- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Your Mama's so......
by uunet!in2.uu.net!gatech!newsfeed.internetmci.com!lamarck.sura.net!mother.usf.edu!luna!panagopo＠warwick.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaak

1 0

Lawz to be.
by A. Padgett Peterson P.E. Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cut & Paste > "§2804. Unlawful use of encryption to obstruct justice" > "Whoever willfully endeavors by means of encryption to obstruct, ... >Interesting wording - sounds almost like if you impede the *commission* of >a felony, you is been had. Keyword would seem to be "willingly". Jim: >You need to learn to read more carefully. The word they (according to VTW) >used was "willfully," not "willingly." Agree, problem was that to get into E-Mail had to cut/paste in 255 bytes segments but the quoted part is what I got off VTW with minor line length adjustment and separation of elements for clarity. >In any case, assuming they either never made the error you noticed, or they >manage to correct it before the bill becomes law, they will have just >outlawed the used of encrypted remailers, because: No, what the wording seems to outlaw was the use of encryption to obstruct the commission of the crime, not the investigation. Read it again please. >> Suspect they meant to say "...obstruct (etc) the investigation of a >>felony..." >Probably. This section is their wish-list to Santa Claus. It's easy to >make mistakes when you're excited about something. They're hoping you >suckers will support the whole bill despite this booby-trap. Thought the gotcha was down in the part about the Secretary of Commerce. My reading is that the secretary will still be required to grant approval for commercial export. Is past the part about no regulation inside the US (which is true now - still would be nice to see a "Congress shall make no law..."). The puzzler is the requirement that a comperable foreign product must exist before permission to export will be granted. Will this be like "comparable product" price matching in discount houses ? Somehow there never is one... Warmly, Padgett ps did you mean the Thomases and Memphis ? Not aware of similar prosecution in Oklahoma. Besides my understanding was that the online stuff was dropped, the conviction was for stuff sent through the mails. Is that incorrect ?

2 1

sci.crypt archive?
by Paul Rubin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is anyone on cypherpunks archiving sci.crypt? I'd be interested in getting hold of some articles from some years back... thanks

1 0

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: Bootable disks
by JonWienke＠aol.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I recently installed an IDE version of the Syquest EZ 135 hard drive for a client. Since it is a fully functional hard drive, it is bootable, unlike the parallel port model. The biggest advantage to this type of drive is that the cartridge (and any potentially incriminating data) can be quickly removed and destroyed (burn it, smash it with a large heavy object, insert it into a bulk eraser) or taken to a secure location for storage. Also, this type of drive provides an excellent place to put swap files, which have an annoying tendency to pick up sensitive data. That is less of a problem if you can remove the cartridge and store it in a secure location when not processing sensitive data. Jonathan Wienke

2 1

Re: Firewalls
by nobody＠REPLAY.COM 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The only `culture' Timothy Mayo possesses is that cultivated from his foreskin scrapings. \\\^^^^^/// = 0 0 = -o00--( )--00o-- Timothy Mayo

1 0

Leahy bill nightmare scenario?
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In case any of you people still think that Leahy bill ostensibly freeing up encryption is "progress," the following scenario is provided for your consideration: "Bob" runs an encrypted remailer. His system forwards mail whose contents he cannot read, even if he wanted to. He cannot know from where the messages originated, or where they ended up. He likes it this way, because nobody can accuse him of complicity with a (encrypted) message that he can't read. One day, Leahy's bill passes, as described by VTW (and quoted by Peterson): "§2804. Unlawful use of encryption to obstruct justice" "Whoever willfully endeavors by means of encryption to obstruct, impede, or prevent the communication of information in furtherance to a felony which may be prosecuted in a court of the United States, to an investigative or law enforcement officer shall-..." I am assuming they fix the obvious error in the phrasing above. "Bob," the operator of the encrypted remailer, receives an email one day which states something like: "Thanks for the use of your nifty anonymous remailer. Under a different name, I intend to use this remailer (along with others) to transmit child pornography, plot terrorism, and do all of my drug deals. You've made my life so much more secure!" Bob, alarmed at this note, tries to cover his ass by sending back a message asking this person to not do anything illegal on his machine, hoping that this will protect himself. The response is "as long as the system operates, it will be used for whatever I want!" What "Bob" doesn't realize is that the message came from an agent for the cops, who now have proof that he is aware that his system will be regularly used for illegal purposes. If "Bob" is smart enough, he will realize his quandary, and he has only two choices: 1. Shut the remailer down to prevent such use. 2. Continue to run the remailer, knowing that it is being used for illegalities. If he should choose the latter, the cops merely have their agent mail some kid some child pornography, and use Bob's remailer as the last link in the chain. At that point, the "investigation" starts. The cops approach "Bob," and insist that he tell them from where the message came. Naturally, however, "Bob" is an honest fellow, and he runs a remailer that doesn't keep records. At that point, Bob is GUILTY of violation of the Leahy bill, because his encrypted anonymous remailer: 1. Uses encryption to thwart message tracing, and thus the "criminal investigation." 2. Bob has already been informed that his system will be used for illegal purposes; the cops have the messages to prove he has been told. He's GUILTY GUILTY GUILTY, he will definitely lose the system and possibly whatever residence it runs in, and will probably have to pay a huge fine to boot. Now, you may not sympathize with Bob. This doesn't affect YOU, right? RIGHT?!? But let's suppose the cops offer him a DEAL! "Spy for us, keep records and forward each and every one of them to us, and we won't prosecute you!" Such a deal! At that point, even an idiot begins to see the problem: Suddenly, you can no longer trust ANY anonymous remailer, because the operator might have been "stung" already, and he's keeping his system up only to keep his house and life savings. One by one, each encrypted anonymous remailer is dealt the same treatment, and pretty soon you can't trust any of them. All the systems run by honest, uncoerced people will go down. Naturally, this treatment will occur in every country that sites anonymous remailers. So maybe the word gets out, occasionally. At that point, usage of anonymous remailers declines, and people willing to risk operating one declines. A few come up which are run by the Feds, which log anyone who attempts to use it... Or am I the only person who can see this, huh? If anybody doubts this scenario, I challenge you to tell me WHY it cannot happen. I am, frankly, astonished at anybody who did not immediately see the potential downside to this portion of the bill! Jim Bell, Pessimist and proud of it. Klaatu Burada Nikto

2 1

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

crypto ++ where?
by Oscar Boykin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

How can I obtain crypto++, I seem to have deleted the email I had reguarding it. any info would be appreciated. thanks. oscar boykin mailto:boykin@pobox.com http://pobox.com/~boykin home: 404-206-0477

2 1