July 2003 - cypherpunks-legacy

Re: Warchalking and 802.11bag repeaters?
by Tyler Durden 01 Jul '03

01 Jul '03

This remionds me of something I've been wondering about, which may actually call for warchalking (though I'm sure warchalking is not being used for this yet). Here in NYC Verizon has already set up about 50 802.11b nodes on top of telephone booths, and when they're finished there will be about 150 city wide. Now one of these nodes is down the street (Wall Street), but its too far out of range for me to reach from my desk. The Starbucks across the street, however, is a different story. Now I'm wondering...if there existed an 802.11b repeater between Starbucks and the Verizon hotspot, then I could potentially send a friend working down by Wall and Water email or whatever without the message ever going wireline. (Is this correct? Of course it assumes that the IP shortest path is a wireless one.) Since any 802.11 repeaters that might ever come into being could be quite cheap, I can easily see private citizens installing them in order to connect 802.11 b/a/g islands together, bypassing the wireline infrastructure althogether. Warchalking would help such folks determine how far the hotspots actually are from one another, to see if a repeater is needed. -TD >From: Morlock Elloi <morlockelloi(a)yahoo.com> >To: cypherpunks(a)lne.com >Subject: Re: Warchalking does not exist: a wager. >Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 22:34:30 -0700 (PDT) > > > Don't know about warchalking per se, gpsdrive and kismet work a lot >better, > > and people trade the waypoints/nodes. Makes a hundred times more sense > >I never figured out why does one need a map of grocery stores. You see a >store >with the OPEN sign and get your chocolate. > >802.11b works the same way, there are zillon drivers that give you a list >of >OPEN access points IN YOUR RANGE* and you simply pick one (some drivers >will >also test the connectivity to the backbone so you don't waste time with >firewalled ones.) > >And the purpose of chalk marks is ? > > > >* 18" grid dish does wonders ... all the city is in the range. > > > >===== >end >(of original message) > >Y-a*h*o-o (yes, they scan for this) spam follows: > >__________________________________ >Do you Yahoo!? >SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! >http://sbc.yahoo.com _________________________________________________________________ Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail

1 0

[eff-austin] Wired: Ex-Intel Coder Wins E-Mail Case (fwd)
by Jim Choate 01 Jul '03

01 Jul '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2003 23:58:14 -0700 (PDT) From: Carl Webb <webbcarl(a)hotmail.com> To: eff-austin(a)effaustin.org, tlc-discuss(a)lists.cwrl.utexas.edu Subject: [eff-austin] Wired: Ex-Intel Coder Wins E-Mail Case ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Ex-Intel Coder Wins E-Mail Case http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,59450,00.html By Ryan Singel Sending e-mails to a company's employees, even when those messages are critical of the company, can't be considered trespassing, according to a decision released Monday by California's Supreme Court. In a 4-3 ruling applauded by free speech advocates, the court overturned a Court of Appeals decision that barred Ken Hamidi, a disgruntled former Intel employee, from e-mailing his former co-workers at the chipmaker. "The court understood that this case is about communication," said Lee Tien of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which filed a friend of the court brief on Hamidi's behalf. "If the decision had gone the other way, the Internet's fundamental structure -- where everyone is connected to everyone -- would have been compromised. It would have Balkanized the Internet." Hamidi, who was fired in 1996 by Intel, sent a series of six e-mails to 30,000 Intel employees during the late 1990s. The messages criticized the company's labor practices, asking employees to join an anti-Intel group and urging them to look for jobs elsewhere. Intel sought a court order to stop the campaign, arguing that Hamidi's e-mails disrupted its workplace and trespassed on its network. The California Superior Court agreed with Intel in 1998, ordering Hamidi to stop sending e-mails. Hamidi appealed the decision, but in 2001, the Court of Appeals upheld the ruling that Hamidi was trespassing on Intel's servers. The lower courts justified the injunction against Hamidi based on the common law provision known as "trespass to chattels," which allows property owners to sue someone who misuses, but does not steal, their property. The Court of Appeals ruling held that meddling with another person's property was enough to warrant an injunction. The state Supreme Court rejected the appeals court's reasoning, saying that Hamidi's e-mails weren't trespassing since they didn't actually disrupt Intel's servers. The court declared in its majority opinion that "Hamidi did nothing but use the e-mail system for its intended purpose -- to communicate with employees." The court added, "The system worked as designed, delivering the messages without any physical or functional harm or disruption. These occasional transmissions cannot reasonably be viewed as impairing the quality or value of Intel's computer system." Hamidi's lawyers and supporters feared that if the lower court's decision had stood, individuals could be sued for hyperlinking to a Web page or sending a single unwanted e-mail. "The Court has soundly rejected the invitation to create a new rule with the potential to cripple the Internet as a network," said Gregory Lastowka, one of Hamidi's attorneys. "If a plaintiff wants to bring a claim of trespass to chattel, there must be some proof of damage to the communications equipment." Intel argued that the case was about private property, not free speech. Intel hasn't decided whether to appeal the ruling, said Chuck Mulloy, a company spokesman. "We're disappointed with the ruling," said Mulloy. "But we are studying the ruling to assess what options we have if Mr. Hamidi resumes his spamming of Intel." The carefully worded decision does not prevent companies from suing spammers for overloading their servers. "The functional burden on Intel's computers, or the cost in time to individual recipients, of receiving Hamidi's occasional advocacy messages cannot be compared to the burdens and costs caused ISPs and their customers by the ever-rising deluge of commercial e-mail," according to the court. The court also said that Intel couldn't stop Hamidi by arguing that the e-mails disrupted the workplace and affected productivity, writing that Intel could not "assert a property interest in its employees' time." The court did not, however, decide that the First Amendment required Intel to let Hamidi's e-mails reach its employees' mailboxes. After Hamidi's first mass e-mail, Intel engineers added mail filters that blocked Hamidi's missives based on their content and IP address. Hamidi evaded some of those filters by using different computers and scrambling words in the e-mails to avoid keyword filters.

1 0

[We The People] Simkanin Back in Jail (fwd)
by J.A. Terranson 01 Jul '03

01 Jul '03

Echoes of Jim Bell here: "(Note: Although apparently not mentioned in Friday's oral arguments, the DOJ has reportedly asserted that language that appeared briefly on Simkanin's website some time ago referring to "heavenly fires" that would strike at government agents that illegally moved against him constituted a direct threat justifying incarceration.)" -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin(a)mfn.org "We have folded in on ourselves; we have severely weakened the delicate international coalitions and alliances that are vital in maintaining and promoting peace, and we are part now of a dubious troika in the war against terror with Vladimir Putin and Ariel Sharon, two leaders who do not shrink in Palestine or Chechnya from carrying out acts of gratuitous and senseless acts of violence. We have become the company we keep." Christopher Hedges 15-year veteran of foreign war coverage for the New York Times ---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 22:34:41 -0500 From: "Bob Schulz (DO NOT REPLY - Unmonitored Mailbox)" <LMM-1-116-50433(a)givemeliberty.org> To: measl(a)mfn.org Subject: [We The People] Simkanin Back in Jail Do not reply to this message -- it was sent from an unmonitored mailbox. If you can't read this, visit http://www.givemeliberty.org/mailroom <http://www.givemeliberty.org/mailroom> to see the message. We respect your privacy. To REMOVE yourself or JOIN our e-mail list, see below. <http://www.givemeliberty.org/> <http://www.givemeliberty.org/aboutus.htm> <http://www.givemeliberty.org/projects.htm> <mailto:info@givemeliberty.org> 6-30-03 Employer Simkanin Sent Back To Jail Federal Judge Openly Ignores Due Process Government Attacks Simkanin's Company Dick Simkanin, owner of Dallas based Arrow Custom Plastics, was remanded back to a federal detention facility following a hearing Friday that was described by an eye-witness as a legal sham. Simkanin, facing 27 counts of violating federal tax laws related to failing to withhold wage taxes on his employees, had previously been arrested and subsequently released following a detention/bail hearing before a federal Magistrate on Wednesday. At that hearing, DOJ failed to produce any evidence that established that Simkanin was either a "danger to the community" or a "flight risk." During a scheduled arraignment related hearing Friday, US District Court Judge John H. McBryde dismissed, without any consideration, several motions filed earlier in the week by Simkanin on a "pro se" basis, ruling that they were completely "frivolous." One of these motions requested a legal "Bill of Particulars" (which cites the exact statutes violated and circumstances of the alleged crimes) and other required legal documents which verify the indictment process. Judge McBryde then proceeded to take notice that the DOJ had filed a "motion to reconsider" federal Magistrate Erma Ramirez's ruling from Wednesday that had freed Simkanin on his own recognizance. Over the extensive and repeated objections of Simkanin's legal counsel Weuster, the judge began to address the DOJ motion for reconsideration during the arraignment hearing. Weuster objected that the motion to reconsider had only been filed on Thursday, and that they had not had any time respond to it, much less be prepared to argue the motion in court. Weuster strenuously objected that a hearing on that matter could not take place without prior public notice as is required by law and proper due process. Judge McBryde ignored Weuster's objections. According to reports from witnesses, Simkanin and his attorney were then given several minutes to confer on the side of the courtroom. Simkanin then took the stand, answering questions from his own attorney and then from the US Attorney regarding Simkanin's beliefs regarding the jurisdiction of the court, the jurisdiction of the US inside Texas, etc. and about a letter he had apparently sent to the US Attorney as part of his earlier grand jury appearances over the last two years. (Note: Although apparently not mentioned in Friday's oral arguments, the DOJ has reportedly asserted that language that appeared briefly on Simkanin's website some time ago referring to "heavenly fires" that would strike at government agents that illegally moved against him constituted a direct threat justifying incarceration.) At some point during the questioning of Simkanin, Judge McBryde simply stopped the discussion and summarily remanded Simkanin to be held by the federal authorities, remarking that a further detention hearing would be scheduled following McBryde's review of the transcript of the original detention hearing from Wednesday. According to legal documents, Judge McBryde has a significant history of aberrant and improper behavior from the bench. Judge McBryde was effectively suspended from the federal court in 2000 for over a year as a result of special, several year judicial investigation that documented a long history of McBryde's flagrant abuses of judicial power and courtroom practices that negatively affected the judicial process, i.e., denied due process. The following quote comes from the 5th Circuit appellate court decision <http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200109/00-5016b.txt> of the case Judge McBryde brought to challenge the suspension and additional sanctions imposed on him following his refusal to resign from his lifetime appointment to the federal bench: Based on all of this evidence, the Report concludes (1) that "many of these individual instances, together with the patterns demonstrated over the years surveyed," indicate that Judge McBryde had "engaged in conduct prejudicial to the effective administration of the business of the courts," and (2) that Judge McBryde's "pattern of abusive behavior ... has brought disrepute upon the federal judiciary." Report at 150. The Report recommends that the Council ask Judge McBryde to resign, and if he refused, that it impose the three sanctions--a reprimand and two suspensions--described in the court's opinion. Maj. Op. at 3. The recommended reprimand states that Judge McBryde's "intemperate, abusive and intimidating treatment of lawyers, fellow judges, and others ha[d] detrimentally affected the effective administration of justice ... in the Northern District of Texas," Due to the lack of timely public notice regarding the DOJ's motion to reconsider Simkanin's detention, WTP was unable to call for observers for the hearing. Simkanin is apparently being held at the federal medical detention facility near Fort Worth. He is allowed no visitors except for licensed attorneys. In addition, according to sources working for Arrow Plastic, the IRS on Thursday formally notified the two leading business credit bureaus, Dun & Bradstreet and Experian, that Arrow Custom Plastics, Inc. and another Simkanin corporation had been legally dissolved and that they were involved in a significant tax legal action. Vendors of Arrow Plastics (Simkanin's sole proprietorship -- not Arrow Custom Plastics, Inc.) were immediately notified electronically of the IRS notice by the credit bureaus and deluged the business Friday demanding to be paid in cash for materials and services already on credit with Arrow. Arrow is working to clear up the vendor situation as Simkanin's criminal charges relate strictly to the former (now non-existent) incorporated entities, not the sole proprietorship known as "Arrow Plastics" that Simkanin has run for the last several years. The Arrow proprietorship does not withhold from wages or salaries and none of the pending legal charges relate to that entity. Simkanin has no criminal record. Simkanin's website is www.ArrowPlastics.net <http://www.ArrowPlastics.net> . Click Here <http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200109/00-5016b.txt> to read the official posting of Judge McBryde's appeal regarding his suspension. _____ Click Here <https://givemeliberty.org/user/subscribe/amount.aspx> New ! Automated Monthly or Semi-Monthly e-Donations to WTP (Secure/Encrypted -- MC/Visa, AMEX, Discover & "e-Check") Click Here <http://www.givemeliberty.org/NoRedress/Update03-15-03.htm> for FREE legal forms and instructions to LEGALLY Stop ALL wage withholding for employers, employees, and independent contractors. Click here <http://www.givemeliberty.org/LDA/LDAApplyInstructions.htm> for INSTRUCTIONS on how to apply for membership in the WTP Legal Defense Association for NO cost or fee. Click Here <http://www.givemeliberty.org/SUMMER/TestDrive.htm> to obtain the record of the historic Truth-in-Taxation hearing. 14 hours of video testimony under oath by attorneys, former IRS agents, etc. Hundreds of legal exhibits and a full transcript conclusively document the income tax fraud. Fully interactive multi-media on four CD-ROMs or VHS. Click Here <http://www.givemeliberty.org/NoRedress/WTPTV-01-07-03Transcript.htm> to Read Why Bob Schulz is Forming the WTP-Legal Defense Association and Why The People Are Morally & Legally Justified: "No Answers, NO Taxes" Click Here <http://www.bostonteapartyii.org/purchase/> to obtain the VHS version of the first WTP-TV LIBERTY HOUR Broadcast OR the CD-ROM of the Freedom Drive event in DC. Our homepage is: www.GiveMeLiberty.org <http://www.givemeliberty.org> Click Here <http://www.givemeliberty.org/SUMMER/TestDrive.htm> Schulz doesn't file or pay. Learn why & see the Schulz "Tax Termination" package. Click Here <http://www.givemeliberty.org/5linxdetails.htm> To Help WTP the Easy Way--- $49.99 = Totally Unlimited Local, In-state & Long Distance PLUS all the extra digital services (Caller ID, Call Waiting, 3-Way Calling, Call Forwarding, etc.) Donate <http://www.givemeliberty.org/donations/donate-join.htm> Join the WTP Congress <http://www.givemeliberty.org/donations/congress.asp> This message was sent to address measl(a)mfn.org If this is NOT you, you are not on the WTP mailing list. We value and respect your privacy. To unsubscribe from our mailing list, click here: https://givemeliberty.org/user/info/mywtp.aspx <https://givemeliberty.org/user/info/mywtp.aspx> If this message was forwarded to you by a friend and you'd like us to send you regular updates, please visit http://www.givemeliberty.org/mailroom/ and subscribe. Already on our list, and want to update your information? Visit http://www.givemeliberty.org/mailroom/. To send an email to Bob Schulz, click here <mailto:bob@givemeliberty.org> . (mailto:bob@givemeliberty.org)

1 0

Re: Warchalking does not exist: a wager.
by Major Variola (ret) 01 Jul '03

01 Jul '03

At 10:24 PM 6/30/03 -0500, Harmon Seaver wrote: > Don't know about warchalking per se, gpsdrive and kismet work a lot better, >and people trade the waypoints/nodes. Makes a hundred times more sense that >scribbling marks on buildings, especially that are hard to find and wash away. Publishing a table of GPS coords and other info sounds like something 2600 would do, for yucks. (In fact, I thought I had seen such tables there, but couldn't find it in a brief scan of my issues.)

2 1