- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Security technical list
by MacGyver 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[pgp sign clear] Anybody could help me to find a mail list of security,crypto,etc?? Regards

2 1

Morph Escrow
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:40 AM 9/13/96, Greg Broiles wrote: >Kozinski also suggested that computer-generated or morphed images of >children involved in sexual acts may not be protected under the Constitution >because of ongoing trauma to the child, while computer-generated or morphed >images of adults would be protected. Hence the proposal for "morph escrow": "Upon presentation of a valid court order or Presidential Decision Directive, a complete morph history of any image deemed possibly of prurient interest must be presented to law enforcement." As the law cannot tell if an image of prurient interest started out as a legal image of Raquel Welch or Jennifer Aniston, or started out as an illegal image of a minor child, morph escrow will force all image possessors and distributors to produce proof that the image started out legal. Failure to escrow morph histories, or possession of an image with an authorized morph history escrow certificate, is punishable by not less than six months in jail. --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Fed appellate judge remarks re anonymity, free speech on the (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 17:40:19 -0700 > From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles(a)netbox.com> > Subject: Fed appellate judge remarks re anonymity, free speech on the > net > > The article quotes Kozinski as saying "I have a severe problem with > anonymous E-mailers . . . You don't have a right to walk up to somebody's > door and knock with a bag over your head." The article says Kozinski likened > anonymous E-mail to menacing someone. I guess the esteemed judge doesn't believe in Halloween.... Does this also mean that he supports the complete elimination of junk mail that has no return address on it? > Kozinski is considered relatively conservative and relatively libertarian, > as 9th Circuit judges go. Conservative AND Libertarian? Talk about a non-sequitar. Jim Choate ravage(a)ssz.com

1 0

Reputation Systems in Action
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:41 PM 9/11/96, paul(a)fatmans.demon.co.uk wrote: >> tcmay(a)got.net (Timothy C. May) writes: >> > As to "tasteless and insulting," a matter of personal perspective. I find >> > it helpful to call a spade a spade, and others apparently do as well. >> > >> >> Of course, Tim gets very uncomfortable when others call a spade a spade. > > >This constant character assasination of Tim is getting rather boring, >as far as I can see, and I read all of the posts on the list, he has >done nothing more than ignore posts from these idiots, that is his >choice and nothing to do with anyone else. But this latest episode illustrates the role of reputations. Namely, my own reputation is not being harmed by bizarre commentaries from the Vulis-bot. As its reputation is (apparently) pretty low, and associated with Serdar Ardic-style rants about "sovoks," "the cabal," and "spit," such an entity can hardly "assassinate" my character. A few years ago Larry Detweiler, aka "vznuri" ("visionary"), aka "S.Boxx," aka "Pablo Escobar," aka several other alternate personalities, wrote dozens of screeds denouncing me, Eric Hughes, Nick Szabo, Hal Finney, etc. Did this have an effect on our reputations? Not to people I respected, of course. And if Detweiler's rants affected my reputation with his peers, including Dimitri Vulis, Ludwig Plutonium, Doctress Neutopia, Serdar Argic, well, this is to the good. In the mathematics of reputations, a negative reputation held by one whose own reputation is negative is a positive. --Tim May We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: What is best policy paper on crypto?
by gcooke＠Rt66.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:07 PM 9/12/96, Hallam-Baker wrote: >Adam Shostack wrote: >> >> Declan McCullagh wrote: >> | I happen to know that an influential Congresspern will be meeting with >> | some Cato folks tomorrow morning, so I'm assuming this isn't an idle >> | request. [ . . . ] > >> The NAS report, despite a few silly points, does push for >> liberalization of the export regime, standardization, a switch to [ . . . ] > >I agree that the NAS report is the one to use. Its from an authoratative >source and the conclusions are pretty reasonable. Its perhaps not as far [ . . . ] I'm gonna stick my neck out here and ask a naive question: where can I find "the NAS report" mentioned in this thread? Note that I'm new to this list (2 days) so please be kind if this paper is extremely well known (it's not known to me but it sounds like something I need to read). -Gregg

1 0

Re: Bubba Bottoming out on Cocaine Paranoia?
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

No comments about Bubba, Joe Sixpack, the NWO, Greys, Reds, Greens, those on the dole or those high on Dole.... Just notice the strange contradiction below: =WIRED WORLD WILL "DIMINISH NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY" [..] =when the whole world is "wired" and e-cash is the norm. The result =will be less powerful governments in relation to criminal =organizations such as the Mafia and international drug cartels, says =Michael Nelson, who adds that organized crime members are already =some of the most sophisticated users of computer systems and strong =encryption technology. ... Ok, the "bad guys" will use sophisticated security devices... but below, apparently the "good guys" don't use the same sophisticated tech, and therefore are at an even greater risk from another set of "bad guys"... = ... In addition, computer crackers will pose a =more significant threat. In response, Nelson advocates resolving the =issue of whether unauthorized access of a computer is an "act of =trespass" or an "act of war," and prosecuting the intrusions =accordingly. (BNA Daily Report for Executives 6 Sep 96 A14) = (Courtesy of Edupage) --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

1 0

Re: Fed appellate judge remarks re anonymity
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 1:47 AM 9/13/96, Jim Choate wrote: >Forwarded message: > >> Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 17:40:19 -0700 >> From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles(a)netbox.com> >> Subject: Fed appellate judge remarks re anonymity, free speech on the >> net >> >> The article quotes Kozinski as saying "I have a severe problem with >> anonymous E-mailers . . . You don't have a right to walk up to somebody's >> door and knock with a bag over your head." The article says Kozinski likened >> anonymous E-mail to menacing someone. > >I guess the esteemed judge doesn't believe in Halloween.... Actually, seven of the children who came before his court on this charge are still in prison. He sentenced them to between 4 and 7 years. (By the way, some communities have made it illegal for adults to be out by themselves when children are "trick-or-treating." Typically, the laws are vague and are used for harassment, not actual prosecution. And I rather doubt that the costume I plan to wear to Sandy Sandfort's party--"Jeffrey Dahmer," with a bag over my shoulder and what appear to be severed limbs sticking out of the bag--would be "acceptable" to local cops.) --Tim "The Unadahmer" May (I blow up my victims and then cook the pieces) We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, I know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^1,257,787-1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

2 1

WinSock Remailer Accepting Only PGP Messages Starting September
by Joey Grasty 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Y'all: Due to the large number of inconsiderate users and spammers, the vast majority of whom do not use PGP, we are changing the operation of the WinSock Remailer at winsock(a)c2.org to accept only incoming messages that are encrypted with PGP. This change will become effective September 16, 1996 at 9:00 PM EDT. On a brighter note, a new release of the WinSock Remailer will be available on September 17. In addition to bug fixes, a number of new features have been added including: - support for shared or exclusive POP account (the operator will be able to operate the remailer from his personal account; messages without proper remail headers will be left in the mail spool for retrieval with any other POP mail client). - support for changing the outgoing message pool size on the Outgoing Mail dialog box. - remailer now accepts "help" in addition to "remailer-help" to retrieve the help file for the remailer. A large number of help requests were piling up in the reject directory, so this should cure that problem. And yes, the bug that prevented the remailer from operating in PGP Only mode, has been fixed. :-) Regards, Joey Grasty (jgrasty(a)gate.net) Jim Ray (liberty(a)gate.net) WinSock Remailer Operators

1 0

"Unwanted Mail"
by Ross Wright 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Or About: 12 Sep 96 at 22:49, Rabid Wombat wrote: > > The same useless and boring message posted by rote to a huge collection of > addresses is spam, unless participation is voluntary and consensual, in > which case it is a mailing list. :) > Spam, like the definition of useless and boring, is very subjective. So, I feel that waht I am doing is useful and interesting. I am sure that HipCrime feels the same. Just keep on bitching to the list and don't call your congressman about a few unwanted e-mails. Tim May writes: >But to attempt to define "SPAM" (unless you're Armour) is dangerous. >This whole notion of "unwanted mail" is ill-defined and not something >"the law" should get involved in, in my view. (And CP technologies >certainly are consistent with this, e.g., placing the role of >screening on those who set up gates, not on tracking down True Names >for prosecution.) >In the case of actual USPS mailboxes, there are laws which prevent >others from using them (e.g., no UPS or FedEx deliveries). For sure, >dead skunks can be placed in mailboxes, or under porches, or whatever. >The law can't fix everything. Thanks, Tim. My point exactly! Ross =========== Ross Wright King Media: Bulk Sales of Software Media and Duplication Services http://www.slip.net/~cdr/kingmedia Voice: 415-206-9906

1 0

Re: who can count?
by Jean-Francois Avon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On 12 Sep 96 at 17:57, HipCrime wrote: > > No, this b.s. is more like having someone put a dead skunk in my > > mailbox, with no return address, trying to prevent me from sending > > them 100 dead skunks as a return favor. And about as welcome. > > 100 dead skunks in exchange for ONE is exactly what this discussion > is all about. You CypherWIMPS just love over-kill. EmailRobot sent > ONE message to EACH address. Are you guys so unskilled in > arithmetic to understand the difference between 1 and 100? > > One message is NOT spam, 100 messages to a single box IS spamming. Dear HipCrime, My e-mail address is *paid for*, I subscribe to it for my own self-interest *only*. I do send requests for junk mail from various companies that falls into my fields of interest. But take note that since *I* pay for it, I consider it as my private territory. If you want to trespass, it is up to you and for the moment, there is nothing much I can do, unfortunately. I invite you to send me as much spam as you want, as long as you send me 0.1 gram of pure, 24k gold per kilobyte of spam (rounded to the superior Kb, i.e. 1.1Kb=.2g Au) you send me, payable in gold at the rate of the next day the spam was received by me, delivered at my local mailbox within 30 days (2% monthly fees applies). As long as you send payement, your spam will be welcome. (And don't send "spoofed-gold" I've got an eye for the genuine stuff :) Of course my rates are steep and non-negotiable, but there hey, what is morally objectionable in making profit when I don't *force* anybody to accept? Regards jfa p.s. e-mail me privately for my postbox address. - -- Jean-Francois Avon, Montreal QC Canada DePompadour, Societe d'Importation Ltee Finest of Limoges porcelain and crystal JFA Technologies, R&D consultant physicists and engineers, LabView programing PGP keys at: http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon ID# C58ADD0D : 529645E8205A8A5E F87CC86FAEFEF891 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2i iQEVAgUBMjh/3ciycyXFit0NAQE0eQgApAM5ESHO/rTv6CcpFCXizEI4+5WcCjWx Aq2IBAXhfHXCgfne5mo/K4U1PrlumxfxMA1NiQ0QQ7R1hgnzocF/NlnzMrX9vkVc w1NpAFr5hc2Jr5hOyBhr/tZsvYwcQXCdAqrA+Pj/qSDDPmeO8GGfoK09Xgrsvy16 zRQTGjOh/3ko4vTGuOMCiLSPJ4vLqFfAcvF6arJ2cEBXl7opoVFVGmvIugcosTN7 gZ97lWrJiEbc/HnHT5dkgTXpqDZQkC/PLz7EmXIYdf65zCJ1G3DRYgYpXQXd3V+a nXyc3i2TDW5/tlnk6SLZvwaApzwAMtn5ZHNgBlgCIQHootcIf+Zulw== =+bxp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0