- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: WWW proxies?
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:31 5/6/96, sameer wrote: >> site, the commercial value of the information that could be gained by >> logging traffic at the site is tremendous. > > The commercial value of being honest is greater. In your evaluation, perhaps. In the mind of every web proxy site? Doubtful. In fact, a former client of mine seriously considered offering an "anonymous" web proxy for the sole reason to be able to capture the traffic stats. Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

2 1

Re: Why Leahy is No Friend of Ours
by attila 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

** Reply to note from Stanton McCandlish <mech(a)eff.org> 05/04/96 5:03pm -0700 = To: tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) = Date: Sat, 4 May 1996 17:03:31 -0700 (PDT) = = Timothy C. May typed: = = > But no Congressman who co-sponsors such legislation as the "National = > Wiretap Initiative," with its "1% of the engineering capacity" requirements = > and other such Big Brother Surveillance State clauses, is a friend of ours. = = No legislator at all is our friend. The legislature is a gateway - we push = an issue thru it into the politico-legal system, and other groups push = their own issues back through the gateway at us. Whoever pushes more, and = times their pushing with when the gate is open, wins. = = This isn't about making chums. Leahy is a gatekeeper, like any other = legislator. We don't have to like him, just get him to open the gate for us, = and close it for our opponents. = _all_ politicians face reelection, all politicians must raise money --special interest groups control large blocks of money, or as Mark Twain put it: "Congress is the only natural criminal class in America." or Will Rogers: "Circus? Why would I want to go to the circus when Congress is in session?" the Federal government as a whole certainly is not the friend of the people --we have not had a free election since Lincoln in 1860, with the possible exception of JFK, whose only true claim to greatness was issuing Treasury notes in May '63 --which circulated only until he was assassinated. how many _truly_ "populist" presidents have we elected? Jackson, Lincoln, JFK? Despite the immense fortune (from Joe's questionable endeavors); the social connections, even if he was Irish-Catholic; and some "ideals" (not necessarily mutually mine), JFK was _not_ a product of the establishment, nor the "real" political machine until he "captured" it. I was a _paid_ "consultant" in the JFK '60 campaign, and again for Teddy in '62 --no amount of pain will acquire further discussion of political campaign ethics.... "mech" is correct, IMHO, in the gatekeeper analogy. Therefore, *personal* villification of our "enemies" is counterproductive to our efforts. unicorn stated: "Mind you, I never said Leahy was a giant in the movement for crypto and privacy interests, just that I was glad someone had a clue." is not our task to educate the Congress critter? Is it not better to deal with the critter if he, or his staff, is at least aware of the issues? again, unicorn further stated v/v Leahy: "His staff are some of the most astute people on the hill technologically. That their view might tend to the statist side disturbs me, but I wasn't talking about their politics. On the hill a competent and fairly reasonable enemy is much less a problem than an incompetent publicity seeker." generally speaking, communication is _not_ facilitated by punching your intended correspondent in the nose. extremist demands are dismissed as such. maybe I might prefer to clean the house that greed and control built; but, practically, we either work within the system as erudite and rational "educators," or the class is ignored, if not labelled "dangerously subversive" --which means we will be first on the roundup.... however, all of the above ignores reality: the Federal Reserve Bank, a quasi-government agency with private owners, represents the power. JFK recognized the inherent impossibility of debt reduction when even your interest is borrowed. The Fed also represents the international big money pool, and the means of historical revisionism and the consolidation of power. the "ruling class" underestimated the explosion of the Net, just like China underestimated the fax. Now the ruling class is playing catch up, and attempting to sandbag the Net --they probably will not succeed as the Net will go underground around the world --technology is moving faster than regulations. they may kill mainstream information privacy, but the innovation of the underground will outpace their regulations. Secondly, regulations which are despised are ignored and confronted --sure, a few high profile cases will go forward for intimidation --was PKZ granted "Constitutional due process?" --or should I phrase that: "...any due process?" unless we are willing to patiently and persistently educate the governing class, no matter how "ignorant" they may appear from our perspective of inalienable rights, the "enlightened" position is dismissed as revolutionary excess, and labelled subversive to the US government. --and, not only must we educate the governing class, but we must educate the people, and the people's media to prevent the governed from surrendering their inalienable rights for a little security. "They that give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." --Ben Franklin (Historical Review of PA -1759) and, the bottom line is: "It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." --Robert H. Jackson (1892-1954), U.S. Judge -- Overseeing first-rate programmers is a managerial challenge roughly comparable to herding cats. cc: Tim May <tcmay(a)got.net> Black Unicorn <unicorn(a)schloss.li> Cypherpunks <cypherpunks(a)toad.com>

1 0

FW: Why I Pay Too Much in Taxes
by blanc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Black Unicorn (in reply to TCMay): > I have no doubt that "tax planning" works for some people, and I think > certain people like Vince Cate may do well in places like Anguilla, > essentially starting a business from scratch. I even have longterm hopes > for tax havens, cyberspace tax havens, anonymous systems, etc. But this > ain't happening soon. Here I'm not so sure I agree. Several of us are working on making it happen, soon. .................................................................................................. I have a great idea - let's start a closed, elite mailing list for "Offshorepunks". Uni, Sandy, & Duncan et al could "show us how it's done". <G> .. Blanc

1 0

Re: WWW proxies?
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 14:37 5/5/96, Mark M. wrote: >The same is also true for cpunk and penet-style remailers that do not use >encryption. You always have to trust remailer operators regardless of whether >encryption is used or not. You have to trust *one* of the remailer operators in the chain. If there is no chain, you have to trust the sole remailer's ISP as well. >The situation will become much better when there >is some way to chain proxies and encrypt to each individual proxy. That's why we need PipeNet. Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

Key
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The below is the key I will be using to sign documents I submit to cypherpunks. It's also headed for the keyservers and available by finger. - -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAzGNKP8AAAEEAMNzMyNHEhxQsKjvvKNbODkcb9bTlTWn5mUl++lHE+fWsdBr iSnl0MyXHtRPsz3GarHMIdtszdZtPoX1mvSIZ34RE10kzdcw7rheuPjWXlY9gZ7Q VNAn/tXClUoCposaUfI72nclJk4DRhip59WIi3ZNH6gDjjR3dmqgui0rHO4JAAUR tDdCbGFjayBVbmljb3JuIERvY3VtZW50IFNpZ25pbmcgS2V5IDx1bmljb3JuQHNj aGxvc3MubGk+iQCVAwUQMY1Xnmqgui0rHO4JAQHqtQQAihgWtmSsAn02Kddj25tH mDd7nnlfFvzyNYDOLNhzZlRlE75ur32wuAIaMo3LsNmlEUmZkFZPRZ9NOr5pR/Lw bMq/xJK060cyEWYEdy7u4Lbbn/7ANKUfhMKqsWjPVEeL3vxOgbsVgXyxD/5rDxL8 tvr1ZlnKfIj9v8LUO128TUWJARUDBRAxjWRQLWieb05oXTkBAfbeCACzNI/pmMPu IlLfEN/Fu5IAVD72btGQz+5uS9dX2pzTIZCkmHra1w/qLOAmQwQtChuMdqHd1no9 /FX6I3t7/AWbglxFtmb7D/fCA8GAozZpPrOwM6jt/qkVjOo3adowv/n152lf2jOZ 7Gjk2AQuEYXZsCxZqPNwAS82gzm7vFhSU63yltpTWgeaesgapUhpDzGxNe+K3fya hXiklRZp3U19rOFNvdjgGy1Cm3HNVgTXjaYnB9o1yVAE5Eazu7U2XRYz/RWzVDSf HM1fJaGJwhyDsFIIsZUFTLJtoX4OF34GDR0ucjQJGaa33j1hPaSgtH0x/GuJ7pQL AZniS4SliZac =8GgR - -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMY1o7y1onm9OaF05AQGe2QgAqlY0DRLJVW5puVHYMYc+LpKk+f9SGFEY VvfIjt3R8lAk3ku+f0Nn9MPSZc31UEZQHkeE7zvctzYtyvQrhxtod+uyX/1YgBct e1mphAPe/G+SWAnAUmSF6QFhmN9ORFcHbwM5TJI2cJxedbkvvUW5gwvCkdqJ1SLz Wi6oJwYPjs4Nnvs6zSN0zKpXd+/FS20h+dTyIX9R0WMkkaWYfqQwzC9o4v2Ru2FT ylxZvFudDhibtUUr6MVawJaAZi99ISEmfFe4T+8kkEQfL6762/lcTmckSG7a7jPR Fiy/1v0jj9ReNFQ5KL7KPX484h414GUdKAwBnfEERU+mNERNG4EcYg== =O1go -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: L. Detweiler is a CyberAngel
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- A few days ago, I forwarded along an excerpt from a recent CyberAngels mailing where they had favorably cited a HUGE FAQ on remailers by one L. Detweiler. So far, four different people (or nyms) have asked me for a copy of my remailer FAQ. Um... I believe you can get it at http://www.csn.net/~ldetweil/ - -rich (the truth is out!) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMY1TpY3DXUbM57SdAQEfgwP/a6gAKZXtsDG/rG5E+y0whaCF7qh51FCM aa9Hr4w/v085MJ3vHmH9TtLgSvxh1mLHuzBs2X/bNh3cFaiA3qAZ5OgDZPbo/58Z MCOlSHjPrJ+y7p56KJmUosN2VZKugeiUIvQyRT3c1b2pKcAuJf0dxKUOWCQvoi1Q SUd3/d7bFR4= =YXxJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

3 2

PGP and Pine?
by Black Unicorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is there a package that integrates PGP and Pine nicely? --- My preferred and soon to be permanent e-mail address:unicorn@schloss.li "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information Opp. Counsel: For all your expert testimony needs: jimbell(a)pacifier.com

4 3

Re: WWW proxies?
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:37 PM 5/5/96, Mark M. wrote: >The same is also true for cpunk and penet-style remailers that do not use >encryption. You always have to trust remailer operators regardless of whether >encryption is used or not. The situation will become much better when there >is some way to chain proxies and encrypt to each individual proxy. If the >operator of a proxy is more trustworthy than the operators of any sites you >visit using the proxy, then you have nothing to lose. We haven't talked about traffic analysis of remailers and Web proxies much lately, so it bears repeating that: -- this is a little-studied subject -- that nobody has done--to my knowledge--a fairly detailed study of the traffic analysis that is possible -- that a model is lacking (I don't mean we don't have some ideas of what's important, but that we haven't filled in the details, figured out what sorts of correlations an analyst can make by looking at packet sizes, sending times, delivery times, etc.) -- the real world situation with remailers is that message volume is probably way too low for comfort (my presentation on remailers at the first CP meeting outlined a need for about 10 mixes, each mixing at least 10 messages of the same size before remailing...and 20 mixes each mixing 30 or more messages is much better...we are most likely far, far below this, for nearly all remailed messages. Fortunately, most remailed messages are either not critical or are being done for novelty, harassment, flaming, etc.). -- with Web proxies, the problem of traffic analysis (even with encryption, which I am taking for granted) becomes astronomically larger...all those commands sent to the site and stuff returned, and all in a "reasonable" amount of time! (How many of us will use a Web proxy in our current mode if we have to wait minutes to hours between actions? I'm not saying what the response times will be, as this will depend on mixing ratios, desired security, etc. But it is likely that "fast response" is counterproductive to the avoiding of traffic analysis.) (PipeNet-type schemes may help, depending on a bunch of details. So would "local mixes in cabinets," meaning, Web anonymizers with high bandwidth that do their mixing locally. They have to be "trusted," to some extent, but would help a lot. There are some gotchas.) -- I certainly believe the NSA has put at least an analyst or two on this problem, and probably long ago put together some models. We have a very long way to go before remailer networks are really up to snuff. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Why I Pay Too Much in Taxes
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 21:48 5/5/96, Alan Horowitz wrote: ><< " I paid approximately 60%...." >> > > >didn't the feudal vassels only pay 33% ? To paraphrase - I forget >which Presidential candidate of yore - "are you better off than you were >a thousand years ago?" > >ANd that's not even counting the interest you pay on your mortgage. Count >that, and the vassels were head and shoulders above Californians. Generally, the feudal subjects paid the Tithe. Yes, Robin Hood and his men fought the evil Sheriff of Nottingham for his crushing 10% tax. :-) [My last post in this off-topic thread.] Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

Re: PGP and Pine?
by jordan＠Thinkbank.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

That reminds me that I have been meaning to send out what I use for PGP and ucbmail. First of all, since you can ~| outgoing messages, I don't need any support for sending. For receiving, there's two ways to 'edit' messages: 'e' invokes $EDITOR and 'v' invokes $VISUAL on a message. I actually use 'v' so I set $EDITOR (in my .mailrc) to ~/bin/mypgp which looks like this: #!/bin/csh pgp -f < $* | more So to read a PGP'd message, I just type 'e' ... Anyone else do something interesting with ucbmail? /jordan

2 1