- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: "Export" controls
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>You sure it's not Microshaft? More meanings. Macroshit ? But I digress. >A little experiment is often a good thing. I heard that the guys who >made the DES cracker have had $$ requests for machines and/or chips. Their architecture has real $$ value because it cracks 99% of "encrypted" traffic. >In case you missed it, my original reply was an attempt to open >discussion on some type of cooperative effort. Offering the real stuff for sale in US requires some investment. Whether it is hardware (128-bit crypto engine on a PCI card ?) or software plug-in for the aforementioned OS that makes all traffic go through IPsec with 128-bit non-DES block cipher, some amount of money must be put to a risk. We are not talking here about free stuff. We are talking about products that can be deployed by non-programmers, businesses etc., that will be supported professionally (the perceived quality of professional support vs. free stuff is immaterial here.) >purposes. I wonder how many DES or IDEA engines could be put on a 500K >gate array? It would fit about 35 instantiations of Twofish. That should >be enough for a phone or a disk encryptor. Hardware is overkill for the single voice line. PGPfone works fine there. >Who want to get them done. <-- the key item If there is a demand, it will be done. Let's run a small poll: How much would you pay for transparent hardware/software solution that encrypts all traffic between peer users (assuming all rational crypto requirements are met, like available source code etc.) ? >No sense pushing the button without critical mass. The main problem with hard crypto is that it is so equalizing. Any pauper can cheaply encrypt and make it hard for any government to break. This is not the case with guns, where more resources almost linearly buy more power. - One of the posters mentioned that PGP is retailed in CompUSA. My mistake, I did not check them (but I did check 3 other big chains). - On the wild side, suppose that all crypto restrictions are terminated. Some would say that now "they" can break all available stuff. In any case the value of crypto products in the eyes of buyers would fall. If it is legal it is no good. Most of the research would lose the best people. Cypherpunks would cease to exist. A very dangerous proposition.

1 0

What's Down ....!!!!
by COM PLAIN 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In this letter i wanna know some tricks how to take revange, of a operator by hacking his code ,, can you help me ??? in alamak chat www.alamak.com ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

1 0

blanc's MIB
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:54 PM 12/1/98 -0800, Blanc wrote: >I received my visit from the friendly IRS guys tonight, asking about CJ/Toto. How did you authenticate them, or why was it unnecessary? >Kind of amusingly, one of them asked if CJ had ever asked me to join the Circle >of Eunuchs! heh. Should have said, "I 'know nothing' about such things" One of the investigators >expressed a great interest in the cpunk dicussions and concepts; I described >something of what the list is about and the flow of subscribers through it, and >referred him to the archives, saying '94-'95 were some good years. I'm sure >given a little time and several dinners we could convert him to the Dark Side. Or he could have gotten more intelligence from you.

1 0

Re: Fwd: FC: Gun groups take aim at new FBI database
by Albert P. Franco, II 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From frissell(a)panix.com: Some of the following statements do not (in my recollection) apply to those in California... > >The following statements are true: > >It is legal to own a car without a driver's license or vehicle registration. In CA only "junk" cars can be unregistered. An unregistered car on private property can be cited under a long list of circumstances. > >It is legal to drive an unregistered car without a driver's license (in >some circumstances). It is never "legal" to drive an unregistered vehicle (or even tow it without a trailer) on CA roads. The judge may let you off if you have "a real good reason". But the cops can and in most cases will cite you! > >No permission is required to purchase a car and felons, the mentally ill, >children, aliens and those guilty of misdemeanor domestic violence offenses >can buy cars and most of the above can drive cars on public streets and roads. I do believe that there are some legal restrictions for children purchasing cars... > >You are not required to report the purchase of a car to anyone. Since every car in CA MUST be registered, every change of ownership must be reported. If you do not you are subject to a fine. They give you ten days to report the transfer of ownership. > >It is legal to drive a car on public streets and roads in the US with a >license from any jurisdiction on earth. Only for a limited period of time in CA... > >It is legal to drive a car on public streets and roads in the US that is >registered in other states or nations. Not if the owner is a resident of CA, and again only for a limited period of time. > >It is legal to drive a car on public streets and roads in the US that is >owned by and registered to any person or legal entity. > >Legal entities can own and register cars and permit anyone they like to >drive them. > But they assume all the liability and even possible criminal consequences for letting unlicensed persons drive the car. >Note that if we regulated guns like driving, the above would mean that you >could buy and use a gun on your own property without licensing, >registration or reporting. NOT in CA... > >DCF >

1 0

Hi
by jt9＠mail.dsd.it 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Do you know what the number one factor is, that will determine whether your business is a success or not? ADVERTISING! Effective conventional advertising is quite expensive. So what do you do? Direct email is one of, if not thee most effective method of advertising in the 90's. You can get your ad out to hundreds of thousands, even millions, for only a fraction of the cost of traditional advertising. The wave of future advertising is here, don't miss it. We will send your advert for you. We have gone through painstaking methods to insure that we have the the most quality lists on the Internet. We send your ad for your, all you have to do is create it. 250,000 addresses - $199 350,000 addresses - $250 500,000 addresses - $350 1 million addresses - $700 For advertising to 3 million or more ask about our special rates. For more information or to place an ad call IMC Marketing at (909) 627-3557

1 0

Re: Fwd: FC: Gun groups take aim at new FBI database (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 03 Dec 1998 11:01:25 +0100 > From: "Albert P. Franco, II" <apf2(a)apf2.com> > Subject: Re: Fwd: FC: Gun groups take aim at new FBI database > Some of the following statements do not (in my recollection) apply to those > in California... > > > >The following statements are true: > > > >It is legal to own a car without a driver's license or vehicle registration. > > In CA only "junk" cars can be unregistered. An unregistered car on private > property can be cited under a long list of circumstances. Only if they can see it. Otherwise they'd need to execute a warrant to even find it. Park it in a garage or a niche in the backyard, problem solved. > >No permission is required to purchase a car and felons, the mentally ill, > >children, aliens and those guilty of misdemeanor domestic violence offenses > >can buy cars and most of the above can drive cars on public streets and > roads. > > I do believe that there are some legal restrictions for children purchasing > cars... There are legal restrictions on children buying anything. Technicaly the sale isn't final without a guardians signature as co-signatory of the bill of sale. > >You are not required to report the purchase of a car to anyone. > > Since every car in CA MUST be registered, every change of ownership must be > reported. If you do not you are subject to a fine. They give you ten days > to report the transfer of ownership. In most states the time limit and further instructions are on the vehicle license. If you buy it via a loan then other terms may apply. > >It is legal to drive a car on public streets and roads in the US with a > >license from any jurisdiction on earth. > > Only for a limited period of time in CA... Unless it's an international license that is recognized by the US this isn't true. Simply having a drivers license from England, for example, won't allow you to drive a vehicle in any of the states anymore than your CA license will let you drive legaly there. > >It is legal to drive a car on public streets and roads in the US that is > >registered in other states or nations. > > Not if the owner is a resident of CA, and again only for a limited period > of time. Actualy as long as the owner isn't a resident (not the driver) and doesn't stay in whatever state over some period set by the legislature then it is permissible. In a lot of states it is between 30-90 days. I'd bet the limit in CA is the residence time limit. I rather doubt that anyone staying in CA 11 days automaticaly becomes a resident with a right to vote in state elections and such. > >It is legal to drive a car on public streets and roads in the US that is > >owned by and registered to any person or legal entity. > > > >Legal entities can own and register cars and permit anyone they like to > >drive them. > > > > But they assume all the liability and even possible criminal consequences > for letting unlicensed persons drive the car. It depends on the insurance limitations. My Bronco II is technicly uninsured, and therefore illegal to drive, unless I am the driver. In some cases even if the driver is licensed the owner still assumes liability. At least here in Texas irrespective of who is driving the vehicle, the owner is ultimately responsible for the vehicle. So if you loan it to cousin Bippy and he has a wreck and runs away guess who gets to go to court on leaving-the-scene charges. Now if you roll on Bippy the situation may change. > >Note that if we regulated guns like driving, the above would mean that you > >could buy and use a gun on your own property without licensing, > >registration or reporting. > > NOT in CA... Move to Texas. You can still drive your unregistred, uninspected vehicle on your own property at your own speed and have wrecks at your convenience (within the constraints of your deed restrictions of course). Way too many bubba's still live in Texas for this sort of stuff to go over at all. ____________________________________________________________________ Technology cannot make us other than what we are. James P. Hogan The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

Re: open-pgp / s/mime interoperability
by pgut001＠cs.auckland.ac.nz 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Adam Back <aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk> writes: >Peter Gutmann writes: >>>open-pgp public keys aren't based on X.509 keys, so I would've thought >>>s/mime implementation would barf on them. >> >>Actually S/MIME *could* support the use of PGP keys, but there's a field >>(the SubjectKeyIdentifier) missing from the CMS SignerInfo which prevents >>this. >Surely this in itself should be a compelling argument for inclusion of the >SubjectKeyIdentifier? I'm trying to get this adopted for CMS, the underlying data format for S/MIME. The silly thing about this is that alternative key identifiers (like PGP keys) were going to be included in RSADSI's PKCS7v2, but aren't included in the IETF version of the same thing. The result is that you have a private company going out of its way to accomodate open standards, and the IETF going out of its way to lock them out. Weird. >If it allows conversion of PGP keys into S/MIME X.509 keys. You don't need this conversion, with key identifiers you can use both SPKI and PGP keys directly within S/MIME. There's no need to convert them into an X.509-like format first. Peter.

1 0

No Subject
by Mixmaster 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Date: Thu, 3 Dec 1998 12:24:01 +0800 (CST) >From: Bernardo B. Terrado <bbt(a)mudspring.uplb.edu.ph> >To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com, coderpunks(a)toad.com >Subject: MERRY CHRISTMAS! guys! Fuck Christmas, Bernardo "Go Fuck Yourself" Terrado. You and those bastards in the black helicopters can suck my Christmas cock. >sorry if you're angry with this Why the fuck would I be angry? Go fuck yourself, Bernardo. >~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >"If a student is particular about his studies, especially while he is too >young to know which are useful and which are not, we shall say he is no >lover of learning or of wisdom; just as, if he were dainty about his food, >we should say he was not hungry or fond of eating, but had a poor >appetite. " ---- PLATO Wasn't Plato that cocksucker who didn't pay his taxes to THE MAN? >By the way, it's Bernie not Bernardo. >`````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Oh FUCK! My apologies, Bernardo. If I had known you preferred "Bernie", then I would have told you to go fuck your mother instead of yourself. Warmest fucking regards to you and yer moms, -- PureFuck -- finger HillarysAsshole(a)whitehouse.gov for a good time

1 0

Fwd: FC: Emergency Powers and National Emergencies
by Albert P. Franco, II 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan points out some scary stuff here but no president (even Clinton) would be stupid enough to do something so outrageous. They would have to know that it would spark a long running a especially bloody revolution. Why risk it when they can just keep approaching totalitarianism incrementally with such activities as the FuckingDICks "Know Your Customer" activities. It's much quieter and infinitely less likely to result in a revolution. APF >> >>"The President has the power to seize property, organize and control the >>means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, call >>reserve forces amounting to 2 1/2 million men to duty, institute martial >>law, seize and control all menas of transportation, regulate all private >>enterprise, restrict travel, and in a plethora of particular ways, control >>the lives of all Americans... >> >>"Most [of these laws] remain a a potential source of virtually unlimited >>power for a President should he choose to activate them. It is possible >>that some future President could exercise this vast authority in an attempt >>to place the United States under authoritarian rule. >> >>"While the danger of a dictatorship arising through legal means may seem >>remote to us today, recent history records Hitler seizing control through >>the use of the emergency powers provisions contained in the laws of the >>Weimar Republic." >> >> --Joint Statement, Sens. Frank Church (D-ID) and Charles McMathias (R-MD) >> September 30, 1973 >> >> >>I came across this and the Senate special committee's 1973 report on >>Emergency Powers Statutes in Time Magazine's library. Powerful stuff. >> >>-Declan >> >>

1 0

Re: I Got Mine
by Albert P. Franco, II 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Now there's a really intelligent response to the MIB! I think Blanc would have done a better self-service to have responded that way. MAKE THEM GET A WARRANT! It's your ONLY legal defense against a fishing expedition! It's our CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to require a warrant before letting them in! We are NOT criminals just because we do not allow the MIBs to make ILLEGAL and UNCONSTITUTIONAL searches of our properties! If they can't convince a judge AND obtain a specifically worded search warrant then they are obviously fishing! Tell to go find a real deep lake... I also give the writer an A+ for the Clintonian and Reagonesque touches! APF > >Hello, I'm Special Agent Murfrock of the IRS and this is Special >Agent Prenfrew. We'd like to speak with you about C. J. Parker, >maybe known to you as "Toto" or "TruthMonger..." > >Sorry, I don't recognize any of those. Isn't Toto the dog? > >The dog? > >Yes, Dorothy's dog in... (stops when he notices that the agents are >scribbling furiously in their notebooks) > >May we come in? > >No, I was just about to go to sleep. I'm not well. > >Sorry to hear that. We have an e-mail here that you sent to Toto, >and another he sent back to you... > >May I see those? (takes the printouts) > >Sorry, doesn't ring a bell. > >Well, if you look at those headers, the ones circled in red, you >will see that... > >You must be kidding! There are more people forging e-mail headers >than live in St. Louis! Everybody knows that. > >Would you mind if we just come in for a moment? > >Yes, I would. I told you, I am going to sleep. > >Would you mind if we look at your computer? > >Why would you want to do that? > >Well if you didn't send or receive these messages, you have >nothing to worry about. > >I don't see any reason to do that. > >We can get a warrant, very quickly, as a matter of fact. If you >cooperate, things will go better for you. > >I love to cooperate. I want to cooperate. I am cooperating to the >fullest extent I believe is required of me. Ask me something that >makes sense and I'll answer it. We have learned sooo much from our wonderful President Clinton, haven't we?! > >Have you ever heard of a group called the Cypherpunks? > >It rings a bell. > >Are you a member? > >No. > >How do you explain the fact that we found your e-mail address on >a Cypherpunks membership list in a computer we seized? > >I have no idea. I don't join organizations. > >Are you a member of the Majordomo organization? > >No. The only majordomo I've ever heard of is a mail list manager. > >Where have you seen this Majordomo? > >Oh, everywhere. I think it's worldwide in scope. > >(scribble scribble) > >It's some kind of utility program. Everybody uses it. > >(scribbling stops) >What can you tell us about it? > >Nothing, really. If you want to get on a mail list you send a >"subscribe" message to a majordomo. If you want to get off, I >think you send an "unscrive" message. > >Have you ever done that? > >Maybe. I don't recall. Anyone can submit your e-mail address >to lists, so you don't even have to subscribe to be on an >e-mail list. And there's so much spam these days that I don't >recognize half the stuff I get. > >Spam? (the agents look at each other) > >Junk e-mail. I delete most of my e-mail without even reading it. >Sometimes my email program crashes and it all gets deleted before >I can look at it. > >(scribble scribble) >How many lists have you joined? > >I don't remember. I never paid any attention to those things, >and since I banged my head three months ago, I haven't been >remembering a lot of things. > >(scribble scribble) >So, are you denying being a member of the Cypherpunks? > >I don't know what that means. > >Have you ever subscribed to the Cypherpunks e-mail list? > >I have no idea. > >You have no idea? You don't remember? > >I don't know what I've subscribed to, unsubscribed from, >what I get, don't get. E-mail is a complete mess and I >ignore most of it. I'm really not very good at those >things. > >May we look? > >No. > >Are you going to make us get a warrant? > >Get what you like. My disk crashed last week and I threw it away. >Lost everything. In fact I just formatted my new disk and the >only data on it is manuscripts for the columns I write. > >Columns? > >I write for a magazine and a couple of newspapers. > >(oh shit) >(scribble scribble) >Oh yeah? Which ones? > >I don't think that's appropriate. > >Well, we'll be back. Here's my card in case you think of anything >you'd like to tell us. > >Sure. > >One more thing. Have you ever been invited to join something >called The Circle of Eunuchs, e-u-n-u-c-h-s? > >I don't recall ever hearing of anything like that. > >Do you know who Tim May is? > >Nope. Sounds like a real common name, though. > >How about Blanc? > >Is that French? > >Never mind. Thanks. We'll be seeing you. > >(I don't _think_ so) > >----- > >AmnesiaMonger >

1 0