December 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

No Subject
by Georg Uphoff 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Georg Josef UphoffStud.iur.<A href="mailto:georg.uphoff@uni-konstanz.de">georg.uphoff(a)uni-konstanz.de <FONT color=#000000 face=Garamond size=4><<<<<<<PGP-KEY(S) ON REQUEST>>>>>>>>

1 0

Re: PGP Employee on MKR
by mark＠unicorn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com wrote: > Not true - you can't implement CMR without a mail enforcer unless > you can stop your employees from using non-CMR versions of PGP, > which is nearly impossible. No, you can't enforce corporate snooping without a mail enforcer. You can meet the corporate demands which PGP claim to be supporting without a mail enforcer. There's a difference. The only real benefit of CMR over the alternate systems suggested is that the corporation can snoop on all email sent to their employees. Yet PGP Inc have claimed on several occasions that this is not their intention. Odd, that. Mark

2 1

Terrorism is a NON-THREAT (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "William H. Geiger III" <whgiii(a)invweb.net> > Date: Wed, 29 Oct 97 22:46:45 -0600 > Subject: Terrorism is a NON-THREAT > I wish for once one of the spineless members of the press would ask: > > "How many people have died from Terrorism in the last 10yrs?" > > Let's be generious and say 10,000 world wide (more like 2,000 but lets not > quibble over numbers). Bill, more than 2,000 people have dies from planes being blown up by terrorist in the last 10 years alone. Old Prince Ferdinand, you know the bloke whose death started WWI allegedly, had an attempt on his life the morning of his death via bomb. He shrugged it off and got shot. Stalin had millions killed for political reasons. The Isrealis have killed tens of thousands in their expanionisitic, non-survivalist motivated actions. The US backed Central American death squads have killed hundreds of thousands if not millions. People kill for religion, politics, insanity, and fun. Terrorism has a long history in human culture. Yours is a unreasoned view. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

7 8

Cpunk Hots: E-Cash
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Village Voice reviews "Close to the Machine: Technophilia and Its Discontents," by Ellen Ullman, City Lights, 189 pp. $12.95 paper. Ullman, a Silicon Valley programmer, "describes having an affair with a young cypherpunk: 'we sat with our legs extended across the sofa, not quite touching, and we were going to talk about electronic cash.' "

2 1

Re: PGP Employee on MKR
by mark＠unicorn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I wrote: > stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com wrote: > > > Not true - you can't implement CMR without a mail enforcer unless > > you can stop your employees from using non-CMR versions of PGP, > > which is nearly impossible. > > No, you can't enforce corporate snooping without a mail enforcer. You can > meet the corporate demands which PGP claim to be supporting without a > mail enforcer. There's a difference. Actually, that's not entirely true. My suggested CMR replacement will work happily with non-CMR versions of PGP; they would simply encrypt to the default key, regardless of whether that was a group key or an individual's key. Hence the corporation can choose how non-CMR versions will interact by choosing whether to make the group key or the individual key the default choice. This even gives users an incentive to upgrade, rather than the current disincentive to downgrade to snoopware. Of course it still doesn't enforce snooping, since you could just seperate the individual key from the default group key and encrypt to that. Mark

1 0

Re: Protocols for Insurance to Maintain Privacy
by Secret Squirrel 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Tim May wrote: > The FDA has probably killed more people in the last 30 years than > all the wars the U.S. has been in during the same time. Mostly > because of the game-theoretic nature of the system: all that matters > to FDA officials is covering their ass so that promotion is > ensured. No points for approving a controversial drug, but lots of > demerits for approving a drug which hurts even one person (if the > media reports it as "another FDA oversight"). Avoiding flipper > children is the raison d'etre for these people. Tim no doubt already knows this, but I'm going to mention it anyway. The FDA has other reasons for existing such as protecting the major drug cartels from competition and providing wonderful employment opportunities for former FDA employees in said drug cartels. The choice of medical products and services as a choke point to exploit is a particularly evil one as the link between government imposed oligopoly profits and people's lives is very clear. And, of course, this is worst of all for poor people because they are least able to manage their situation. I have my doubts as to whether it is possible to set up a really good anonymous insurance scheme. At some point the customer must physically be matched up with the policy. The damage may be minimized by putting a hash of the customer's DNA markers in the policy instead of the markers themselves. But, when the customer wishes to draw on the policy, his or her markers will have to be taken. If there were a way for the representative of the insurance company to absolutely verify the DNA markers such that the customer could be absolutely certain the information didn't leave the room, a really good anonymous policy would be feasible. But, I can't think of a way to do this. The really good way to protect your medical privacy is to self insure. Most people are happy with policies that tap out at $1 million. If you would be happy with such a policy, then all you need is $1 million to protect your privacy. It is likely that this $1 million will not ever be consumed by health care costs. (Probably much less likely than that a policy holder will hit that limit. People tend to spend their own money more responsibly than somebody else's.) One of the most important criteria for issuing insurance must be age. Is there anyway to unambiguously determine somebody's age? I know how to do it with trees, but it doesn't work with people. Monty Cantsin Editor in Chief Smile Magazine http://www.neoism.org/squares/smile_index.html http://www.neoism.org/squares/cantsin_10.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBNFgp6ZaWtjSmRH/5AQES/wf+Ijrvktr6VxOxFRKZsad19G6fLuotWLTx /kGEncb+3cAHg26Pxn2FRjt8FO4fdqNp/adaEtCmaVDJeJavhhiqW+XyXuLb1Iy4 5YrvG/xIbbPIIYdVeZ5coATNAIaKZvQu0UWrbDQzbmyxi0bIHmaixxx53isc14w1 qn+4PrlV7jVyKCPf/BMw7Mv7L33v8ZR3r3iS15L/OjIxBtvpVDvnBv8BdKwMA7C+ S5HBSYhiYjSGi1CnisnKI0POD9BqXXr5LwNA+407hPWDTkSGZ4iRqY3koiO0e/Je eEvfbcSBEazaXcqlMtuI5xkFhLOY3L9oF+BtRjAfc9TRocFTTzZwHA== =VcKo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

6 6

GOST
by Vipul Ved Prakash 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I have compiled some links related to GOST at http://www.fieo.org/gost/ vipul -- Powell lingered. "How's Earth?" It was a conventional enough question and Muller gave the conventional answer, "Still spinning." -- "Reason", Asimov. ================================================================== Vipul Ved Prakash | - Electronic Security & Crypto vipul(a)best.com | - Web Objects 91 11 2233328 | - PERL Development 198 Madhuban IP Extension | - Linux & Open Systems Delhi, INDIA 110 092 | - Networked Virtual Spaces

1 0

Victim Ordered to Surrender Computer and Passwords
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Resent-Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 10:11:33 -0500 X-Authentication-Warning: qnx.com: localhost [127.0.0.1] didn't use HELO protocol To: 0xdeadbeef(a)substance.abuse.blackdown.org Cc: bostic(a)bsdi.com Subject: Victim Ordered to Surrender Computer and Passwords Date: Thu, 30 Oct 1997 10:04:22 -0500 From: glen mccready <glen(a)qnx.com> Resent-From: 0xdeadbeef(a)substance.abuse.blackdown.org X-Mailing-List: <0xdeadbeef(a)substance.abuse.blackdown.org> archive/latest/2399 X-Loop: 0xdeadbeef(a)substance.abuse.blackdown.org Precedence: list Resent-Sender: 0xdeadbeef-request(a)substance.abuse.blackdown.org Forwarded-by: Peter Tonoli <anarchie(a)brimstone.suburbia.net> Date: Mon, 27 Oct 1997 03:02:58 -0500 From: David Kennedy <76702.3557(a)compuserve.com> Subject: Victim Ordered to Surrender Computer and Passwords Approved: proff(a)suburbia.net Cyber Allegations (AP US & World 21 Oct 1997) > PONTIAC, Mich. (AP) -- A woman who said she was sexually assaulted by a > man she met through an on-line "chat room" has been ordered to turn over > her computer for examination by the defendant's lawyer. Circuit Judge > Alice Gilbert issued the order Oct. 8 after the defendant said another > computer user told him that the woman had bragged on-line -- in a chat > room called "Man Haters" -- about making up the story. The woman was > also ordered to reveal her password and on-line aliases. o The accused, a 26-year old is alleged to have pulled a knife and attacked the victim after a date on Feb 28th. Prosecutors have said they will appeal. > "In my view, turning over somebody's computer these days is the same as > asking to go through their diary or mail," said prosecutor John > Pietrofesa. Inspecting computer records from the opposing side, while > relatively new in criminal cases, has become common in civil cases, said > Michigan lawyer and computer law expert Robert A. Dunn. In civil cases, a > judge will institute safeguards such as making both sides sign a > confidentiality agreement that information gleaned from computer records > will not be disclosed outside of court, he said. Dave Kennedy CISSP, National Computer Security Assoc --- 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/>

2 1

CAUTION: This *could* be a TROLL / Re: Request For Cash: TruthMailer services at dev.null
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

TruthMailer wrote: > > O "I'm from BassMasters, and I'm here to help you." > |/------o > -\______|___/- | > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > | > |/ <}+++< >

1 0

Internet Censorware Summit, Clinton to speak, Dec 1-3 [resent]
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:20 -0800 10/30/97, James S. Tyre wrote: >Showing my ignorance, what's the "real" censorware summit? Check out http://www.kidsonline.org/ -- it's a hoot. Praises the CDA as a "well-intentioned effort to protect children." Grew out of the White House's kickoff Censorware Summit in July; Clinton is expected to speak at this one. Scheduled for Dec 1-3 here in DC. Chaired by former Clinton campaign official and former FTC "protect the children" Commissioner Christine Varney. (This is not to criticize Varney; I rather like her personally, but politically, well...) The Censorware Summit is organized largely by industy groups -- America Online initially took the lead role -- and sympathetic advocacy groups. Donna Rice-Hughes (yes that Donna Rice) is heavily involved, as operations co-chair or something (I forget her real title). Sydney Rubin (syd(a)kidsonline.org) a public relations rep for CyberPatrol, is handling media registration. The Center for Democracy and Technology, which runs the pro-censorware netparents.org site, is hosting the kidsonline.org site. Following is a quote from the web site. Note it talks about how we need stricter enforcement of obscenity laws -- one of the worst ideas I've heard in a while. Remember Robert Thomas -- why should S.F. or NYC be subject to the "community standards" of Tennessee? *sigh* >The summit will seek to advance the following objectives in accordance with >Presidential and Congressional statements on Internet use by children: > > Technological Solutions: Encouraging market-based development and > deployment of an effective, easy-to-use "digital toolbox" of user > empowerment tools which can assist parents and others responsible for > children, in shielding those children from material they deem >inappropriate > and shaping children's communication and information options online; to > enable access to positive content and communications based on >individual > values; and to enable service and content providers, and others, to >create > family-friendly environments. > > Enforcement of Current Law: Fostering greater cooperation among > law enforcement, industry, and the public, to support vigorous > enforcement of existing laws against using the Internet to traffic >in obscene > material and child pornography, stalk children, and commit other >crimes. Fortunately there's a coalition forming to oppose this. That is, emphasizing the free speech implications of rating and filtering proposals. I understand details will be made public soon. As I said: >>Look for the usual suspects to stand up and wave around censorware >>programs, blissfully ignoring the fact that the Supreme Court ruled >>recently that the Net should be as free as print or a public square. Last I >>checked, print publishers would never endorse any "self-labelling" system >>to stave off Federal censorship. They'd have the balls to stand up and >>fight. So should the Net. -Declan

1 0