- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Fight ECHELON while the topic is hot!
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From whgiii(a)invweb.net Tue Feb 24 11:15:11 1998 > > >It is *you* who are advocating being a "sheeple"!!! > > No not at all I just don't have any pie-in-the-sky daydreams that it will > mean squat! I have better things to do with my time than dealing with a > news media who's highest goal is to sell more tampons and toilet paper to > the sheeple. I said to go for it and *try* for results. If you want to act like a disgruntled old Andy Rooney and say "it won't make any difference", fine, but why drag down everyone else? The EU, not just anybody, but the EU, is talking about massive NSA spying via ECHELON! ---guy Turn up the heat.

1 0

Re: Cypherpunk Policeman?
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Guy wrote: > Has 'cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net' replaced 'cypherpunks(a)toad.com'? Apparently it hasn't, because I never got a copy of my own post back. So, here it is again... > From aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk Mon Feb 23 16:26:58 1998 > > Guy <guy(a)panix.com> claims that he managed to persuade PSInet (who > Dimitri used as his ISP) to pull his plug. Leaving him with full access to a minimum of three other accounts. Don't cry for him, Ukrainia... > I'd just like to feed back to Guy that I think this is uncool, and > that it is counter productive. Hey, maybe _you_ would get a warm and fuzzy feeling when Dimitry posts a death threat (including to this list) and signs your name: not me. ! I will gladly pay the $50,000 (canadian) reward to whomever KILLS ! Chris Lewis and his family, who reside in a suburb of Ottawa. ! I'm putting the notice of the CAUCE reward on http://www.panix.com/~guy ! ---guy > Guy, you may not have hit it off with Dimitri, but this is no reason > to go attempting to censor people. Ever heard of a kill file? Censor? Yeah, and the "Freedom Fighters" who are against any spam cancellation do so because they are fighting "censorship". I don't think so. > As an aside I don't think getting into a dirty tricks contest with > Dimitri is a good idea, I am pretty sure Dimitri could win by a large > margin if he cared to. No dirty tricks involved: I complained to PSINet using traffic analysis. If he had simply called me a cocksucker, I would not have complained. > Guy <guy(a)panix.com> writes: > > PSINet terminated Vulis for stalking, which I documented he did to a > > minimum of four people. > > What is your working definition of stalking as applied to a mailing > list, USENET or email? What are you talking about? In addition to death threats, forging death threats: he tries to get people fired from their jobs. But Dimitry can't figure out where I work (MUHAHAHAHAHAHAHA), reducing him to saying I was fired from where I _used to_ work. <snicker> This stalking: attempting to deprive someone of their right to work. ---- > From tcmay(a)got.net Mon Feb 23 17:14:50 1998 > > At 1:24 PM -0800 2/23/98, Adam Back wrote: > >Guy <guy(a)panix.com> claims that he managed to persuade PSInet (who > >Dimitri used as his ISP) to pull his plug. > > > >I'd just like to feed back to Guy that I think this is uncool, and > >that it is counter productive. > > > >Guy, you may not have hit it off with Dimitri, but this is no reason > >to go attempting to censor people. Ever heard of a kill file? > > I agree with Adam. As one who has borne a frontal assault of Vulis' insults > and raves, and (in all probability his) ASCII artwork, I dealt with it by > filtering as much of it as I could into a trash file. Oh, great, an independently wealthy person is telling me it's not a problem that a known stalker has posted angrily to this list asking if anyone knows where I work. > In my 10 years of actively being on the Net (though my first ARPANet > account was in 1973), I've complained a handful of times to postmasters, > and only _once_ because of content. The rest were about spam, mail bombs, > etc. > > The one content-based complaint I made was about Lawrence Detweiler's > attachment of my name to pro-Hitler, anti-Jewish rants he sent to > newsgroups like alt.culture.jewish and alt.culture.german. Then please explain why you agree with Adam, since I decided to complain to PSINet about Vulis stalking me and signing my name to death threats? > If Vulis can have his account yanked for calling Guy a pedophile, what > about all those who have called Arthur C. Clarke a pedophile? > > Has there been any determination (and what does that mean anyway?) as to > whether either Guy or Clarke are pedophiles? Ahhh, that's the wrong question. Look past your nose. Calling me a pedophile is one part of Vulis' patented style of stalking attacks. Add to that him saying I was fired from consulting work for being a pedophile, asking if anyone knows where I now work, etc: stalking. It wasn't merely him being insulting, but part of a larger Simon-Barr-Sinister pattern of behavior. Certain behavior is not permissible regardless of the venue. Not a direct analogy, but: you would censor (CENSOR! CENSOR!) people who work for you who wanted to speak "Ebonics" on the job. Gosh, how dare you deprive them of their right to free speech!. ---- > From aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk Mon Feb 23 21:35:47 1998 > > John Young <jya(a)pipeline.com> writes: > > Since Guy's death notice Dimitri's telephone has not answered > > several tries. The number of his sig: 1-718-261-2013, in Brooklyn > > across floater bay from here. > > > > Was he whacked as well as unplugged? Or is he hiding from the > > peds, plotting anthrax terror posing as Jim Kallstrom? > > OK, Guy, could you fill us in on what exactly you did to get PSInet to > pull Dimitri's plug? Exactly what I said: I submitted traffic analysis reports ("the big picture") regarding Vulis' stalking activity via PSINet to their legal people. I have previously posted to this list a dejanews URL for an early traffic analysis report on him that I posted to Usenet. It was like that, only more complete and specifically oriented towards getting him spanked. > Did it involve calls to law enforcement? No. He used an anonymous remailer for the death threat. His personal stalking of me didn't get far before I blew him off PSINet. I'm sure he's learned his lesson. ;-) He's still here, but sulking silently. He's run out of dirty tricks. > Is it likely that your claims would have been relayed by PSI to law > enforcement? Oh, I _wish_ I had that kind of influence. Of course, in the Cryptography Manifesto polemic, I have said not-nice things about law enforcement, as part of complaining about Key Recovery and the general Orwellian state of affairs. Guy's CM: Louis Freeh is a Scary Man with the morals of a styrofoam cup. On the other hand, I do believe most FBI personnel are good people who perform an invaluable service for all of us. Guy's CM: This posting isn't about the many good FBI and other law enforcement people. Gee, could I do a better job of offending both "sides"? ;-) > If you have taken this far enough to get Dimitri into legal trouble, > and your claims are untrue, or exaggerated, I think you owe it to > Dimitri to try to undo some of this stuff fast! Hell. Freeze. Over. > What did you tell PSInet? I documented his stalking behavior via PSINet, documented that he had begun stalking me via PSINet, and stated that if they didn't terminate him and he continued stalking me, I would sue them. And that the traffic analysis report they were holding was what a jury would use to decide PSINet was liable for their continued (after _years_ of people's complaints) inaction. ---guy With Vulis, the best defense is a good offense.

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Michael Elder wrote: > > trei(a)ziplink.net wrote: > > >>Applied Cryptography: Protocols, Algorithms, and Source Code in C, > >Second Edition, by Bruce Schneier. Copyright 1995, John Wiley & Sons, > >Inc. All rights reserved. > >For those wondering: Applied Cryptography includes the source code > >appendix. I have not checked if it has the 5th printing corrections. > > Just a little note of interest, AC is currently in its sixth printing. I > just got it last week. > > -E. I noticed the sixth printing in Barnes and Noble 2 weeks ago. I didn't have too long to peruse thru it... Are there any big error corrections/ other reasons to pay any close attention to the new printing? -Anon

2 1

Re: Valentine Suprise
by William R. Butler 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Yes you are prob. right but I do get a little burned about it in my mail all the time. ----Original Message Follows---- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 10:00:46 -0500 To: "William R. Butler" <wrb(a)hotmail.com> From: Michael Elder <melder(a)descartes.coker.edu> Subject: Re: Valentine Suprise Cc: cypherpunks@toad.com,celeste@seeme.com At 05:28 AM 2/24/98 PST, William R. Butler wrote: >FUCK-OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >************************ ... >Me and my friends are so lonely!! >I wish that you would come and see me. >With Valentines day coming I don't want to be alone. >I will do anything to make you happy, >if you want me to I'll even invite a friend over to join us. >Just PLEASE don't let me be alone! >I'll be awaiting for you every night. >I'll be at: http://www.cyber-fantasy.com/ > I think that was the point of the advertisement d=] -E. ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

1 0

Pentagon Papers
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From William "Grumpy-pie" Geiger III Tue Feb 24 11:46:52 1998 > > >Didn't the Pentagon Papers make it out? > > What did it change? NOTHING My vague understanding of the matter is that it was an important US Supreme Court case involving free speech and prior restraint thereof. ---guy

1 0

Re: Cypherpunk Policeman?
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From aba(a)dcs.ex.ac.uk Tue Feb 24 14:56:22 1998 > > Guy <guy(a)panix.com> writes: > > > Has 'cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net' replaced 'cypherpunks(a)toad.com'? > > Er, yes, some time ago now. cypherpunks(a)toad.com is no longer, and > that mail to it gets through is just that toad.com feeds what it gets > back to cyberpass.net. The others replacements are algebra.com, and > ssz.com. Well, toad.com should stop accepting subscription requests. > You said elsewhere in your expose your claim that Dimitri forged posts > as from you that he used a remailer. So how can you have traffic > analysis showing that it was him, and secondly how do you know it even > was him. Because he posted under his own name ~"Chris Lewis should die", etc, and it matches up with the death threat. He is massively on record in his own name for stalking Chris Lewis, and contacting Chris Lewis at the same address. It was good enough for legal counsel. ---guy Plus the easily documented job-stalking of various people.

1 0

[Q: Information on PhD Cryptography Classes]
by sunder 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I got this request sent to me directly. If you have info for this person please reply directly to: balakrik(a)goldey.gbc.edu. To: SUNDER(a)brainlink.com Subject: Information on Cryptography From: Karthik Balakrishnan <balakrik(a)goldey.gbc.edu> Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 11:45:26 -0500 To introduce myself, I am Karthik Balakrishnan, a senior majoring in Computer Information Systems. I should be graduating at the end of th Fall semester. I am planning to pursue my Master's in Cryptography, probably try for PhD program. I would really appretiate your help in guiding me through this proces by giving me some advice on this, as to which schools offer a PhD in this field, the schools that you recommend, and how to go about this process. My e-mail address is : balakrik(a)goldey,gbc.edu Thank you very much.

1 0

Re: Cypherpunk Policeman?
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From jya(a)pipeline.com Tue Feb 24 16:06:28 1998 > > Guy, > > Without defending Dimitri's actions I'd like to check that > he's not suffered a Jim Bell snatch, perhaps unrelated > to your complaint. PSINet snatcheroo? That's getting tough on complaints. ;-) I've only submitted a complaint to PSINet so far. Haven't gotten around to Altopia. I do actually work for a living, despite Vulis' claims. He posted from 'cj3(a)alt.net' _after_ being terminated from PSINet. > He's not answered his phone since > you announced the unplug, nor answered e-mail (to dm.com, > which is no longer active). > > Do you have any info on who I could contact for leads? > Or can you refer this to someone who does? I've only got > the phone number listed in his sig. Whois gives his number as: Billing Contact: Vulis, Dimitri (DV1010) dlv(a)DM.COM 718-261-6839 > BTW, I'm in Manhattan. Vox: 212-873-8700. Ain't it great here in NYC, Third Planet From the Sun? You could always go over and knock on his door. I hear he posted a picture of himself to the Net in 1992, and that "he looked dorky, and his wife fat". Hey, Vulis is probably looking for a real job. Maybe he's finally found one. I can hear him saying: "Would you like fries with that?" ---guy

2 1

Group to Attack Clinton on Crypto
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Date: Tue, 24 Feb 1998 18:49:25 +0000 (GMT) From: "Dr I. D. Goodyer" <goodyer(a)well.ox.ac.uk> To: ukcrypto(a)maillist.ox.ac.uk Subject: Group to Attack Clinton on Crypto >From http://www.news.com/News/Item/0,4,19388,00.html I hope that this isn't too American for us the majority on this list. I thought that it was relevant. See original webpage for hyperlinks. Ian Group to Attack Clinton on Crypto By Courtney Macavinta Staff Writer, CNET NEWS.COM February 23, 1998, 2:40 p.m. PT A bipartisan group of politicos, high-tech companies, and privacy advocates will announce a broad coalition next week to overturn the White House's current encryption policy through a million-dollar media blitz and lobbying campaign, CNET's NEWS.COM has learned. Encryption secures digital communications, rendering it unreadable if intercepted. The technology is the center of a U.S. debate with federal law enforcement officials asking Congress for access to the "keys" that unlock encrypted data on one side, and consumer groups and industry representatives arguing that such provisions make encryption products useless and constitute an invasion of privacy. The formation of the coalition--Americans for Computer Privacy--signals a shift in the diligent, but Beltway-confined, fight against the White House's crypto stance. The players in the coalition will attempt to force encryption policy on the mainstream radar by convincing Americans that the government has plans to read their private digital discourse. "This will be an effort with very major financial backing, and this effort will be joined by a breathtaking coalition of interests," Jack Quinn, the coalition's legal adviser, told CNET's NEWS.COM today. Quinn is a senior partner with Arnold & Porter in Washington and is a former counsel to President Clinton. "I think people will understand that the FBI director's [Louis Freeh] proposal for domestic encryption controls is really like asking them to make a duplicate of their front door key and leave it at the post office in case he wants to get inside...I don't think it will be hard to explain," he added. The coalition includes the Business Software Alliance, which will be just one of the financial backers, the trade group confirmed today. The hired guns to head up the coalition's strategy and media campaign also include Ed Gillespie, president of Policy Impact Communications and the strategist behind the Republican's sweeping 1994 legislative package known as the Contract with America; and the firm of Goddard-Claussen, which is best known for creating the famous "Harry and Louise" commercials that helped defeat the president's health care reform initiative the same year. In addition, Mindshare Internet Campaigns will be in charge of the online strategy and Web site for the coalition, with the Dittus Group in charge of public relations. Recruiting pamphlets with scant details about the coalition's membership, but with clearly laid out goals, already were circulated at the Computers, Freedom, and Privacy conference in Austin, Texas, last week. These forces and other yet-to-be named members of the coalition will try in about 50 calendar days remaining in Congress's session to derail legislation already on the table that they say will prevent private online communication. The group will fight an FBI-backed plan that would require all federally funded computers to store encryption keys with a government-approved party, allowing law enforcement to unscramble documents without users' knowledge or even a court order in some cases. "Even if you don't have a PC at your home or office, still there is information about you that is computerized; maybe it's your medical or financial records. We want to make sure that the technology that can keep that information private stays that way," said Tom McMahon, a spokesman for the coalition, which officially will launch next Wednesday. In addition, the Americans for Computer Privacy will ramp up an ongoing battle to overturn Clinton administration regulations prohibiting the export of strong encryption products unless the codes are made available to law enforcement agencies. A bill know as the SAFE Act was the vehicle for this export relief, but at least one version of the bill altered by the House Intelligence Committee would grant law enforcement access to encrypted protected communication in the United States. (See related story) "BSA is involved in this broader coalition of users, industry, and privacy groups. We are coming together to push for a policy that is based on a voluntary, market-based system that is based on consumer demand vs. the government's demand to access your communication in a way that is unprecedented and violates privacy," said Kim Willard, a spokeswoman for the BSA. The media campaign is expected to cost more than $1 million and will continue over the next eight months. The goal is to stimulate grassroots action against the bills that add more controls on cryptography. At the same time, the coalition's political heavyweights will be working with Congress members to secure a victory. "They clearly want to get this out to broader public audiences and move outside the Beltway to focus on what the public has at stake in this the debate," said Richard Claussen, whose firm will work on the TV campaign. "The indication is that we want to move pretty aggressively on this."

1 0

Cryptobook: State of the Art in '98?
by andrew fabbro 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I finally got around to building a cryptobook, as Joel McNamara described at http://www.eskimo.com/~joelm/cryptbk.html Being cool cypherpunk types, you already know that I'm referring to a computer that has an encrypted partition, is tricked out with cryptoware, and has been modified to prevent data leakage as much as possible (e.g., the OS swaps on the encrypted drive, the fact that it's a cryptobook is somewhat concealed, etc.) Joel's excellent article is two years old. I'm wondering if anyone can improve upon it, as there is at least one near-showstopper problem. (FYI, I'm using Win95 as a platform for various reasons, mostly because the data I'm encrypting is Win95-based and Joels' guide is Intel-based): (*) SecureDrive is recommended as a hard drive encryption product. Unfortunately, it's 16-bit and designed for DOS. On my laptop, which (as is typical) only has one hard drive controller, in order to mount the partition in 16-bit mode, I have to turn off all 32-bit disk access, which slows everything down a great deal, means loading a 16-bit CD-ROM driver, etc. Little things like animated icons also don't work -- yes, who cares, but it suggests there are probably other side effects. My winGeek friends don't think there is a way to mount one partition in 16-bit mode and the other in 32-bit mode. I'm wondering if anyone knows of 32-bit program like SecureDrive, preferably one using IDEA, that would be a worthwhile replacement. (FYI, another package of the same generation, SecureDevice, has the same problems). (*) Anyone care to recommend anything that is not included in Joel's list? Maybe new or better products since '96? I'd particularly be interested in some way of automating some of the manual things Joel proposes -- secure deletions, steganography, etc. Sorry, I'm a UNIX geek and am somewhat lost in Windows land... Thanks all, -- Andrew Fabbro [afabbro(a)umich.edu] www-personal.umich.edu/~afabbro "Solutions are not answers to problems." -- Richard Nixon

1 0