them reelected. Neither party will be safe from the backlash on >this one. Neither party can distance themselves from those consequences. > >Don't let them. > >Yours, >Mike Schrader > > > > >Confiscation Comes to California >Lungren fulfills Feinstein's fantasy > > >By Daryl N. Davis > > > They said it would never happen. Any suggestion that it would was >derided >as "NRA paranoia." They told us they only wanted "reasonable controls." > > Well, it has happened. Gun confiscation is now the law in California. >Thank you, Dan Lungren! > > In a letter dated November 24, 1997, The Man Who Would Be Governor >declared that SKS rifles with detachable magazines, unless the owners can >prove they acquired the rifles prior to June 1, 1989, are illegal "and must >be relinquished to a local police or sheriff's department." This is a >reversal of the opinion held by Mr. Lungren from the time he took office in >January 1991, and which has been conveyed in numerous training sessions for >peace officers, criminalists and prosecutors during the past four years. > >When the Roberti-Roos Assault Weapons Control Act (AWCA) became law in >January 1989, it included "SKS with detachable magazine." At that time, >there were two distinct models-one with a fixed magazine (Type 56) and one >with a detachable, AK-47 magazine (Type 84). President Bush banned >importation of the Type 84 in 1990. Later that year, aftermarket detachable >magazines (which are not interchangeable with the AK-47 magazine) became >available for SKS rifles originally designed to use only a fixed magazine. > > Until September 1997, Mr. Lungren's position had been that only the >Type >84 was an "assault weapon." He allowed the sale of the aftermarket >detachable magazines and of SKS rifles equipped with them. He also allowed >the sale of the SKS Sporter, basically a Type 84 that, in compliance with >the import restrictions imposed by President Bush, had its bayonet lug >ground off and was fitted to a sporting stock rather than a military stock. > > In September 1996, the Attorney General's office asked the state >Supreme >Court to "on its own motion order review of the Court of Appeals >decision..." in the Dingman case. James Dingman had been convicted of >possession of an unregistered assault weapon (Type 56 with detachable >magazine) and his conviction was upheld by the Court of Appeals for the >Sixth District. Chief Deputy Attorney General (now candidate for Attorney >General) David Stirling wrote: > >"The impact of the court's opinion cannot be over stated because of the >millions of SKS rifles and after-market magazines currently in circulation. >Tens of thousands of California citizens may become criminals simply by >using a perfectly lawful rifle with a lawfully purchased magazine without >adequate notice that such activity brings them within the proscriptions of >the AWCA." > >In October 1996, in response to the "unprecedented" request by the Attorney >General, the Supreme Court granted review of the Dingman case. In February >1997, the Attorney General's office filed an amicus brief with the Supreme >Court in support of Dingman; they asked that the opinion of the Court of >Appeals be "reversed." > > In September 1997, in response to a series of blatantly biased and >aggressively uninformed hit pieces in the Los Angeles Times, Mr. Lungren >reversed himself. He withdrew his amicus brief in the Dingman case, stating >that it "inaccurately reflects the view of the Attorney General." Deputy >Attorney General Paul Bishop, who had worked on the AWCA project since >1989, was transferred. > > Thanks to Mr. Lungren, "tens of thousands of California citizens" must >either surrender their lawfully acquired property without compensation or >become felons. Gun dealers throughout the state face felony prosecution, on >individual counts, for each detachable magazine SKS they sold during the >six years Mr. Lungren assured them it was legal to do so. Furthermore, the >opinion does nothing to clarify what constitutes a "SKS with detachable >magazine." Must the magazine be affixed to the rifle? With the rifle? The >rifle in the owner's gun safe and the magazine buried somewhere in a box of >miscellaneous parts in his/her garage? > > On CBS's "60 Minutes" on February 5, 1995, Senator Dianne Feinstein >declared, "If I could have gotten 51 votes in the Senate of the United >States for an outright [firearms] ban, picking up every one of them, Mr. >and Mrs. America turn them all in, I would have done it." Thanks to Dan >Lungren, Feinstein's fantasy is well on its way to becoming reality. >Whether Mr. Lungren's fantasy of currying favor with the loony Left at the >Los Angeles Times becomes reality, remains to be seen. > > > > >What Should I Do? > >1. If a law enforcement officer attempts to confiscate your SKS, live to >fight another day. DO NOT RESIST! Do get a receipt, though. > >2. Contact Governor Wilson and firmly but politely express your outrage at >this situation. In addition to infringing the Second Amendment, the AG's >position creates a taking of private property without just compensation >(Fifth Amendment) and an ex post facto application of the Assault Weapons >Control Act (Article I, Section 9, Paragraph 3). >Gov. Pete Wilson >State Capitol >Sacramento, CA 95814 >Phone: 916-445-2864 >FAX: 916-445-4633 > >3. Become active in your local NRA Members Council. You may call the >Silicon Valley Members Council at 408-235-9175, 24 hours a day, for up to >date legislative information or for information on contacting a Members >Council in your area. > <snip> --- 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

ITAR is back!
by David Miller 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Those of you who thought that ITAR was dead had better check this out -- http://www.itar-tass.com/ Aparently, ITAR has found a new home... :-) Note that they are running Sun / Elvis+. --David Miller middle rival devil rim lad

1 0

Privacy as Censorship -- Cato Institute policy analysis
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

If you care about electronic privacy, read this new report. It correctly says that many proposals to create new "privacy rights" become censorship by another name. The paper is at: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-295.html -Declan ******* http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-295es.html PRIVACY AS CENSORSHIP: A Skeptical View of Proposals to Regulate Privacy in the Private Sector by Solveig Singleton (solveig(a)cato.org) director of information studies at the Cato Institute. Executive Summary Some privacy advocates urge the adoption of a new legal regime for the transfer of information about consumers among private-sector databases. This "mandatory opt-in" regime would require private businesses to ask for a consumer's permission before trading information about that consumer, such as his buying habits or hobbies, to third parties. This would, in effect, create new privacy rights. These new rights would conflict with our tradition of free speech. >From light conversation, to journalism, to consumer credit reporting, we rely on being able to freely communicate details of one another's lives. Proposals to forbid businesses to communicate with one another about real events fly in the face of that tradition. New restrictions on speech about consumers could disproportionately hurt small businesses, new businesses, and nonprofits. Older, larger companies have less need for lists of potential customers, as they have already established a customer base. We have no good reason to create new privacy rights. Most private-sector firms that collect information about consumers do so only in order to sell more merchandise. That hardly constitutes a sinister motive. There is little reason to fear the growth of private-sector databases. What we should fear is the growth of government databases. Governments seek not merely to sell merchandise but to exercise police and defense functions. Because governments claim these unique and dangerous powers, we restrict governments' access to information in order to prevent abuses. Privacy advocates miss the target when they focus on the growth of private-sector databases. To view the entire document: http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-295.html

1 0

Will bureaucrats turn the Net into TV? Note from FCC
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A note from an acquaintance formerly at the FCC. --Declan ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Having spedt my years at the FCC doing pre-repeal Fairness Doctrine and Sec. 315 equal time matters, I think [deleted-dm]'s concerns, tho' justified politically [because most adminsitrations will leave no good technology unhobbled] are without substantial legal basis. The hook for the Fairness Doctrine obligation imposed on broadcasters as a corollary to their statutory 'public interest' obligations was as a licensee of scarce broadcast spectrum--a discrete frequency awarded on a putatively compettive basis. Those key elements[scarcity/license/obligation] are--for now--lacking in the on-line environment. And while no doubt this or another Administration, or wiley Congressional staffer could gin up a plausable nexus between the web and interstate commerce, sufficiient to sustain a new public interest obligation, I think we're two or three generations of bandwith scarcity away from that becoming a compelling element of a cyber-resource allocation scheme. Without that overarching allocation-based [license] compulsion (to force even facial compliance with an obligation, so that enforcement would become essential to compliance, thus creating a need for thousands of Web police to review commercial licensees sites and traffic--[what a nightmare] -) -the liklihood of developing a meaningful scheme of public interest obligation would be a an overdebated and overhyped PC exercise, quickly becoming comic--and then dangerous.

3 2

Ultra computer
by Nobuki Nakatuji 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ultra computer which NEC had the calculation speed of the world maximum of about 1000 times of the super computer to was decided to be developed. Ultra computer will be completed in 2001. It has the performance that the calculation which takes 10000 years with the personal computer is made of 3, 4 days. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

4 3

Misty???
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Well on another mailing list I have been chastised for calling Misty "snake-oil". Has anyone actually examined this algorithm? Seems there is an IETF Draft on it (draft-ohta-misty1desc-00.txt). Any opinions on it?? My only exposure has be through the pidgon-english posts of Nobuki Nakatuji (if it looks like a duck, it smells like a duck, it quacks like a duck ....). - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://users.invweb.net/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- Tag-O-Matic: I use OS/2 2.0 and I don't care who knows! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a-sha1 Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNMbWgY9Co1n+aLhhAQFjoQQAgRac4gm3MM1mbZUfb0jH21b7gQt1IRYR wWFilIA2am/6x+bmF3RKG64A9/iwp00rD45g2yybw91Gg3/87nEMjPBpo+DCchtb psYRKyDOTxOAr7GljOa2k4HJAfNDqjxQ56sI/4whk2PEADnpHilzln98tEJobZA7 oxZw9FeGlig= =M0fT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

6 10

Re: RC1 and RC3 ??
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>At 09:28 PM 1/19/98 PST, Nobuki Nakatuji wrote: >> >>Why doesn't it have RC1 and RC3 though there are RC2, >>RC4 and RC5 of RSADSI RC series ? > >If we told you we would have to kill you. Cool! Let's tell him, then, so we won't have to listen to him anymore! :)

1 0

tell me what you think of this RC2 C++ source code
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

tell me what you think of this RC2 C++ source code #include <string.h> #include <assert.h> void RC2Keyschedule::schedule( unsigned short K[64], const unsigned char L[128], unsigned T8, unsigned TM ) { unsigned char x; unsigned i; static const unsigned char PITABLE[256] = { 217,120,249,196, 25,221,181,237, 40,233,253,121, 74,160,216,157, 198,126, 55,131, 43,118, 83,142, 98, 76,100,136, 68,139,251,162, 23,154, 89,245,135,179, 79, 19, 97, 69,109,141, 9,129,125, 50, 189,143, 64,235,134,183,123, 11,240,149, 33, 34, 92,107, 78,130, 84,214,101,147,206, 96,178, 28,115, 86,192, 20,167,140,241,220, 18,117,202, 31, 59,190,228,209, 66, 61,212, 48,163, 60,182, 38, 111,191, 14,218, 70,105, 7, 87, 39,242, 29,155,188,148, 67, 3, 248, 17,199,246,144,239, 62,231, 6,195,213, 47,200,102, 30,215, 8,232,234,222,128, 82,238,247,132,170,114,172, 53, 77,106, 42, 150, 26,210,113, 90, 21, 73,116, 75,159,208, 94, 4, 24,164,236, 194,224, 65,110, 15, 81,203,204, 36,145,175, 80,161,244,112, 57, 153,124, 58,133, 35,184,180,122,252, 2, 54, 91, 37, 85,151, 49, 45, 93,250,152,227,138,146,174, 5,223, 41, 16,103,108,186,201, 211, 0,230,207,225,158,168, 44, 99, 22, 1, 63, 88,226,137,169, 13, 56, 52, 27,171, 51,255,176,187, 72, 12, 95,185,177,205, 46, 197,243,219, 71,229,165,156,119, 10,166, 32,104,254,127,193,173 }; assert(len > 0 && len <= 128); assert(bits <= 1024); if (!bits) bits = 1024; memcpy(xkey, key, len); for (i = 0; i < 128; i++) { L[i] = PITABLE[L[i-1] + L[i-T]]; } T8 = (T1+7) >> 3; TM = 255 MOD 2^(8 + T1 - 8*T8); L[128-T8] = PITABLE[L[128-T8] & TM]; for (i = 0; i < 127-T8; i++) { L[i] = PITABLE[L[i+1] XOR L[i+T8]]; }; i = 63; K[i] = L[2*i] + 256*L[2*i+1]; }; void RC2Encryption::ProcessBlock( const unsigned short K[64], ) { unsigned R3, R2, R1, R0, i; for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) { R0 += (R1 & ~R3) + (R2 & R3) + K[4*i+0]; R0 = R0 << 1; R1 += (R2 & ~R0) + (R3 & R0) + K[4*i+1]; R1 = R1 << 2; R2 += (R3 & ~R1) + (R0 & R1) + K[4*i+2]; R2 = R2 << 3; R3 += (R0 & ~R2) + (R1 & R2) + K[4*i+3]; R3 = R3 << 5; if (i == 4 || i == 10) { R0 += K[R3 & 63]; R1 += K[R0 & 63]; R2 += K[R1 & 63]; R3 += K[R2 & 63]; } } void RC2Decryption::ProcessBlock( const unsigned short K[64], ) { unsigned R3, R2, R1, R0, i; for (i = 0; i < 16; i++) { R3 = R3 << 5; R3 += (R0 & ~R2) + (R1 & R2) + K[4*i-3]; R2 = R2 << 3; R2 += (R3 & ~R1) + (R0 & R1) + K[4*i-2]; R1 = R1 << 2; R1 += (R2 & ~R0) + (R3 & R0) + K[4*i-1]; R0 = R0 << 1; R0 += (R1 & ~R3) + (R2 & R3) + K[4*i-0]; if (i == 4 || i == 10) { R3 -= K[R2 & 63]; R2 -= KR1 & 63]; R1 -= K[R0 & 63]; R0 -= K[R3 & 63]; } }

1 0

Re: Latest smartcard software
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>They'll say hey, you've already surrendered your biometric number >during fingerprinting for driver's licenses. > >It will be too late. > >The high-tech American Leviathan will be in place. Sounds like Microsoft. No, really. I'm dead serious. Like it or not, people have to use Mickeysoft crap sooner or later. Want to read that document? Read that email? Run that program? Purchase things (software which runs)? It's garbage. I know it's garbage. Many of us here know it's garbage. But we have to use it anyway. Compare this to the smartcard as proposed like this: I know it's garbage. Many of us here know it's garbage. But we have to use it anyway. Want to read that document? Read that email? Access that computer system? Drive your car? Get in your house? Get through a toll booth? Enter or leave the country? Better make sure your papers are in order. The high-tech American Leviathan is already in place. The problem is that it'll just get worse because the sheeple are, by definition, naked, stupid, and blind.

2 1

Re: SC rules 1st doesn't cover lies [CNN] (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 23:47:05 -0500 > From: Declan McCullagh <declan(a)well.com> > Subject: Re: SC rules 1st doesn't cover lies [CNN] > Reply-To: austin-cpunks(a)ssz.com > > Clarification on the Subject: line -- the court's ruling, at least as > described below, applies only to government employees. It is the > state-as-employer, not the state-as-sovereign, role the court is discussing. > > In other words, we're still free to lie, cheat, and steal[1]. > >> "A citizen may decline to answer the question, or answer it > >> honestly, but he cannot with impunity knowingly and willfully answer > >> with a falsehood," Rehnquist said. So you have to be an employee of the government to be a citizen? ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The most powerful passion in life is not love or hate, | | but the desire to edit somebody elses words. | | | | Sign in Ed Barsis' office | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0