- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Network of majordomos (fwd)
by ichudov＠algebra.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bryan, What you did may be the ideal way to go actually. It would be great to have several NNTP servers with these (or similarly named) groups open to the world. I believe that it is possible to set them up such that they feed each other. say, the following groups may be good: cypherpunks.crypto cypherpunks.politics cypherpunks.flames cypherpunks.products cypherpunks.pgp (sort of redundant with the pgp newsgroups) cypherpunks.groups cypherpunks.admin cypherpunks.kooks cypherpunks.remailers cypherpunks.paranoia (or cypherpunks.tla) cypherpunks.politics.assassination cypherpunks.censorship (the following part is more questionable as some people would argue in favor of nocems) cypherpunks.moderated.sandy-sandfort cypherpunks.moderated.ray-arachelian cypherpunks.moderated.tim-may cypherpunks.moderated.... whoever else wants ... igor Bryan Reece wrote: > > Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 14:33:03 -0800 > From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles(a)netbox.com> > > Yes, I installed INN and ran a few hundred test messages through it last > night. My machine will be on the net full-time Thursday or Friday. Will yours > be ready then, too? > > We've got INN here. I created a cpunks.general group (as well as > alt.cypherpunks) on taz.nceye.net and made both world-accessible. Our > feed hasn't got alt.cypherpunks yet; is someone who has got it willing > to feed it? (also, is there a consensus on what group names to use: > new top-level hierarchy? cpunks or cypherpunks? or just the alt group, > with the usual propagation and spam problems?) > - Igor.

1 0

Re :Re?
by Mark Krell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>X-Sender: camcc(a)smtp1.abraxis.com >Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:36:16 -0500 >To: Mark Krell <markk(a)randomc.com> >From: camcc(a)abraxis.com (Alec) >Subject: Re :Re? >Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > >At 10:02 PM 2/12/97 -0500, you nastily wrote in the form of : >: >:Attachment Converted: "c:\remove1.txt" >: >How, do you imagine, did you get on this God-forsaken list? Anger abounds. > >Is this Kismet that you are here now at this crucial moment of the list's evolution? > >Perhaps you have something to offer of which you are not aware. > >Avail yourself of our hospitality as we implode. Flee not. > >There is meaning to this. So our savants have told us. > >Speak the words to Majordomo(a)toad.com in the message panel (no quotes): > >"unsubscribe cypherpunks" > >Speak only thus. > >Bother us no more at our moment of transfiguration. > >Hail and farewell, Bro. > > > > >

1 0

Unsubcribe
by George Leerhuber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Unsubcribe <lerhuber(a)joshuanet.com>

1 0

Re :Re?
by Mark Krell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>X-Sender: camcc(a)smtp1.abraxis.com >Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 22:36:16 -0500 >To: Mark Krell <markk(a)randomc.com> >From: camcc(a)abraxis.com (Alec) >Subject: Re :Re? >Cc: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > >At 10:02 PM 2/12/97 -0500, you nastily wrote in the form of : >: >:Attachment Converted: "c:\remove1.txt" >: >How, do you imagine, did you get on this God-forsaken list? Anger abounds. > >Is this Kismet that you are here now at this crucial moment of the list's evolution? > >Perhaps you have something to offer of which you are not aware. > >Avail yourself of our hospitality as we implode. Flee not. > >There is meaning to this. So our savants have told us. > >Speak the words to Majordomo(a)toad.com in the message panel (no quotes): > >"unsubscribe cypherpunks" > >Speak only thus. > >Bother us no more at our moment of transfiguration. > >Hail and farewell, Bro. > > > > >

1 0

Re: anonymity and e-cash
by Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Wed, 12 Feb 1997, Lee Tien wrote: > Is payee anonymity technically possible? Under what conditions? > Yes. In addition to having "money changers" play an anonymizing role, one can use an anonymous bank account. Contrary to intuition, banks might be willing to set these up with cryptographic safeguards. See http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/oceanno.htm#ENDNOTE286 which describes otherwise unpublished work by Brands (by permission). == The above may have been dictated via Dragon Dictate 2.52 voice recognition. Please be alert for unintentional word substitutions. A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin(a)law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here.

1 0

Procmail during the transition, anyone?
by Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At various stages in the transition, we will be getting multiple copies of the same messages as the are re- cross- whatever-posted to lists, newsgroups and anything else handy. Anyone have a procmail script that will show me just ONE copy of messages, even if the headers are not identical (e.g. one looped, another was forwarded, etc.)? I have yet to find a good guide to procmail coding. My file is long, and inefficient, and a pain to maintain...and I'm too busy to learn it right. == The above may have been dictated via Dragon Dictate 2.52 voice recognition. Please be alert for unintentional word substitutions. A. Michael Froomkin | +1 (305) 284-4285; +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax) Associate Professor of Law | U. Miami School of Law | froomkin(a)law.miami.edu P.O. Box 248087 | http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA | It's warm here.

1 0

Re: Recommendation: Creation of "alt.cypherpunks"
by Dale Thorn 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Dr.Dimitri Vulis KOTM wrote: > > "Timothy C. May" <tcmay(a)got.net> writes: > > > At 1:20 PM -0600 2/11/97, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > > > >If the people decide for creation of a new USENET newsgroup, > > > >we need to think very hard about actually moving it to a different > > > >hierarchy from alt.*. I would propose comp.org.cypherpunks, > > > >comp.cypherpunks, sci.crypt.cypherpunks or something like that. > It is too late to stop alt.cypherpunks, but if I had to make a > prediction again, I would predict that soon posters will BEG to help > them create comp.*.cypherpunks, because of spam and alt.flamage. I would lean toward sci.crypt.cypherpunks myself. Are there any implications in the use of that name as to restrictions, etc.?

1 0

Re: anonymity and e-cash
by Hal Finney 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Sean Roach <roach_s(a)alph.swosu.edu> > Here is another idea. > The merchant and customer agree on a price, with the merchant knowing that > the "bank" will take a cut for their services. > The merchant and customer both LOG IN to the bank seperately, each type in > their agreed upon price and cut & paste in the services rendered > information. If they match, the bank makes the necessary transaction > between the accounts, e-cash stash, etc. This provides no anonymity with respect to the bank, right? The bank knows who is paying whom. That's not very valuable IMO. The bank is still a centralized place where all this transaction information exists, a fat target for privacy opponents. I'd say that anonymity to the bank is more important than anonymity to the merchant for this reason. So I think you're going at this backwards. > Another idea that has been festering. If we could get a CPA involved in > this forum, I would be willing to have h[im/er] sign my key, (which is > seldom used, mostly because this is the only place I use e-mail), for that > reasonable fee that CPA's can charge. I know that it is not a standard, or > even legally recognized, post for CPA's, but I think that enough people > would trust them. The big question with identity certificates is what procedures were followed in verifying the identity when the cert was issued. If the CPA publishes some standard method, and his reputation is strong enough that people will trust him to follow it, then it might well be worth money to you to have him sign it. This is the traditional role of the Certification Authority. > This would take care of some of the "newly minted" key problems. Since > getting someone who is trusted to sign your key is a recognized method of > getting people to believe you are who you say you are. It depends on the circumstances where you expect to use your key. Within a small to medium circle of associates there may be some group members who sign keys and are trusted by other members of the group. There is no particular reason for it to be difficult. If you want a signature which will be accepted by everyone in the U.S. you have a harder problem. Hal

1 0

Re: Moderation experiment almost over; "put up or shut u
by chefren 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 11 Feb 97 at 3:54, John Gilmore wrote: > I've come to the conclusion that I'm not willing to host the > cypherpunks list any more. It's not the true assholes that brought me > to this decision; it's the reaction from the bulk of people on the > list: suspicion, flamage, and criticism with every attempt to improve > things. I noticed few people volunteering some of their own time, > money, or machines to help out. Almost all the suggestions were > advice for *other* people to implement: Hm... In the year 1513 or 1514 someone who could be an Honourable Member of this list (if one could be one...) wrote: > There is nothing more difficult to take in hand, more > perilous to conduct, or more uncertain in its success, > than to take the lead in the introduction of a new order > of things. <Niccolo Machiavelli, Il Principe> Please stop at looking too much on how people scream about your new ideas and continue this list the way you like it!!! I think it's Your Machine and we have to respect your decision to pull the plug, nobody should blame you for that, but please listen a little to the 1000+ people who don't scream and are obviously happy with the list and respected your right to do the "sandy filter experiment". +++chefren

1 0

Security (Re: Encryption for DNS registration)
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Donald Eastlake posted this on the IAHC-discuss list. Cool stuff. >Date: Wed, 12 Feb 1997 10:14:05 -0500 (EST) >From: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee(a)cybercash.com> >To: iahc-discuss(a)iahc.org >Subject: Security (Re: Encryption for DNS registration) > >People may want to note that yesterday (Feb 11th) the IESG approved the DNS >dynamic update and DNS secure dynamic update (draft-ietf-dnssec-update-04.txt >and draft-ietf-dnsind-dynDNS-11.txt) as Proposed Standards. The base DNS >security protocol was approved some time ago and is now out as RFC 2065. TIS >is working on a government funded implementation which will be in the public >domain (http://www.tis.com/docs/research/network/dns.html) Their current >Beta implementation of the base DNS security has been approved for export. I >believe there is an independent implementation effort underway at Microsoft. > >While this was primarily motived by wanting to be able to securely do dynamic >updates of the DNS in connection with DHCP, it is a general facility and >could be one element of securely implenmeting a shared TLD. You would, >however, still need a way of sending general authenticated messages. PGP >seems like an excellent candidate for this as it is the de-facto standard >available world wide. > >Donald [ quotes from previous messages deleted -- Bill ] >===================================================================== >Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1 508-287-4877(tel) dee(a)cybercash.com > 318 Acton Street +1 508-371-7148(fax) dee(a)world.std.com >Carlisle, MA 01741 USA +1 703-620-4200(main office, Reston, VA) >http://www.cybercash.com http://www.eff.org/blueribbon.html > > >

1 0