- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Memo From...(6 of 7)
by bureau42 Anonymous Remailer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

(Part 6 of 7) > without prejudice, A legal term found in any law dictionary. > UCC 1-207, A reference to some part of the Uniform Commercial Code. Terrorism can now consist of citing existing law. Great. > pro se, Defending onesself now earns the classification of "terrorism." > sui juris, Acting of one's own rightm possessing full social and civil rights, not being under any civil disability or power of another or guardianship, having the capacity to manage one's own affairs... is now "terrorism?" Since we have to presume that she is not prepared to sacrifice these legal terms for her own use we have to think that this is a redefinition of what is politically correct for a citizen- unit to write in his own legal documents. > united states, United States? As a common noun? Trying to demonize that one is a dangerous ploy for bureaucrats and politicians who are themselves largely functionally illiterate. "Make a mistake in capitalization or punctuation and GO TO JAIL!" God, wouldn't your 5th grade spinster teacher, Miss Anderson, have just LOVED that? "Johnny, fail this weekly quiz and you're going to the slammer for a month! Beverly, you're going to get the chair if you go down for the third time!" > Black's law. Oh dear! The common everyday law dictionary. Of course only nincompoop resisters quote Black's. Real Lawyers (tm) cite case law, not dictionaries, because they've been let in on the Great Secret (tm) that "law comes from the bench." No wonder we're in such trouble! We've been electing the wrong asswipes all this time! We've been electing legislators, thinking they make the law, when we should have been electing judges. Geez. > Analysis and Trends > > These anti-government extremists and supporters are > convinced citizens are being systematically oppressed > by an illegal, totalitarian government. Maybe that's because it's true. > They believe the time for traditional political reform > has passed, Traditional political reform seems to mean "no political reform." At least that's what it has meant all through MY lifetime. > that their freedom will only be secured by resistance > to the law and attacks against the government in several > forms. Sadly, there is probably a rapidly increasing number of ordinary citizen-units coming to this conclusion. To understand why, all one must do is watch the government. > Members of these groups bond to one another and lose > contact with other people who hold different opinions. Nice try! We've been to college, have we? We've taken Psych 101, have we? We fancy ourselves adept at Psychwar, do we? (continued in Part 7)

1 0

RE: engineering infowar disasters (was Re: How the FBI/NSA forces can further twist SAFE)
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Phill warned Adam: >I suggest unless people want to hand the FBI an excuse >to harass everyone that they don't enter into this discussion. The WSJ reported recently on the comparatively lax security of the principal US nodes of the Internet -- MAEs and such. The reporter located the facilities and spoke to several of the sys admins, most of whom were surprised at being IDed, and were reluctant to discuss security. Some did, though, and shook their nogs at the ease with which the whole shebang could be trashed, claiming that for now it was only obscurity that saved the net -- or at least its facilities -- and asked the reporter not to tell the full story. A similar report was written in a mag a few months back, with a focus on the New Jersey facility (with photo), MAE, I think. There was a discussion here in 1994 or so on the location of the landing points of transatlantic cables, many of which come into New York City at obscure points along the coast, into huts and shacks, actually, easily located by following the cables shown on coastal maritime maps which neatly diagram every one of them to warn off shipping and dredging. At that time some of the cpunks associated with the telco and financial industries here (NYC) hinted at even worse security, especially the facilities kind, at the humongous hi-rise switching banks and highly accessible local distribution cablings into dank "secure" cells. I pray that none of these remarks are seen as darkly conspiratorial, but merely chit-chat, like Phill's bark. -- Now officially an EAR violation... Have *you* violated EAR today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`

1 0

Don't RELY On Bulk Email Servers! Bulk Email WORRY-FREE!
by GoStealth＠DontRELYonAGIS.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Dear cypherpunks(a)toad.com, Quit relying on CyberPromotions, Regulus, Quantom, or any other bulk email server that you are wasting your money on! Depend on yourself to get the job done hassle free! SEND YOUR E-MAIL OUT, AT up to 250,000 + MESSAGES / HOUR (28.8k modem) Yes, 250,000 + Messages An Hour 125,000 / Hour With a 14.4k Modem Over 1,000,000 / Hour with an ISDN Connection That's right, we believe that there should be little or no restrictions on Internet communications and email! This software demonstrates the notion of unlimited, uncensored, and unrestricted, bullet-proof email use. >>>Introducing.. "STEALTH MASS MAILER"... Do not get this program confused with other slow speed programs that call themselves "STEALTH". This program is the only one in the world that can send email out at HIGH SPEEDS with one single connection to the internet. This is NEW, Cutting Edge Email Technology. First Of Its Kind.. The Most Powerful BULK EMAIL SENDER In The World.. NOTHING CAN EVEN COME CLOSE! Thanks to the countries top programmer's, this technology is NOW available and we are the only place in the world to get it from! +ONLY "ONE" DIAL-UP OR ISDN CONNECTION NEEDED. +NO MORE TERMINATED CONNECTIONS. +NO MORE WAITING TO SEND LARGE AMOUNTS OF EMAIL. +IMMEDIATE RESPONSE TO YOUR MASS MAILINGS. +YOU WILL HAVE ALL THE CONTROL AND CONFIDENCE OF SENDING EMAIL THE WAY IT SHOULD BE SENT... IN HUGE AMOUNTS! +SEND YOUR WHOLE LIST IN ONE DAY, WHETHER IT BE 500,000 OR 5 MILLION - AND JUST SIT BACK AND WAIT FOR YOUR ORDERS TO POUR IN. +SEND EMAIL OVER 15 TIMES FASTER THAN EVER BEFORE. +NO MORE DOWNLOADING UNDELIVERABLE NAMES. Also, you will be happy to know that regardless of which bulk e-mail software program you own, you will be able to incorporate this technology with it, as long as you can export your list of recipients to a text file ( 1 address per line ). The program requires Windows 95 or NT and will not work with Windows 3.x. Bulk Emailer's Dream Come True!!! - >>>STEALTH - MASS MAILER Connect to multiple mail servers, make multiple connections to a single server or any combination of the two ( All Simultaneously ) with one single dial-up connection. After your message is sent out by the selected mail server(s), you can then have it relayed through another mail server or through multiple mail servers, in any server order you choose. SEND MULTIPLE SIMULTANEOUS MAILINGS... View complete details about your mailings. Shows each server your connected to, the status of that connection, how many message are going out through that connection, etc... NOTE: You only need one dial-up connection, and you can send email out through over 4,000 service providers accounts FREE! This program gives you ALL the tricks all the mass emailers don't want you to know... Here are just a few features the STEALTH MASS MAILER offers to you... +Forge the Header - Message ID - ISP's will Spin their wheels. +Add's a Bogus Authenticated Sender to the Header. +Add's a complete bogus Received From / Received By line with real time / date stamp and recipient to the Header. +Does NOT require a valid POP Account be entered in order to send your mailings. +Easy to use and operate Plus much more! All this, at speeds of up to 250,000 messages / hour ( 28.8k modem ). +Get better through put than a T1 line, using a 128 ISDN line ( save thousands per month ) +Personalized mail feature - 20 times faster than NetContact! Available Now for Immediate shipment - Your Competitor(s) may already own The STEALTH Mass Mailer - ORDER YOURS NOW - Or Get Left In The Dust !!! Well, how much is the STEALTH MASS MAILER..$3,000? WE COULD EASILY CHARGE THAT MUCH... THIS SOFTWARE IS INVALUABLE TO ONLINE MARKETERS ALL OVER THE WORLD! SPECIAL INTRODUCTORY PRICE... NOW YOU CAN HAVE THE STEALTH MASS MAILER FOR JUST $399.00! (Reg. $499 ... Save $100 Plus Bonuses!) Step up to the plate and play with the big boys TODAY and receive the complete STEALTH MASS MAILER PACKAGE for the unbelievably low price of ONLY $399.00! (Other bulk email software has sold for as much as $2,500 and cant even come close to the STEALTHS cutting edge technology of EASE, ACCURACY AND SPEED ... SPEED ... SPEED!) All STEALTH users receive 2 FULL HOURS technical support. ***SPECIAL BONUS INCLUDED*** You will receive 40 MILLION email addresses for half price! Yes, for only $50 you can take advantage of our constantly updated list of 40 million email addresses! ___________________________________ So if you are interested in taking advantage of the most powerful bulk email software in the world..... Simply hit reply and put "Stealth Order" in the subject! Thanks In Advance!

1 0

Re: FCPUNX:In response to Declan's questions about crypto.com
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:09 PM 9/26/97 -0400, Jonah Seiger wrote: > 4. CDT continues to support efforts to relax encryption export controls. And that is where you are wrong: We need crypto legislation like we need nine inch nails hammered through our skulls. Any legislative attention to crypto is bad and dangerous, as we have been saying for years, and has just been dramatically proven once again. Business lobby groups are intermediaries, and therefore serve two masters, both the politicians and the businessmen, not one master. Frequently they serve the interests of the politicians at the expense of their donors, at the expense of the goals that the lobby group is supposed to pursue. > We also recognize the realities of politics. No matter how much any of us > might wish it to be true, members of the Commerce Committee were not > willing to stand up and simply oppose everything. This is a bunch of crap: It is highly likely that no bill will go through. Most bills die. This bill should die. Killing bills is always politically safer than passing them, doing nothing cannot get you into trouble. > It was not in the > cards. White and Markey offered them a chance to defeat Oxley while > throwing a small bone to law enforcement. We believe that passage of SAFE > with the White-Markey amendment, despite the problems with the criminal > provisions, is on balance, a step forward in the fight for encryption > policy reform. This is untrue and dishonest. No bill at all is the best step forward, and doing nothing is always easiest to attain. > As always, I am happy to respond to queries about CDT's positions and > tactics, but I am not interested in engaging in public flame throwing. The CDT is ultimately a business lobby group, because it gets most of its funding from businesses. It is therefore potentially subject to the same corruption as other business lobbies. Business lobby groups are intermediaries, and therefore serve two masters, both the politicians and the businessmen, not one master. Frequently they serve the interests of the politicians at the expense of their donors, at the expense of the goals that the lobby group is supposed to pursue. Suppose for example you have a lobby group that represents the widget industry. On the one hand, the CEO of General Widgets might ring them up and say: "We are being trashed by these great japanese widgets, and unless something is done about it we might have to reduce prices or improve quality", and the lobby organization has a little chat with some tame politicians about the terrible suffering the Japanese are inflicting on American workers. That is the way lobby groups are supposed to work, but seldom do. On the other hand sometimes the politician (or a gofer on his staff), rings the lobby and says: "I need a million dollars fast: What potential political action gets the chairman of General Widgets waking up in a cold sweat in the middle of the night? What could destroy the widget industry, and yet be politically feasible?" Shortly thereafter the lobbyist has a little chat with chairman of General Widgets about forthcoming legislation. The lobby group gets a big bag of money, some of which it passes on to the politician, and the threatened legislation evaporates until the next election. To be a successful lobby group, the CDT needs to get its fingerprints on legislation, so that it can make threats and promises to businessmen in the computer industry. Thus the CDT's best interests as an organization are contrary to our desires and contrary to the announced aims of the organization. Legislation, any legislation, is in their interests and legislation, any legislation is against our interests. Our interests, and the CDT's interest are opposed with no apparent mutual good possible. Now it is possible that the CDT is virtuously pursuing its supposed goals, rather than its practical interests. We should consider the available evidence in order to infer what it is in fact up to. According to Dave Barry the word "politics" derives from the Greek "poly" meaning many, and "ticks" meaning small disgusting bloodsucking parasites. In order to be well funded, the CDT needs government regulation of the net. The kind of regulation that would be most effective in ensuring large donations would be regulation that compels internet businessmen to lobby the government. for example regulations that make impossible, inconsistent, and contradictory requirements on those who provide software, hardware, and services, for example a demand that big companies police the net in ways that even governments would find extremely difficult, such as the British child porn crackdown, or legislation which if properly crafted would have the effect of giving some businessmen a monopoly of some aspect of the net, and putting other businessmen out of business, for example legislation that requires case by case approval of software, or legislation that compels the businessman to invade his customers privacy, and also prohibits him from invading that privacy unless he has a waiver issued by the state. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Don't go there...
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

http://www.xensei.com/users/hubcom/units.htm

1 0

Re: write up AP for FC++
by William H. Geiger III 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In <3.0.3.32.19970927210451.006b202c(a)schloss.li>, on 09/27/97 at 09:04 PM, Black Unicorn <unicorn(a)schloss.li> said: >At 06:49 PM 9/27/97 -0700, James A. Donald wrote: >>Tim May wrote: >>>>I'm now mildly amused that Bell is being seen as the inventor of anonymous >>>>and untraceable murder markets, with clueless journalists seeking >>>>information on his discovery. But, hey, better he rot in jail than me. >> >>At 04:27 PM 8/18/97 -0700, Blanc wrote: >>> A presentation from you at FC98 would remind everyone of your own initial >>> writings on the subject and provide you with due credit (better credit than >>> a jail/rotting sentence). I can't think of anyone else who would be more >>> qualified for this. >> >>Freedom of speech is protected by nothing stronger than the cluelessness >>of our masters. >> >>If you publish your idea in appropriate forums, you can get away with it. >> >>If you go from forum to forum singing your idea like a broken record, >>and flogging it like soap, you will probably go to jail. >> >>I see no point in explaining our ideas so thoroughly and repeatedly >>that even cops and politicians start to understand them. >Try to keep in mind that Bell went to jail for crimes only semi-related >to his AP ranting. >The AP ranting is just the way he managed to attract attention. >Moral: If you're going to rant about AP you better be squeeky clean >first. Moral: If you're going to rant about AP you better have a system in place to take out the rat-bastards before they come looking for you. - -- - --------------------------------------------------------------- William H. Geiger III http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii Geiger Consulting Cooking With Warp 4.0 Author of E-Secure - PGP Front End for MR/2 Ice PGP & MR/2 the only way for secure e-mail. OS/2 PGP 2.6.3a at: http://www.amaranth.com/~whgiii/pgpmr2.html - --------------------------------------------------------------- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: cp850 Comment: Registered_User_E-Secure_v1.1b1_ES000000 iQCVAwUBNC5TOI9Co1n+aLhhAQHvqAQAiFDWTe/75ncZKsw+1zqOYhHqa3Igat/c EtLaQK0syZdIJak//qHxuTbva6o7/S+MAeRpwzQIITFWwXqCIF8rdMCZQkm308Au eprjZa1rV8qxYdG7cJBYOUXp6oIk6rNTmK1s9wRG/rnkVXD3OMdW7n8XfAyCGTNV GUsA3iijYNc= =FfZc -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: write up AP for FC++
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:49 PM 9/27/97 -0700, James A. Donald wrote: > > If you publish your idea in appropriate forums, you can get away with it. > > > > If you go from forum to forum singing your idea like a broken record, > > and flogging it like soap, you will probably go to jail. > > > > I see no point in explaining our ideas so thoroughly and repeatedly > > that even cops and politicians start to understand them. At 09:04 PM 9/27/97 -0500, Black Unicorn wrote: > Try to keep in mind that Bell went to jail for crimes only semi-related to > his AP ranting. Not too many people face a lengthy period of imprisonment without trial, followed by a lengthy period of imprisonment without sentence, for using a false social security number and possession of a stink bomb. Actually Jim Bell's greatest offence was being broke. I have seen some truly laughable convictions of people with public defenders. He who pays the piper calls the tune. If you are charged with politically incorrect crimes, and have a public defender, you have two prosecutors and no defender, and under those circumstances a prosecutor could convict a dog of being a ham sandwich, and have him sentenced to death by drowning in mustard. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Message
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Sat, 27 Sep 1997 21:04:51 -0500 Black Unicorn foolishly blurted: > Try to keep in mind that Bell went to jail for crimes only > semi-related to his AP ranting. > The AP ranting is just the way he managed to attract attention. Try to keep in mind that that is how the government plays the game, here and elsewhere. Even in countries that have laws against irritating the government a hip regime always now tries to prosecute for only semi-related or even completely unrelated "crimes." Maybe you, too, could be found to have engaged in juvenile activities like ordering noxious substances, much to your surprise and horror, after calling attention to yourself in a way that touches a sensitive spot on the body bureaucratic. Although Bell might in fact be a complete idiot and have given them the levers they needed to destroy him, it would be a grave mistake to assume that there is any truth at all to the charges. This is political prosecution a la 1997 in the land of the Freeh, home of the slave. In this climate the risk of expressing any opinion that touches government's hot buttons is that you will be investigated. Being investigated can easily ruin you, being charged almost certainly will -- both pre-trial punishments that make a mockery of the entire set of constitutional protections against prosecutorial and judicial abuses. The modern equivalent of the Crown's former ability to target someone with a law is the ability of the government to mine a rich cache of laws for the one that can circumstantially be applied to the victim. The odd thing that works in their favor is that anyone who practices as he preaches is more likely than others to have vulnerabilities of the sort government looks for when targetting him. It's one of those things that provides the black hats with a heavy strategic advantage. Not that they're satisfied with that, of course. They'll use it, but they'll also black bag you, maybe send in some orders in your name to chemical supply houses, whatever it takes once you get on their list.

1 0

Re: Crypto Legality Question
by jim＠mentat.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Burnes writes: > ACME corporation, a mostly Canadian outfit with a major > subsidiary in the US, wants to roll out corporate wide crypto. > > Most of their network operations are in the US except one > of their offices in Ireland. > > Question (1): Can they buy a strong crypto package in the > US and physically roll it out to both Canada and Ireland. I suspect not. Re-exporting US crypto to Ireland without a license doesn't make it. Perhaps the fact that they're only using it within their company would make it OK, but I'd check with the attorneys. > Question (2): If Canada is OK, but Ireland is out of the > question, can Irish employees simply procure a compatible > strong crypto package from, say, Finland? This assumes Very likely. An American would want to be careful not to give any Sekrit Data to the furriners, but perhaps the rules are different for Canadians. Easier yet, they can buy Canadian-grown strong Crypto from Entrust, for example, and ship it both to their Irish and U.S. branches. A guy from Entrust told me last week that there was some consternation from Ft. Meade when they first started shipping overseas this year, and after they were shown the details and legalities they backed off. Jim Gillogly jim(a)acm.org

1 0

Re: FCPUNX:CDT complains to my editors after post to cypherpunks
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:34 AM 9/26/97 -0700, Tim May wrote: > The larger issue is that the CDT/VTW "players" are showing their > willingness to trade away the civil liberties of us all for a few minor > tidbits thrown (they think) to corporate sponsors. In fact, the problem is not corporate sponsors. Rather the problem is that lobbying groups often tend to get captured by the government. They want to get their fingerprints on legislation, so that they can extort money from their corporate sponsors, and are therefore eager to do the politicians bidding in any way whatever in order that they can get their fingerprints on any legislation whatever. This problem is unrelated to civil liberties issues. Lobby groups for the milk industry, small business, etc, are infamous for selling out the interests of the businesses that support them. I am not saying that the CDT is guilty of this, but the fact it persists in trying to get legislation passed under present circumstances should not only alarm civil libertarians, it should also alarm big business. > Those who work near Washington tend to get pulled into this power vortex. > They become functionaries, advisors, consultants, lobbyists, or even, > sometimes, elected politicians themselves. > > This is probably why EFF belatedly realized that their soul was being lost > and got the hell out. That so few news magazines delved into this is > telling.] My congratulations to EFF, who I have vigorously flamed in the past. I hope that one day I will be able to similarly congratulate the CDT. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0