- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Sen. Leahy's "impeccable cyberspace credentials"
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 06:11 PM 8/31/96 EDT, patrick b cummings wrote: > I agree with what you are saying but not all polititions are that bad. > You make it sound as if their are no politisions are for freedom of the > net. So who is the exception? --------------------------------------------------------------------- | 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

3 2

Re: hackers texts
by crichardson＠earthlink.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I working on a WWW page for people who want to recieve text articles on hacking/phreaking/etc. It's not very extensive now, but were working on it. Point your browswer to: http://home.earthlink.net/~crichardson/omega.html Also on this page are some files, as well as some other misc indexes. All feedback is apprechiated. -flux

1 0

Re: Esther Dyson on Remailers
by Dave Farber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Just for record, Esther's position is NOT necessarily EFFs. At 01:39 PM 9/1/96 -0400, Duncan Frissell wrote: >At 06:52 AM 9/1/96 -0400, Dave Farber wrote: >>EFF does not, to my knowledge, (and I am a Board Member) have an >>organizational view on this issue. There are a lot of different views and >>each member of EFF has their own view that they can and will state as >>private people. The tendency of the Press to label people with organizations >>affiliation ship gives the impression of organizational views. For example I >>certainly don't speak for the University of Pennsylvania when I say thing to >>the newspapers. >> >>Dave >> > > >At CFP in '95 in SF, Esther expressed the view that there was a place on the >Net for an anonymous ghetto (my words not hers) where people could be >anonymous but that most of the net would involve traceability of >transactions so that people could be held accountable and that businesses >and individuals would want to know who they were dealing with for payment >and accountability reasons. > >I am not stating her position well I'm sure but it was clear that she >thought that non-anonymity would be the rule not because it was mandated but >just because Net actors would want it that way. A short quote would not >allow anyone to understand her full position. > >If she believes that anonymity would be rejected voluntarily for practical >reasons then that is just a prediction of a market not a conclusion. Most >on this list would have no objection to making a prediction though we might >disagree with it. > >Just as Esther predicted that the net would end copyright, we might predict >that the net combined with immediate settlement payment systems might reduce >if not eliminate the need for "positive ID." > >DCF > > >

1 0

FW: get me off of this list!!!!!
by Herbert Feran 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- On Sun, 1 Sep 96 12:41:21 PDT Herbert Feran <porsche(a)themall.net> wrote: I need to be taken off of this list but I can't remeber the code to desubscribe. Can anyone tell me what the code is? ------------------------------------- Name: Herbert Feran E-mail: Herbert Feran <h7869755(a)themall.net> Date: 9/1/96 Time: 12:41:21 PM This message was sent by Chameleon ------------------------------------- -----------------End of Original Message----------------- ------------------------------------- Name: Herbert Feran E-mail: Herbert Feran <h7869755(a)themall.net> Date: 9/1/96 Time: 12:48:19 PM This message was sent by Chameleon -------------------------------------

1 0

No Subject
by patrickbc＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

need more hackers for the list please send following info to me handle e-mail address P.O. Box url type of hacking you do

1 0

Re: FW: get me off of this list!!!!!
by drose＠AZStarNet.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>--- On Sun, 1 Sep 96 12:41:21 PDT Herbert Feran ><porsche(a)themall.net> wrote: >I need to be taken off of this list but I can't remeber the code > >to desubscribe. Can anyone tell me what the code is? >------------------------------------- What's the frequency Herbert? Help, I've fallen and I can't remeber the code. Hint: Try consulting "The Codebreakers."

1 0

Re: DON'T Nuke Singapore Back into the Stone Age
by Arun Mehta 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:35 31/08/96 -0700, Timothy C. May wrote: > If discussions of Lee Kwan Yew's dynasty are considered illegal, then >Singaporans will have to choose not to carry the various newsgroups into >which *I* post such messages! How long do you propose to carry on doing that? Soon, the others in the newsgroups will be asking you very impolitely to stop, just as you would if someone kept on and on posting such stuff to cypherpunks. >At 6:35 AM 8/31/96, Arun Mehta wrote: >>Then again, inappropriate postings are the bane of the Internet: the consensus >>on which the Net functions relies heavily on people not posting >>inappropriately. >This works imperfectly, as all long-time surfers of the Usenet will attest! True, but Usenet only functions because it works most of the time. To the extent we subvert this consensus, we damage Usenet, make it less useful. It shouldn't happen that in trying to save or spread Usenet, we have to destroy it... >And _never_ has it involved determinations of "inappropriate" by >_governments_! There I'm with you -- I'm merely suggesting that you find a way to protest Singapore's actions in a manner that would be less objectionable to most Internet users, in Singapore and outside. >The point of being sometimes "impolite" (*) is to "force their hand." I never said anything about politeness -- the appropriateness I was talking about was in the context of what the people posting to a discussion group consider proper material for them to receive, not what the government of Singapore thinks. In any case, I think we may be slightly going off track as far as the current Singapore problem is concerned. They are blocking access to certain web sites from mid September -- Usenet isn't part of the current discussion, far as I know. Arun Mehta Phone +91-11-6841172, 6849103 amehta(a)cpsr.org http://www.cerfnet.com/~amehta/ finger amehta(a)cerfnet.com for public key

1 0

HAZ-MAT virus
by kickboxer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I do not know how it is run by the JPG and GIF files, but I do know that the code somehow loads into the image viewer itself..I am not sure how it works, just that it is very destructive.. I had it destroy my 486 (using Lview Pro) Oh, well, ENOUGH already. if you have something to say that is related to "image files cant execute a virus" please do not. there are too many spams with those ideas out now

2 1

Re: "Security risks" vs. "credit risks"
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

According to the WaP article, the database in question would be _required_ by the federal government... thus removing any voluntary aspect of it, so long as you want to fly on a plane. I have had the thought that it might be possible for an air cargo business to have as a stock benefit a guarantee that, for payment of any extra costs, any stockholder could ride on one of their planes. I don't know how the laws on the subject are worded, but I believe that a lot of restrictions are removed for planes other than standard passenger airlines. This might be a way to fly anonymously - Chaumian "is-a-stockholder" credidentials might be usable to arrange it (the local library's copy of Applied Cryptography is checked out, so I don't know for sure) anonymously. -Allen

1 0

Undeliverable Message
by MAILER-DAEMON＠mqg-smtp3.usmc.mil 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To: <cypherpunks(a)toad.com> Cc: Subject: Re: It is good that anon.penet.fi has been closed! Message not delivered to recipients below. Press F1 for help with VNM error codes. VNM3043: BANYAN SERVER@MAG26@2DMAW NEW RIVER VNM3043 -- MAILBOX IS FULL The message cannot be delivered because the recipient's mailbox contains the maximum number of messages, as set by the system administrator. The recipient must delete some messages before any other messages can be delivered. The maximum message limit for a user's mailbox is 10,000. The default message limit is 1000 messages. Administrators can set message limits using the Mailbox Settings function available in the Manage User menu (MUSER). When a user's mailbox reaches the limit, the user must delete some of the messages before the mailbox can accept any more incoming messages. UNDEFINED-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Sun, 1 Sep 1996, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > Yes, subject says it all. anon.penet.fi was a whole lot worse than > cypherpunks remailers. It provided clueless users with no real security, > because it stored return addresses and did not use chaining and > encryption. It also provided anonymity to many people who needed it. I think that many people who need anonymity will probably just learn faking mail and news headers. Many people just don't want to deal with cpunk remailers. OTOH, I agree that this might actually force many people with Penet addresses to learn about more secure remailers. In this way, the closing of anon.penet.fi could be looked upon as a Good Thing. However, as long as there is no easy way for Windoze and Mac users to use secure remailers, users will sooner resort to fake-mailing then learning how to use cpunk remailers. People that need a pseudonym address to use on various support groups can get them from other, equally insecure, remailers. - -- Mark PGP encrypted mail prefered. Key fingerprint = d61734f2800486ae6f79bfeb70f95348 http://www.voicenet.com/~markm/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3 Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMinwTizIPc7jvyFpAQFpGAf/ZGEXRU7MuROtatlHoAIdaJfIiwig1oDr fwlNjRe7f1ze8dwUuh74nWFt/ofPtjwSUtpCa1xDgTptPPhzr1I6beOdjwONlUzf MVif+wnzyIp27V/DCjebAMxQc2avmYKM6mwcOKfzFwG0cfvf/walJrjmADR9K0oe EXqi7mJzY1rI08Dsw8aHXNj8maDy9pRTSz9O9e0qZTdFlQtFyVNM6PSfAnKR9e1L ebQ5Yx4qNkgkfhDZgacKNv2inkyuD1LsyQneiCIZ0obhhRL7ORU63wGgYlvqc3gx Ux8sK2mMo6kr2dvA07nRyLzl3w9vm6efrFJeZC94fjdBYxluFg6/ag== =+Qm6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0