- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Have a few questions for you?????
by HARTSFIELDHARTS＠aol.com 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

I am very interested in your home based business, however I would like to have a phone # and mailing address to whom I am sending my money. My second concern is the shipping and handling. If you could explain that in detail that would be greatly appreciated. I can be reached at 813-805-2038 after 8pm every night. I look forward to your prompt response as I am ready to earn some great $$$$. Thanks for your time and consideration. Sincerely, Jennifer Hartsfield

1 0

Man arrested in burning US flag
by mmotyka＠lsil.com 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

Don't you hate it when the issues are tangled. It would much nicer if there were a clean and simple case of free speech but no, it has to be impure. OTOH the police could be lying about the firecracker and the struggle knowing that the Constitutional issue is clear ( today anyway ) and wanting to punish the unbeliever. The neighbor is a real piece of work too. Let's all pitch in and send him a brown shirt.

1 0

World Socialist Web On PGP creator
by Matthew Gaylor 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

PGP creator defends right to encrypt emails against calls for a ban By Mike Ingram 1 October 2001 http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/oct2001/pgp-o01.shtml [ Home page: http://www.wsws.org/index.shtml ] Philip Zimmermann, the creator of Pretty Good Privacy (PGP) encryption software, has issued a statement aimed at clarifying his attitude towards encryption in the aftermath of the September 11 terrorist attacks in New York and Washington. The statement, published on the technology site Slashdot, begins: "The Friday September 21 Washington Post carried an article by Ariana Cha that I feel misrepresents my views on the role of PGP encryption software in the September 11th terrorist attacks." Referring to a claim in the article that he was "overwhelmed with feelings of guilt", Zimmermann says, "I never implied that in the interview, and specifically went out of my way to emphasise to her that was not the case, and made her repeat back to me this point so that she would not get it wrong in the article. This misrepresentation is serious, because it implies that under the duress of terrorism I have changed my principles on the importance of cryptography for protecting privacy and civil liberties in the information age." Zimmermann says that due to the political sensitivity of the issue, he had the reporter read most of the article back to him by phone, before she submitted it for publication. He insists, "the article had no such statement or implication when she read it to me. The article that appeared in the Post was significantly shorter than the original, and had the above-mentioned crucial change in wording. I can only speculate that her editors must have taken some inappropriate liberties in abbreviating my feelings to such an inaccurate soundbite." He says he told Cha, "I felt bad about the possibility of terrorists using PGP, but that I also felt that this was outweighed by the fact that PGP was a tool for human rights around the world, which was my original intent in developing it ten years ago." Speculating on the reason for the misrepresentation in the Post article, Zimmermann says, "It appears that this nuance of reasoning was lost on someone at the Washington Post. I imagine this may be caused by this newspaper's staff being stretched to their limits last week." Zimmermann concludes his statement; "I have always enjoyed good relations with the press over the past decade, especially with the Washington Post. I'm sure they will get it right the next time." Given the seriousness of the distortion that had appeared, this reporter contacted Cha to ask if the Post would be issuing a retraction of the article. Cha said in reply, "What I did not realise was that some people would take the idea that he was feeling 'guilty' would imply that he felt he did something wrong, despite the fact that the story says he doesn't feel he made a mistake. That was not my intention and I apologise for any misunderstanding. The way we were thinking about 'guilt' was simply in terms of people feeling bad or somehow responsible, even though there may be no reason for that. She added, "I've talked to Mr. Zimmermann about this story several times since it ran-in fact the day after the story was in the paper he called me to thank me for it and tell me how much he liked it. He did not mention any possible problem until this weekend when he reached me at home." Cha said she accepted that Zimmermann, "needed to put out a statement to clarify that he had not changed his views that allowing the public to have strong encryption does more good than harm." Whatever the facts about Zimmermann's initial thoughts on the article, his attributing the misrepresentations contained in the article to editorial laxity is clearly not credible. The September 21 Post article was published amidst a concerted campaign by the Bush administration and a compliant media to channel public opinion behind support for anti-democratic measures. The tragic events of September 11 have been used to mount a wholesale attack on civil liberties, one focus of which has been an unprecedented intrusion into peoples' online privacy. Under these conditions, it is hardly accidental that an interview commissioned with Zimmermann is slanted to paint a picture of the man responsible for the development of encryption consumed with grief and regret in the aftermath of the terrorist attack. Such an article fits in with the tenor of official propaganda insisting that so horrific is the tragedy, only the most insensitive would object to a necessary curtailing of civil liberties. Zimmermann's public stance, as expressed in the Slashdot statement, is entirely justified. Saying that the Post article "showed that I'm not an ideologue when faced with a tragedy of this magnitude," he continues: "Did I re-examine my principles in the wake of this tragedy? Of course I did. But the outcome of this re-examination was the same as it was during the years of public debate, that strong cryptography does more good for a democratic society than harm, even if it can be used by terrorists. Read my lips: I have no regrets about developing PGP." Rather than the response to a terrorist outrage, the present moves to curb encryption and for closer monitoring of Internet use is the outcome of a long held desire by the security services to be able to monitor the movements and correspondence of every individual. Sections of the US political elite have never reconciled themselves to having been forced to abandon the so-called "escrow" plan, requiring decoding keys used for private messages to be given to the government. Neither have they accepted the December 1999 decision to abandon controls on the use of "strong encryption." Writing in the Online section of the Guardian newspaper in Britain, Duncan Campbell exposes the claim that encryption played a key role in regard to the terror attacks in the US. Campbell writes, "FBI investigators had been able to locate hundreds of email communications, sent 30 to 45 days before the attack... The messages, in both English and Arabic, were sent within the US and internationally... According to the FBI, the conspirators had not used encryption or concealment methods. Once found, the emails could be openly read. [Emphasis added] Campbell cites Dr Brian Gladman, formerly responsible for electronic security at the Ministry of Defence and NATO, who "believes that the reason that the terrorists didn't use encrypted emails is that would have 'stood out like a sore thumb' to NSA's surveillance network, enabling them to focus on who they were." For the real reason for the calls for increased surveillance and a ban on encryption, one must look back to the period immediately prior to the terrorist attack when tens of thousands of people were protesting against the injustices of global capital in Seattle, Melbourne, Quebec and Genoa. It was then that media commentators and government spokesmen began talking about the role of the Internet in allowing people to organise on a global scale and demanded an effective means of preventing the free association of millions of people desirous of social and political change. See Also: Internet privacy threatened following terrorist attacks on US http://www.wsws.org/articles/2001/sep2001/isp-s24.shtml [24 September 2001] Copyright 1998-2001 World Socialist Web Site All rights reserved ************************************************************************** Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt(a)coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/ **************************************************************************

1 0

Man arrested in burning US flag
by Jim Choate 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

http://www.indystar.com/data/wire/out/1002ap_l91ia7g109.html -- -- ____________________________________________________________________ The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion. Edmund Burke (1784) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Investor's Business Daily: Government Trust Grows Despite Its Inability to Protect
by Matthew Gaylor 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

1 0

Stegdetect 0.3 released (fwd)
by Jim Choate 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2001 17:10:45 -0400 From: Niels Provos <provos(a)citi.umich.edu> To: cryptography(a)wasabisystems.com Subject: Stegdetect 0.3 released Stegdetect 0.3 contains Stegbreak, a tool for launching dictionary attacks against the following steganographic systems: JSteg-Shell, JPHide and OutGuess 0.13b You can download Stegdetect from http://www.outguess.org/ More details about the steganography detection framework can be found in the CITI tech report "Detecting Steganographic Content on the Internet" at http://www.citi.umich.edu/techreports/reports/citi-tr-01-11.pdf Greetings, Niels. --------------------------------------------------------------------- The Cryptography Mailing List Unsubscribe by sending "unsubscribe cryptography" to majordomo(a)wasabisystems.com

1 0

Re: America needs an enema...
by mmotyka＠lsil.com 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

Duncan Frissell <frissell(a)panix.com> > >At 09:41 PM 9/30/01 -0500, measl(a)mfn.org wrote: >>While I would *like* to think that your point is _completely_ valid and >>all-encompassing, I'm afraid I can't :-( Unfortunately, we are just as >>interested in "liberating" everyone else (read: forcing them do do as we >>please, but not necessariily as we do) on the planet. The U.S. has a >>rather intense ego problem. > >Actually that raises the interesting question- > >If we could do so without stolen money and without collateral damage, would >it be moral to invade countries and kill their governments to prevent the >oppression of their people? > >That is, since all governments violate people's rights and some violate >them more than others, would attacks on governments by outsiders be proper >(as internal revolution presumably is)? > >My poli sci prof once said "after the 'Revolution' of 1845 in England, the >Liberals imposed laissez-faire." Can one impose non-imposition? > >Is it wrong to kill a government? > >Sic Semper Tyrannis. > >DCF > What does the concept of right and wrong have to do with it? I would say that a more relevant phrasing of the question is one that needs to be answered on a case by case basis : is it possible to kill that particular government? What's in it for the aggressor? Access to rare earths, risk reduction, a warm-water port, a Pepsi factory, supermodels? I doubt that any 3rd party would incur the expense of killing an entire government completely out of a sense of right unless that cost were extremely small - pocket change, so to speak. Mike

1 0

Re: STILL OFF TOPIC: Re: America needs therapy
by Ken Brown 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

Eugene Leitl wrote: > Problem is high LEO launch costs. It would seem easier to build automated > and teleoperate fabbing and (linear motor) launching facilities on Luna, > and circularize orbit mostly by aerobraking. And if you can put up a bloody huge enough launcher on the moon, (use solar energy or nuclear - why not - it is one place in the system that we don't care about pollution) then you can send material back all the way to LEO by slingshot, and when it is captured by the facility at LEO, if you do it right, you can get a "free" boost in orbit because of greater orbital velocity of moon. So the more you accrete onto your LEO station the higher it flies. Why not make it the size of Wales? Hello Earth Station One. Well, 3 technically I suppose, Mir was One, the thing up there now is Two. Can't really count Skylab. There is a good fun fictional treatment of the lunar-driven space station idea by Donald Kingsbury "The Moon Goddess and the Son". Written before the Soviet Union fell. In the book they get done in by home-made cruise missiles built out of private planes & off-the-shelf, computers, autopilots, and GPS by Afghan refugees who studied aero engineering in Europe and the US. I think it might be worth re-reading. That and "Arslan" AKA "The Wind from Bukhara" by Madeleine (?) Engh. Ken Brown

4 6

File - Friend, I saw that you unsubscribed
by Anti_Immigration Moderator 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

Dear Friend, I saw that you unsubscribed from the anti-immigration email list. I am the moderator of this group. Please Read the Census Burea statistics at the bottom of this email. Would you please take a moment and write me and tell me why you unsubscribed and tell me how I can, could or should improve the anti_immigration email list. I want to thank you in advance for helping me make this email list more pleasing to more people by offering your suggestions. You may write me at BobfromMichigan74(a)hotmail.com Friend, you and I corresponded many times in the past. However, I have switched ISP's and email addresses several times and you may not recognize me. The last time we corresponded I do not remember if I was using AOL or another ISP. If you wish to be removed from my anti-immigration email list just let me know and it will be immediately done? I purposely moderate this list to keep the volume of emails very low. The anti-immigration email list only generates perhaps one or two emails per day on average. Peace be unto you, Bob from Michigan, The Moderator of this email list. PS - It would make me very happy if you would re-subscribe and rejoin the email list. Please write me at BobfromMichigan74(a)Hotmail.com ATTN: VERY IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOLLOWS BELOW - PLEASE READ THIS AND SEND IT TO YOUR FRIENDS AND FAMILY. The following information comes from the Census Bureau http://www.census.gov/ http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0029/tab04.html http://www.census.gov/population/www/documentation/twps0029/tab03.html Legal Immigration - Total numbers for each decade is listed as follows 1990 19,767,316 1980 14,079,906 1970 9,619,302 1960 9,738,091 FRIENDS - PLEASE NOTE THAT OVER 45 MILLION LEGAL (YES I SAID LEGAL) IMMIGRANTS HAVE ENTERED THE COUNTRY SINCE 1970. ADD TO THE 45 MILLION LEGAL IMMIGRANTS ANOTHER 15 TO 30 MILLION ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS AND YOU HAVE A TOTAL OF 60 TO 75 MILLION PEOPLE IN AMERICA WHO WERE BORN IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY. EVEN AN IDIOT CAN SEE THAT THE VERY COMPOSITION OF AMERICA IS BEING INTENTIONALLY CHANGED BY THE IMMIGRATION POLICY OF OUR GOVERNMENT. GOD HELP US IF WE DO NOT STOP THIS NOW!!! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I am going to miss you... please come back soon. Bob, Moderator of anti_immigration email list. Sincerely Yours, Bob from Michigan. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ BELOW ARE THE ADDRESS'ES FOR SUBSCRIBING & POSTING TO THE ANTI-IMMIGRATION GROUP: To Re-Subscribe: Anti_Immigration-subscribe(a)yahoogroups.com To Post message: Anti_Immigration(a)yahoogroups.com

1 0

78590253 New Dating Directory Service - AdvancedDating.com!
by newcust＠advanceddating.com 02 Oct '01

02 Oct '01

Dear Sir or Madam: Find the information you are looking for from the most comprehensive dating resource available on the net today! Visit our global directory at http://www.advanceddating.com/dat_homeb.asp?emstr=324160445 and see sites covering topics in love, relationship, matchmaking, personals and more.. Webmasters, add your site for free and increase your traffic! To remove click: http://www.advanceddating.com/mkmEmRemCustb.asp?sid=324160445&eid=78590253 Regards, George, President of advanceddating.com Please copy and paste the above links to your browser if you have problems. This message is sent in compliance of the new email bill: SECTION 301. Sender: AdvancedDating.com, 343, Soquel Ave, Ste. 511, CA 95062 email: newcust(a)jumpdates.com. 'Per Section 301, Paragraph (a)(2)(C) of S. 1618, further transmissions to you by the sender of this email may be stopped by clicking on the link above or copying and pasting to the browser address box followed by return.

1 0