- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

magic money
by Ice-Fox (aka Robert Sturtz) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

could someone give me a hand compileing magic money?? btw many thanks too all those who emailed me adresses for pgp Yours in SYNC. Robert Sturtz __ __ __/// rsturt(a)wilbur.mbark.swin.oz.au (Ice-Fox on irc) __/// \XX/ Vice-President of Eastern Wargamers And Roleplayers Club \XX/

1 0

No Subject
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- The Phantom Exchange public client list -------------------------------------------- aa <bb@cc> ... etc. Is there someone out there who would like to act as a broker (for a small fee, natch), so that I can maintain rigorous anonymity while trading? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.3a iQCcAgUBLdFfwLhnz857T+PFAQGKiQQ49PT6XiiXCjcIt4TRRApXdom4iaKBYnTs hPbdYSm7Yo3tBbzluZwBH2zX3k2P48yO2Z3nSoMzQvtI7AW9761xzInDl7mvyTlu QBIT5glBrbFGFkUl5HFfAV4mpOnNoXRHRsxp7QvIZTT3vG9YrzH5FAi/7gjBQvyE h+V7MSBrF7vuhpAHs+5/ =SRWU -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

TEST
by tcmay＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is a test to see if mail is getting though. If you get this, there are only about a dozen of us shown on Majordomo's listing, as you probably already know. Anybody know what happened? (I can think of some possibilities: Nalbandian's threatened 12.2 MB mail bomb, someone (LD or JN?) unsubscribed everyone with Majordomo, or a toad problem unrelated.) Exciting times in cypherspace. --Tim -- .......................................................................... Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)netcom.com | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero 408-688-5409 | knowledge, reputations, information markets, W.A.S.T.E.: Aptos, CA | black markets, collapse of governments. Higher Power: 2^859433 | Public Key: PGP and MailSafe available. "National borders are just speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

No traffic received in two days...
by Christian D. Odhner 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Who got nuked, me or the list? Happy Hunting, -Chris. ______________________________________________________________________________ Christian Douglas Odhner | "The NSA can have my secret key when they pry cdodhner(a)indirect.com | it from my cold, dead, hands... But they shall pgp 2.3 public key by finger | NEVER have the password it's encrypted with!" cypherpunks WOw dCD Traskcom Team Stupid Key fingerprint = 58 62 A2 84 FD 4F 56 38 82 69 6F 08 E4 F1 79 11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

An ignorable test...
by hugh＠ecotone.toad.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Lets see if fixing all the file perms fixes the list... Hopefuly the list will be up in a few minutes. ||ugh Daniel Sometimes Postmaster hugh(a)toad.com

1 0

Anonymous Faxes Illegal (Re: legal rqmt for FAX return phone #)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> I thought I heard somewhere that it was illegal to send > anonymous faxes -- namely, that there was some regulation ===== Excerpted from FCC January 11, 1993 Public Notice ===== FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION PUBLIC NOTICE (31291 / DA 92-1716) January 11, 1993 INDUSTRY BULLETIN -- TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT TELEPHONE SOLICITATIONS, AUTODIALED AND ARTIFICIAL OR PRERECORDED VOICE MESSAGE TELEPHONE CALLS, AND THE USE OF FACSIMILE MACHINES ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [...] *** [Lots of Q&A's Deleted] *** WHAT OTHER REQUIREMENTS APPLY TO THE USE OR MANUFACTURE OF TELEPHONE FACSIMILE MACHINES? FCC rules require that each transmission to a telephone facsimile machine must clearly contain, in a margin at the top or bottom of each transmitted page or on the first page of the transmission, (1) the date and time the transmission is sent (2) the identity of the ender and (3) the telephone number of the sender or of the sending machine. All telephone facsimile machines manufactured on or after December 20, 1992 must have the capacity to clearly mark such identifying information on the first page or on each page of the transmission. WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH FCC RULES ON TELEPHONE FACSIMILE TRANSMISSIONS? The person on whose behalf a facsimile transmission is sent will ultimately be held liable for violations of the TCPA or FCC rules. *** [More Q&A's Deleted] *** ===== Partial Text of FCC January 13, 1993 Public Notice ===== FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION PUBLIC NOTICE (31328) January 13, 1993 PART 68 IMPLEMENTATION OF TELEPHONE CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT FCC Docket No. 92-90, released October 16, 1992, became effective on December 20, 1992. For Part 68 requirements, see 47 C.F.R. sec. 68.318(c)(2) and (c)(3). [...] Form 730 Customer Instructions: The following information must be provided in Exhibit J of the Form 730 application and in instructions furnished the customer as provided in the following example: The Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 makes it unlawful for any person to use a computer or other electronic device to send any message via a telephone fax machine unless such message clearly contains in a margin at the top or bottom of each transmitted page or on the first page of the transmission, the date and time it is sent and an identification of the business or other entity, or other individual sending the message and the telephone number of the sending machine or such business, other entity, or individual. In order to program this information into your fax machine, you should complete the following steps. Insert here instructions for programming the equipment and the required information or the page where it can be found. The fax branding procedure outlined above will be used only for fax machines and not for fax cards used in computers pending reconsideration proceedings. FCC Contact: William von Alven (202) 634 1833 ===== end of attachments =====

1 0

Re: What's Happened to the Cypherpunks list?
by gtoal＠an-teallach.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

: I came in this morning, expecting (as usual), a plethora of : mail from the cypherpunks mailing list. Instead, zilch. : Since this sounded fishy, I tried to find out if there was : a fault with the mecahnisms at U. Q. Since this seemed to : check out, I tried mailing to the Majordomo server with the : magic line: : : : "who cypherpunks" : in the body. I found out that "only" about 12 people were : subscribers. Yet when I last tried it, there were 700 people : listed. Is it a problem with me, or do other people have the : same hassles? Oh dear, looks like our favourite net.kook has forged 700 unsubscribe requests to majordomo on our behalf. This is getting out of hand :-( G

1 0

So what happened?
by Robert A. Hayden 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subject says it all. What happened to the list? Did someone hack it or did it just suffer from sunspots or some such? ____ Robert A. Hayden <=> hayden(a)krypton.mankato.msus.edu \ /__ -=-=-=-=- <=> -=-=-=-=- \/ / Finger for Geek Code Info <=> Political Correctness is \/ Finger for PGP 2.3a Public Key <=> P.C. for "Thought Police" -=-=-=-=-=-=-=- (GEEK CODE 1.0.1) GAT d- -p+(---) c++(++++) l++ u++ e+/* m++(*)@ s-/++ n-(---) h+(*) f+ g+ w++ t++ r++ y+(*)

1 0

Is the list down?
by John Clark 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I didn't get anything from Cypherpunks today (Sunday), is the list down? John K Clark johncla(a)freenet.fsu.edu

6 5

sufficantly advanced software...
by a2＠ah.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

...is indistinguishable from a bug. Sufficantly advanced hacking.... ...is indistinguishable from a bug. : The Cypherpunks list has been wiped somehow...everyone was unsubscribed. Send mail to majordomo(a)toad.com with "subscribe cypherpunks" in the subject and as the first line of the message. If you are not on the cypherpunks list, or if you get multiple copies of this message, please ignore it... Mike -a2

1 0