- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: PEP Announcement (fwd)
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hey, Amos! Talk to me about using your spiffy chain-remailing script button with the new Eudora... It asks me for a directory in an open box now, and urps... Cheers, Bob ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) e$, 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "If they could 'just pass a few more laws', we would all be criminals." --Vinnie Moscaritolo The e$ Home Page: http://thumper.vmeng.com/pub/rah/

2 1

Anonymous banking
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Speaking of the below information, what is anonymous banking like in Austria, Colombia, Venezuela, and Thailand? -Allen >Copyright 1996 Nando.net >Copyright 1996 Reuter Information Service >VIENNA (Apr 24, 1996 11:18 a.m. EDT) - The United Nations, fighting a >rearguard action against illegal drugs and money laundering, on Wednesday >turned its fire on sloppy banking laws and called on all states to ban a>nonymous accounts. [...] >Experts say anonymous bank accounts are a safe haven for drugs money and >are an ideal vehicle for laundering cash. >They say the drugs trade must be attacked at its roots by cracking down on >transfers of narcotics-based "dirty money." [...] >Drug barons use a number of ruses including anonymous bank accounts and >specially set up front businesses, such as restaurants, to channel large >sums of money and obscure its origins. The money comes out "clean," or >laundered. >Helmut Butke, who chaired the meeting of the 53-member Commission of >Narcotic Drugs, said the United States was the main sponsor of the >resolution which seeks to streamline and increase international cooperation >against money laundering. >The draft resolution, which was shown to Reuters, "urges states to prohibit >banks and other financial institutions from offering accounts identified >only by a number, anonymous accounts or accounts in obviously false names." >It also urges states "to take all reasonable measures to ensure that such >institutions are informed of the identities of beneficial customers in all >transactions." [...] >Austria, the only country in the EU which allows anonymous bank accounts, >was adamant its current legislation did not run counter to the resolution. [...] >The Vienna government is clinging on to its banking system, saying the >accounts were useless for money laundering as they do not extend to >deposits over 200,000 schillings ($19,000). >But Washington last year ranked Austria alongside Colombia, Venezuela and >Thailand in a league table of nations that tolerate money laundering.

2 1

Militias, reputation capital, unfounded rumor-mongering, and the DNS
by Rich Graves 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Anatomy of a paranoid troll: http://fight-censorship.dementia.org/fight-censorship/dl?thread=FBI+monitor… Someone sent a message to Declan alleging that the FBI, with the cooperation of ISPs, was reading/disrupting/censoring the email of people interested in "patriot" movements. Declan said hmm, I can see the FBI doing that, and forwarded the message to fight-censorship. I pointed out that the story was complete bullshit, which is easily verified (yvv.com's incompetence in managing their DNS affects all users, including postmaster(a)yvv.com, not just the paranoid), but evidently my reputation capital on the moderated fight-censorship list is so low that instead of my objections, subscribers to the fight-censorship list got to read another, more paranoid rant. I do not expect this story to die, even though it's completely false -- it's too good. The meme in the subject line is awfully strong, lots of people won't take the time to read more than the title, and who really listens to a FUCKING STATIST anyway. Truth is indeed stranger than fiction, but seldom in the way you think. -rich

2 2

Re: Golden Key Campaign
by Hal 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I appreciate the temperate responses to my knee-jerk diatribe against RSA's involvement in the golden key campaign. The key logo doesn't actually resemble RSA's very much, although the small versions do seem similar to the golden keys shown in Netscape's browser. So far as I know though Netscape hasn't threatened any lawsuits to make people take crypto off the net so I don't object to that... Now that the patent situation with regard to public key encryption has changed due to the RSA/Cylink split, it appears that the patent which claims to cover all PK encryption has been seriously weakened. There are other PK encryption systems than RSA which are just as good, such as El Gamal or Rabin encryption. Rabin encryption would have the advantage that it could be used with existing RSA keys as long as the modulus is a Blum modulus. PGP at least has always used Blum moduli, perhaps for this eventuality. So an alternative encryption program could use Rabin encryption and work with the existing infrastructure of PGP keys. It would not of course be compatible with PGP for encryption and decryption. This doesn't solve the signature problem; I'm not sure if there is a signature algorithm which could use RSA public keys but which is not covered by the RSA patent. In any case since PGP key certificates use RSA signatures it would not appear to be possible to validate key signatures without infringing on the RSA patents, so that cancels out a lot of the advantages of using existing PGP keys. Hal

3 2

"Separate but equal" as a racist doctrine
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

For some considerable period of time the doctrine of "separate but equal" was one of the major racist theories in the U.S. People who wish to organize for racist ideology behind this doctrine while proclaiming they are not racists merely place themselves in the old racist camp. Their organizing for (and their denials of) racist ideology does not make them less racist, just less honest. --tallpaul PS: Oh yes, for all the other rightwingers on the net who remain silent when rightwing views are presented but tell those who challenge the rightwing material to stop posting because it isn't "cypher" relevant: perhaps we could call the thread something like "Racist Code Talkers" or "Why Don't 'Americans' Learn History." Both of those seem to have resembled past on-topic threads.

2 1

Re: Nazis on the Net
by tallpaul＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Apr 23, 1996 19:44:00, '"E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH(a)ocelot.Rutgers.EDU>' wrote: [misc. material against holocaust revisionism snipped] > > It would >have been better if the atomic bomb had been ready in time to use against >Germany and Stalinist Russia. > -Allen > It was ready "in time" to use against "Stalinist Russia" (which, BTW, was Stalinist "Soviet Union,"). Both your sense of history and geography continue to be deficient. --tallpaul PS: Since T.C. May and others wrote of the atomic bomb being used in the Pacific theater I see no reason however why E.A. Smith can't discuss the bomb in Europe. And, when I asked about the cypherpunk relevance to the Bell/May concern over atomic weapons I was told it was relevant because the Japanese Purple Code was involved. I infer that the new discussion on Europe is equally relevant to cypherpunks because of Enigma and VERONA.

1 0

Re: [NOISE] Re: Nazis on the Net
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:20 PM 4/23/96 -0700, Rich Burroughs wrote: >On Tue, 23 Apr 1996, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: >[snip] >> However, one reference in this report to Weaver's calling for a meeting >> to oppose the "Zionist Occupation Government" does provide an argument for >> calling him a racist of the anti-Semitic variety. On the other hand, the only >> person claiming this is the FBI's informant; the truth of his statements has >> been called into doubt. > >I'm sure it has been. That doesn't mean his report is untrue. Is the >standard of proof the same for both of these issues? We need proof to >establish that Weaver is a racist, but not to establish that the FBI >informant is lying? I see no contradiction, here. Weaver's credibility, at least to his telling the truth, is apparently unchallenged. The FBI, however, has been caught in numerous lies about Ruby Ridge, and the believability of its informants (at least, to the extent that the FBI itself can be trusted to relay their reports accurately) is highly in doubt. The government spent about $1.5 million to get a minor, first-time (alleged) criminal. There is no obvious or logical basis for such extreme interest, even in hindsight based on what we now know. An objective person analyzing this would have to conclude that the government's interest in Weaver was entirely different than what it was claimed to be, and if it was that important it is logical to conclude that fraud was not beyond their capability and motivation. Given the fact that the government actually faked evidence in the trial (photographs of shell casings), a fact that was brought out during trial, anything they say is not believable. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

2 1

Re: 5th protect password?
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:59 PM 4/23/96 -0400, Black Unicorn wrote: >On Tue, 23 Apr 1996 jamesd(a)echeque.com wrote: > >> At 06:19 AM 4/23/96 -0700, Sandy Sandfort wrote: > >> > didn't Unicorn offer Mr. Bell a >> > wager on this issue? Isn't the ball in Mr. Bell's court to put >> > his money where his mouth is? >> >> Yeah: fifty thousand dollars. > >[...] > >> Now if Unicorn had proposed a bet for one hundred dollars, then >> I would sit up and take notice. A hundred dollars is real money. > >US$ 100.00 it is. Mr. Bell? As I recall from a message a day ago, you claimed that you saw no way that we could come to any kind of agreement as to the terms and conditions. I'm willing to accept your word on this prediction. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

4 3

Re: Meta: The Arguing about the Terms of the Wager Continues
by Sandy Sandfort 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ SANDY SANDFORT ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ C'punks, Tim May wrote: >Frankly, I thought that Black Unicorn claimed to have seen >the error of his ways (in terms of debating with Bell) and >was going to stop? Since declaring victory, Unicorn has said far less about the wager than has Tim. When it comes to wasting bandwidth, Tim might consider removing the boulder in his own eye before going after the mote in someone else's. As far as I can see, the wager had its intended effect. I only hope that future undocumented pronouncements are dealt with as effectively. S a n d y ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1 0

Meta: The Arguing about the Terms of the Wager Continues
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:14 AM 4/24/96, jim bell wrote: >As I recall from a message a day ago, you claimed that you saw no way that >we could come to any kind of agreement as to the terms and conditions. I'm >willing to accept your word on this prediction. And in another message, Black Unicorn wrote: >I note for the record that I never predicted that the terms and >conditions would be complex or unresolved, but that you would alter >the claim and the logistics of the wager to the point where you might >evade the consequences of loss. > >I note for the record that it was your post that originally supported its >accuracy with a call for wagering. > >I note for the record...... And so the back-and-forth continues...taking up even more list space arguing, waffling, finessing, rebutting, disputing, and on an on. Exactly as several of us have predicted. Give it a rest. --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