- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

RE: WINDOWS NT ????
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 05:43 PM 10/4/96 -0700, John Fricker <jfricker(a)vertexgroup.com> wrote: >Security in NT can be defeated by any clever, out of work, bored, >NT device driver author who brews up a stealth device driver replacement >(perhaps a COM port improvement) that could run amok on the file system or >basically do anything. Good point; if you can talk somebody into installing device drivers, most security guarantees go out the window, and if you can talk a system administrator (i.e. "the user") into installing unexamined code, he's lost. And on PCs, users install unexamined stuff all the time. >Of course, any clever device driver developer is making enough money to >not be bored nor even consider writing a backdoor into a driver. Right? Definitely.... # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, +1-415-442-2215 stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com America's Open Presidential Debate - Beyond Dole and Clinton! <A href="http://gate.net/~bdcollar/bbe/debate.htm">Tuesday, Oct. 8th 8:00 PM EDT</a>

1 0

Re: WINDOWS NT ????
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Fri, 04 Oct 1996 05:41:42 -0700, Bill Stewart wrote: >> is Windows NT secured system ? >Windows NT 3.51 is a real operating system. It is not as secure >as I would like, but it is much better than Windows 3.1, which was >totally insecure. It has some good security techniques, >but I don't know how secure the networking is, and networking >is the big technical insecurity on most machines today. >(Well, bad administration is the biggest insecurity on almost all >machines for almost all time. And physical security is also big.) >Windows 4.x moves the graphics/windowing system into Ring 0, >where the "secure" parts of the kernel are. Bad. >This means graphics bugs can make the kernel insecure or crash. I must say I like the way OS/2's Workplace Shell can crash entirely (doesn't happen here anymore; did with some really crappy video drivers for an old Trident 8900) and you can watch while it restarts it (takes about 10 seconds and didn't bother open apps). NT's shell seems to be a *little* harder to screw up, but when it does it goes bigtime. >I don't trust it, especially because Windows 3.1 crashes all the time >for me, and stupid bugs make Windows 3.1 behave badly for me. >So if they put the window system in the kernel, I don't trust it. You lose speed but gain security and stability - the continual operating sytem tradeoff. # Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp # <cadams(a)acucobol.com> | send mail with subject "send PGPKEY" "That's our advantage at Microsoft; we set the standards and we can change them." --- Karen Hargrove, Microsoft (quoted in the Feb 1993 Unix Review editorial)

1 0

Re: Who the heck is "CYBERPROMO" and why are they spamming me?
by travel23＠juno.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ernest Hua wrote: > >I keep getting mail from an "abusebot(a)savetrees.com" ... > >This is getting very very annoying. They're a company involved in mass emailing ads on behalf of their clients. They have also sued AOL because of the latter's trying to protect their subscribers by blocking Cyberpromo's ads. Cyberpromo obtained a TRO stopping AOL's block, but the TRO was set aside on appeal. Dale Thorn posted the following on this list in response to ads he was receiving from Cyberpromo, specifically: > If you would like to send a complaint about any account @cyberpromo.com > @answerme.com or @omni.cyberpromo.com that has not been terminated, >please send email to: wallace(a)cyberpromo.com I believe Cyberpromo is run by Sanford Wallace. Think he was also on 60 Minutes raising First Amendment rights along with Free Enterprise concepts. So, is it a spam or someone legitimately using the net in the ordinary course of business? T.T. ................................................................................. Just consider me an acorn who is trying to deal with the rest of the nuts .................................................................................

1 0

Re: WINDOWS NT ????
by Adamsc＠io-online.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On Fri, 04 Oct 1996 22:03:17 +1030, Petr Snajdr wrote: >> > > > > is Windows NT secured system ? >> > > NT? Secured? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaha >> > How ? >> By turning off the machine, unpluging the ethernet, moving the >> hard drive to another state... > 8-) ..and Os/2,unix .etc.etc. not ? OS/2 doesn't claim to be a secure multiuser operating system. If they have console access, they *can* get almost anything*. Unix can be secure, but most places don't run it in the most secure form. However, your average Unix box is probably going to do pretty well, especially if you've compiled Linux with an encrypting file system. Microsoft claims C2 or higher for NT and deserves any ragging they get if it's not. Ditto for any other vendor who claims one thing and sells another. BTW: Bizarre NT Quirk #15413 - The Administrator account does not have access to the entire disk. You got it - if you're the administrator you still cannot look into certain directories belonging to another user - even if you've given all access privileges to the Admin account. Got a few chuckles at work. * - The various OS/2 Servers have a new version of the High Performance File System. HPFS386 does a much better job of maintaining security. Apparently even the boot-floppy that can defeat NTFS won't work. I haven't verified this yet because I'm still waiting for my personal copy of Warp Server Advanced-SMP to arrive. # Chris Adams <adamsc(a)io-online.com> | http://www.io-online.com/adamsc/adamsc.htp # <cadams(a)acucobol.com> | send mail with subject "send PGPKEY" "That's our advantage at Microsoft; we set the standards and we can change them." --- Karen Hargrove, Microsoft (quoted in the Feb 1993 Unix Review editorial)

2 1

Re: EUB_low
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> in the world, 24 hours a day. A U.S. official said, "The > bank is being investigated for violating U.S. laws with > open solicitations on the Net, which is at best for tax > evasion and at worst for money laundering." > I hate to tell the Feds but the internet is more of an international publication than "High Life" (the BA inflight mag) or the BBC World Service mag (whatever it's name is these days. International publications can advertize offshore accounts and investments. DCF

4 4

Re: anonymous oddsman
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:32 PM 10/5/96 -0400, Anonymous wrote: >anonymous oddsman > >"Demeaning the integrity of the U.S. Presidential election process >for you on a regular basis, at no charge." What "integrity"? Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

anonymous oddsman
by amnesia＠chardos.connix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Apologies for repeats, & please repost where appropriate. Looks like advocating GAK(3-4?) hasn't hurt [and may helped] Clinton. Dole is now an even-longer shot than before, and Perot is back on the table at Ladbrokes, though William Hill is still giving a better deal on him. Here are the latest odds from your roving UK reporter. I'll try to develop a nym by next post, in case you are interested in corresponding. Current Prices @ 11:00 BST Sat 4th Oct 1996 +---------+----------------+----------------+ | | Ladbroke's | William Hill | +---------+----------------+----------------+ | Clinton | 1:9 | 1:8 | | Dole | 5:1 | 9:2 | | Perot | 50:1 | 250:1 | | Browne | Not currently offered by either.| +---------+----------------+----------------+ | New | | | | Phone | +44-800-524524 | +44-800-444040 | | Numbers:| (Free) | (Free) | +---------+----------------+----------------+ Coral, another national firm in the same business, expects to be offering odds shortly. (+44-345-581527). Local bookmakers said to be laying off (and putting on a hefty markup!). No explanation so far for the lack of odds on longer-shot candidates Browne, Nader, Hagelin, Phillips, etc. as these would all seem to be pure profit to the oddsman, but I am not in the gambling business. Oh well. anonymous oddsman "Demeaning the integrity of the U.S. Presidential election process for you on a regular basis, at no charge."

2 1

Re: Sun's GAK position
by Frank Stuart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Bill Stewart (stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com) wrote: [...] >That's not looking for someone to do GAK work at Sun; that's just looking for >someone to help Sun sell stuff to the Feds. They've been doing secure [...] The two aren't mutually exclusive. I suspect the government plans to buy lots and lots of GAK'ed products that come out of this consortium. Not only will this sweeten the pot for otherwise reluctant companies, it will also help make the products the defacto standard. In any event, the things that caught my attention most were the date (October 1), and the phrases "Export controls as they apply to encryption and security products", and "Public policy issues of cryptography and Key Escrow". | (Douglas) Hofstadter's Law: | It always takes longer than you expect, even Frank Stuart | when you take into account Hofstadter's Law.

1 0

David Sternlight knows 1000 times more about cryptograpjy than Timmy May
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Cryptanalysis by David Sternlight: >From: David Sternlight <david(a)sternlight.com> >Newsgroups: phl.food,alt.food.wine,ne.food,rec.food.drink.coffee,rec.arts.fine,rec.food.cooking,austin.food,triangle.dining,la.eats,soc.culture.jewish,chi.eats,memphis.dining,nyc.food >Subject: Re: 2nd Avenue Kosher Deli is on the Web, and they do mail order! Go to http://www.quicklink.com/~nycdeli/ >Message-ID: <32574E6F.64F1(a)sternlight.com> >Date: Sat, 05 Oct 1996 23:15:11 -0700 >References: <01bbb2c8$efc52a60$29a5c0d0@dell-xps-p200s> <5366ac$qtj(a)news1.panix.com> <slrn55dmhj.4r.jamie(a)apm5-190.realtime.net> >Reply-To: david(a)sternlight.com >Organization: DSI/USCRPAC >Lines: 14 >NNTP-Posting-Host: sternlight.com >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >jamie wrote: >> >> On Sat, 05 Oct 1996 19:46:07 GMT, Andrew Mathis <fresh(a)panix.com> wrote: >> >Two observations >> >1) From the most Orthodox standpoint, 2nd Ave. Deli is not Kosher >> >because they are open on Shabbat. Many frum Jews I know refuse to eat >> >there >> >> Ah....kosher style, then? > >Congregant: "What does "kosher style" mean? >Rabbi: "Tref". > >David

1 0

Dole crack mirror
by Rick Campbell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- I put a copy of the stuff that I found at http://www.dole-kemp.org/ at http://www.c2.net/~campbell/www.dole-kemp.org/ Basically, there was very little to the content: a couple of pages and a few images. The link to the Clinton-Core page was through http://www.dole-kemp.com/ (Note .com rather than .org) where one of the links there redirects immediately to http://www.cg96.org/new/index2.htm -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMliJARj0UvMeUesFAQHW6QP/QL/P49brEIS7Hmw2myu4gL0fikL8Y1dW 03RO2a8IbBZVcN9FPA8FKlcDg5rApvquO83c930Wdihy1Lt1ot28Jlu0wrb1TExk paTWfmFG2kkRf66HvBbW5HYxdDPBUhv6X+WW+TztuLgtau/8p6TB67gyH84QBiYz kExTNxnu/54= =8gCv -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Rick Campbell <campbell(a)c2.net> ``One of the symptoms of an approaching http://www.c2.net/~campbell/ nervous breakdown is the belief that one's work is terribly important.'' - Bertrand Russel

2 1