- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

YOU CAN OWN AN ADULT SITE AND MAKE HUGE ��/$$$
by maillist＠customers.com 18 Sep '01

18 Sep '01

Take advantage , get involved with the $35 billion dollar a year adult XXX industry by taking one of our adult web sites business and we'll make sure you earn a lot of money. It's what over 70% of 250'000'000 of surfurs are looking for. Make tens of �1000's without selling, experience, administration, stock, investment or having to answer the phone ever again. Get a "REVOLUTIONARY" money making web site from us and we'll make sure you make A LOT OF MONEY Contact me: puce1957(a)yahoo.com "more info" in subject line, or "remove" if you prefere to be removed from my database.

1 0

crypto law survey questions
by Eric Murray 18 Sep '01

18 Sep '01

Lots of media are running survey questions asking if the US should ban strong cryptography. Here is a more honest survey: 1. Are you willing to ban strong cryptography so the FBI, CIA, NSA etc. can listen in on potential terrorists, and jail Americans that use strong cryptography? 2. The browser that you're using to read this survey uses strong cryptography. If you answered "yes" to #1, are you ready to go to jail now? 3. Ok, you didn't know that your browser uses cryptography and you're not a terrorist. We won't report you. Are you willing to arrest little old ladies who didn't know that their browser uses crypto? 4. Are you willing to allow hackers to steal your credit card number or medical information or email accounts because they're no longer protected by strong cryptography? 5. How about your banking info? Are you willing to deal with periodically straightening out your bank accounts when hackers break into them because they're no longer protected by strong cryptography? 6. Even if the US banned all strong crypto tommorrow, there would still be many strong crypto programs out in the world, and all the knowledge is readily available (printed in books no less). Would you be willing to allow governments and hackers to read all your communications and personal data, while in the rest of the world they cannot? 7. Terrorists or those associated with them sometimes attack web sites and networks. Are you willing to tolerate more of these sorts of attacks against U.S. digital infrastructure because it's no longer protected with strong cryptography? 8. Criminals, by definition, do not follow laws. Do you think that all criminals are dumb enough to switch back to weak crypto to plan their crimes? 9. Terrorists do not always communicate digitally. In fact there are rumors that Osama bin Laden communicates with his associates either by sending verbal messages with trusted couriers from families that he knows, or for longer distances, using paper messages sent via services like FedEx. Do you think that banning strong crypto in America will slow bin Laden down at all? Eric

1 0

Assistance /Partner
by Jannet Sankoh 18 Sep '01

18 Sep '01

From : Mrs JENETH SANKOH Abidjan, C�te d'Ivoire West Africa Dear Sir, With due respect and humility I write you this letter which I believe you would be of great assistance to me and my children. I am Mrs JENETH SANKOH, the wife of the late Dr FREDERICK SANKOH of the blessed memory. Priorto my husband assassination by the rebel force loyal to CORPORAL FODAY SANKOH of the revolutionary United Front (RUF), He was the Director general National Gold and Diamond Mining corporation of Sierra-leone. Few days before my husband was assassinated,he instructed me and my children (DIDOW K. SANKOH AND HENRY)to move out of Sierra-Leone and also to go in his underground strong room where the documents of money he has deposited in a security company in Abidjan C�te d'Ivoire in one trunk Box as family valuables and treasures with the name of my first son DODOW K. SANKOH as the beneficiary. The amount is US$12.500,000 (Twelve million five hundred thousand United States Dollars. We managed to escape to Abidjan the Republic of C�te d'Ivoire through the help of my husband's friend who is a trawler. As our travelling document was sized.For your information , the security company did not know the real content of the box and we do not wish them to know until the money is transferred to your account. As it was deposited as family valuables and treasures. Meanwhile, I want to leave C�te d'Ivoire entirely with this money for investment in your country because of the unstable political situation and mostly for the future of my children. I want you to please assist us to claim the box from the security company and also deposit the money in a local account here in your name and order the bank to transfer the money to your account in your country. As our foreign partner for our investment. We have it in mind to reward you with a certain percentage for your assistance. As soon as we hear from you Do not hesitate to give me your word through this E-mail mamasankoh(a)yahoo.com immediately you receive this letter to enable us proceed in Ernest toward retrieving the box and transferring of the money into your account. Finally, Please ensure that no one else knows about this money as it is only myself my son, yourself and the Rev. Pastor of the church where we worship knows about this money.May God bless you as you assist me. yours sincerely. MRS JENETH SANKOH __________________________________________________ > > > > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > > > > Get email at your own domain with > Yahoo! > > > > Mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > > > Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! > > > Mail. > > > > > > > > > > > > > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/?.refer=text > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > > > > Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! > > Mail. > > > > > > === message truncated === > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. > http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/ > __________________________________________________ Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help? Donate cash, emergency relief information http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/

1 0

Forbes: The Big Lie
by mean-green＠hushmail.com 18 Sep '01

18 Sep '01

The Big Lie Forbes.com, 09.17.01, 1:10 PM ET Must Americans sacrifice their liberty to achieve safety? The knee-jerk reaction to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on the U.S. has been to say yes. Two out of three Americans are willing to surrender civil liberties to stop terrorism, according to an ABC-Washington Post poll taken the day after the attacks. "I'm puking every time I hear that," says Baltimore lawyer Thomas Bowden. "The idea is to compromise their lifestyle. We keep ours the same." It's also irresponsible to suggest waiving civil rights. Take the bill passed by the Senate two days after the attack. It would permit police to tape phones and seize Internet records without a search warrant. That would leave Americans vulnerable to even greater evils. "It is something we will all regret down the road," says Timothy Lynch, a constitutional law expert with the Cato Institute, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank. Most threatened is the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches. Does that safeguard have to be scrapped to search airline passengers more thoroughly? No, it doesn't. Airports already use machines sensitive enough to detect a box cutter. Luggage and people are already searched, but these searches don't raise constitutional issues, unless a government is involved. The Constitution restricts only official actions, not private ones. Courts agree that people can't expect much privacy in airports anyhow. What about when police are involved? They usually need a search warrant before raiding a home or tapping the phone. But police seldom have trouble persuading a judge to sign one. The standards are lax, especially when a terrorist is involved. This week America Online (nyse: AOL - news - people) and EarthLink (nasdaq: ELNK - news - people) cooperated with the FBI investigation by providing information about certain subscribers, according to the Washington Post. "This is already constitutional," explains lawyer James Harper, a privacy advocate and former counsel to the House Judiciary Committee. So why waive the Fourth Amendment and allow the government to eavesdrop and seize records without a warrant? Is the Justice Department trying to exploit a crisis for illicit purposes? "Sometimes they take advantage of these tragedies," sighs Lynch, citing antiterrorist laws inspired by the bombing of the Federal building in Oklahoma City in 1996. Sacrificing rights didn't work then and it's dishonest for law enforcement to pretend that waiving civil rights now will work, either. Even if giving up some rights would help some, Americans shouldn't do it. That would be a victory for the terrorists, who sought to destroy a way of life. Even temporary measures tend to become permanent, as the British have discovered since the 1970s, when they waived some rights to thwart bombings by the Irish Republican Army. Giving up rights might even lead the U.S. into autocratic rule--which is what the terrorists want and what the Founding Fathers were trying to prevent when they wrote the Bill of Rights. America is built on a healthy distrust of government power. In the words of Ben Franklin, "Those who trade liberty for security will have neither."

1 0

Free XXX pics
by samw＠ijustgotfired.com 18 Sep '01

18 Sep '01

*****ADULT INFORMATION***** Hi! If you want get a FREEE XXX pics in your email box (without hours searching through pay sites), just write me at koncert(a)epatra.com with "Send" in Subject line Peter To be removed just write in Subject line - "Remove"

1 0

Re: SI - The End of Nations, Part 1
by Anonymous Coredump 18 Sep '01

18 Sep '01

> I just switched to CBS, and there was Dan Rather crying on "Late Night" > with Letterman holding his hand, as he explained to the public that we > could expect a 5-10 year campaign to rid the world of evil, and we had to > make sure this generation wasn't too "spoiled" to stay on board for the > whole performance. Of course, with 5000 week-old bodies lying in the WTC wreckage there's not much doubt that at least some Americans are spoiled.

1 0

tu
by Scegli 18 Sep '01

18 Sep '01

La prima compagnia che ti regala un Nokia 8210 (fino al 15 ottobre) ! Aut.min.rich. Vieni a visitarci: http://scorpius.spaceports.com/~logical2/ AVVERTENZA Secondo l' articolo n. 1618 Par. 111 deliberato al 105� congresso USA, questo messaggio non pu� essere considerato SPAM poich� include la possibilit� di essere rimosso da invii ulteriori infatti : a norma della Legge 675/96(Legge sulla privacy in Italia) : Tutela delle persone e di altri soggetti rispetto al trattamento di dati personali le comunico quanto segue : il suo indirizzo e-mail proviene o da richieste di informazioni o da elenchi (newsgroup) e servizi di pubblico dominio pubblicati in Internet che lo hanno reso pubblico. Comunque se ha ricevuto questa e-mail per errore e/o non desidera riceverne altre invii una email con oggetto CANCELLAMI e ci scusi per l'errore.

1 0

news you can use: EFF CALL TO ACTION
by citizenQ 18 Sep '01

18 Sep '01

(In the interest of self-consistency note that this also includes the "warrantless wiretapping" and "emergency powers for computer crimes" concerns which I don't think have been argued persuasively enough or with enough weight to overcome the proposal and which I don't think constitute the worst threats. But there's more here of much value.) FYI: Electronic Frontier Foundation ACTION ALERT (Issued: Monday, September 17, 2001 / Deadline: Friday, September 21, 2001) Introduction: San Francisco, California - The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) today urged governmental officials to act deliberately in the coming days and to approve only measures that are effective in preventing terrorism while protecting the freedoms of Americans. Your urgent action is needed TODAY. In a press conference earlier today, Attorney General John Ashcroft indicated that he would be asking Congress to expand the ability of law enforcement officers to perform wiretaps in response to the terrorist attacks on the United States on September 11, 2001. Ashcroft asked Congress to pass anti-terrorism legislation including "expanded electronic surveillance" by the end of this week. Ashcroft's comments come in the wake of the Senate's hasty passage of the "Combating Terrorism Act" on the evening of September 13 with less than 30 minutes of consideration on the Senate floor. EFF believes this broad legislation would result in unintended negative consequences for civil liberties of law-abiding citizens by making it unnecessary for law enforcement officers to obtain a court wiretap order before requiring Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to release e-mail message header information and Internet browsing patterns of their subscribers. The bill would also authorize local U.S. attorneys to authorize certain surveillance orders. The Combating Terrorism Act is presently a Senate-passed amendment to a House appropriations bill. It is expected to be voted on in joint conference committee this week, or early next week at the latest. The House has already passed the "base" bill, while the Senate has passed it plus the wiretapping amendment. The House delegates several Representatives to meet with several Senators, who will collectively decide what amendments the final, joint version will include. This final version is then voted on by the full House and Senate. This only real pressure point is the conference committee; whatever emerges will almost certainly pass both houses near-unanimously. What YOU Can Do Now: * Contact the conference committee members and your legislators about this issue AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. Call them, and fax and/or email the EFF letter below today. Postal mail will be too slow on this issue. Feel free to use this letter verbatim, or modify it as you wish. Let them know that you do not believe liberty must be sacrificed for security. Please be polite and concise, but firm. For information on how to contact your legislators and other government officials, see EFF's "Contacting Congress and Other Policymakers" guide at: http://www.eff.org/congress.html * Join EFF! For membership information see: http://www.eff.org/support/ Sample Letters: There are two sample letters below, one to the conference committee members, and one to your own legislators. Use this sample letter below to conference committee members or modify it, and send to all of the following: Representatives: To be determined; conferees not publicly announced yet. Check the web-posted version of this alert for an update tomorrow: http://www.eff.org/alerts/20010917_eff_wiretap_alert.html Senators: Name (State), Phone (202-224-####), Fax (202-224-####), Email Patrick Leahy (VT), 4242, 3479, senator_leahy(a)leahy.senate.gov Ernest Hollings (SC), 6121, 4293, none Daniel Inouye (HI), 3934, 6747, senator(a)inouye.senate.gov Barbara Mikulski (MD), 4654, 8858, senator(a)mikulski.senate.gov Herb Kohl (WI), 5653, 9787, senator_kohl(a)kohl.senate.gov Patty Murray (WA), 2621, 0238, senator_murray(a)murray.senate.gov Jack Reed (RI), 4642, 4680, jack(a)reed.senate.gov Robert Byrd (WV), 3954, 0002, senator_byrd(a)byrd.senate.gov Judd Gregg (NH), 3324, 4952, mailbox(a)gregg.senate.gov Ted Stevens (AK), 3004, 2354, senator_stevens(a)stevens.senate.gov Pete Domenici (NM), 6621, none, senator_domenici(a)domenici.senate.gov Mitch McConnell (KY), 2541, 2499, senator(a)mcconnell.senate.gov Kay Hutchison (TX), 5922, 0776, senator(a)hutchison.senate.gov Ben Campbell (CO), 5852, 1933, none Thad Cochran (MS), 5054, 9450, senator(a)cochran.senate.gov Dear Sen./Rep. [Surname] and Other H.R. 2500 Conference Committee Members: I write to express my gravest concern over aspects of the Congressional response to the tragedies of September 11. While I share your grief and anger in no uncertain terms, I do not believe that sacrificing essential liberties in a vain hope of improving security is good for America or the world. Security can be improved without privacy invasion, and we cannot win an attack on freedom by attacking that freedom ourselves. I specifically object to H.R. 2500 amendment S.A. 1562 sections 816, 832, 833, and 834, and any similar measures, such as those proposed by Attorney General Ashcroft, as well as recent calls for measures that would thwart Americans' use of secure encryption. I also object to provisions being passed in response to terrorism but which have nothing to do with terrorism, such as "emergency" wiretaps against simple computer crime incidents. I urge you to vote AGAINST incorporating the above-mentioned sections of S.A. 1562 into the final version of H.R. 2500, and to vote against any similar amendments expanding wiretap powers, online monitoring, warrantless pen register or trap and trace authority, censorship, or restrictions on encryption. The United States should not take steps toward becoming a police state, or otherwise undermine our own freedom in the name of defending that freedom from terrorist attack, or the terrorists have already won. This is a time for careful consideration, not passing legislation without debate or careful consideration of the consequences. Sincerely, [Your name & address] (Be sure to correct the salutation - use EITHER Sen. or Rep., and use the correct name.) If one of the conference committee members if your Rep. or Sen., mention that you are a constituent, as in the letter below.) Use this sample letter to YOUR legislators or modify it, and send to their Washington fax and e-mail, which you can get this from Project Vote Smart: http://www.vote-smart.org/vote-smart/data.phtml?dtype=C&style= or the House: http://www.house.gov/house/MemberWWW.html and Senate: http://www.senate.gov/senators/index.cfm websites. Dear Sen./Rep. [Surname] I write as a constituent to express my gravest concern over aspects of the Congressional response to the tragedies of September 11. While I share your grief and anger in no uncertain terms, I do not believe that sacrificing essential liberties in a vain hope of improving security is good for America or the world. Security can be improved without privacy invasion, and we cannot win an attack on freedom by attacking that freedom ourselves. I urge you to vote AGAINST H.R. 2500 should it emerge from conference committee with amendment S.A. 1562 attached, and to vote against any similar legislation expanding wiretap powers, online monitoring, warrantless pen register or trap and trace authority, censorship, or restrictions on encryption. The United States should not take steps toward becoming a police state, or otherwise undermine our own freedom in the name of defending that freedom from terrorist attack, or the terrorists have already won. This is a time for careful consideration, not passing legislation without debate or careful consideration of the consequences. I specifically object to S.A. 1562 sections 816, 832, 833, and 834, and any similar measures, such as those proposed by Attorney General Ashcroft, as well as recent calls for measures that would thwart Americans' use of secure encryption. I also object to provisions being passed in response to terrorism but which have nothing to do with terrorism, such as "emergency" wiretaps against simple computer crime incidents. Sincerely, [Your name & address] (Be sure to correct the salutation - use EITHER Sen. or Rep., and use the correct name.) Non-US Activists Non-US readers can probably have little impact on the US Congress's votes on these matters, and could even affect them negatively. Your best course of action is to contact your own legislators/parliamentarians and urge them to avoid similar policies in your own country. Privacy Campaign: This drive to contact your legislators about unprecedented wiretap power expansion is part of a larger campaign to highlight how extensively companies and governmental agencies subject us to surveillance and share and use personal information online & offline, and what you can do about it. Check the EFF Privacy Now! Campaign website regularly for additional alerts and news: http://www.eff.org/privnow/ Background: During the Congressional session considering the Combating Terrorism Act, which was introduced as amendment S.A. 1562 to an omnibus appropriations bill, H.R. 2500, Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) expressed concern that he was asked to vote so rapidly on such important legislation within minutes of receiving it and without conducting hearings in the Intelligence, Armed Services and Judiciary committees: Maybe the Senate wants to just go ahead and adopt new abilities to wiretap our citizens. Maybe they want to adopt new abilities to go into people's computers. Maybe that will make us feel safer. Maybe. And maybe what the terrorists have done made us a little bit less safe. Maybe they have increased Big Brother in this country. If that is what the Senate wants, we can vote for it. But do we really show respect to the American people by slapping something together, something that nobody on the floor can explain, and say we are changing the duties of the Attorney General, the Director of the CIA, the U.S. attorneys, we are going to change your rights as Americans, your rights to privacy? We are going to do it with no hearings, no debate. We are going to do it with numbers on a page that nobody can understand. EFF shares Senator Leahy's concerns in this time of national crisis. EFF Legal Director Cindy Cohn commented, "These proposals significantly impact the civil liberties of Americans. We urge legislators to please slow down and consider the long-term consequences of your votes." "I believe that deep in their souls, Americans understand that the reason this country is so great--is so worth defending--is because it is free," explained EFF Executive Director Shari Steele. "We should be very careful to make sure that any legislation that passes is truly needed to address national security concerns." During World War I, the US Congress hastily passed the Espionage Act which was notorious for decreasing freedoms without improving the security of the American public, under which Congress granted the Postmaster General (who delegated it to 55,000 local postmasters) the authority to read any mail and remove any material that might "embarrass" the government in conducting the war effort. The Combating Terrorism Act (S1562) passed by the Senate: http://www.eff.org/sc/wiretap_bill.html Senator Leahy's testimony on the Combating Terrorism Act: http://www.fas.org/sgp/congress/2001/s091301.html EFF analysis of the Combating Terrorism Act [coming soon]: http://www.eff.org/sc/eff_wiretap_bill_analysis.html Why "backdoor" encryption requirements reduce security: http://www.crypto.com/papers/escrowrisks98.pdf EFF Surveillance Archive: http://www.eff.org/Privacy/Surveillance/ About EFF: The Electronic Frontier Foundation is the leading civil liberties organization working to protect rights in the digital world. Founded in 1990, EFF actively encourages and challenges industry and government to support free expression, privacy, and openness in the information society. EFF is a member-supported organization and maintains one of the most linked-to Web sites in the world: http://www.eff.org Contact: Cindy Cohn, EFF Legal Director cindy(a)eff.org +1 415-436-9333 x108 Lee Tien, EFF Senior First Amendment Attorney tien(a)eff.org +1 415-436-9333 x102

1 0

dismisinformation
by citizenQ 18 Sep '01

18 Sep '01

first On Tue, 18 Sep 2001, Eugene Leitl wrote: > > "According to intelligence officials, bin Laden is aware that the > >United States can eavesdrop on his international communications but he > >does not seem to care. To impress cleared visitors, NSA analysts > >occasionally play audiotapes of bin Laden talking to his mother over an > >INMARSAT connection." > >http://www.it.mycareer.com.au/news/2001/09/18/FFXBHD3OLRC.html Then DCF writes: >BTW, the perps used their real names and IDs and Osama doesn't even use a >telephone. He communicates using couriers from his family's clan. > >DC Obviously these statements are not equally true.

3 2

Re: IP: Osama bin Laden and crypto (fwd)
by Subcommander Bob 18 Sep '01

18 Sep '01

At 05:19 AM 9/18/01 -0400, baptista(a)pccf.net wrote: > >In other words these twits we pay to run our government violate the >privacy of another individual by disclosing internal government documents >(audio tapes) on an irrelevant conversation bin Laden has with his mother >to third parties who have no business with it. > >incredible You should hear the tapes of Monica & Bill they have!

1 0