- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

META: Having the last word
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 3:58 PM 4/17/96, rick hoselton wrote: >I am enjoying this discussion, but I feel like I'm running out of >useful new ways to try to express this idea. If I don't reply, >it doesn't mean you have convinced me. :) I have long used this principle. All discussions have to end at some point, and I have no problems with others having "the last word." If they think that by having the last word, or by my non-response to their points, that they have "won," or that I am speechless before their eloquence, then of course they were not worth arguing with in the first place. No point in arguing with the preterite. (My neo-Calvinist stoicism showing.) Recall the recent absurdity of one of our list members repeatedly saying "I see that Joe Blow has still not responded to my arguments, so I guess he has conceded defeat! Hee Hee." The more likely explanation is that his opponent simply realized what he was dealing with. --Tim May THE X-ON CONGRESS: INDECENT COMMENT ON AN INDECENT SUBJECT, by Steve Russell, American Reporter Correspondent....You motherfuckers in Congress have dropped over the edge of the earth this time... "the sorriest bunch of cocksuckers ever to sell out the First Amendment" or suggesting that "the only reason to run for Congress these days is to suck the lobbyists' dicks and fuck the people who sent you there," ....any more than I care for the language you shitheads have forced me to use in this essay...Let's talk about this fucking indecent language bullshit.

1 0

Re: A possible problem with more regulation possible?
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 02:17 PM 4/16/96 EDT, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > This proposal would appear to increase vulnerability to regulation. > -Allen > >From: IN%"educom(a)elanor.oit.unc.edu" 7-APR-1996 18:42:00.83 > >>MORE ROUTERS = MORE INTERNET BROWNOUTS >>As businesses and Internet operators keep adding routers to speed electronic >>content on its way, the proliferation of routing devices actually begins to >>slow traffic, causing Internet "brownouts" -- when the response time slows >>to a crawl. The solution could be an updated Internet, redesigned for >>fewer, more powerful routers, so that data packets need fewer hops. "The >>U.S. Internet is about as reliable these days as the phone system in >>Russia," says NetStar's VP for sales and marketing. (Business Week 8 Apr 96 >>p82) I'd like to hear of some estimates of the cost (total, and per-user) of installing the system, and running Internet on a daily basis. They are spread out over a large number of entities, but I'd think they could be estimated with at least a factor-of-two precision. What are the costs of laying fiber? Switching equipment? etc.

1 0

Re: "STOP SENDING ME THIS SHIT"
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This rash of postings reminds me of a technique to harass someone by telephone. You note that pager companies are usually assigned a block of telephone numbers. So you program your auto-dialer to dial each in turn and then send your target's number. Result: your target gets a lot of, "Why did you page me?" calls. (My collage roommate had fun in high school by dialing two "random" numbers on his two line phone and then connecting them together and listening to the result.) The analogy here is to spoof mail addresses to subscribe your target to high-volume mailing lists. If you want to attack the list as well, even better. Can someone be subscribed to cypherpunks and not get the welcome message? ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

1 0

Re[2]: "STOP SENDING ME THIS SHIT"
by Adam Pingitore 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I've got news for you all. This 'jerk' was spammed by some ass out there. I've canceled by subscription so would you all quit whining already. Sorry if I sent you people inappropriate mail, but I just wasn't very happy getting 2000 e-mails a day.

2 1

[NOISE] Toast Fishing in America
by Dave Del Toasto 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[from "If _____ Made Toasters" ...my edits] If The Rand Corporation made toasters... They would be large, perfectly smooth, seamless black cubes. Each morning, exactly as much toast as you could eat would appear on top of your toaster. Their service department would have an unlisted phone number and the cube's blueprints would be highly-classified government documents, but the "X-Files" would have an episode with a partially disassembled toaster remarkably similar to it visible in the background. If the NSA made toasters... Your toaster would have a secret crumb-door on the back that only the NSA could open in case they needed to inspect your toast for breakfasts of a national security nature.

1 0

"STOP SENDING ME THIS SHIT"
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:12 PM 4/16/96, Adam Pingitore wrote: > STOP SENDING ME THIS SHIT As this is one of several such messages this clown has sent us, despite unsubscribe instructions having been posted several times in the last few weeks, I am bouncing all of his inappropriate messages back to him (though I am being careful--and I urge you all to be careful, too--to cut out any cc:ing of others). If you feel this jerk's posts are inappropriate, you might decide to do the same as I am doing. (Again, be careful to review the To: and cc: fields before sending, to ensure that the list does not get spammed by your actions.) --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, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

7 6

Re: why compression doesn't perfectly even out entropy
by JonWienke＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In a message dated 96-04-18 15:05:51 EDT, Perry Metzger writes: >Before making pronouncements like "You are still OK" you ought to >learn a bit more about cryptanalysis. Its tiny little statistical >toeholds like that which permit breaks. I don't know for sure, but my >intuition says that there may very well be instances in which a couple >of little nicks like that into the entropy of a key are sufficient to >radically lower the time to crack something. Since there are far >better techniques available (hash distillation, for instance) for >assuring the quality of a random stream, Jon's suggested techniques >should be regarded as unnecessary and dangerous. [Slightly ad hominem PSA deleted] 1. If "cooking" a byte sequence in a manner that reduces its maximum entropy by less than 1% allows an attacker to break your cryptosystem, then it is crap to begin with. With only a little more effort, he could break it anyway. 2. All I was trying to say was that applying cooking technique X to a byte sequence will reduce the maximum entropy of the sequence by a factor of Y; adjust entropy expectations accordingly. I said nothing about the origin of the byte sequence, the techniques used to generate it, or the exact method for "cooking" it. I did not recommend against using hash distillation, hardware RNG's, or any other commonly accepted method of generating cryptographically useful random or pseudo-random numbers. Jonathan Wienke

2 1

Burns Bill
by frantz＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

A quick read thru the text of the bill (via http://www.cdt.org/crypto/) shows none of the principle objectionable features of the Lehey bill. (Standards for key escrow agents, and additional criminal penalties for using encryption to hinder an investigation.) This bill has some obscure, to me, exceptions. The most troubling of which I think means (IANAL) that export can be restricted if there is a reasonable expectation that the hard/software will be reexported to one of the countries on the extreme bad boys list. This provision could possibly be construed to affect FTP sites, but in any case, it is not clear how passage of the bill could possibly make things worse. Its provisions preventing the Secretary of Commerce from developing standards for anyone except government agencies, and forbidding mandatory GAK/key escrow are very welcome. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Bill Frantz | The CDA means | Periwinkle -- Computer Consulting (408)356-8506 | lost jobs and | 16345 Englewood Ave. frantz(a)netcom.com | dead teenagers | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

2 1

Re: Why I dislike Java. (was Re: "Scruffies" vs. "Neats")
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 23:37 5/2/96, Jeff Weinstein wrote: >Perry E. Metzger wrote: >> Netscape with Java cannot be so tested because important components >> come down off the net. So no, I'm not holding Netscape with Java to a >> higher standard. I'm very much holding it to the same standard. > > The Netscape Administration Kit will allow a site security admin >to create a configuration that disables Java, and does not allow the >user to enable it. If your customers require netscape, perhaps this >is an option that will make you more comfortable. Does it prevent the user from downloading an unrestricted copy from Netscape's ftp site or installing one brought from home? Disclaimer: My opinions are my own, not those of my employer. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred.

3 2

Conrad_Burns@burns.senate.gov: Open Letter to Internet Community From Senator Burns
by Perry E. Metzger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yes, I know this will probably be forwarded five hundred times. However, I thought I ought to try to be the first. ------- Forwarded Message Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 19:39:04 -0400 From: Conrad_Burns(a)burns.senate.gov To: Multiple recipients of list <com-priv(a)lists.psi.com> Subject: Open Letter to Internet Community From Senator Burns OPEN LETTER TO THE INTERNET COMMUNITY May 2, 1996 Dear friends: As an Internet user, you are no doubt aware of some of the hurdles the federal government has put up that limit the growth and full potential of exciting, emerging technologies. One of the most egregious of these has been the governmentally set limits on so-called "encryption" technologies. Today I am introducing a bill to address this major problem for businesses and users of the Internet. If the telecommunications law enacted this year is a vehicle to achieve real changes in the ways we interact with each other electronically, my bill is the engine that will allow this vehicle to move forward. The bill would promote the growth of electronic commerce, encourage the widespread availability to strong privacy and security technologies for the Internet, and repeal the out-dated regulations prohibiting the export of encryption technologies. This legislation is desperately needed because the Clinton administration continues to insist on restricting encryption exports, without regard to the harm this policy has on American businesses' ability to compete in the global marketplace or the ability of American citizens to protect their privacy online. Until we get the federal government out of the way and encourage the development of strong cryptography for the global market, electronic commerce and the potential of the Internet will not be realized. The last thing the Net needs are repressive and outdated regulations prohibiting the exports of strong privacy and security tools and making sure that the government has copies of the keys to our private communications. Yet this is exactly the situation we have today. My new bill, the Promotion of Commerce On-Line in the Digital Era (Pro-CODE) Act of 1996, would: - Allow for the unrestricted export of "mass-market" or "public-domain" encryption programs, including such products as Pretty Good Privacy and popular World Wide Web browsers. - Require the Secretary of Commerce to allow the unrestricted export of other encryption technologies if products of similar strength are generally available outside the United States. - Prohibit the federal government from imposing mandatory key-escrow encryption policies on the domestic market and limit the authority of the Secretary of Commerce to set standards for encryption products. Removing export controls will dramatically increase the domestic availability of strong, easy-to-use privacy and security products and encourage the use of the Internet as a forum of secure electronic commerce. It will also undermine the Clinton Administration's "Clipper" proposals which have used export restrictions as leverage to impose policies that guarantee government access to our encryption keys. The Pro-CODE bill is similar to a bill I co-authored with Senator Patrick Leahy of Vermont, except that it highlights the importance of encryption to electronic commerce and the need to dramatically change current policy to encourage its growth. My bill does not add any new criminal provisions and does not establish legal requirements for key-escrow agents. Over the coming months, I plan to hold hearings on this bill and encourage a public debate on the need to change the Clinton Administration's restrictive export control policies. I will need your support as we move forward towards building a global Internet that is good for electronic commerce and privacy. I look forward to working with the Internet community, online activists, and the computer and communications industry as this proposal moves through Congress. I'd like to hear from you, so please join me on two upcoming online events to talk about the new bill. The first is on America Online in the News Room auditorium at 9 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time on May 6. The second will be on Hotwired's Chat at 9 p.m. EDT on May 13. In the meantime, I need your help in supporting the effort to repeal cryptography export controls. You can find out more by visiting my web page http://www.senate.gov/~burns/. There you will find a collection of encryption education resources that my Webmaster has assembled. I trust that the entire Internet community, from the old-timers to those just starting to learn about encryption, will find this information useful. This bill is vital to all Americans, from everyday computer users and businesses to manufacturers of computer software and hardware. I very much look forward to working with you on this issue. Conrad Burns United States Senator ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0