- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

heise/telepolis in cryptome
by Eugen Leitl 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

Achtung, kraut. http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Cryptome-Betreiber-kritisiert-Wikile… http://www.heise.de/tr/artikel/Nur-eine-Art-Aufwaermen-1158406.html -- Eugen* Leitl <a href="http://leitl.org">leitl</a> http://leitl.org ______________________________________________________________ ICBM: 48.07100, 11.36820 http://www.ativel.com http://postbiota.org 8B29F6BE: 099D 78BA 2FD3 B014 B08A 7779 75B0 2443 8B29 F6BE

1 0

the blast shack
by Eugen Leitl 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

http://www.webstock.org.nz/blog/2010/the-blast-shack/ The Blast Shack 22 December 2010 We asked Bruce Sterling (who spoke at Webstock b09) for his take on Wikileaks. The Wikileaks Cablegate scandal is the most exciting and interesting hacker scandal ever. I rather commonly write about such things, and Ibm surrounded by online acquaintances who take a burning interest in every little jot and tittle of this ongoing saga. So itbs going to take me a while to explain why this highly newsworthy event fills me with such a chilly, deadening sense of Edgar Allen Poe melancholia. But it sure does. Part of this dull, icy feeling, I think, must be the agonizing slowness with which this has happened. At last b at long last b the homemade nitroglycerin in the old cypherpunks blast shack has gone off. Those b cypherpunks,b of all people. Way back in 1992, a brainy American hacker called Timothy C. May made up a sci-fi tinged idea that he called b The Crypto Anarchist Manifesto.b This exciting screed b I read it at the time, and boy was it ever cool b was all about anonymity, and encryption, and the Internet, and all about how wacky data-obsessed subversives could get up to all kinds of globalized mischief without any fear of repercussion from the blinkered authorities. If you were of a certain technoculture bent in the early 1990s, you had to love a thing like that. As Tim blithely remarked to his fellow encryption enthusiasts, b The State will of course try to slow or halt the spread of this technology, citing national security concerns, use of the technology by drug dealers and tax evaders, and fears of societal disintegration. Many of these concerns will be valid; crypto anarchy will allow national secrets to be traded freely,b and then Tim started getting really interesting. Later, May described an institution called b BlackNetb which might conceivably carry out these aims. Nothing much ever happened with Tim Maybs imaginary BlackNet. It was the kind of out-there concept that science fiction writers like to put in novels. Because BlackNet was clever, and fun to think about, and it made impossible things seem plausible, and it was fantastic and also quite titillating. So it was the kind of farfetched but provocative issue that ought to be properly raised within a sci-fi public discourse. Because, you know, that would allow plenty of time to contemplate the approaching trainwreck and perhaps do something practical about it. Nobody did much of anything practical. For nigh on twenty long years, nothing happened with the BlackNet notion, for good or ill. Why? Because thinking hard and eagerly about encryption involves a certain mental composition which is alien to normal public life. Crypto guys b (and the cypherpunks were all crypto guys, mostly well-educated, mathematically gifted middle-aged guys in Silicon Valley careers) b are geeks. Theybre harmless geeks, theybre not radical politicians or dashing international crime figures. Cypherpunks were visionary Californians from the WIRED magazine circle. In their personal lives, they were as meek and low-key as any average code-cracking spook who works for the National Security Agency. These American spooks from Fort Meade are shy and retiring people, by their nature. In theory, the NSA could create every kind of flaming scandalous mayhem with their giant Echelon spy system b but in practice, they would much would rather sit there gently reading other peoplebs email. One minutebs thought would reveal that a vast, opaque electronic spy outfit like the National Security Agency is exceedingly dangerous to democracy. Really, it is. The NSA clearly violates all kinds of elementary principles of constitutional design. The NSA is the very antithesis of transparency, and accountability, and free elections, and free expression, and separation of powers b in other words, the NSA is a kind of giant, grown-up, anti-Wikileaks. And it always has been. And webre used to that. We pay no mind. The NSA, this crypto empire, is a long-lasting fact on the ground that webve all informally agreed not to get too concerned about. Even foreign victims of the NSAbs machinations canbt seem to get properly worked-up about its capacities and intrigues. The NSA has been around since 1947. Itbs a little younger than the A-Bomb, and we donbt fuss much about that now, either. The geeks who man the NSA donbt look much like Julian Assange, because they have college degrees, shorter haircuts, better health insurance and far fewer stamps in their passports. But the sources of their power are pretty much identical to his. They use computers and they get their mitts on info that doesnbt much wanna be free. Every rare once in a while, the secretive and discreet NSA surfaces in public life and does something reprehensible, such as defeating American federal computer-security initiatives so that they can continue to eavesdrop at will. But the NSA never becomes any big flaming Wikileaks scandal. Why? Because, unlike their wannabe colleagues at Wikileaks, the apparatchiks of the NSA are not in the scandal business. They just placidly sit at the console, reading everybodybs diplomatic cables. This is their function. The NSA is an eavesdropping outfit. Cracking the communications of other governments is its reason for being. The NSA are not unique entities in the shadows of our planetbs political landscape. Every organized government gives that a try. Itbs a geopolitical fact, although itbs not too discreet to dwell on it. You can walk to most any major embassy in any major city in the world, and you can see that it is festooned with wiry heaps of electronic spying equipment. Donbt take any pictures of the roofs of embassies, as they grace our public skylines. Guards will emerge to repress you. Now, Tim May and his imaginary BlackNet were the sci-fi extrapolation version of the NSA. A sort of inside-out, hippiefied NSA. Crypto people were always keenly aware of the NSA, for the NSA were the people who harassed them for munitions violations and struggled to suppress their academic publications. Creating a BlackNet is like having a pet, desktop NSA. Except, that instead of being a vast, federally-supported nest of supercomputers under a hill in Maryland, itbs a creaky, homemade, zero-budget social-network site for disaffected geeks. But who cared about that wild notion? Why would that amateurish effort ever matter to real-life people? Itbs like comparing a mighty IBM mainframe to some cranky Apple computer made inside a California garage. Yes, itbs almost that hard to imagine. So Wikileaks is a manifestation of something that this has been growing all around us, for decades, with volcanic inexorability. The NSA is the worldbs most public unknown secret agency. And for four years now, its twisted sister Wikileaks has been the worldbs most blatant, most publicly praised, encrypted underground site. Wikileaks is b undergroundb in the way that the NSA is b covertb; not because itbs inherently obscure, but because itbs discreetly not spoken about. The NSA is b discreet,b so, somehow, people tolerate it. Wikileaks is b transparent,b like a cardboard blast shack full of kitchen-sink nitroglycerine in a vacant lot. That is how we come to the dismal saga of Wikileaks and its ongoing Cablegate affair, which is a melancholy business, all in all. The scale of it is so big that every weirdo involved immediately becomes a larger-than-life figure. But theybre not innately heroic. Theybre just living, mortal human beings, the kind of geeky, quirky, cyberculture loons that I run into every day. And man, are they ever going to pay. Now we must contemplate Bradley Manning, because he was the first to immolate himself. Private Manning was a young American, a hacker-in-uniform, bored silly while doing scarcely necessary scutwork on a military computer system in Iraq. Private Manning had dozens of reasons for becoming what computer-security professionals call the b internal threat.b His war made no sense on its face, because it was carried out in a headlong pursuit of imaginary engines of mass destruction. The military occupation of Iraq was endless. Manning, a tender-hearted geek, was overlooked and put-upon by his superiors. Although he worked around the clock, he had nothing of any particular military consequence to do. It did not occur to his superiors that a bored soldier in a poorly secured computer system would download hundreds of thousands of diplomatic cables. Because, well, why? Theybre very boring. Soldiers never read them. The malefactor has no use for them. Theybre not particularly secret. Theybve got nothing much to do with his war. He knows his way around the machinery, but Bradley Manning is not any kind of blackhat programming genius. Instead, hebs very like Jerome Kerveil, that obscure French stock trader who stole 5 billion euros without making one dime for himself. Jerome Kerveil, just like Bradley Manning, was a bored, resentful, lower-echelon guy in a dead end, who discovered some awesome capacities in his system that his bosses never knew it had. It makes so little sense to behave like Kerveil and Manning that their threat canbt be imagined. A weird hack like that is self-defeating, and itbs sure to bring terrible repercussions to the transgressor. But then the sad and sordid days grind on and on; and that blindly potent machinery is just sitting there. Sitting there, tempting the user. Bradley Manning believes the sci-fi legendry of the underground. He thinks that he can leak a quarter of a million secret cables, protect himself with neat-o cryptography, and, magically, never be found out. So Manning does this, and at first he gets away with it, but, still possessed by the malaise that haunts his soul, he has to brag about his misdeed, and confess himself to a hacker confidante who immediately ships him to the authorities. No hacker story is more common than this. The ingenuity poured into the machinery is meaningless. The personal connections are treacherous. Welcome to the real world. So Private Manning, cypherpunk, is immediately toast. No army can permit this kind of behavior and remain a functional army; so Manning is in solitary confinement and he is going to be court-martialled. With more political awareness, he might have made himself a public martyr to his conscience; but he lacks political awareness. He only has only his black-hat hacker awareness, which is all about committing awesome voyeuristic acts of computer intrusion and imagining you can get away with that when it really matters to people. The guy preferred his hacker identity to his sworn fidelity to the uniform of a superpower. The shear-forces there are beyond his comprehension. The reason this upsets me is that I know so many people just like Bradley Manning. Because I used to meet and write about hackers, b crackers,b b darkside hackers,b b computer undergroundb types. They are a subculture, but once you get used to their many eccentricities, there is nothing particularly remote or mysterious or romantic about them. They are banal. Bradley Manning is a young, mildly brainy, unworldly American guy who probably would have been pretty much okay if hebd been left alone to skateboard, read comic books and listen to techno music. Instead, Bradley had to leak all over the third rail. Through historical circumstance, hebs become a miserable symbolic point-man for a global war on terror. He doesnbt much deserve that role. Hebs got about as much to do with the political aspects of his war as Monica Lewinsky did with the lasting sexual mania that afflicts the American Republic. That is so dispiriting and ugly. As a novelist, I never think of Monica Lewinsky, that once-everyday young woman, without a sense of dread at the freakish, occult fate that overtook her. Imagine what it must be like, to wake up being her, to face the inevitability of being That Woman. Monica, too, transgressed in apparent safety and then she had the utter foolishness to brag to a lethal enemy, a trusted confidante who ran a tape machine and who brought her a mediated circus of hells. The titillation of that massive, shattering scandal has faded now. But think of the quotidian daily horror of being Monica Lewinsky, and that should take a bite from the soul. Bradley Manning now shares that exciting, oh my God, Monica Lewinsky, tortured media-freak condition. This mild little nobody has become super-famous, and in his lonely military brig, screenless and without a computer, hebs strictly confined and, no doubt, hebs horribly bored. I donbt want to condone or condemn the acts of Bradley Manning. Because legions of people are gonna do that for me, until webre all good and sick of it, and then some. I donbt have the heart to make this transgressor into some hockey-puck for an ideological struggle. I sit here and I gloomily contemplate his all-too-modern situation with a sense of Sartrean nausea. Commonly, the authorities donbt much like to crush apple-cheeked white-guy hackers like Bradley Manning. Itbs hard to charge hackers with crimes, even when they gleefully commit them, because itbs hard to find prosecutors and judges willing to bone up on the drudgery of understanding what they did. But theybve pretty much got to make a pureeb out of this guy, because of massive pressure from the gravely embarrassed authorities. Even though Bradley lacks the look and feel of any conventional criminal; wrong race, wrong zipcode, wrong set of motives. Bradleybs gonna become a b spyb whose b espionageb consisted of making the activities of a democratic government visible to its voting population. With the New York Times publishing the fruits of his misdeeds. Some set of American prosecutorial lawyers is confronting this crooked legal hairpin right now. I feel sorry for them. Then there is Julian Assange, who is a pure-dye underground computer hacker. Julian doesnbt break into systems at the moment, but hebs not an b ex-hacker,b hebs the silver-plated real deal, the true avant-garde. Julian is a child of the underground hacker milieu, the digital-native as twenty-first century cypherpunk. As far as I can figure, Julian has never found any other line of work that bore any interest for him. Through dint of years of cunning effort, Assange has worked himself into a position where his b computer crimesb are mainly political. Theybre probably not even crimes. They are b leaks.b Leaks are nothing special. They are tidbits from the powerful that every journalist gets on occasion, like crumbs of fishfood on the top of the media tank. Only, this time, thanks to Manning, Assange has brought in a massive truckload of media fishfood. Itbs not just some titillating, scandalous, floating crumbs. Therebs a quarter of a million of them. Hebs become the one-man global McDonaldbs of leaks. Ever the detail-freak, Assange in fact hasnbt shipped all the cables he received from Manning. Instead, he cunningly encrypted the cables and distributed them worldwide to thousands of fellow-travellers. This stunt sounds technically impressive, although it isnbt. Itbs pretty easy to do, and nobody but a cypherpunk would think that it made any big difference to anybody. Itbs part and parcel of Assangebs other characteristic activities, such as his inability to pack books inside a box while leaving any empty space. While others stare in awe at Assangebs many otherworldly aspects b his hairstyle, his neatness, too-precise speech, his post-national life out of a laptop bag b I can recognize him as pure triple-A outsider geek. Man, I know a thousand modern weirdos like that, and every single one of them seems to be on my Twitter stream screaming support for Assange because they can recognize him as a brother and a class ally. They are in holy awe of him because, for the first time, their mostly-imaginary and lastingly resentful underclass has landed a serious blow in a public arena. Julian Assange has hacked a superpower. He didnbt just insult the captain of the global football team; he put spycams in the locker room. He has showed the striped-pants set without their pants. This a massively embarrassing act of technical voyeurism. Itbs like Monica and her stains and kneepads, only even more so. Now, I wish I could say that I feel some human pity for Julian Assange, in the way I do for the hapless, one-shot Bradley Manning, but I canbt possibly say that. Pity is not the right response, because Assange has carefully built this role for himself. He did it with all the minute concentration of some geek assembling a Rubikbs Cube. In that regard, onebs hat should be off to him. Hebs had forty years to learn what he was doing. Hebs not some miserabilist semi-captive like the uniformed Bradley Manning. Hebs a darkside player out to stick it to the Man. The guy has surrounded himself with the cream of the computer underground, wily old rascals like Rop Gonggrijp and the fearsome Teutonic minions of the Chaos Computer Club. Assange has had many long, and no doubt insanely detailed, policy discussions with all his closest allies, about every aspect of his means, motives and opportunities. And he did what he did with fierce resolve. Furthermore, and not as any accident, Assange has managed to alienate everyone who knew him best. All his friends think hebs nuts. Ibm not too thrilled to see that happen. Thatbs not a great sign in a consciousness-raising, power-to-the-people, radical political-leader type. Most successful dissidents have serious people skills and are way into revolutionary camaraderie and a charismatic sense of righteousness. Theybre into kissing babies, waving bloody shirts, and keeping hope alive. Not this chilly, eldritch guy. Hebs a bright, good-looking man who b letbs face it b canbt get next to women without provoking clumsy havoc and a bitter and lasting resentment. Thatbs half the human race thatbs beyond his comprehension there, and I rather surmise that, from his stern point of view, it was sure to be all their fault. Assange was in prison for a while lately, and his best friend in the prison was his Mom. That seems rather typical of him. Obviously Julian knew he was going to prison; a child would know it. Hebs been putting on his Solzhenitsyn clothes and combing his forelock for that role for ages now. Ibm a little surprised that he didnbt have a more organized prison-support committee, because hebs a convicted computer criminal whobs been through this wringer before. Maybe he figures hebll reap more glory if hebs martyred all alone. I rather doubt the authorities are any happier to have him in prison. They pretty much gotta feed him into their legal wringer somehow, but a botched Assange show-trial could do colossal damage. Therebs every likelihood that the guy could get off. He could walk into an American court and come out smelling of roses. Itbs the kind of show-trial judo every repressive government fears. Itbs not just about him and the burning urge to punish him; itbs about the public risks to the reputation of the USA. They superpower hypocrisy here is gonna be hard to bear. The USA loves to read other peoplebs diplomatic cables. They dote on doing it. If Assange had happened to out the cable-library of some outlaw pariah state, say, Paraguay or North Korea, the US State Department would be heaping lilies at his feet. Theybd be a little upset about his violation of the strict proprieties, but theybd also take keen satisfaction in the hilarious comeuppance of minor powers that shouldnbt be messing with computers, unlike the grandiose, high-tech USA. Unfortunately for the US State Department, they clearly shouldnbt have been messing with computers, either. In setting up their SIPRnet, they were trying to grab the advantages of rapid, silo-free, networked communication while preserving the hierarchical proprieties of official confidentiality. Thatbs the real issue, thatbs the big modern problem; national governments and global computer networks donbt mix any more. Itbs like trying to eat a very private birthday cake while also distributing it. That scheme is just not working. And that failure has a face now, and thatbs Julian Assange. Assange didnbt liberate the dreadful secrets of North Korea, not because the North Koreans lack computers, but because that isnbt a cheap and easy thing that half-a-dozen zealots can do. But the principle of it, the logic of doing it, is the same. Everybody wants everybody elsebs national government to leak. Every state wants to see the diplomatic cables of every other state. It will bend heaven and earth to get them. Itbs just, that sacred activity is not supposed to be privatized, or, worse yet, made into the no-profit, shareable, have-at-it fodder for a network society, as if global diplomacy were so many mp3s. Now the US State Department has walked down the thorny road to hell that was first paved by the music industry. Rock and roll, baby. Now, in strict point of fact, Assange didnbt blandly pirate the massive hoard of cables from the US State Department. Instead, he was busily b redactingb and minutely obeying the proprieties of his political cover in the major surviving paper dailies. Kind of a nifty feat of social-engineering there; but hebs like a poacher who machine-gunned a herd of wise old elephants and then went to the temple to assume the robes of a kosher butcher. That is a world-class hoax. Assange is no more a b journalistb than he is a crypto mathematician. Hebs a darkside hacker who is a self-appointed, self-anointed, self-educated global dissident. Hebs a one-man Polish Solidarity, waiting for the population to accrete around his stirring propaganda of the deed. And they are accreting; not all of bem, but, well, it doesnbt take all of them. Julian Assange doesnbt want to be in power; he has no people skills at all, and nobodybs ever gonna make him President Vaclav Havel. Hebs certainly not in for the money, because he wouldnbt know what to do with the cash; he lives out of a backpack, and his daily routine is probably sixteen hours online. Hebs not gonna get better Google searches by spending more on his banned MasterCard. I donbt even think Assange is all that big on ego; I know authors and architects, so Ibve seen much worse than Julian in that regard. Hebs just what he is; hebs something we donC"bt yet have words for. Hebs a different, modern type of serious troublemaker. Hebs certainly not a b terrorist,b because nobody is scared and no one got injured. Hebs not a b spy,b because nobody spies by revealing the doings of a government to its own civil population. He is orthogonal. Hebs asymmetrical. He panics people in power and he makes them look stupid. And I feel sorry for them. But sorrier for the rest of us. Julian Assangebs extremely weird version of dissident b living in truthb doesnbt bear much relationship to the way that public life has ever been arranged. It does, however, align very closely to what webve done to ourselves by inventing and spreading the Internet. If the Internet was walking around in public, it would look and act a lot like Julian Assange. The Internet is about his age, and it doesnbt have any more care for the delicacies of profit, propriety and hierarchy than he does. So Julian is heading for a modern legal netherworld, the slammer, the electronic parole cuff, whatever; you can bet there will be surveillance of some kind wherever he goes, to go along with the FREE ASSANGE stencils and xeroxed flyers that are gonna spring up in every coffee-bar, favela and university on the planet. A guy as personally hampered and sociopathic as Julian may in fact thrive in an inhuman situation like this. Unlike a lot of keyboard-hammering geeks, hebs a serious reader and a pretty good writer, with a jailhouse-lawyer facility for pointing out weaknesses in the logic of his opponents, and boy are they ever. Weak, that is. They are pathetically weak. Diplomats have become weak in the way that musicians are weak. Musicians naturally want people to pay real money for music, but if you press them on it, theybll sadly admit that they donbt buy any music themselves. Because, well, theybre in the business, so why should they? And the same goes for diplomats and discreet secrets. The one grand certainty about the consumers of Cablegate is that diplomats are gonna be reading those stolen cables. Not hackers: diplomats. Hackers bore easily, and they wonbt be able to stand the discourse of intelligent trained professionals discussing real-life foreign affairs. American diplomats are gonna read those stolen cables, though, because they were supposed to read them anyway, even though they didnbt. Now, theybve got to read them, with great care, because they might get blindsided otherwise by some wisecrack that they typed up years ago. And, of course, every intelligence agency and every diplomat from every non-American agency on Earth is gonna fire up computers and pore over those things. To see what American diplomacy really thought about them, or to see if they were ignored (which is worse), and to see how the grownups ran what was basically a foreign-service news agency that the rest of us were always forbidden to see. This stark fact makes them all into hackers. Yes, just like Julian. Theybre all indebted to Julian for this grim thing that he did, and as they sit there hunched over their keyboards, drooling over their stolen goodies, theybre all, without exception, implicated in his doings. Assange is never gonna become a diplomat, but hebs arranged it so that diplomats henceforth are gonna be a whole lot more like Assange. Theybll behave just like him. They receive the goods just like he did, semi-surreptitiously. They may be wearing an ascot and striped pants, but theybve got that hacker hunch in their necks and theybre staring into the glowing screen. And I donbt much like that situation. It doesnbt make me feel better. I feel sorry for them and what it does to their values, to their self-esteem. If therebs one single watchword, one central virtue, of the diplomatic life, itbs b discretion.b Not b transparency.b Diplomatic discretion. Discretion is why diplomats do not say transparent things to foreigners. When diplomats tell foreigners what they really think, war results. Diplomats are people who speak from nation to nation. They personify nations, and nations are brutal, savage, feral entities. Diplomats used to have something in the way of an international community, until the Americans decided to unilaterally abandon that in pursuit of Bradley Manningbs oil war. Now nations are so badly off that they canbt even get it together to coherently tackle heroin, hydrogen bombs, global warming and financial collapse. Not to mention the Internet. The world has lousy diplomacy now. Itbs dysfunctional. The world corps diplomatique are weak, really weak, and the US diplomatic corps, which used to be the senior and best-engineered outfit there, is rattling around bottled-up in blast-proofed bunkers. Itbs scary how weak and useless they are. US diplomats used to know what to do with dissidents in other nations. If they were communists they got briskly repressed, but if they had anything like a free-market outlook, then US diplomats had a whole arsenal of gentle and supportive measures; Radio Free Europe, publication in the West, awards, foreign travel, flattery, moral support; discreet things, in a word, but exceedingly useful things. Now theybre harassing Julian by turning those tools backwards. For a US diplomat, Assange is like some digitized nightmare-reversal of a kindly Cold War analog dissident. He read the dissident playbook and he downloaded it as a textfile; but, in fact, Julian doesnbt care about the USA. Itbs just another obnoxious national entity. He happens to be more or less Australian, and hebs no great enemy of America. If hebd had the chance to leak Australian cables he would have leapt on that with the alacrity he did on Kenya. Of course, when Assange did it to that meager little Kenya, all the grown-ups thought that was groovy; he had to hack a superpower in order to touch the third rail. But the American diplomatic corps, and all it thinks it represents, is just collateral damage between Assange and his goal. He aspires to his tpolitical tactility is beneath his dignity. Hebs extremely intelligent, but, as a political, social and moral actor, hebs the kind of guy who gets depressed by the happiness of the stupid. I donbt say these cruel things about Julian Assange because I feel distant from him, but, on the contrary, because I feel close to him. I donbt doubt the two of us would have a lot to talk about. I know hordes of men like him; itbs just that they are programmers, mathematicians, potheads and science fiction fans instead of fiercely committed guys who aspire to topple the international order and replace it with subversive wikipedians. The chances of that ending well are about ten thousand to one. And I donbt doubt Assange knows that. This is the kind of guy who once wrote an encryption program called b Rubberhose,b because he had it figured that the cops would beat his password out of him, and he needed some code-based way to finesse his own human frailty. Hey, neat hack there, pal. So, well, thatbs the general situation with this particular scandal. I could go on about it, but Ibm trying to pace myself. This knotty situation is not gonna b blow over,b because itbs been building since 1993 and maybe even 1947. b Transparencyb and b discretionb are virtues, but they are virtues that clash. The international order and the global Internet are not best pals. They never were, and now thatbs obvious. The data held by states is gonna get easier to steal, not harder to steal; the Chinese are all over Indian computers, the Indians are all over Pakistani computers, and the Russian cybermafia is brazenly hosting wikileaks.info because thatbs where the underground goes to the mattresses. It is a godawful mess. This is gonna get worse before it gets better, and itbs gonna get worse for a long time. Like leaks in a house where the pipes froze. Wellb& every once in a while, a situation thatbs one-in-a-thousand is met by a guy who is one in a million. It may be that Assange is, somehow, up to this situation. Maybe hebs gonna grow in stature by the massive trouble he has caused. Saints, martyrs, dissidents and freaks are always wild-cards, but sometimes theybre the only ones who can clear the general air. Sometimes they become the catalyst for historical events that somehow had to happen. They donbt have to be nice guys; thatbs not the point. Julian Assange did this; he direly wanted it to happen. He planned it in nitpicky, obsessive detail. Here it is; a planetary hack. I donbt have a lot of cheery hope to offer about his all-too-compelling gesture, but I dare to hope hebs everything he thinks he is, and much, much, more. Bruce Sterling

2 1

Cheap ViagraPills start fr $1.85, *25mg: 40 pills-$78, *50mg:30 pills-$99, 270 pills-$499, *100mg: 30 pills-$105 q0f
by Luann Arlette 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

Cheap ViagraPills start fr $1.85 30 pills - $ 78 270 pills - $499 Optional: Delivery Insurance (Guaranteeed reshipment if delivery failed) Order more products & get free Regular Airmail shipping! http://twoapenny.ru

1 0

Re: [p2p-hackers] Whistle-blower site platform design
by Eugen Leitl 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

----- Forwarded message from Len Sassaman <Len.Sassaman(a)esat.kuleuven.be> -----

1 0

Re: [p2p-hackers] Whistle-blower site platform design
by Eugen Leitl 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

----- Forwarded message from Len Sassaman <Len.Sassaman(a)esat.kuleuven.be> -----

1 0

Home Internet with Anonymity Built In
by Eugen Leitl 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

http://www.technologyreview.com/printer_friendly_article.aspx?id=26981 Home Internet with Anonymity Built In A router that runs the Tor software prevents Web tracking. By Tom Simonite Many political activists, nonprofits, and businesses use an anonymity system called Tor to encrypt and obscure what they do on the Internet. Now the U.S.-based nonprofit that distributes Tor is developing a low-cost home router with the same privacy protection built in. The Tor software masks Web traffic by encrypting network messages and passing them through a series of relays (each Tor client can also become a relay for other users' messages). But using Tor has typically meant installing the software on a computer and then tweaking its operating system to ensure that all traffic is routed correctly through the program. "We want to make anonymity something that can happen everywhere, all the time," says Jacob Appelbaum, a Tor project developer. "When you are connected to a router with Tor inside, all your traffic goes through Tor without you changing your system at all. It makes it simple to use." Appelbaum says volunteers are already testing a small number of modified routers with Tor installed. The prototypes were made by installing new software onto a popular low-cost wireless router made by Buffalo Technology. The software was developed by Appelbaum and colleagues at Tor and is based on the work of the OpenWrt project, which offers open source code for networking equipment. The finished routers can be configured to pass all traffic through Tor, or only some kinds of communications. "You might want to run your VOIP device through Tor but not your other traffic," Appelbaum explains. They will also be capable of simultaneously offering Tor-protected and conventional wireless networks. "If we find that these routers are useful [in the trials]," he says, "we could partner with OpenWrt and Buffalo to offer a version for sale that helps support the Tor and OpenWrt projects." The software will also be made available for people to install on routers they have bought themselves, Appelbaum says. Besides serving as Tor clients, the new routers will help anonymize the traffic of other Tor users. This means that they could help boost the performance the Tor network. When a person uses Tor to bring up a Web page, the request is encrypted and sent along a random path through other Tor computers that act as relays. This obscures the originating IP (Internet protocol) addressba unique code that can be used to track down a Web user, to filter access to certain sites or services, or to build up a profile of a person's Web use. Generally, the process results in lag and restricts bandwidth, which deters some people from using Tor, says Chris Palmer, technology director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "The primary way to address that problem is to have more Tor relays in more places, connected to high-bandwidth, low-latency lines," he explains. "Wireless routers may fit the bill well, if they can be built with the computational resources necessary to run a Tor relay of decent capacity." Although consumer-grade routers are necessarily relatively low-powered, their capabilities have grown markedly in recent years, Palmer notes. Tor routers could also make the entire Tor system better able to resist government attempts to block its use. An individual installation of Tor software hooks into the network by referring to a list of relays in a directory maintained by the Tor project. It is possible to block Tor by checking the same directory and preventing connections to the servers listedba tactic apparently used by the Chinese authorities. It is possible to get around such a block, however, by configuring the Tor software to act as a "bridge," or a private relay, that can only be discovered by word of mouth. A Tor router can also act as a bridge, and Appelbaum is considering making that a default setting. During the protests in Iran that followed the 2009 election, the EFF campaigned for more people to act as Tor bridges to keep the government from blocking the tool, and Palmer says increasing the supply of bridges remains important. "It makes the adversary's job more difficult when there are more possible bridges to advertise and use," he says. Appelbaum says, "If you have 10,000 people using these little routers, then China would have a lot more difficulty blocking Tor." Copyright Technology Review 2010.

1 0

Re: [p2p-hackers] Whistle-blower site platform design
by Eugen Leitl 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

----- Forwarded message from Yongdae Kim <yongdaek(a)gmail.com> -----

1 0

Распродажа на свинокомплексе
by Monty Gage 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

СВИНИНА живой вес От 72 руб./кг. полутуши От 106 руб./кг +7 (495) 669 94 18 Группа предприятий (сфера деятельности - животноводство и растениеводство) стабильно предлагает к реализации свинину собственного производства с 2-х откормочных комплексов, работающих на основе канадской технологии содержания животных и использования 100% покупных комбикормов от известных производителей с высокоэнергетичным натуральным рационом. К реализации предлагается экологически безопасная продукция с высокими вкусовыми качествами. Товар имеет все необходимые сертификаты качества и разрешительную документацию. Еженедельное предложение: 200-300 голов (либо 15 - 25 тонн мяса в полутушах). Средний вес 105-110 кг; шпик 2-2,5 см. (6-7 ребро); свинина соответствует ГОСТ-у 1-ой категории. Продажа возможна как живым весом, так и в полутушах (есть свой забойных цех, соответствующий промышленным стандартам). Предпочтителен самовывоз со склада продавца (Пензенская область), но возможна доставка. Предоплата 100%. Динамика цен меняется еженедельно в соответствии с изменениями кондиции товара и/или колебаниями рынка, уточняйте предложение у менеджеров. Фотографии животных, полутуш, качества забоя, схемы проезда и заявки на посещение объектов Вы можете также получить по указанным далее телефонам. Прайс-лист: Количество голов Живой вес Полутуши До 10 80 руб./кг 125 руб./кг От 10 до 30 79 руб./кг 119 руб./кг. От 30 до 50 78 руб./кг 115 руб./кг От 50 до 100 76 руб./кг 112 руб./кг От 100 и более индивидуально индивидуально +7 (495) 669 94 18

1 0

Re: [p2p-hackers] Whistle-blower site platform design
by John Young 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

The expectation was that I'd leak the whole shebang without permission. Never. That shit is over. However ... a request by PGP to me can get a PDF of the whole thing. This should not be made public. JY PK: ID: 0x58A4971E The PK: http://cryptome.org/other-stuff#pk At 03:20 PM 12/22/2010 -0800, you wrote: >On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 2:57 PM, John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> wrote: >> Cryptome was given a preview of OpenLeaks.org yesterday. >> ... >> It is in testing now with access by invitation. > >FD or GTFO > >;)

1 0

Re: [p2p-hackers] Whistle-blower site platform design
by Eugen Leitl 23 Dec '10

23 Dec '10

----- Forwarded message from Ian G <iang(a)iang.org> -----

1 0