- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Electric power generators ?
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

You're talking about the wired.com article I wrote. I carefully did not say there is a "shortage" of generators, diesel or otherwise -- that's your own misreading of it. I did say that the largest U.S. distributor of diesel generators has half year delays on the most popular model. Same with bulk food suppliers like Walton's. Solar power companies also report vastly increased demand. You can buy cheaper gasoline generators at Home Depot, but there are reasons people want to pay three or four times as much for a diesel model. These differences and the other answers to your questions have been well-documented elsewhere; I'm not inclined to list them for you here, though others might be. -Declan At 05:52 PM 11-7-98 -0600, Igor Chudov @ home wrote: > >Hi there, > >I saw an article posted about "shortages" of electric power generators >and other Y2K "survival" goods, such as grains in airtight drums. My >reading of the article gave me a feel that those products are bullshit >products geared towards naive losers, and can be easily replaced with >much cheaper products that can be bought at discount stores. > >More careful reading of the article showed that only certain high power >diesel generators are scarce. > >A visit to my local discount retailer has shown that there are 10KW >gasoline generators available for as little as $500. 10KW is far more >than I would need in an emergency. (I will probably need about 2KW). > >Questions: > >1) Aside from probably lower power, are those cheaper generators somehow >worse? > >2) How reliable are those cheaper generators? > >3) What is their expected lifetime, in hours of operation? > >4) How hard is it to service them? > >5) How do you connect them to the electric system, to properly use >them as backup? (this may be a stupid question, but I am not very >familiar with American system of electric wiring). > >6) How much gasoline do they consume if you draw 2KW power from them? > >Thank you. > >---------------------------------------------------------------------------- >char*p="char*p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);} > > \=/, _-===-_-====-_-===-_-==========-_-====-_ > | @___oo ( )_ > /\ /\ / (___,,,}_--= ) > ) /^\) ^\/ _) =__ Anything is good and useful if ) > ) /^\/ _) (_ ) > ) _ / / _) ( it's made of chocolate. ) > /\ )/\/ || | )_) (_ ) >< > |(,,) )__) ( http://www.algebra.com/~ichudov ) > || / \)___)\ (_ _) > | \____( )___) )___ -==-_____-=====-_____-=====-___== > \______(_______;;; __;;; >

1 0

Re: IP: Discover Alien Life With Your PC And SETI (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1998 20:39:58 -0800 > From: Steve Schear <schear(a)lvcm.com> > Subject: Re: IP: Discover Alien Life With Your PC And SETI > Perhaps I'm missing something, but it seems to me that if I were an alien > civilization and wanted to send out a beacon, in as wide an angle as > possible, across the vast reaches of space and overcome as much of the path > losses as possible using the least energy I certainly wouldn't use a narrow > band signal. Quite the contrary, I'd want to spread a low bandwidth > information signal across the widest practical spectrum. Its much easier to > increase process gain (the ratio of the baseband information signal to the > final carrier bandwidth) than transmit power. The problem becomes the 1/r^2 losses. The receivers on this end have fixed lower end to their sensitivity that sets a minimal effective energy output at the transmitter. If you do the math you find that the entire Earth doesn't generate enough energy to send a spread-spectrum wide-band signal more than a few light-years out, not worth the effort or the social costs (nobody'd know about it because radio and television and such wouldn't be available since we're using all *that* energy for sending the signal). This might work for a hive mentality society but not for people. > While a narrow band signal from Arecibo's powerful transmitter/antenna > combination can be detected at a distance of about 300 light years. Since it's only been transmitting intermittenly about 30 years that's more than a tad moot. > Switching to a spread spectrum approach could allow broadening the antenna > pattern, and thereby its chances of detection, significantly without > reducing its effective range. Spread spectrum won't effect the beam angle of the dish, that's set when the dish is designed - spread spectrum or not. Also you'll need to build a new set of LMB's since the old ones won't be able to handle the frequency range or the gross power input required to keep the new signal at a given frequency at a respectible power level with the other frequencies we're now operating on in parallel. That baby's gonna get hot. > Notice how 63 dB (or over 2,000,000 fold > effective increase in transmit power) of process gain enables handheld GPS > receivers to pull in signals from satellites, sent using only a few watts > of transmit power, without much of an antenna. It's amazing how much you can pull in when you increase the sensitivity of the front-end and use mechanisms to reduce noise. > If all this seems to make sense, then why are the SETI people apparently > seaching the skies with lots of narrow band receivers? They don't seem to > be employing any broadband correlator techniques, so spread signals will > probably be missed. Then you haven't been keeping up with the Million Channel Receiver system that has been operating at Aricebo for several years. You also haven't been keeping up with the folks out at White Sands either who also impliment receivers of the same spread-spectrum type. Just about all the current big money (there ain't any since the feds cut the budget several years ago) projects use this system and the small-money and individual projects also impliment it but at a lower range of bandwidth sampled. It isn't that these folks don't want to use the latest technology it's that they can't.....$$$. ____________________________________________________________________ To know what is right and not to do it is the worst cowardice. Confucius The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

BOOST YOUR WEB SITE'S TRAFFIC--GET LISTED ON YAHOO!
by trgz941＠netscape.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

BOOST YOUR WEB SITE'S TRAFFIC--GET LISTED ON YAHOO! ---------------- THE MARKETING BENEFITS OF HAVING A YAHOO! LISTING FACT: Yahoo! is the most important search engine/directory on which your Web site can be listed. FACT: Independently conducted Internet studies show that 42% of all Internet traffic and 70% of all business-to- business Web site traffic is generated from Yahoo!. FACT: Getting your Web site listed on Yahoo! is without question the single most important marketing step you can take to promote your Web site. EXAMPLE: For some of our clients, a Yahoo! listing is the only Internet advertising they have--and the only advertising they need. EXAMPLE: Some of our clients now receive over 20,000 hits per *day* and do well over $100,000 in Internet sales per month--not from expensive advertising, but all from a single Yahoo listing. ---------------- YAHOO! REJECTS 90% OF ALL SUBMITTED WEB SITES--BE IN THE 10% PROBLEM: In case you didn't know, Yahoo!'s staff rejects over 90% of the submissions they receive. SOLUTION: Our R&D division has studied hundreds of sites-- both those that have been successfuly indexed and those that have been rejected. SOLUTION: Based on our findings, we've helped hundreds of clients not only get their site into the Yahoo! index, but into a very prominent place within that index. The Yahoo! Project Team can do the same for you. ---------------- MY SITE HAS ALREADY BEEN REJECTED BY YAHOO! WHAT CAN I DO? PROBLEM: "I submitted my site to Yahoo! but it was rejected. What can I do now?" SOLUTION: If your site has already been rejected--don't despair. We've helped many clients' sites get into Yahoo!'s index even after they've been rejected. ---------------- THE YAHOO! SITE SELECTION PROCESS--IN A NUTSHELL "I can just submit my URL and be considered for a listing, right? It's easy, isn't it?" No. It's not. Read on to learn why. PROBLEM: Every site that gets accepted into the Yahoo! directory is scrutinized by a Yahoo! "editor." The first step in the submission process is to get an already overworked editor to look at your site. SOLUTION: We have a carefully-researched technique to help your site's chances of being examined. PROBLEM: Before submitting, your site *must* be prepared for the Yahoo! editor's "10 minute lookover." In order to grab that editor's attention--and get listed--you need to understand what he or she will be examining to determine if your Web site gets a Yahoo! listing. SOLUTION: Our R&D division has studied hundreds of Yahoo! rejection letters and learned why Yahoo! editors commonly reject sites. In short, we can *tell* you ---------------- SOLUTION: THE "SECRETS TO GETTING A TOP YAHOO! LISTING" REPORT We offer an information-packed "Secrets to getting a top Yahoo! listing" report that will tell you exactly what Yahoo! editors will be looking for when they evaluate your site. You can learn from hundreds of other people's mistakes so that you won't make them when submitting--or resubmitting-- your site. Here's what's covered in the report: <> A general overview of Yahoo! and how it works <> The technical details of what they look for <> What *specific* types of content you *must* have <> What *never* to do before submitting to Yahoo! <> Why looking at your competitors is so important before submitting <> The specifics of how to submit properly to skyrocket your chances <> The best-kept secret on the net: this single submission technique alone has achieved top rankings for many of our clients! ---------------- FOR THE SERIOUS SITE OWNER--THE CUSTOMIZED YAHOO! EVALUATION We also offer a "Customized Evaluation" service where we'll examine your site like a Yahoo! editor will--and tell you, step-by-step, each of the changes you'll need to make before submitting to Yahoo!. The "Customized Evaluation" includes all of the information from the "Secrets to getting a top Yahoo! listing" report *plus*: <> A customized evaluation of your competitors' sites and why they are so important to consider before submitting <> An evaluation of your site's technical specs. and recommendations for improving them <> An evaluation of your site's content and recommendations for improving it ---------------- SUMMARY: WHY YOU NEED A GOOD LISTING ON YAHOO! (1) If you're thinking of submitting your site to Yahoo! --or have already tried and failed--put our research and the failure of others on your side. (2) Let us help you dramatically improve the effectiveness of your on-line marketing efforts. Preparing your site for Yahoo! is worth the extra effort. (3) Remember: Yahoo! is the only *free* Internet marketing resource that can help you to increase your long-term goals of widespread exposure and profitability. (4) Best of all, once your listed in Yahoo, you're there forever. This one-time effort will be rewarded with years of residual benefits. benefits ---------------- PRICING "Secrets to getting listed on Yahoo!" report -- $99 Customized Web site evaluation (incl. report) -- $249 ---------------- CONTACT US: Call us at: (314) 994-1286 <> Learn more about the Yahoo! project and us. We'll explain exactly how we can maximize your particular site's chances of a top Yahoo! listing <> We'd love to answer any questions you might have! <> It could be the single most important phone call you'll ever make when it comes to the on-line success of your website! (314) 994-1286 ---------------- If you've received this E-mail in error, or do not desire to receive any further mailings from the Yahoo! Project Team, please REPLY to this E-mail with the word "REMOVE" in the E-mail's subject line. Thank you.

1 0

BOOST YOUR WEB SITE'S TRAFFIC--GET LISTED ON YAHOO!
by trgz941＠netscape.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

BOOST YOUR WEB SITE'S TRAFFIC--GET LISTED ON YAHOO! ---------------- THE MARKETING BENEFITS OF HAVING A YAHOO! LISTING FACT: Yahoo! is the most important search engine/directory on which your Web site can be listed. FACT: Independently conducted Internet studies show that 42% of all Internet traffic and 70% of all business-to- business Web site traffic is generated from Yahoo!. FACT: Getting your Web site listed on Yahoo! is without question the single most important marketing step you can take to promote your Web site. EXAMPLE: For some of our clients, a Yahoo! listing is the only Internet advertising they have--and the only advertising they need. EXAMPLE: Some of our clients now receive over 20,000 hits per *day* and do well over $100,000 in Internet sales per month--not from expensive advertising, but all from a single Yahoo listing. ---------------- YAHOO! REJECTS 90% OF ALL SUBMITTED WEB SITES--BE IN THE 10% PROBLEM: In case you didn't know, Yahoo!'s staff rejects over 90% of the submissions they receive. SOLUTION: Our R&D division has studied hundreds of sites-- both those that have been successfuly indexed and those that have been rejected. SOLUTION: Based on our findings, we've helped hundreds of clients not only get their site into the Yahoo! index, but into a very prominent place within that index. The Yahoo! Project Team can do the same for you. ---------------- MY SITE HAS ALREADY BEEN REJECTED BY YAHOO! WHAT CAN I DO? PROBLEM: "I submitted my site to Yahoo! but it was rejected. What can I do now?" SOLUTION: If your site has already been rejected--don't despair. We've helped many clients' sites get into Yahoo!'s index even after they've been rejected. ---------------- THE YAHOO! SITE SELECTION PROCESS--IN A NUTSHELL "I can just submit my URL and be considered for a listing, right? It's easy, isn't it?" No. It's not. Read on to learn why. PROBLEM: Every site that gets accepted into the Yahoo! directory is scrutinized by a Yahoo! "editor." The first step in the submission process is to get an already overworked editor to look at your site. SOLUTION: We have a carefully-researched technique to help your site's chances of being examined. PROBLEM: Before submitting, your site *must* be prepared for the Yahoo! editor's "10 minute lookover." In order to grab that editor's attention--and get listed--you need to understand what he or she will be examining to determine if your Web site gets a Yahoo! listing. SOLUTION: Our R&D division has studied hundreds of Yahoo! rejection letters and learned why Yahoo! editors commonly reject sites. In short, we can *tell* you ---------------- SOLUTION: THE "SECRETS TO GETTING A TOP YAHOO! LISTING" REPORT We offer an information-packed "Secrets to getting a top Yahoo! listing" report that will tell you exactly what Yahoo! editors will be looking for when they evaluate your site. You can learn from hundreds of other people's mistakes so that you won't make them when submitting--or resubmitting-- your site. Here's what's covered in the report: <> A general overview of Yahoo! and how it works <> The technical details of what they look for <> What *specific* types of content you *must* have <> What *never* to do before submitting to Yahoo! <> Why looking at your competitors is so important before submitting <> The specifics of how to submit properly to skyrocket your chances <> The best-kept secret on the net: this single submission technique alone has achieved top rankings for many of our clients! ---------------- FOR THE SERIOUS SITE OWNER--THE CUSTOMIZED YAHOO! EVALUATION We also offer a "Customized Evaluation" service where we'll examine your site like a Yahoo! editor will--and tell you, step-by-step, each of the changes you'll need to make before submitting to Yahoo!. The "Customized Evaluation" includes all of the information from the "Secrets to getting a top Yahoo! listing" report *plus*: <> A customized evaluation of your competitors' sites and why they are so important to consider before submitting <> An evaluation of your site's technical specs. and recommendations for improving them <> An evaluation of your site's content and recommendations for improving it ---------------- SUMMARY: WHY YOU NEED A GOOD LISTING ON YAHOO! (1) If you're thinking of submitting your site to Yahoo! --or have already tried and failed--put our research and the failure of others on your side. (2) Let us help you dramatically improve the effectiveness of your on-line marketing efforts. Preparing your site for Yahoo! is worth the extra effort. (3) Remember: Yahoo! is the only *free* Internet marketing resource that can help you to increase your long-term goals of widespread exposure and profitability. (4) Best of all, once your listed in Yahoo, you're there forever. This one-time effort will be rewarded with years of residual benefits. benefits ---------------- PRICING "Secrets to getting listed on Yahoo!" report -- $99 Customized Web site evaluation (incl. report) -- $249 ---------------- CONTACT US: Call us at: (314) 994-1286 <> Learn more about the Yahoo! project and us. We'll explain exactly how we can maximize your particular site's chances of a top Yahoo! listing <> We'd love to answer any questions you might have! <> It could be the single most important phone call you'll ever make when it comes to the on-line success of your website! (314) 994-1286 ---------------- If you've received this E-mail in error, or do not desire to receive any further mailings from the Yahoo! Project Team, please REPLY to this E-mail with the word "REMOVE" in the E-mail's subject line. Thank you.

1 0

Re: A question about the new ISP ruling and email...
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:29 PM 11/7/98 GMT, phelix(a)vallnet.com wrote: >Is an anymous remailer needs to register, what will the implications be? Armbands next, bubby.

1 0

Re: Advertising Creepiness
by Information Security 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> From owner-ignition-point(a)majordomo.pobox.com Sat Nov 7 16:04:32 1998 > To: ignition-point(a)majordomo.pobox.com, cypherpunks(a)cyberpass.net > From: Robert Hettinga <rah(a)shipwright.com> > Subject: IP: Re: A question about the new ISP ruling and email... > Cc: believer(a)telepath.com > > Now *this* should be fun. Someone who claims to be a cypherpunk is now > going to call the copyright police on a non-profit, volunteer news list. Would you like to know whether it is "fair use" to repost entire articles? I would. > When the going gets tough, the "tough" rat out the innocent, it appears... "Innocent" is hardly an accurate description of Michele Moore. Would you like Information Security to cough up more color on his netcopping move? Hey, you ratted me out to the IP list! ;-) ---- > From: Steve Mynott <stevem(a)tightrope.demon.co.uk> > Subject: Re: Advertising Creepiness > > On Sat, Nov 07, 1998 at 11:50:05PM -0800, Tim May wrote: > > > Myself, I try to mostly just snip out a few paragraphs of a story and > > comment on them, fair use and all. > > > > My guess is that nearly all of us skip this junk > > completely, and I think marketing studies will someday confirm this. > > Click through rates are something like 2%, so most are screening them out. > I rarely noticed what the ads actually said. > > > (Yes, I tried the utilities which purport to flush banner ads, but they > > didn't work well (long delays, cruftiness).) > > I don't know which ones you have tried but junkbuster > > http://www.junkbuster.org/ (a proxy on port 8000) > > works _very_ well on my linux system, particularly with the "blank gif" > patch. > > It blanks out 99% of banner gifs, which makes pages like metacrawler and > wired look more visually attractive and load faster. But, when sites get smarter about using server-side includes, the I/O delays will still be there. I think ISPs should offer a proxy service for WWW access. They have bigger pipes. This could include an opt-in (configure through an ISP-local WWW page) adbuster. At the same time, it would to a certain extent anonymize access. And let's say cable-modem access becomes wide-spread, and legislation forces the cable companies to allow ISP choice. I think ISPs that offer some privacy in user access over this shared medium will have a leg-up on their competition. That would involve software residing local to the user's box that would encrypt access between them and the ISP for WWW, email, ftp, etc. More than just ssh. Hey, then you would finally have ads that make clear what encryption is for the average user: picture two neighbors going to work in the morning meeting in the elevator, and one starts hinting he knows what the other was receiving for email, which sites he was surfing... Maybe the Anonymizer.com people will release/sell such software for ISPs, and, of course, sans GAK. ---guy

1 0

Accept Credit Cards
by foreclosure-world＠foreclosure-world.cc 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

ACCEPT CREDIT CARDS!! PRE-APPROVED APPLICATION Good Credit/Bad Credit/No Credit NO APPLICATION FEES For a Limited Time Only! Regular $195.00 Application Fee Waived For This Offer! Increase Your Business Up To 100% Or More, Just By Accepting Credit Cards! This Means More Customers...More Orders...More Money! We Specialize in Home Based Businesses - Apply Today! Accept Visa, Mastercard, American Express, and Discover! Apply Now by visiting our Online Application Site! We are overwhelmed with Responses... http://209.215.68.186/ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * If you have received this message in error, please accept our apology as a responsible e-mailer, and reply with the word REMOVE in the subject line. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

1 0

Re: Advertising Creepiness
by Tim May 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:04 AM -0800 11/9/98, Declan McCullagh wrote: >I didn't see Tim's original post, but I wouldn't be at all surprised to see >such a right "emerge" in claims by media company lawyers. (Probably not the >advertisers.) > >Something that came across our Reuters feed over the weekend is a lawsuit >by the whitehouse.com folks -- they're pissed that a new version of >Netscape has some "intelligent" guessing features that, when someone types >in "whitehouse," automatically take 'em to whitehouse.gov. > >Which interferes with the rights of the whitehouse.com porn site, or so the >argument goes. Seems to me there are numerous variants and angles: * If the adbuster is user-controlled, it's like handing a copy of "Time" to a butler and saying "Please clip out the articles and throw away all the ads." * And "clipping services" do this and redistribute the results to clients, perhaps with some "copyright remuneration" to the publisher (I just don't know). The ads are obviously not retained. * If a content supplier (Web page, magazine, etc.) has the power to stop adbusters from removing ads, does it also have the power to stop font changes? Or colors? Can a television commercial maker sue to stop viewers from disabling color when viewing his commercial? (Of course this wouldn't happen, for various logistical and common sense reasons, but it seems to me analogous to where users disable dancing Java applets....if disabling dancing Java applets is ruled a violation of the advertiser's leasing of the original copyright, why not block anyone who interferes with a television ad?) * The "whitehouse.com" --> "whitehouse.gov" thing is just another skirmish in the whole Namespace War. Corporations will try to get browsers and search engines to turn spelling errors or perceived errors to their favor. "intek.com" --> "intel.com" I'm glad I'm not a lawyer. --Tim May Y2K: A good chance to reformat America's hard drive and empty the trash. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, ComSec 3DES: 831-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments.

1 0

RE: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > From: "X" <xasper8d(a)lobo.net> > Subject: RE: How to solve the tax problem w/o anarchy or force (fwd) > Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 10:22:00 -0700 > So you are one of those people that truly believes you can insult someone in > public, then say, "I was responding to you" and cap it off with "it's my > opinion" ? You have formed an opinion about me already? And that opinion > includes the fact that I want other people to carry my weight? How absurd > you are, little man! I simply based it on your apparent motivations based on your statements. > If I had thought you were serious about your article, I would have pointed > out the huge flaws in your theory. I gave you credit for well-thought > sarcasm when apparently it was neither. I'm waiting... ____________________________________________________________________ Lawyers ask the wrong questions when they don't want the right answers. Scully (X-Files) The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

3 2

IP: NSA Threatens To "OUT" Republicans Over Hubbell Investigation
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: softwar(a)us.net (CharlesSmith) Subject: IP: NSA Threatens To "OUT" Republicans Over Hubbell Investigation Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 16:53:35 -0500 (EST) To: ignition-point(a)majordomo.pobox.com President Clinton has tried to avoid the subject of encryption exports to China while considering the release of Israeli crypto-spy Jonathan Pollard. Yet, encryption has played a large role in a foreign donation scandal with one of Clinton's closest associates, Webster Hubbell. After losing at the polls, Republican insiders are grumbling that they could not investigate Hubbell because the secret National Security Agency (NSA) is threatening to retaliate against hill members. Webster Hubbell took money from Lippo in 1994. Mr. Hubbell served time in Federal prison because of his Whitewater uncovered during Ken Starr's investigation. In 1993, Attorney General Janet Reno tasked Mr. Hubbell to encryption under the CLIPPER encryption chip project. Hubbell had access to highly classified materials on encryption chip design, including algorithms and software. Hubbell met often in the White House with now CIA Director George Tenet on the CLIPPER project. According to a Republican Capitol Hill staff member the "NSA does not want Hubbell investigated." The NSA has quietly threatened to "out any congressional member like (Congressman) Burton" who mentions Hubbell with encryption and China. The NSA threat is not a hollow one because the agency is certainly equipped with incriminating and/or embarrassing personal information gathered from years of phone intercepts. The NSA is the prime listening agency for national intelligence. The NSA is equipped with satellites, super computers, employs an estimated 25,000 and has a budget estimated to be one third of the $26 billion U.S. intelligence budget each year. John Huang, Ron Brown and Web Hubbell were deeply involved in classified NSA encryption systems. Specifically, John Huang, Lippo banker, DNC fundraiser and secret-cleared Commerce employee was briefed 37 times by the CIA on satellite encryption technology. According to the Commerce Department, Mr. Huang had no encryption materials. CLIPPER, according to secret Clinton documents, was to be implemented by law whether it by "mandatory" legislation or a "voluntary" system of taxpayer backed payments. The CLIPPER chip, according to a secret FBI document, also had an "exploitable" feature allowing the U.S. government to monitor communications. The NSA CLIPPER chip was intended to provide all the banking and financial security for the entire United States. It was to be required in every computer, fax and phone manufactured. According to more secret FBI documents, CLIPPER also had one big flaw. A single penetration of the master key list would compromise the entire system. Ron Brown insisted that the Commerce Department be one of the master CLIPPER key holders. President Clinton tasked Brown to the project in 1993 in a top-secret executive order. According to Nolinda Hill, Brown was aware that the encryption transfers to China were bordering on treason. NASA administrator Benita Cooper wrote in 1993 that "compromise of the NSA keys, such as in the Walker case, could compromise the entire EES (CLIPPER) system." Ms. Cooper at NASA knew convicted spy John Walker sent tons of materials on U.S. secret code systems to Russia for years during the Cold War. One breach of CLIPPER in a NASA computer could kill many and ruin the agency. In 1994 President Clinton began personally authorizing the export of advanced, nuclear hardened, encryption technology directly to communist China. The exports took place with presidential waivers that included the signature of Bill Clinton. They also took place using loopholes and bureaucratic gray areas of U.S. export law. The Clinton exports included such military items as advanced fiber optic communications; radiation hardened encrypted satellite control systems, encrypted radios and cellular phones, and encrypted navigation systems. According to the GAO, President Clinton even approved the sale of a fully operational, secure air traffic control system for the Chinese Air Force. The failure of the NSA CLIPPER project is already a blot on the secret agency based at Ft. Meade. The possibility that Chinese agents penetrated the NSA project would bring encryption to the forefront of public debate and shine intense light on an inept intelligence agency. The seemingly crazy Clinton policy shows our President to be crazy like a fox. Clinton did what Pollard and Walker could not do. President Clinton sold national security secrets for cash by writing his own legal waivers. Clinton's secret crypto policy served to line the pockets of politicians and greedy corporate executives with red money. The Clinton export policy has significantly upgraded the nuclear strategic and tactical firepower of the Chinese Army. Clinton, like Walker and Pollard, sold military code secrets for cash. America knows more about AREA-51 and UFOs than Ft. Meade and Webster Hubbell. Bill Clinton and his China crypto-tale will never be declassified for the American people. The Clinton scandal cover-up is backed by the NSA library of greatest intercepts against Republicans. ================================================================ Information on CLIPPER, Ron Brown and Vince Foster - http://www.softwar.net/clip.html ================================================================ 1 if by land, 2 if by sea. Paul Revere - encryption 1775 Charles R. Smith SOFTWAR http://www.softwar.net softwar(a)softwar.net Pcyphered SIGNATURE: 93513049E31CC7BD371748D388E8EED0A73B5D3D90AF3349F8A40E5DE61B4ABD 3CAC50EF4BFE2CF287C9843E6E4676B2D9D710EB301CB0E05B5F52B2D1448A04 90B9E2F4C67594DF =============================================================== SOFTWAR EMAIL NEWSLETTER 11/08/1998 *** to unsubscribe reply with "unsubscribe" as subject *** ================================================================ **************************************************** To subscribe or unsubscribe, email: majordomo(a)majordomo.pobox.com with the message: (un)subscribe ignition-point email@address or (un)subscribe ignition-point-digest email@address **************************************************** www.telepath.com/believer ****************************************************

1 0