- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: New Remailer (hidden)
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cool. I've got a test message going now. Does your remailer accept PGP-encrypted email? It's really critical for high-security applications, at least for first remailer hops, but your key's not on the MIT keyserver. BTW, how do we know you're not a plant? :-) Aside from having an interesting nym, you've probably got the first remailer that makes it difficult to tell who's running it. You could be Sameer, or you could be Louis Freeh, but we don't know. At least folks like Xenon were known to be real people.... Even if you _are_ a plant, of course, we can still use your system, but I'd want to do encrypted email through other remailers on one end or the other. # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215 # goodtimes signature virus innoculation

1 0

Re: Why does the state still stand:
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"jimbell(a)pacifier.com" "jim bell" 18-MAY-1996 02:54:47.09 >On the other hand, the government also has enormous "obligations" that keep >it close to bankruptcy. It wouldn't take a great deal of interference in >its ability to collect taxes to put it solidly in the red based on current >receipts. And remember, if the individuals who populate government could be >persuaded that their tenure would be forcibly shortened if they didn't >resign, they wouldn't stick around. Once that cohesiveness of jointly >sucking on the government tit is eliminated, I think they'll cut and run. >These people are working for a fat paycheck and the promise of a retirement >package, and it wouldn't take much convincing to show them that they won't >get either for very long. I'm convinced that's why so many Senators and While quite a lot of people in the government are working just for the paycheck, there are also some idealists - and some who are working for a "power paycheck" rather than a "cash paycheck." I'm willing to bet that that's the case with the NSA and its _general_ opposition to cryptography. You'll have three basic groups: A. Those who are idealists. This can be divided into two categories. 1. Those who idealize the power of government, such as via a devotion to democracy. These oppose cryptography because it weakens the government. 2. Those who are primarily interested in protecting America from everyone else. These promote cryptography, and need to be supported. 3. Those who (stupidly) believe in the US government enough to "just follow orders," as the Nuremberg phrase goes. If you can get the type 2 idealists in power, these will do the right thing. B. Those who want power. These oppose cryptography because they will lose power if it is widely implemented. C. Those who are just there to get a paycheck. These will act in most situations about like an idealist of type 3, but when push comes to shove won't be willing to back it up seriously. I'd appreciate feedback from anyone who's dealt with the intelligence community more than I have (not particularly difficult) to confirm or deny the above classification system, and give some idea as to the proportions within the NSA, government in general, etcetera. -Allen

1 0

Re: The Crisis with Remailers
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"loki(a)infonex.com" 18-MAY-1996 20:02:12.04 >I was invited to the digicash API design meeting precisely to make sure it >could be used in remailers. It will not be using the current API. The >problem is that Mixmaster requires exact knowledge of the size of every >object in the message, to maintain constant message size. I could set aside >room for one, two, three coins, but there is no guarantee that the payment >will be made with only that many coins. The current API is going to be high >level. It will does not allow the program to know anything about the >internals of the payment. I need to be able to specify payment of amount X >using no more than N coins. As soon as I have that level of control, you >will see postage in Mixmaster. Good. I can see doing a limited postage now, actually, with relatively simple modifications - the postage goes to the initial remailer front end and to the remailer that sends out the message to something other than another remailer. -Allen

1 0

Re: Remailers & what they get out of it...
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: IN%"ravage(a)ssz.com" "Jim Choate" 18-MAY-1996 09:43:06.96 >As long as the remailer is run a 'grins & giggles' affair you are right. There is the increase in reputation capital in _some_ quarters possible through running a remailer. (On the other hand, in authoritarian quarters, it would tend to decrease one's reputation capital...) >To me the biggest problem with the crypto work right now is that not enough >professionals are involved. If more remailers and such were initiated as >a business there would be legal avenues to explore. Also, in this vain is >the apparent lack of support for commercial ventures by developers of such >apps as MixMaster (whose license explicity prohibits commercial use). It prohibits commercial use? That's silly. Is it a holdover from when the idea was to turn Mixmaster into a company? >And for the record, yes, we expect to charge real $$$ for access. Our >current plan is $10/month for each account. Money orders prefered. We have >at this point pondered e-cash methods but it doesn't seem popular enough >at this juncture. How would you be doing this? Only remailing from accounts that have paid up, or what? -Allen

1 0

Re: SEVERE undercapacity, we need more remailer servers FAST
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:07 AM 5/20/96, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > What countries are noticeable for being anti-Scientology? They would >appear to be good locations for special-purpose remailer ultimate-output ends. But any country that is "anti-Scientology" is likely to be repressive in various ways we would find inimical to our goals. Germany is a prime example: yes, they have placed restrictions on the CoS, but they have also ordered crackdowns on Internet sites. Whatever one may think of Scientology, or Catholicism, or Baalism, or whatever, crackdowns by the government ("anti-Scientology," "anti-Catholic," etc.) is not a good thing. (The issue of how believable the claims of CoS are is no more relevant than similarly outlandish claims that taking communion is eating the flesh of JC. And the issue of CoS seeking legal actions against those they claim are violating their copyrights is separable from their religious status. As I have said many times, "Newsweek" would likely take similar actions in similar circumstances.) --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: The Crisis with Remailers
by lcs Mixmaster Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > not!!! I should have made this clear, but imho no matter how favorably > the public sees anonymity, I still believe there will be little > incentive to run remailers until there is some kind of ecash > scheme. I hope this is not true. Some of us simply believe it is important to help people with unpopular opinions speak without fear of harassment. I for one will continue to operate a free remailer even if the technology becomes available to charge for the service. I hope others will, too. Some people do care about things other than money. I hope the reason there aren't more remailers out there is simply that it is sort of a pain to set one up, rather than simply because nobody cares. > >People seem to forget that anyone can drop a letter into the mailbox with > >no return address. Did the Unabomber bring negative publicity to the > >postal service, causing people to demand that return addresses become a > >requirement? :-/ > > agreed, but the subject at hand was not whether anonymity is good or bad, > but whether there is some incentive to run remailers. Well, wanting there to be remailers is a good incentive to run one. Another good incentive is if you ever want to send a truly sensitive anonymous message. If you chain through your own remailer, then you can be absolutely sure that at least one remailer in your chain is not run by "bad guys." > I would be interested if any longtime remailer operators posted > statistics about the amount of mail going through their services. Usage statistics are publicly available from mixmaster remailers by sending mail with subject "remailer-stats". Whenever I've checked, the number of messages through the lcs mixmaster remailer has been around 300/day. This is neither a longtime remailer nor a particularly accurate statistic, but it should give you some idea. mix-admin(a)anon.lcs.mit.edu -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMZ//ZETBtHVi58fRAQHePQP+JQcCu/zDfhRB1BLOea+OSENfM6qRxj0h KlYtV5O+IgcmlfZ+vupbtds6IrL8GN5YAQ7kpLoSCIUPC3+r4X0ppJjqgETEYI23 cJoZU9tG3Csj+KNSRn7tDjXdPFcGooqemvhV5SERiQEkAYqzRBDCcd7VQTOGgls5 TTRHxUQ1F+c= =DOAo -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: My meeting with Chaum (Also: ecash full anonymity and a legal question)
by Jüri Kaljundi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Sat, 18 May 1996, Ian Goldberg wrote: > I am, in fact, going to Canada, and was considering writing a version of > the library while I was there. Now, Chaum has a patent on 2 lines of > code (blinding the coin before it goes to the bank, and unblinding the > value returns). Believe it or not, I would like to stay within the law. BTW why isn't some other company besides DigiCash selling similar software product as the Ecash mint & client? Are there some international patents or trade secrets involved? There is a real market for similar software solution and it should not be too hard to write, considering it is a financial system and there is big money involved. Public domain ecash software would be an interesting effort to accomplish. In case of full source availability it should be possible to develop commercial systems based on public software, it might even be more secure than commercial software which source is available for review to only certain persons. There is also a problem with Digicash licencing: they licence only to banks, and usually only to one bank in each country. I believe there are also many companies that are not banks, who would also like to issue ecash for specific purposes. Setting up an separate company issuing electronic cash, not connected to any of the existing banks, is something that probably will happen sooner or later. Of course there are problems of legislation and clients trusting the company, but those are not problems that the software manufacturer like Digicash should decide. Jüri Kaljundi jk(a)stallion.ee AS Stallion

1 0

No Subject
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I like the idea about bed hopping. But have we worried about AIDS (VIRUS)? >Hi. > >Pardon my ignorance, but I had a few questions haunting me since a >while. > >Is there a way to have a remailer de-localize itself and relocalize >itself over the internet? > >For example, could there be several machines around the worlds that, >when you send an e-mail to it, is routed to differents physical >places of the world depending on where the actual remailer process is >actually running? Could there be such a thing as a virtual machine >runing a remailer that gets to hop from physical machine to physical >machine around the world? > >Just an idea to avoid jurisdiction problems. > >Just asking, probably quite futilely... > >Thanks > >JFA > > DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee; Limoges porcelain, silverware and crystal > JFA Technologies, R&D consultants; physists, technologists and engineers. > > PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon > ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891 > Unsollicited commercial e-mail will be proofread at US165 $/h > Any sender of such material will be considered as to have ac- > cepted the above mentionned terms. >

1 0

RAC_ket
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

5-19-96. WaPo: "From Out Of the Shadows." Book review. Spies Without Cloaks: The KGB's Successors By Amy Knight Princeton University Press. 318 pp. $24.95 Knight suggests that Russia's new security forces are not only continuing the same kinds of skulduggery as they undertook in the past but are now also expertly manipulating public opinion in Russia and the rest of the world to obscure and disguise what they do. What Knight suggests is that the old client-master relationship between Russia's elite and the KGB has not only been reversed but may even have vanished, because these "children of the KGB" have subsumed large chunks of Russia's economy and government. If *Spies Without Cloaks* is correct, much of Russia today is little more than a mutant KGB, the communist ideology it once served now replaced by ruthless devotion to great-power politics and bottom-line capitalism. The book is worth reading for its applicability to the transformation of the US and international intelligence "communities" into free-market racketeering of espionage technologies and expertise and insider secrets -- as WaPo reported May 2 on high-tech intel patrons Perry and Deutch. RAC_ket

1 0

Re: SEVERE undercapacity, we need more remailer servers FAST
by Rich Burroughs 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 01:08 AM 5/20/96 -0700, tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) wrote: [snip] >And the issue of CoS seeking legal actions against those they claim are >violating their copyrights is separable from their religious status. Not at all. Their actions are based on their religious doctrines, as passed down by Hubbard. "Always attack, never defend." Their claims of copyright violation are part of an ongoing effort to silence those who criticize their illegal and immoral practices. They should be examined in that context. > As I >have said many times, "Newsweek" would likely take similar actions in >similar circumstances.) AFAIK, "Newsweek" does not file lawsuits just for the purpose of harassment, as Hubbard counselled his followers to do. AFAIK, "Newsweek" does not hire PIs to harass those who criticize them. Tim, do you think "Newsweek" articles have ever been posted to the Net? If so, did the magazine sue everyone who posted them? The "Church" doesn't even want to admit that fair use is a possibility. "Newsweek" is also not a non-profit coporation. Not only is CoS tax exempt, but they claim to have "trade secrets" as well. That's having your cake and eating it... Rich ______________________________________________________________________ Rich Burroughs richieb(a)teleport.com http://www.teleport.com/~richieb See my Blue Ribbon Page at http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/blueribbon New EF zine "cause for alarm" - http://www.teleport.com/~richieb/cause

1 0