- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Russian Programmer Not Eager to be Celebrity
by measl＠mfn.org 14 Aug '01

14 Aug '01

On 13 Aug 2001, John R. Levine wrote: > I can't say I'm surprised. When he's not writing copy protection and > password cracking code, he's also one of the world's leading authors > of spamware, both programs to scrape e-mail addresses from web pages > (http://www.mailutilities.com/aee/) and to spam direct from dialups, > avoiding rate limits in the ISP's mail server > (http://www.mailutilities.com/adr/) > > While I agree that the DMCA is an asinine law, and it's doubly asinine > to try to enforce it against non-resident foreigners, Skylarov is > hardly the virtuous innocent that some press accounts suggest he is. I cannot express how fed up I am with this type of tunnel-vision HYPOCRISY. The same folks who are screaming that writing public crypto code must be covered by the 1st because "it is good" are screaming that Sklyarov is now "bad" because he writes spamware. One idiot went so far as to call for Sklyarov's *execution* because he may have written the program that was once used to send UCE/UBE to the miscreant whiner! The is same belligerently assinine argument that the anti-gunners use: a gun is designed to kill, so we must do away with the right to own them. Yes, I am aware that this politically incorrect (but logically accurate) statement is likely to get me flamed from here to hell and back (I can just see the "SPAM SUPPORTER!" pseudo-flames now...). -- Yours, J.A. Terranson sysadmin(a)mfn.org If Governments really want us to behave like civilized human beings, they should give serious consideration towards setting a better example: Ruling by force, rather than consensus; the unrestrained application of unjust laws (which the victim-populations were never allowed input on in the first place); the State policy of justice only for the rich and elected; the intentional abuse and occassionally destruction of entire populations merely to distract an already apathetic and numb electorate... This type of demogoguery must surely wipe out the fascist United States as surely as it wiped out the fascist Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The views expressed here are mine, and NOT those of my employers, associates, or others. Besides, if it *were* the opinion of all of those people, I doubt there would be a problem to bitch about in the first place... --------------------------------------------------------------------

2 1

OPT: Slashdot | Felten Will Present SDMI Research At USENIX
by Jim Choate 13 Aug '01

13 Aug '01

http://slashdot.org/yro/01/08/13/1947257.shtml -- -- ____________________________________________________________________ natsugusa ya...tsuwamonodomo ga...yume no ato summer grass...those mighty warriors'...dream-tracks Matsuo Basho The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: Cypherpunks, pay per use remailers, and the good ol' days
by lcs Mixmaster Remailer 13 Aug '01

13 Aug '01

Declan wrote, quoting himself: > > Yet some form of PPU remailer could exist today: A remailer would find a > > cookie and an encrypted-to-PPU-public-key credit card in the body of the > > message it receives. It would then debit a credit card for, say, $3 and > [...] > > The usual objection to such a system would be that the feds would impose > > pressure on the banking system (or credit card companies would do it > > themselves) and prevent remailer ops from securing merchant accounts. That > > may be true, but remailers at least today aren't seen as a serious threat. > > They could get away with it for a while. > > Thinking through this a little bit more, such a system wouldn't work > well given today's technology. It would allow an attacker to know > with a high degree of certainty the truename (cardname) of someone > and link that with an encrypted message. By unwrapping it down the > chain with subpoenas and court orders, it would be possible to > get at least the last To: line if not the final text. An alternative is to pay the first remailer for the whole chain, and then to have that remailer pay the second remailer, the second remailer pay the third remailer, and so on. This way the follow-on remailers don't know who the original sender of the message was. The remailers can also batch up their payments when they are sending a bunch of messages to other remailers, perhaps even just pay the net clearing amount on a daily basis. Some discussion of this idea as a mechanism for anonymous payments is in the archives at http://www.inet-one.com/cypherpunks/dir.2000.02.28-2000.03.05/msg00302.html and follow-ups.

2 1

Re: chip fabs gearing up for AES (fwd)
by Dr. Evil 13 Aug '01

13 Aug '01

> With subtle distinctions, intellectual-property (IP) core vendors are > readying implementations of the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) > security algorithm. This author needs to get a clue. There is only one form of intellectual property, which is the trademark, and trademarks won't benefit from encryption. Copyrights are "held", not "owned". Copyrights expire; property doesn't. Copyrights exist to reward the production of artisitic or literary material, as a public benefit. Property rights exist for their owners. The term "intellectual property" must have been invented by the same PR genius who invented the terms "freeway" and "Social Security".

2 2

Terrorist and Pedophiles
by Eric Cordian 13 Aug '01

13 Aug '01

Declan forwards: > http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/20966.html > Think tank urges face-scanning of the masses > Chief among these are the detection of terrorists and pedophiles, as we > said. No matter that these sick individuals comprise a mere fraction of > a fraction of normal human beings. > No matter that detecting them requires the most outrageous government > intrusions into the natural comings and goings of millions of innocent > people. Of course this is nonsense. Regarding terrorists. Our government conveniently defines a "terrorist" as any sub-national group that breaks the law in order to influence opinion. Note under such a definition, no recognized government can commit a terrorist act, even if it firebombs nuns and orphans holding kittens. Our government has suggested such defining characteristics of "terrorists" as a knowlege of the Constitution, and self-identification as a "patriot," It's pretty clear whom our government considers to be the terrorists, and it ain't fereigners. Regarding pedophiles. It's a rare disorder, there are only a few tens of thousands of them on the planet, and most of them, like most other people, conform their sexual behavior to society's expectations. Of course, to get called a pedophile these days, all one has to do is to criticize the Sex Abuse Agenda, and neurotic women will line up for blocks to spew forth detailed scenarios on all the kids you've molested, crafted entirely from their Child Sex Hysteric imaginations. As the clued know, most sexual assaults on children are crimes of opportunity, and have nothing to do with pedophiles. It would make pretty much zero change in the safety of children to jail all pedophiles. Since most of the loons on the far right pushing the anti-Porn and Sex Abuse Agendas have an attitute towards childrens' rights which is summarized by the statement - "Children don't have any rights" - one might argue on the other hand that the lives of children could be improved immensely by jailing the Abuse Hysteria Whackos. Don't suppose we'll be seeing the Rand Corporation recommending that anytime soon. > Of course, no appeal to Fascism and Kafkaesque control would be complete > without reference to the safety of innocent children. Rand does not let > us down: "many parents would most likely feel safer knowing their > children's elementary school had a facial recognition system to ensure > that convicted child molesters were not granted access to school > grounds." Of course, statistics easily show that the most dangerous place for a child is at home, at the mercy of his parents, with no witnesses present. One has to seriously wonder if the fondness of parents for pedophile scapegoating has a lot to do with the wish to divert child-protection resources onto a form of abuse that is largely fictional. After all, we don't see these parents out demonstrating when kids are kicked with combat boots and forced to ingest mud at boot camp. > It's all very popular, but immensely dangerous, thinking. Preserving > personal liberty requires that we all accept a bit of chaos, a bit of > hooliganism, a bit of risk. Yes, you or I might possibly get our heads > bashed in by brain-dead hooligans, or get blown up by terrorist bombers, > and our little lambs might get exploited by sexual sickos if we don't > keep a close eye on them. But probably not. Leaders rarely have to fear freedom and democracy, because all they have to do to get their absolute power back is rock the boat a little, and the Sheeple will run begging to give up their rights. "Please, give us face recognition so our homes will not be blown up, and our children will not be diddled by weirdos. Where do we sign up?" > Surely, the suffocating, risk-free environments our governments are > trying so desperately to sell us to extend their powers of observation > and control are far more grotesque and soul-destroying than anything a > terrorist or a pedophile might ever hope to produce. . One might think so, but such critical thought requires the idiots to turn their brain cell on for a few hours each day. Too much work, when they can just sit in front of the tube, and be told what to think by John Walsh and friends. -- Eric Michael Cordian 0+ O:.T:.O:. Mathematical Munitions Division "Do What Thou Wilt Shall Be The Whole Of The Law"

2 2

RE: Traceable Infrastructure is as vulnerable as traceable messages.
by Eugene Leitl 13 Aug '01

13 Aug '01

On Mon, 13 Aug 2001, Trei, Peter wrote: > I hate to say this, but until software developers are held (at least > at the corporate level) in some way liable for their failures, there > will be little or no improvement in the situation. I think this is the wrong approach to the situation. Making people liable stifles innovation. The customers abundantly prove that they don't care. I know it, because I've talked to the customers. They might complain, but in a curiously perfunctory manner, their lips move, but their neurons don't spike. In the market, everybody is free to use more stable components for the mission critical systems. If they make a difference (apparently, not on the short run, if at all, since businesses are either operating in a largely brownian market, or are running in an irrational regime, since capable to afford very broad error margins), the marketplace will select for fitter products. If they do not, well, too bad. Where people's life are at stake the product as a whole is certified, and the producer is already liable. There's no point in introducing a Hippocrates oath for the code samurai in the field. There will be fewer programmers, the average programmer will be better, but you're paying by arresting progress. See small civilian aircraft for an illustration. If you're afraid of change, the customer eventually suffers. -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204/">leitl</a> ______________________________________________________________ ICBMTO : N48 10'07'' E011 33'53'' http://www.lrz.de/~ui22204 57F9CFD3: ED90 0433 EB74 E4A9 537F CFF5 86E7 629B 57F9 CFD3

5 6

Re: chip fabs gearing up for AES (fwd)
by mmotyka＠lsil.com 13 Aug '01

13 Aug '01

Jim Choate <ravage(a)einstein.ssz.com> wrote : >On 13 Aug 2001, Dr. Evil wrote: > >> Copyrights expire; property doesn't. > >Never bought milk I guess, or a pet, or been to the beach.... > Surprised you didn't quote the classic about beer...you know, you can't own beer you can only rent it. Why do those dipshits who lose the big beach houses in NC when a nice hurricane comes through get to file for federal disaster aid? That's very, very wrong. Mike

1 0

Re: chip fabs gearing up for AES (fwd)
by mmotyka＠lsil.com 13 Aug '01

13 Aug '01

"Doc Evil" <drevil(a)sidereal.kz> wrote : >> With subtle distinctions, intellectual-property (IP) core vendors are >> readying implementations of the Advanced Encryption Standard (AES) >> security algorithm. > >This author needs to get a clue. There is only one form of >intellectual property, which is the trademark, and trademarks won't >benefit from encryption. Copyrights are "held", not "owned". >Copyrights expire; property doesn't. Copyrights exist to reward the >production of artisitic or literary material, as a public benefit. >Property rights exist for their owners. > >The term "intellectual property" must have been invented by the same >PR genius who invented the terms "freeway" and "Social Security". > It's a matter of context. In the chip world a tested netlist that can be turned into Si is "IP" in the sense that it is something a company can offer as a product. AES is no different from USB, bluetooth, IEEE-1384, SCSI, 802.11b, MPEG, PCI cores etc. Yes, actual work is involved in turning a public standard into Si. Yes, people actually pay to include this sort of "IP" in their ASICs along with CPUs, memory, I/O and whatever else they may need to fuel their cash flow. Various licenses may or may not be part of each piece of "IP" used in an ASIC. Each has to be addressed before the part is built or your lawyers can fight it out later in court. I'm more of a SW than a HW guy but this is pretty much the view I've gotten of the business. Mike

1 0

alt.anonymous.messages practice
by dmolnar 13 Aug '01

13 Aug '01

I just took a look at the first 10 messages I could pull down from alt.anonymous.messages using pgp2.6.2 . Eight were encrypted with symmetric encryption. One was encrypted with keyID 591B0E69. A last one identified itself as encrypted with public-key crypto, but in a format not otherwise intelligible to poor 2.6.2 . Now, keyID 591B0E69 isn't in the keyservers, of course, but it will be interesting to watch alt.anonymous.messages for the next few days and see if any other messages encrypted to that key should show up. Well, if I get around to writing the scripts to watch for it, which I probably won't. I don't suppose anyone's been gathering data like this in public? In particular, it'll be interesting to see if 591B0E69 is simply receiving an initial message (to set up a shared password for conventional encryption) -- or if it will receive many more messages. This is a good reason to use Adam Back's Stealth PGP. Although, as David Hopwood has pointed out, ordinary RSA may reveal information about the key used to encrypt, even if the headers are stripped out. There are fixes for that, of course, but not yet deployed AFAIK.

1 0

I need
by Hurtado, Jorge E 13 Aug '01

13 Aug '01

I need Places of the dreamcast games isos. Tahnk you ******************************************************************************** The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawfull. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice contained in this email are subject to the term and conditions expressed in the governing KPMG client engagement letter. ********************************************************************************

1 0