December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone (fwd)
by Jim Choate 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 18:29:20 -0500 > From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> > Subject: RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone > (fwd) > At 6:01 PM -0500 on 11/4/98, Jim Choate wrote, from the bowels of my killfile: > > > > They're bound by economics and nothing else, not even the government cats. > > Amen. Which is why it's a *BAD* idea. > A government is just another economic actor. A very large economic actor > with lots of guns and a monopoly on force, but an economic actor > nonetheless. You need to look around, the government has NO monopoly on force. > Reality is not optional. Absolutely, that's why any free-market/anarchy is doomed to fail. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: TriSnakeoil questions
by pgut001＠cs.auckland.ac.nz 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

I wrote: >I'm currently sitting in a booth at a Tandem user show directly opposite the >Atalla one. If there's anything in particular which someone wants to ask >them, let me know and I'll see how knowledgeable their salesdroids are. I had a talk to them, it turns out that of the two different Atalla's, Atalla the company and John Atalla the person, the snake oil is being pushed by Atalla the person rather than Atalla the company. The Atalla people knew as little about it as everyone else, and although they were careful with their replies I got the impression that they were about as impressed with TriStrata as others on this list are. OTOH perhaps they were just depressed that I asked them about TriStrata instead of their RSA/3DES card :-). [I have half a dozen brochures for this one, in every single brochure it's called something different (SET accelerator, SSL accelerator, e-commerce accelerator, <buzzword> accelerator) but once you get past the first few application-specific paragraphs the rest is identical. Covers all the bases I guess. Their white paper on why hardware crypto is better than software crypto is a hoot too - "Hardware is cheaper" (obviously some new definition of the word with which I wasn't previously familiar), "software crypto can't be shared" (as opposed to hardware, which can be shared with a simple copy command), etc. Their products look pretty good, but everyone I talked to complained about the price and was ready to jump on software alternatives] Peter.

1 0

No Subject
by solution＠hampton.net 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

11/05/98 INTERNET NEWS 8 Pine Circle Dr. Silicon Valley,Ca. USA INTERNET NEWS/Y2K (YEAR 2000 SOLUTION) Most of the information from the silicon valley is obtained from the local pubs/bars. Un-named sources discussing the Y2K problem at the local brew revealed, that 2 of the big valley software manufacturers are in a bidding war for software technology created by a small publicly traded company OTC-BB symbol:"TCFG" that is in the process of obtaining a patent. This 3 year old emerging growth company has tested and out performed the "Big Boys" with a system industry experts consider to be a technological breakthrough! Several rogue ex-employees of the "giants" joined this company and claims abound about their success. If truth is stronger than fiction then "TCFG" is going to play with the big boys. We all know the Y2K problem and what the real solution would mean to all of us $$! How much will they pay "TCFG"? Back to the pub friday evening for more info...

1 0

Project 415
by John Young 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

Paul Dore, a British engineer involved in SETI research who had picked up signals from a secret NSA/GCHQ intelligence satellite and believed them to be from outer space, was asked by the agencies on November 2 to cease and desist publishing his findings and to cancel a planned press conference to tell his latest news, or face punishment under the Official Secrets Act. The agencies said the satellite was part of "Project 415." http://jya.com/project415.htm This was noted here a few days ago, but that was before Paul's description of the agencies' visit to his home was pulled from its original URL, along with related files which described his findings as well as confirmations by other researchers: http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Hall/7193/cancelled.html A Project 415 (maybe the same) was first reported by Duncan Campbell in a 1988 article in The New Statesman, in which he also gave the first public description of ECHELON: http://jya.com/echelon-dc.htm It may not be related to Paul Dore's situation but Duncan's article has had some 9,000 downloads in the last 24 hours. Anyone seen a news report on the topic? Thanks to KF for the lead.

1 0

Thurs. night seminar in W. Mass.: All About Alice (and Bob, Eve, and Oscar, too): The Research Culture of Cryptography
by Lewis McCarthy 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

This talk by Jean-Francois Blanchette tomorrow (Thurs.) night may be of interest to those of you in the vicinity of western Massachusetts. Check www.hampshire.edu for a map and directions. Enjoy -Lewis --- begin forwarded message --- ISIS <isisGU(a)hamp.hampshire.edu> wrote: Seminar: All About Alice (and Bob, Eve, and Oscar, too): The Research Culture of Cryptography Location: West Lecture Hall, Franklin Patterson Hall, Hampshire College, =>=>=> Thursday, November 5, 7:30pm Modern cryptology researchers have been enthusiastically portrayed in the media as cyberspace's Freedom Fighters, and the fruit of their work, as tangible evidence that computers not only control, but can also liberate. In this seminar, we'll see how this simplistic picture of cryptological research shapes both the public perceptions of cryptology, and cryptologist's perceptions of themselves and their work. Jean-Francois Blanchette will discuss how the culture of secrecy and military intelligence has deeply informed the models cryptologists use to analyze and design security artifacts. He will also discuss how, from a initial concern with communication secrecy, cryptological research has dramatically expanded its scope to encompass digital signatures and certificates, watermarking, e-cash, copy-protection, and other domains. These are all artifacts of much broader cultural and societal import that can be fit under the analytical category of "privacy." Cryptologists, as well as the rest of us, have to imagine and invent richer and more complex representations of what cryptological research is about and what its object is, and to explore other social and ethical paradigms than those offered by privacy and confidentiality. Jean-Francois Blanchette is a graduate student in the Department of Science, Technology and Society at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute. Trained as a cryptologist, he is now researching and writing about the practices, cultures, and ethics of cryptology. --- end forwarded message ---

1 0

internet
by Rusik 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

Hi. i need to crack my internet provider. he use windows 95 operation system. can you help me??? have you any crackers?? or you know where i can find them or any literature that can help me??? BYE with my best wishes Rusik

1 0

Who Cares
by Blanc 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

When the politicians speak they always make statements which imply that they're speaking to, and being heard by, the whole nation. I just read a notice that less than 40% of eligible voters went to the polls. Since the Republicans are still in the majority, this means that less than one quarter of the voting population supports Clinton as President. And only slightly more than one quarter support Republicans. This would be meaningful to me, if I was making policy: what are all those other people doing? .. Blanc

2 1

RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone (fwd)
by Matthew James Gering 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

> They're bound by economics and nothing else, not even the > government cats. Which is preferable IMHO, and I think most here agree (at least in this context). As soon as you give some entity (e.g. government) the power of force to regulate privacy, you create an entity that will abuse that force and abuse privacy. Plus such regulations are a false security blanket that diminishes demand for true privacy-creating tools (cryptography) -- not to mention you current regime turns around and attacks those tools. Being bound by the law of economics is generally a good thing. Matt

1 0

Who Cares (fwd)
by Jim Choate 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "Blanc" <blancw(a)cnw.com> > Subject: Who Cares > Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1998 21:22:56 -0800 > When the politicians speak they always make statements which imply that they're > speaking to, and being heard by, the whole nation. I just read a notice that > less than 40% of eligible voters went to the polls. Since the Republicans are > still in the majority, this means that less than one quarter of the voting > population supports Clinton as President. And only slightly more than one > quarter support Republicans. This would be meaningful to me, if I was making > policy: what are all those other people doing? If you're talking about the people who didn't vote, they're trying to keep from going under. Probably working two jobs, keeping the kids in school and out of trouble, saving for college, paying the house morgage off, etc. Who's in office won't make a whit of difference to any of that. It's irrelevant. If you're talking about the politicians, they're laughing their ass off on the way to the bank to cash their tax-derived income. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

RE: dbts: Privacy Fetishes, Perfect Competition, and the Foregone (fwd)
by Matthew James Gering 18 Dec '03

18 Dec '03

Robert Hettinga wrote: > A government is just another economic actor. A very large > economic actor with lots of guns and a monopoly on force, > but an economic actor nonetheless. No they are not, nor will they necessarily recognize the economic consequences of their actions before they entirely self-destruct or mutate only to do it again. History shows this. I generally use the economic/political distinction as made by Franz Oppenheimer, and furthered by Rothbard, Rand, etc. In that context they are a political actor, not an economic one. I purposefully ignored the prospect of corporations using coercive force to prevent privacy, it is rather improbable and still preferable to government coercion -- but note they do use coercive force today preventing privacy, but government is their instrument of force. Jim Choate wrote: > You need to look around, the government has NO monopoly on force. They have a *legal* monopoly on force (within a state). You do not generally consider the black market in determining monopolistic conditions, and in fact the existence of a black market in a segment generally points to a coercive monopoly in the public one. Matt

1 0