July 2018 - cypherpunks-legacy

None
by None 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

<snip...> --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 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'

1 0

Re: jurisdictional concentration of authorities
by Martin Fick 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

--- On Mon, 6/22/09, Denis Dimick <dgdimick(a)gmail.com> wrote: > If I understand this correctly, as > long as ICANN is "owned" by the US, they have the > ability to shutdown anyone they don't like. While this is certainly a threat, it is not as all emcompassing as it sounds. ICANN may control the currently agreed upon IPs and subnets of the internet, but they do not control the internet backbones which actually route to these agreed upon subnets, do they? So, if we imagine that ICANN goes completely beserk and decides to revoke all the subnets in use in Germany, what would happen? If the ISPs of Germany just keep using them then there is nothing ICANN can do to stop anyone within Germany from communicating to each other with them is there? And, of course, any country with ISPs that have direct links to Germany and decides to continue to route to Germany for those subnets because they think ICANN is nuts, well then anyone in those countries will still be able to communicate with Germany right? Ultimately, the internet it really is just a bunch of people/organizations communicating voluntarily with each other and following certain voluntary guidelines which cannot be imposed by any single organization. A very nice free market real world implementation of cooperation with agreed upon (not forced upon) authorities (mostly). Seems almost like a libertarian anarchist's dream really. :) Again this is not to say that ICANN cannot reak havok, particularly to individuals, just that if they do badly enough, the world will just switch to some other agreed upon authority(ies) and ICANN will become meaningless. They truly can only govern because the governed consent to their governing, they have no physical pull, they are not backed by force. But, since ICANN does have the power to potentially affect individuals, it might make directory servers owned by other non US governments much harder to foil (by ICANN) than those owned by individuals. I surmise this because I think that if ICANN decided to attack the server owned by a government instead of an individual it would likely be seen as ICANN attacking the entire country. The country has more power and influence with those who follow ICANN than most individuals do. Just a thought... Cheers, -Martin ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

Iran exit point
by Matej Kovacic 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Hi, > Of course of course... But in a country like Iran where ALL internet access are hardly monitored and filtered, where clients have to show their ID to enter an internet cafe and where all their data will be recorded, I would like to understand how a TOR node can be run, unless it receives the clearance of the administration! > > Any explaination? I was living in former Socialistic Republic of Yugoslavia. We had a rule that every user of a modem (for dial-up) should be registered by the national telecom. The official reason was that there are some technical issues which require registration. But it was a question of totalitarian control, of course. I have never registered and never had any problems - and the same was with anybody I knew. I have heard similar stories with users using strong encryption in France (which was prohibited). So my explanation is that the control is probalby not so strict. And sometimes it is possible to get a clearance routinely - officials usually do not understand technical details and you just say something that seems reasonably and get clearance. But on the other side Iran could be sniffing Tor exit traffic to steal some valuable information (industrial espionage for instance), or to just annoy west governments (ok, less likely, but you never know). However, I would say that internet communications in Iran are much more monitored by the NSA than by Iranian government... :-)) bye, Matej ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]

1 0

Re: jurisdictional concentration of authorities
by Martin Fick 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

--- On Mon, 6/22/09, Denis Dimick <dgdimick(a)gmail.com> wrote: > If I understand this correctly, as > long as ICANN is "owned" by the US, they have the > ability to shutdown anyone they don't like. While this is certainly a threat, it is not as all emcompassing as it sounds. ICANN may control the currently agreed upon IPs and subnets of the internet, but they do not control the internet backbones which actually route to these agreed upon subnets, do they? So, if we imagine that ICANN goes completely beserk and decides to revoke all the subnets in use in Germany, what would happen? If the ISPs of Germany just keep using them then there is nothing ICANN can do to stop anyone within Germany from communicating to each other with them is there? And, of course, any country with ISPs that have direct links to Germany and decides to continue to route to Germany for those subnets because they think ICANN is nuts, well then anyone in those countries will still be able to communicate with Germany right? Ultimately, the internet it really is just a bunch of people/organizations communicating voluntarily with each other and following certain voluntary guidelines which cannot be imposed by any single organization. A very nice free market real world implementation of cooperation with agreed upon (not forced upon) authorities (mostly). Seems almost like a libertarian anarchist's dream really. :) Again this is not to say that ICANN cannot reak havok, particularly to individuals, just that if they do badly enough, the world will just switch to some other agreed upon authority(ies) and ICANN will become meaningless. They truly can only govern because the governed consent to their governing, they have no physical pull, they are not backed by force. But, since ICANN does have the power to potentially affect individuals, it might make directory servers owned by other non US governments much harder to foil (by ICANN) than those owned by individuals. I surmise this because I think that if ICANN decided to attack the server owned by a government instead of an individual it would likely be seen as ICANN attacking the entire country. The country has more power and influence with those who follow ICANN than most individuals do. Just a thought... Cheers, -Martin ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

Re: [ZS] Re: Bitcoin, Empire of void*
by Gary Mulder 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

My Google Galaxy Nexus already has NFC, and being 6 months old is close to obsolete. It is very likely the next iPhone will support NFC as well. Not even considering the future possibilities of Bitcoin, it is fairly clear that everything in your wallet, credit cards, photo id (retina or thumb scans using your phone's camera, anyone?), tickets, cash, etc. will be integrated into your smartphone within the next 5-10 years. Peer to peer decentralisation and strong encryption is the way to keep big brother out of all of it. Gary -- -- Zero State mailing list: http://groups.google.com/group/DoctrineZero ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

None
by None 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

This is the Postfix program at host bullae.ibuc.com. I'm sorry to have to inform you that the message returned below could not be delivered to one or more destinations. For further assistance, please send mail to <postmaster> If you do so, please include this problem report. You can delete your own text from the message returned below. The Postfix program <measl(a)mfn.org>: host mx1.mfn.org[204.238.179.8] said: 554 <user-119ac85.biz.mindspring.com[66.149.49.5]>: Client host rejected: We do not accept mail from .biz (in reply to RCPT TO command)

1 0

None
by None 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

<snip...> --- end forwarded text -- ----------------- R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)ibuc.com> The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/> 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'

1 0

Iran exit point
by Matej Kovacic 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

Hi, > Of course of course... But in a country like Iran where ALL internet access are hardly monitored and filtered, where clients have to show their ID to enter an internet cafe and where all their data will be recorded, I would like to understand how a TOR node can be run, unless it receives the clearance of the administration! > > Any explaination? I was living in former Socialistic Republic of Yugoslavia. We had a rule that every user of a modem (for dial-up) should be registered by the national telecom. The official reason was that there are some technical issues which require registration. But it was a question of totalitarian control, of course. I have never registered and never had any problems - and the same was with anybody I knew. I have heard similar stories with users using strong encryption in France (which was prohibited). So my explanation is that the control is probalby not so strict. And sometimes it is possible to get a clearance routinely - officials usually do not understand technical details and you just say something that seems reasonably and get clearance. But on the other side Iran could be sniffing Tor exit traffic to steal some valuable information (industrial espionage for instance), or to just annoy west governments (ok, less likely, but you never know). However, I would say that internet communications in Iran are much more monitored by the NSA than by Iranian government... :-)) bye, Matej ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]

1 0

Re: [ZS] Re: Bitcoin, Empire of void*
by Gary Mulder 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

My Google Galaxy Nexus already has NFC, and being 6 months old is close to obsolete. It is very likely the next iPhone will support NFC as well. Not even considering the future possibilities of Bitcoin, it is fairly clear that everything in your wallet, credit cards, photo id (retina or thumb scans using your phone's camera, anyone?), tickets, cash, etc. will be integrated into your smartphone within the next 5-10 years. Peer to peer decentralisation and strong encryption is the way to keep big brother out of all of it. Gary -- -- Zero State mailing list: http://groups.google.com/group/DoctrineZero ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

[cryptography] OT: Data Breaches, Class Actions, and Future Harm
by Jeffrey Walton 06 Jul '18

06 Jul '18

It appears plaintiffs cannot enjoin in a class action for compensation for monitoring services after a breach. "Do nothing" is still cost effective for those who fail in their responsibilities. http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2012/11/court_kicks_dat_1.htm: ... "Allegations of future harm: First, there are allegations of future harmbi.e., plaintiffs said they would have to b spend money to bprotect their privacybb. (quotations in original) The court says (citing to Pisciotta and Ruiz v. Gap) that these are not cognizable damages." ... _______________________________________________ cryptography mailing list cryptography(a)randombit.net http://lists.randombit.net/mailman/listinfo/cryptography ----- End forwarded message ----- -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0