- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by pstemari＠erinet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>> newsgroups. Mandating encryption renders this mode useless. >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > At 02:42 AM 1/15/95 -0600, Larry E wrote: >Here, I don't understand your point. If you mean an encrypted >message to a remailer cannot result in a plaintext usenet posting, >that of course is not true. The remailers have PGP keys of their >own, just as any private user may. In addition, some of the >remailers support direct usenet posting. Thus, a message may be >encrypted to the remailer and posted as plaintext as the remailer >decrypts the message. I wasn't referring to requiring encryption using the remailer's public key. I was referring to the stuff discussed here, where the remailer operator insists on ensuring that the traffic is encrypted over and beyond the remailer's public key, in order to give the operator plausable deniability. Really, all inbound remailer traffic should be encrypted with the remailer's public key if any significant level of security is desired. --Paul J. Ste. Marie pstemari(a)well.sf.ca.us, pstemari(a)erinet.com

1 0

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by pstemari＠erinet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:51 AM 1/14/95 -0700, Ben.Goren(a)asu.edu wrote: > ... Dave certainly doesn't want to know what Alice is sending him, because he >might have to answer to a Grand Jury if he did. ... > >Of course, any data haven worth paying for will offer lots of neat >features, like PGP support, anonymous file drops, and all other sorts of >goodies. But that does little good if Alice can trick Dave into selling >child pornography. ... At 11:45 PM 1/14/95, Robert Rothenberg wrote: > ... How does one keep a site from becomming a remote pirated-software exchange >site? (Esp. since after that MIT case laws may be changed...) It seems that >such a service could become a magnet for the "elite warez" crowd... and even >if the operator isn't jailed it could lead to a shutdown of the service. The whole point of a "data haven" is that the site of operation is in a jurisdiction where these things are not legal problems. If you operate a DH in a location where child pornography/copyright laws are vigorously enforced, I really doubt that encryption is going to make any difference. As Robert rightly points out, a DH probably will become a location of massive copyright violation, etc ad nauseum. I've cc'ed Mike Godwin on this in the hope that he can shed some light on what the scienter requirements for something like this would be. --Paul J. Ste. Marie pstemari(a)well.sf.ca.us, pstemari(a)erinet.com

1 0

Re: How do I know if its encrypted?
by pstemari＠erinet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:53 AM 1/14/95 -0600, Larry E wrote: > ... Those who believe remailers are an evil will argue against any >measure that will promote their presence (and I'm not suggesting >you're in that group). ... True enough. > ... Is encryption a step in the right direction, if an imperfect one? If >not I hope some other positive steps are proposed soon, else I fear >remailers may face extinction. The big problem I have with mandatory encryption for remailers is that it thwarts one of the two major purposes of remailers. Basically I see remailers serving two goals: 1) Defeating traffic analysis of point-to-point communications. Mandating encryption for this is redundant--anyone who wanted this would be encrypting their mail to begin with. Also, I don't believe this mode of operation generates many complaints. 2) Anonymous broadcast transmission. This one can generate a lot of complaints, but it is also very important for things like *.recovery newsgroups. Mandating encryption renders this mode useless. There is a third use, which is anonymous point-to-point transmission. While this is of some benefit for anonymous tip line, it makes things like mailbombs and hate mail very easy. --Paul J. Ste. Marie pstemari(a)well.sf.ca.us, pstemari(a)erinet.com

2 1

Re: C`punks slogan? - Pri
by jsled＠free.org 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- lmccarth(a)thor.cs.umass.ed wrote: > Lest we suffer a recurrence of the C'punks Logo thread, which generated a > whole raft of list traffic which would have been better kept private, please > reply directly to Joshua and not to the whole list. [He seems to imply that > he wants private replies ("testing procmail") anyway, but I want to encourage > this practice explicitly.] Thanks... actually, that's exactly what I wanted, but forgot to put it in... and my last post about "Slogan help": disregard that entirely... it's not needed (either part). But so far I've only gotten one reply about the slogan thing, so please give me help on that one, folks... Josh Sled <jsled@ctp.org/jsled@free.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 iQCVAgUBLxf3kKTT29daLBKRAQGEWgQAhrKR/r/+mqXO63RN86c7hq3bsmid2KLU ct2zJAebaZBzVvltrF3WsBYoWmCSo1tWrYFjv3QsU1gnRJRyxSGVtzzkfOSq7b51 UlGRzUb+6AXvviWmqdBwHGWbT4M6/mxxH8X8gC/eeFWyHMpgEcFzhV9tWUHCqkC/ GMDvXoaKPa0= =i71M -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --- þ KWQ/2 1.2g NR þ "MTV get off the air!" - DKs

1 0

hiatus
by merriman＠metronet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just a short note to let folks know that I'll be unsubscribing for a while (probably a couple of months) while I get ready and then move to Amarillo to set up an ISP :-) The staging phase is taking up a large portion of my time, and I really don't have the slack to do more than give the subject lines in the CP list a cursory glance these days - just enough to see what the current flame war is about :-) Once I get the ISP set up, I'll be putting an anon remailer on it; I may also offer "Remailer-in-a-box" accounts for some relatively minor fee (if motivated, I may even take digicash as payment :-). I don't expect any problems about setting up accounts, since I'll be the MIS Manager, VP Engineering, etc, etc. Too, since the service will be commercial, I expect that I'll be able to do a pretty fair job of ignoring complaints of the kind that get .edu and on-the-left remailers shut down. I'll still be able to receive email at this account at least until the end of February; once I get set up in Amarillo, I'll resub and let everyone know where I am (just in case anyone cares :-) FYI, the tentative name for the ISP is panhandle.net..... Dave Merriman - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Finger merriman(a)fohnix.metronet.com for PGP public key and fingerprint. PGP encrypted Email welcome, encouraged, and preferred. "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." John F. Kennedy

1 0

... and speaking of WiReD...
by paul＠hawksbill.sprintmrn.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Given the recent discussion on WireD, I thought some of you might enjoy this editorial (read: rant) authored by Erik Bloodaxe. Enjoy. - paul Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 15 Jan 1995 20:34:00 CST > Reply-To: TK0JUT2(a)MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU > Sender: CU-DIGEST list <CUDIGEST(a)UIUCVMD.BITNET> > From: "Cu Digest (tk0jut2(a)mvs.cso.niu.edu)" <TK0JUT2(a)MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU> > Subject: Cu Digest, #7.03 > To: Multiple recipients of list CUDIGEST <CUDIGEST(a)UIUCVMD.BITNET> > > Computer underground Digest Sun Jan 15, 1995 Volume 7 : Issue 03 > ISSN 1004-042X > > Editors: Jim Thomas and Gordon Meyer (TK0JUT2(a)NIU.BITNET) > Archivist: Brendan Kehoe > Retiring Shadow Archivist: Stanton McCandlish > Shadow-Archivists: Dan Carosone / Paul Southworth > Ralph Sims / Jyrki Kuoppala > Ian Dickinson > Copy Reader: Laslo Toth > > CONTENTS, #7.03 (Sun, Jan 15, 1995) > > File 1--Open Letter to Wired Magazine (fwd) > File 2--More Legal Analysis of Steve Jackson Games (Legal Bytes) > File 3--The Stupid Net.Coverage News Awards -- 1994 and 1995 > File 4--Alliance for Community Media -- Call for Workshops > File 5--Cu Digest Header Info (unchanged since 25 Nov 1994) > > CuD ADMINISTRATIVE, EDITORIAL, AND SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION APPEARS IN > THE CONCLUDING FILE AT THE END OF EACH ISSUE. > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Date: Sat, 14 Jan 1995 20:08:38 -0600 (CST) > From: David Smith <bladex(a)BGA.COM> > Subject: File 1--Open Letter to Wired Magazine (fwd) > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > > >From--phrack(a)well.sf.ca.us (Chris Goggans) > >Subject--Open Letter to Wired Magazine > >Date--13 Jan 1995 00:51:09 GMT > > To Whom It May Concern: > > I am writing this under the assumption that the editorial staff at > Wired will "forget" to print it in the upcoming issue, so I am also > posting it on every relevant newsgroup and online discussion forum > that I can think of. > > When I first read your piece "Gang War In Cyberspace" I nearly choked > on my own stomach bile. The whole tone of this piece was so far > removed from reality that I found myself questioning what color the > sky must be in Wired's universe. Not that I've come to expect any > better from Wired. Your magazine, which could have had the potential > to actually do something, has become a parody...a politically correct > art-school project that consistently falls short of telling the whole > story or making a solid point. (Just another example of Kapor-Kash > that ends up letting everyone down.) > > I did however expect more from Josh Quittner. > > I find it interesting that so much emphasis can be placed on an issue > of supposed racial slurs as the focus of an imaginary "gang war," > especially so many years after the fact. > > It's also interesting to me that people keep overlooking the fact that > one of the first few members of our own little Legion of Doom was > black (Paul Muad'dib.) Maybe if he had not died a few years back that > wouldn't be so quickly forgotten. (Not that it makes a BIT of > difference what color a hacker is as long as he or she has a brain and > a modem, or these days at least a modem.) > > I also find it interesting that a magazine can so easily implicate > someone as the originator of the so-called "fighting words" that > allegedly sparked this online-battle, without even giving a second > thought as to the damage that this may do to the person so named. One > would think that a magazine would have more journalistic integrity > than that (but then again, this IS Wired, and political correctness > sells magazines and satisfies advertisers.) Thankfully, I'll only have > to endure one moth of the "Gee Chris, did you know you were a racist > redneck?" phone calls. > > It's further odd that someone characterized as so sensitive to insults > allegedly uttered on a party-line could have kept the company he did. > Strangely enough, Quittner left out all mention of the MOD member who > called himself "SuperNigger." Surely, John Lee must have taken > umbrage to an upper-middle class man of Hebrew descent so shamefully > mocking him and his entire race, wouldn't he? Certainly he wouldn't > associate in any way with someone like that...especially be in the > same group with, hang out with, and work on hacking projects with, > would he? > > Please, of course he would, and he did. (And perhaps he still > does...) > > The whole "racial issue" was a NON-ISSUE. However, such things make > exciting copy and garner many column inches so keep being rehashed. > In fact, several years back when the issue first came up, the > statement was cited as being either "Hang up, you nigger," or "Hey, > SuperNigger," but no one was sure which was actually said. Funny how > the wording changes to fit the slant of the "journalist" over time, > isn't it? > > I wish I could say for certain which was actually spoken, but alas, I > was not privy to such things. Despite the hobby I supposedly so > enjoyed according to Quittner, "doing conference bridges," I abhorred > the things. We used to refer to them as "Multi-Loser Youps" > (multi-user loops) and called their denizens "Bridge Bunnies." The > bridge referred to in the story was popularzed by the callers of the > 5A BBS in Houston, Texas. (A bulletin board, that I never even got > the chance to call, as I had recently been raided by the Secret > Service and had no computer.) Many people from Texas did call the > BBS, however, and subsequently used the bridge, but so did people from > Florida, Arizona, Michigan, New York and Louisiana. And as numbers do > in the underground, word of a new place to hang out caused it to > propagate rapidly. > > To make any implications that such things were strictly a New York > versus Texas issue is ludicrous, and again simply goes to show that a > "journalist" was looking for more points to add to his (or her) > particular angle. > > This is not to say that I did not have problems with any of the people > who were in MOD. At the time I still harbored strong feelings towards > Phiber Optik for the NYNEX-Infopath swindle, but that was about it. > And that was YEARS ago. (Even I don't harbor a grudge that long.) > Even the dozen or so annoying phone calls I receied in late 1990 and > early 1991 did little to evoke "a declaration of war." Like many > people, I know how to forward my calls, or unplug the phone. Amazing > how technology works, isn't it? > > Those prank calls also had about as much to do with the formation of > Comsec as bubble-gum had to do with the discovery of nuclear fission. > (I'm sure if you really put some brain power to it, and consulted > Robert Anton Wilson, you could find some relationships.) At the risk > of sounding glib, we could have cared less about hackers at Comsec. > If there were no hackers, or computer criminals, there would be no > need for computer security consultants. Besides, hackers account for > so little in the real picture of computer crime, that their existence > is more annoyance than something to actually fear. > > However, when those same hackers crossed the line and began tapping > our phone lines, we were more than glad to go after them. This is one > of my only rules of action: do whatever you want to anyone else, but > mess with me and my livelihood and I will devote every ounce of my > being to paying you back. That is exactly what we did. > > This is not to say that we were the only people from the computer > underground who went to various law enforcement agencies with > information about MOD and their antics. In fact, the number of > hackers who did was staggering, especially when you consider the usual > anarchy of the underground. None of these other people ever get > mentioned and those of us at Comsec always take the lead role as the > "narks," but we were far from alone. MOD managed to alienate the vast > majority of the computer underground, and people reacted. > > All in all, both in this piece, and in the book itself, "MOD, The Gang > That Ruled Cyberspace," Quittner has managed to paint a far too > apologetic piece about a group of people who cared so very little > about the networks they played in and the people who live there. In > the last 15 years that I've been skulking around online, people in the > community have always tended to treat each other and the computers > systems they voyeured with a great deal of care and respect. MOD was > one of the first true examples of a groupthink exercise in hacker > sociopathy. Selling long distance codes, selling credit card numbers, > destroying systems and harassing innocent people is not acceptable > behavior among ANY group, even the computer underground. > > There have always been ego flares and group rivalries in the > underground, and there always will be. The Legion of Doom itself was > FOUNDED because of a spat between its founder (Lex Luthor) and members > of a group called The Knights of Shadow. These rivalries keep things > interesting, and keep the community moving forward, always seeking the > newest bit of information in a series of healthy one-upsmanship. MOD > was different. They took things too far against everyone, not just > against two people in Texas. > > I certainly don't condemn everyone in the group. I don't even know a > number of them (electronically or otherwise.) I honestly believe that > Mark Abene (Phiber) and Paul Stira (Scorpion) got royally screwed > while the group's two biggest criminals, Julio Fernandez (Outlaw) and > Allen Wilson (Wing), rolled over on everyone else and walked away free > and clear. This is repulsive when you find out that Win in particular > has gone on to be implicated in more damage to the Internet (as Posse > and ILF) than anyone in the history of the computing. This I find > truly disgusting, and hope that the Secret Service are proud of > themselves. > > Imagine if I wrote a piece about the terrible treatment of a poor > prisoner in Wisconsin who was bludgeoned to death by other inmates > while guards looked away. Imagine if I tried to explain the fact that > poor Jeff Dahmer was provoked to murder and cannibalism by the mocking > of adolescent boys who teased and called him a faggot. How would you > feel if I tried to convince you that we should look upon him with pity > and think of him as a misunderstood political prisoner? You would > probably feel about how I do about Quittner's story. > > 'Hacker' can just as easily be applied to "journalists" too, and with > this piece Quittner has joined the Hack Journalist Hall of Fame, > taking his place right next to Richard Sandza. > > Quittner did get a few things right. I do have a big cat named Spud, > I do work at a computer company and I do sell fantastic t-shirts. Buy > some. > > With Love, > > Chris Goggans > aka Erik Bloodaxe > > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > > http://fringeware.com/staff/jonl > -- _______________________________________________________________________________ Paul Ferguson US Sprint tel: 703.689.6828 Managed Network Engineering internet: paul(a)hawk.sprintmrn.com Reston, Virginia USA http://www.sprintmrn.com

1 0

Re: FAREWELL TO A.R.S. (fwd)
by pstemari＠erinet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Now the cypherpunks are going to get blamed for anything that happens to the "Church" of Scientology. Sigh: In article <3f86hh$6gj(a)ag.oro.net> smj(a)smudge.oro.net (Scott Jennings) writes: > ... >Homer Wilson Smith (homer(a)math.cornell.edu) wrote: >: ... is a joke. Their rmgroup message did exactly nothing except create >: 10 more newgroup message and a total war zone on alt.config. They are >: not only pissing off the cypherpunks, but also pissing off the people >: of alt.config. If they continue, this war may spread from the internet >: into the real world as cypherpunks start to hack Church accounts and >: communication lines everywhere, causing total disruption of Scientology. >: >: If all the cypherpunks and hackers and crackers and phone freaks >: and virus writers of the world unite and start to 'rmgroup Scientology', who >: do you think will win? ... Paul J. Ste. Marie, pstemari(a)well.sf.ca.us, pstemari(a)erinet.com

1 0

CP meeting lost&found
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Did anyone notice a left over coat at the CP meeting? My friend seems to be unable to locate his. It's a purple Timberland with white leather trims. The coat has very important mail in the inside pocket. Thanks, -- Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

1 0

Re: bug in remailers
by jml＠wizard.synapse.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> If the remailers are working correctly, then one way you can be >getting garbled postings is if your files are being garbled while you are >pgping them. Have you tried to pgp your files TO YOURSELF, and then unpgp >them to see if they come out ok? Yes I have tried that. No problem they come out ok. > Does the bug happen on the remailers when things are not pgp'd? Well no problem with anon(a)penet.fi. I'll try other remailers that permit unpgp'ed messages and get back to you. -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAy8X2ZIAAAEEALbeB9136vtAk/FOOb8a1rYv7OWAVJZMiWs/CI1Hla9iUxBj hv+KM1rK31cygbk2/y38cZFQupgP34/0HkLKXsl5bP7vifXi5JzyNpeOmYT3Cr/E FqyWRFUo6dyp7AVm23ryZGZAM2qfcdXaslEqWAD3PczAnQ34vKhVa3SvpHjhAAUR tAZ3aXphcmQ= =syn9 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

2 1

Re: Interesting problem with remailers
by jml＠wizard.synapse.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>To: lce(a)wwa.com (Larry E) >From: jml(a)wizard.synapse.net >Subject: Re: Interesting problem with remailers >>Try pgp -eat instead of pgp -ea. Please let me know if that solves >>your problem; I'm curious. No doesn't make any difference. Seems I'm not the only one to have this problem. -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAy8X2ZIAAAEEALbeB9136vtAk/FOOb8a1rYv7OWAVJZMiWs/CI1Hla9iUxBj hv+KM1rK31cygbk2/y38cZFQupgP34/0HkLKXsl5bP7vifXi5JzyNpeOmYT3Cr/E FqyWRFUo6dyp7AVm23ryZGZAM2qfcdXaslEqWAD3PczAnQ34vKhVa3SvpHjhAAUR tAZ3aXphcmQ= =syn9 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----

1 0