December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

kiwi not home (was: getting premail)
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Igor Chudov wrote: > > Bill Stewart wrote: > > > > At 11:11 PM 11/13/1997 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > >Anyone know of a WORKING site where I can download premail from? > > >kiwi...berkeley is refusing connections. > > > > http://atropos.c2.net/~raph/premail.html > > > > Also look at www.publius.net > > Nope, all of these sites refer me to kiwi, which is refusing > connections. kiwi is NOT refusing connections. It is just not there. There's a difference. The host: http://kiwi.cs.berkeley.edu/ does not respond to connection requests to port 80, nor 8080, nor 8001. Ping yields "Host lookup failed - Non-authoritative host not found." The browser indicates it is trying to contact, which can mean anything up to and including that it is awaiting a cascading name lookup, but has not yet opened a TCP connection to the target. I'm guessing kiwi is Raph's computer in Computer Science and that maybe it is hosed. Maybe Raph has been hosed... "(WHAP!) Tell us the name of your leader! (WHAP!) Talk! (WHAP!)" Maybe Raph will turn up one of these days writing plaintive notes of contrition. Maybe... oh, never mind. Oddly, while Raph has a home page at www.cs.berkeley.edu and at atropos.c2.net/, all the critical roads seem to lead to kiwi, including the mixmaster list. Search engines show precious few references to critical remailer files except in the links that point to the dead host. Is it really this easy to make the whole remailer network go stale -- like cutting off jet fighter spare parts to suddenly unfriendly nation-states? Wouldn't it be prudent to mirror the remailer lists, keys and stats at a few dozen places scattered around the world? Would it take more than a few percent of the effort and time that have recently been pissed down a hole writing and reading the flames that have consumed the list of late? Hmmmm?

2 1

Politically Correct Riding Hood
by Eric Cordian 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Author Unknown (to me at least) but it fits in well with our current discussion of how not to offend various minority groups. ----- There once was a young person named Little Red Riding Hood who lived on the edge of a large forest full of endangered owls and rare plants that would probably provide a cure for cancer if only someone took the time to study them. Red Riding Hood lived with a nurture giver whom she sometimes referred to as "mother," although she didn't mean to imply by this term that she would have thought less of the person if a close biological link did not in fact exist. Nor did she intend to denigrate the equal value of non traditional households, although she was sorry if this was the impression conveyed. One day her mother asked her to take a basket of organically grown fruit and mineral water to her grandmother's house. "But mother, won't this be stealing work from the unionized people who have struggled for years to earn the right to carry all packages between various people in the woods?" Red Riding Hood's mother assured her that she had called the union boss and gotten a special compassionate mission exemption form. "But mother, aren't you oppressing me by ordering me to do this?" Red Riding Hood's mother pointed out that it was impossible for womyn to oppress each other, since all womyn were equally oppressed until all womyn were free. "But mother, then shouldn't you have my brother carry the basket, since he's an oppressor, and should learn what it's like to be oppressed?" And Red Riding Hood's mother explained that her brother was attending a special rally for animal rights, and besides, this wasn't stereotypical womyn's work, but an empowering deed that would help engender a feeling of community. "But won't I be oppressing Grandma, by implying that she's sick and hence unable to independently further her own selfhood?" But Red Riding Hood's mother explained that her grandmother wasn't actually sick or incapacitated or mentally handicapped in any way, although that was not to imply that any of these conditions were inferior to what some people called "health". Thus Red Riding Hood felt that she could get behind the idea of delivering the basket to her grandmother, and so she set off. Many people believed that the forest was a foreboding and dangerous place, but Red Riding Hood knew that this was an irrational fear based on cultural paradigms instilled by a patriarchal society that regarded the natural world as an exploitable resource, and hence believed that natural predators were in fact intolerable competitors. Other people avoided the woods for fear of thieves and deviants, but Red Riding Hood felt that in a truly classless society all marginalized peoples would be able to "come out" of the woods and be accepted as valid lifestyle role models. On her way to Grandma's house, Red Riding Hood passed a woodchopper, and wandered off the path, in order to examine some flowers. She was startled to find herself standing before a Wolf, who asked her what was in her basket. Red Riding Hood's teacher had warned her never to talk to strangers, but she was confident in taking control of her own budding sexuality, and chose to dialogue with the Wolf. She replied, "I am taking my Grandmother some healthful snacks in a gesture of solidarity." The Wolf said, "You know, my dear, it isn't safe for a little girl to walk through these woods alone." Red Riding Hood said, "I find your sexist remark offensive in the extreme, but I will ignore it because of your traditional status as an outcast from society, the stress of which has caused you to develop an alternative and yet entirely valid world view. Now, if you'll excuse me, I would prefer to be on my way." Red Riding Hood returned to the main path, and proceeded towards her Grandmother's house. But because his status outside society had freed him from slavish adherence to linear, Western-style thought, the Wolf knew of a quicker route to Grandma's house. He burst into the house and ate Grandma, a course of action affirmative of his nature as a predator. Then, unhampered by rigid, traditionalist gender role notions, he put on Grandma's nightclothes, crawled under the bedclothes, and awaited developments. Red Riding Hood entered the cottage and said, "Grandma, I have brought you some cruelty free snacks to salute you in your role of wise and nurturing matriarch." The Wolf said softly "Come closer, child, so that I might see you." Red Riding Hood said, "Goddess! Grandma, what big eyes you have!" "You forget that I am optically challenged." "And Grandma, what an enormous, what a fine nose you have." "Naturally, I could have had it fixed to help my acting career, but I didn't give in to such societal pressures, my child." "And Grandma, what very big, sharp teeth you have!" The Wolf could not take any more of these specist slurs, and, in a reaction appropriate for his accustomed milieu, he leaped out of bed, grabbed Little Red Riding Hood, and opened his jaws so wide that she could see her poor Grandmother cowering in his belly. "Aren't you forgetting something?" Red Riding Hood bravely shouted. "You must request my permission before proceeding to a new level of intimacy!" The Wolf was so startled by this statement that he loosened his grasp on her. At the same time, the woodchopper burst into the cottage, brandishing an ax. "Hands off!" cried the woodchopper. "And what do you think you're doing?" cried Little Red Riding Hood. "If I let you help me now, I would be expressing a lack of confidence in my own abilities, which would lead to poor self esteem and lower achievement scores on college entrance exams." "Last chance, sister! Get your hands off that endangered species! This is an FBI sting!" screamed the woodchopper, and when Little Red Riding Hood nonetheless made a sudden motion, he sliced off her head. "Thank goodness you got here in time," said the Wolf. "The brat and her grandmother lured me in here. I thought I was a goner." "No, I think I'm the real victim here," said the woodchopper. "I've been dealing with my anger ever since I saw her picking those protected flowers earlier. And now I'm going to have such a trauma. Do you have any aspirin?" "Sure," said the Wolf. "Thanks." "I feel your pain," said the Wolf, and he patted the woodchopper on his firm, well padded ass, gave a little belch, and said, "Do you have any Maalox?" -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

3 3

Re: Naziworld
by Dave Van Domelen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Which link? And which Naziworld are you referring to? There's lots out there in comics, fiction and gaming. Dave

1 0

Citizenship, soverignty and insular areas
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A very interesting report just published which, while explaining to a Congressional Committee about the legal status of certain small U.S. possessions and territories, touches on differences in the application of U.S. law and citizenship in these areas. Interestingly, "The Constitution does not apply in its entirety to territories solely by virtue of the fact that those territories have come under the possession and control of the United States. Whether rights under the Constitution apply to a territory and, if so, to what extent depends essentially on either of two factors, according to a series of Supreme Court decisions called the Insular Cases.15 The first is whether the right in question is considered to be "fundamental" or not; the second is whether the Congress has taken legislative action to extend the Constitution to the territory." In particular, federal income tax does not apply to many of these possessions (e.g., Saipan) and have become tax havens for some U.S. citizens. - U.S. Insular Areas: Application of the U.S. Constitution. OGC-98-5. 13 pp. plus 7 appendices (58 pp.) November 7, 1997. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/og98005.pdf

1 0

House Panel Questions FBI Implementation of Wiretap Law
by Steve Schear 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I doubt any of these revelations will come as a shock to list members. --Steve ------------------ Excerpt from ACLU News 10-26-97 House Panel Questions FBI Implementation of Wiretap Law FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Thursday, October 23, 1997 WASHINGTON -- Amid growing concerns about privacy implications and costs, a House subcommittee today questioned FBI implementation of a controversial 1994 law that forced telephone companies help law enforcement agencies gain access to digital phone lines for surveillance operations. During the four-hour hearing before the Crime Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee, two Republicans -- Bob Barr of Georgia and Steve Chabot of Ohio -- were harshly critical of the 1994 law, has implemented it, saying it represents an enormous invasion of privacy and could lead to a system of ongoing government surveillance. Seconding those criticisms, the American Civil Liberties Union said that safeguards originally implemented in the legislation have failed to protect the American public. "The hearing today clearly revealed that the FBI is embarked on a scheme to undermine the privacy of every law-abiding American," said Donald Haines, a Legislative Counsel with the ACLU's Washington National Office. "From the very beginning, the FBI has flagrantly violated both the process and the requirements set out in the legislation," Haines added. "The FBI has repeatedly sought to coerce the telecommunications industry into changing its technology so that law enforcement agencies could increase their wiretapping." The 1994 telecommunications act is far from the only effort by the FBI to gain backdoor access to private communications. In another ongoing Congressional debate, the FBI is trying to impose restrictions on the use of privacy-protecting encryption technology. "Congress must squarely confront this persistent pattern of FBI and law enforcement intrusions into our privacy," Haines said. "Congress should act immediately to repeal the 1994 law, or, at an absolute minimum, refuse to fund any implementation activities."

1 0

Re: The Electronic Privacy Papers
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks to David Spector's praise and pointer for: "The Electronic Privacy Papers: Documents on the Battle for Privacy in the Age of Surveillance" by Bruce Schneier and David Banisar we offer its 10-page detailed TOC, foreword, preface and epilog: http://jya.com/tepp.htm (49K) The 747-page volume is an excellent read and rich resource of once secret documents, legislation, regulations, letters, memos, names, events, policies, opinions and disputes of the surveillance age and crypto battles. Subscribers to this list are amply represented. In addition to the Amazon URL provided by David: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ats-query/9615-8912043-502933 Bruce offers a 15% discount off the $60 price at: http://www.counterpane.com/privacy.html B&N sells it in Manhattan for $39.95, hardcover.

1 0

Re: PGPsdk is now free for non-commercial use
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[I'm also posting this to coderpunks, but cypherpunks is probably a better place for discussions.] At 10:13 PM 11/15/1997 -0800, Bill Frantz wrote: >At 1:06 AM -0800 11/15/97, phelix(a)vallnet.com wrote: >>Well, PGP has come to it's senses and is allowing non-commercial >>developers to use the sdk for free. I didn't notice anything too >>ominous in the license agreement, and they promise a new >>licensing/prices for shareware and small commercial developers. >> >>Perhaps nobody is buying the sdk at it's current highly >>inflated licensing price. > >Much more likely is that more than a few cypherpunks discussed >the issue with PRZ at the last SF Bay Area Physical meeting, >and that discussion is bearing fruit. I'm pleased to see PGP Inc. permitting development of freeware, but at leased from a first reading of the license, it's a _really_ restrictive definition of "freeware" - not only does the software have to be free, but it can only be used in extremely restrictively non-commercial activities. It's far more restrictive than RSAREF (though more precisely defined.) Here's an excerpt from the web page at http://www.pgp.com/sdk/sdklicencefree.html For purposes hereof, the term "non-commercial" shall mean that the application (a) has been distributed or otherwise made available at no charge (direct or indirect) and (b) is not used for any commercial purpose, which includes, but is not limited to, any activity engaged for the purpose of generating revenues (directly or indirectly). For example, a commercial purpose includes the use of the application within a commercial business or facility or the use of the product to provide a service, or in support of service, for which you charge. Commercial purpose also includes use by any government agency or organization. Examples of non-commercial purposes include use at home for personal correspondence, use by students for academic activities, or use by human rights organizations. First of all, it sounds like it can only be used by students at non-government-run universities, but not at Berkeley, and if Random MIT Student develops PGPwidget using the toolkit, students at U.C.Berkeley can't use it for academic use either, except perhaps on their PCs at home (if they live off-campus.) (Do any of the UK universities count as non-government-run?) But "within a commercial business or facility" is far more restrictive. I use a laptop for my home and work email, and carry it around. It sounds like I can't use PGPwidget or PGPsdk for encrypting personal email at lunchtime when my laptop is at the office, and perhaps not from a hotel (at least if I'm there on business)? I probably can't start PGPwidget at home and leave it running when I carry the laptop to work. I probably can't use PGPwidget when I'm reading my work email at home, though perhaps it's ok to use it on personal mail that someone sent to my work MSExchange, assuming it's not a widget that competes with a PGP product. This is frustrating - today, I can use PGP 2.6.2, and maybe 5.0, at work, though I can't sell it without a license, and it's not very clear whether I can run a commercial service without a license (I probably need a license from RSA, but not PGP, and non-RSA keys probably don't require that.) And I can certainly write programs that use PGP command-line interfaces to encrypt things without any restrictions on my code. Thanks! Bill Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com Regular Key PGP Fingerprint D454 E202 CBC8 40BF 3C85 B884 0ABE 4639

1 0

Apologies to Joichi Ito
by dabi-do＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Mr. Ito: Apologies for misspelling your surname. Ito-san was what I had in mind. Dabi-do dabi-do(a)juno.com

2 1

Re: Exporting crypto from Japan
by Nobuki Nakatuji 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Do you readJapanese import & export law book? If you don't read at yet,You must read it. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

1 0

Digital Revolution!
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~ IMPORTANT NOTE ~~~ This is NOT a chainletter, it is an ANTI-CHAINLETTER! This message has gone to everyone in the world with a computer, and we are asking you to go to the homes and businesses of ten people you know, and delete it. ~~~ IMPORTANT NOTE ~~~ I am proud to announce the formation of the DIGITAL MAJORITY TAX FREE FOUNDATION for the purpose of serving as the voice of people with ten fingers, across the face of the earth. As a one-person operation, the DIGITAL MAJORITY TAX FREE FOUNDATION will be able to voice opinions representative of all ten-fingered people for a fraction of the cost of the bloated bureacracies which bleed charitable people around the world dry through a multitude of sham organizations catering to narrowly focused self-interest groups which have spread like a plague throughout the DEXADIGITAL community. As the sole member of the Digitally United Membership Board, I will be in a position to speak for practically everyone, everywhere, on all issues, and getting stinking rich while still bleeding the mass of humanity of their hard-earned money at a mere fraction of the cost of the current unweildy network of tax deductible rights and freedoms organizations. The DIGITAL MAJORITY believes in equal charitablization for those with equal digitization, as well as many other vague concepts under which all DexaDigital people can stand under the flag of freedom on the distant shores where bells ring for liberty and all mankind. To save the life of a single child, send your contributions to: DIGITAL MAJORITY, BOX 281, BIENFAIT, SK. CANADA S0C 0M0 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ This message sponsored by: Modern Motels of Bienfait Conglomeration "Modern, in the traditional sense of the word." ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0