- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: [butthead] and PGP
by D.C. Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > > > > I would like clarification on [butthead's] contention that PGP violates > > RSA's patents. My understanding is that PGP < 2.4 does not so long as > > its use was private and non-commercial. > > > > In other words, isn't the patent issue a fabrication of [butthead] to > > attack PGP? > > > > Or did he really have a point? > > Can we please can this crapola? The only thing more wasteful of human > effort than listening to the moron is listening to people recount what > he says. If you want to do this, please do it privately. Many of us are > sick and tired of this certified net.wacko, and speaking for myself and > any others of like mind, take it up privately on your own time. Check > out alt.security.pgp and alt.fan.[butthead]. Better yet, find out where > he lives and camp out on his front lawn. > > The only point he has is the one on his head. > > =D.C. Williams > >

1 0

Excerpt from E-d-u-p-a-g-e 06/05/94
by NetSurfer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

CP's, for your edification: Date: Mon, 6 Jun 1994 00:09:30 -0400 From: E-d-u-p-a-g-e <info(a)ivory.educom.edu> E-MAIL AT THE WHITE HOUSE Both the Bush and Clinton administrations have tried to restrict public access to White House e-mail, but later this year the National Security Agency will publish "White House E-Mail," a book-length collection of e-mail messages. The book includes Iran-Contra affair communications to and from Oliver North, who used e-mail because he thought it could be easily deleted. One message from him reads: "Oh lord. I lost the slip and broke one of the high heels. Forgive please. Will return the wig on Monday." (So who needs the Clipper Chip?) (New York Magazine, 6/6/94 p.20) ----------^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^--------------------------------- I guess the spirit of J. Edgar Hoover lives on at the Whitehouse <hehehe> -NetSurfer #include standard.disclaimer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> == = = |James D. Wilson |V.PGP 2.4: 512/E12FCD 1994/03/17 > " " " |P. O. Box 15432 |finger for key / Viacrypt Reseller > " " /\ " |Honolulu, HI 96830 |====================================> \" "/ \" |Serendipitous Solutions| Also NetSurfer(a)sersol.com > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

1 0

Re: Crime and punishment in cyberspace - 3 of 3
by jim＠bilbo.suite.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> The concept of "rights" is really only meaningful in the > context of a group of people, a society which has agreed to > band together for some purpose. But since it can't be > guaranteed that anyone would be educated on the matter of > observing the delineated rights, or that having been > educated they would respect them and observe limits upon > themselves in regard of these rights, it would be unwise > to desist from the development of the tools and systems > for self-protection. > Rather than spending effort developing technology for self-protection, wouldn't it be better to spend effort developing a society in which self-protection is unnecessary? Think of all the energy and resources that would be saved if people just got along. I think the cypherpunks should redirect their efforts into the fields of genetics and human behavior. Better people make a better world. A committee should be formed to develop specifications describing a good person. The committee could then launch a program to guide society to a future where everyone met or exceeded the recommended specifications. The project would include frequent quality assurance testing to guarantee rapid convergence to the desired goals. Individuals who did not meet the specifications would be removed from the program. Citizen-Unit Miller

5 7

Tim Merlin's Holy FAQ
by rishab＠dxm.ernet.in 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Tim May said: [ I've re-ordered his para's ] > to invade North Korea for the "sin" of doing what our "friends" like South > Africa, Israel, and even Risha[b]'s own India have been doing for 20 years Actually Uncle Sam frequently makes noises about India's arsenal, and India responds with cries of "hypocrisy! global disarmament!"... > I've stayed out of this thread on what's criminal and what's not, > mainly because I'm spending all my waking hours (and more) trying to > finish up the %&*#$%^$ FAQ, but I perk up when my name is mentioned: > ... > Enough on anarchy for now. Back to the FAQ. Well, we are _really_ expecting a 5 Mb FAQ now! Every week adds another meg ;-) > --Tim May ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rishab Aiyer Ghosh They came for the Jews, and I was silent because I was not a Jew; rishab(a)dxm.ernet.in They came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not protest, because I did not Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410 belong to a trade union; Voicemail +91 11 3760335 They came for the Catholics, and I said nothing because I was not a Catholic; H 34C Saket And then they came for me. New Delhi There was no one left to say anything... INDIA ----Father Niemoeller

1 0

(None)
by Jeff Gostin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

rishab(a)dxm.ernet.in writes: > discussing it. What's the FBI going to do? Jail people for _talking_ about > murder, or jail _murderers_? Actually, United States law has something "Conspiracy". That's where you talk about committing a crime. There are certain limitations to it, but essentially, idly chatting about killing someone might be construed as a Conspiracy to do it. Therefore, yes, you _can_ go to jail for _talking_ about murder. --Jeff -- ====== ====== +----------------jgostin(a)eternal.pha.pa.us----------------+ == == | The new, improved, environmentally safe, bigger, better,| == == -= | faster, hypo-allergenic, AND politically correct .sig. | ==== ====== | Now with a new fresh lemon scent! | PGP Key Available +---------------------------------------------------------+

1 0

CP Criminal & Strong Crypto gphx. and shirts
by Stanton McCandlish 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

1) who designed those graphics, and what redist. requirements if any do you have on them? 2) where are my t-shirts? >:)

3 2

Re: Cyberspace is by nature crime-free [?]
by Anthony Garcia 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

mgream(a)acacia.itd.uts.edu.au (Matthew Gream) writes: I have to disagree with this, especially the title 'is by nature'. Cyberspace as a communications forum still presents many opportunities for crime as are present in physical and related communications media. Good points, I wasn't thinking far enough. The examples you cite can be classified as follows: - Breaking and entering: Yes, an obvious "cyberspace crime" which I unthinkingly missed. Could perhaps be considered fraud: If you give a username/password to gain access, you are falsely asserting that you're an authorized user of that username. - Vilification/slander/libel: Also possibly can be considered as fraud? You're asserting things that are false, and people who rely on your false information will make bad decisions. - Discrimination: I don't think this should be a crime. The interactions/commerce/associations that people engage in should be freely assented to by all parties, even if they have really stupid reasons for deciding to refuse. - Sedition: Not a crime in my book... Yay, Sedition! - Inciting violence: Perhaps even can be covered by fraud, if you stretch it hard enough: You give people false information ("Such and such ethnic group are polluting our precious bodily fluids and should be killed") which they then rely on to make bad choices regarding the perpertration of violence. Of course, the actual physical committing of violence is a much more serious crime. - Transferring funds, tax evasion: Also not a crime in my book. Yay Tax Evasion! - Illegal business activity, false advertising: False advertising is an instance of fraud. I'm not sure what you mean by "illegal business activity." - Contempt of court: Hm. Refusing to provide your decryption key to the judge... Not really a crime *of* cyberspace; more akin to a crime of the courtroom. - Copyright infringment: Ah, theft of Intellectual Property. A tough nut in these modern times. If you had to forge authorization information to get the material, then it would be fraud in the same sense as an unauthorized login: You are fraudulently asserting that you are a paying customer. But if the material is just lying around unprotected for you to pick up? Hm... -Anthony Garcia agarcia(a)sugar.neosoft.com P.S. Larry, if you're still lurking around here: the "Yay Sedition!" and "Yay Tax Evasion!" are especially for *yoooouuu*.

1 0

FTP-by-mail from US sites for accessing crypto archives?
by wcs＠anchor.ho.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Nobodu asks if FTP-by-mail from a US site will let outsiders retrieve crypto. Most of the popular crypto sites in the US that support non-exportable materials store them in a directory that's constantly being renamed, and require you to read a readme file with the license material so you've been warned before they'll tell you where it is. Most of the popular ftp-by-email sites have tended to be slow when I've used them :-) So it may not work very well, unless you catch a fast ftp-by-mail site. MIT requires you to telnet to ftp-dist.mit.edu and log on to register for PGP, which is tougher to do by email. BIll

1 0

Re: Cyberspace is by nature crime-free
by rishab＠dxm.ernet.in 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

f_griffith(a)ccsvax.sfasu.edu: >A correction: there was no evidence that the cult in Waco was abusing >children - that was government propaganda, part of its demonizing of >them to justify its own atrocious actions. The Texas welfare dept. had >previously investigated such allegations of child abuse. Though someone (Time?) published a child's description of the 'punishment room,' that was not my contention. As the author had provided Waco as an example of cult criminality, my response explained why, _assuming_ such a cult _was_ indeed criminal, it's crimes would _in no way_ occur, or be enhanced by, the usage of the Internet. Any crime (apart from white collar financial fraud) has to occur in a physical location, not in cyberspace... Rishab

1 0

Crime and punishment in cyberspace - 2 of 3
by rishab＠dxm.ernet.in 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The way police can help protect against murders is to patrol the streets. The way police can help identify fraud on cyberspace is Clipper. If you demand protection from society against cyberspace fraud, you accept society's right to violate someone's privacy. You have to also accept their right to violate _yours_. Just as in brickspace (I'm getting sick of calling it the 'real world') you try to protect yourself, _first_, and when it is socially recognized as not possible or very difficult, the police comes in... Are you going to expect the police to protect you against rude language? No, you protect yourself by ignoring it. Are you going to expect the police to protect you against broken promises? No, it's your own failed judgement, or luck. Or you'd have a formal contract. Are you going to expect the police to protect you against terrorist bombs? I would; that's a full-time job that I'm paying them for. In cyberspace too, where you can protect yourself with available tools - encryption, authentication and the other protocols we discuss here, you should not expect police help. You should _refuse_ it. Alternatively, you should give them the power to help you; the power to listen in to 'criminals'; the power to identify conspiracies through communication route tracing. Sounds familiar? Continued... (so that those who look for interesting matter in the first para don't ignore this ;) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rishab Aiyer Ghosh They came for the Jews, and I was silent because I was not a Jew; rishab(a)dxm.ernet.in They came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not protest, because I did not Voice/Fax/Data +91 11 6853410 belong to a trade union; Voicemail +91 11 3760335 They came for the Catholics, and I said nothing because I was not a Catholic; H 34C Saket And then they came for me. New Delhi There was no one left to say anything... INDIA ----Father Niemoeller

1 0