- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Health Care Privacy Alert
by frissell＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:57 AM 8/10/94 EDT, Gerald M. Phillips, Ph.D. wrote: >Posted for general interest >Subject: Health Care Privacy Alert > The health care legislation proposed by Gephardt in the House and >Mitchell in the Senate contains provisions which would establish a >national health care data network and override most state medical >confidentiality laws. All health care providers, whether paid by >insurance or not, will be required to provide the network with data >from the patient medical record after every clinical encounter. *Any* bill that passes will have all sorts of juicy, privacy-invading provisions. Leftists in the "privacy community" will have to decide which they like better: privacy or "health security." There's no way you can have a government-directed, third-party-paid, health care "system" without throwing privacy out the window. Bureaucracies *keep* records, they don't destroy them. Our president likes the "German System" -- 'nuff said. DCF "According to the CBO report on the 'Clinton-Mitchell Bill,' the effective marginal tax rate on some lucky moderate income families ($20K-$30K) will be 85%(!) due to 1) ordinary taxes, (2) phase out of the earned income tax credit, and (3) phase out of health insurance subsidies under the 'Clinton-Mitchell Bill'."

3 4

Suggested Book
by frissell＠panix.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There was a discussion a while ago on books for cypherpunks. A very good fictional discussion of the issues that motivate us in a non-crypto context can be found in Poul Anderson's book "Shield." It is the story of an explorer who returns from Mars with the technology for a (semi-impenetrable) personal force field. The story is relevant because the current FBI briefing book on how to pitch the Digital Telephony Initiative to the press emphasizes the "what if your daughter's kidnappers had a wall or a shield that couldn't be broken, you'd demand that we be able to break it, wouldn't you?" argument. Easy enough to answer with "if my daughter had a wall or shield that couldn't be broken, she couldn't be kidnapped in the first place" reply. The "force field" is a fair analogy to crypto since, as Tim May, has argued, the energy cost necessary to break strong cypto is the equivalent of a journey to the end of the universe and back (or whatever). "Shield" displays the attitudinal differences between control freaks and libertarians (like Poul Anderson) quite well. Impenetrable shields scare control freaks and give hope to believers in personal autonomy. Also, the climax of "Shield" includes a decades-old version of the technique that some members of cypherpunks have used to solve secrecy problems -- uploading the "secret" document to the nets to forestall censorship. Recommended. DCF "Who for decades hoped for the two inventions that would bring about a de facto free society without having to change anybody's politics -- a force field or a $5 a pound orbital launch system -- but who never predicted the direction from which Liberation Technology would sneak up on him." "Hmmm.. 'Liberation Technology' there's a book title in there or is it too close to 'Liberation Management?"

2 1

Re: e$
by jdd＠aiki.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In message <199408111921.MAA08505(a)netcom7.netcom.com> Sheldon Glass writes: > | > Plonk. > | > | A reply showing true intelligence. > > I saw it differently. To me, the plonk was the sound of your wadded up > email hitting the bottom of the trash can. An entirely deserved > destination, in my opinion. If you really believe in the sanctity of > govenrment and in the intelligence and integrity of the government > employees, then you're so far out of phase that discussion is pointless. I believe that government employees are drawn from the general population and the distributions of their attributes are roughly the same as those of the general population. 'Sanctity of government' is not a phrase or concept that I introduced. > Government's fucked, as are it's employees. It's axiomatic. Fanaticism and other types of inflexibility and to be found among government employees, among the general population, and in fact among most groups of any size. -- Jim Dixon

2 1

First Virtual
by L. Todd Masco 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Does anybody know anything about a new company named "First Virtual"? I know they got NSB from BellCore and a couple of other researchers. -- L. Todd Masco | "Cowboy politicians sucking up to the aristocracy, not cactus(a)bb.com | even sure if they like democracy..." - TR-I

1 0

Re: First Virtual
by Jef Poskanzer 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>Does anybody know anything about a new company named "First Virtual"? I > know they got NSB from BellCore and a couple of other researchers. % whois first | egrep -i virtual First Virtual Corporation (FVC-DOM) FVC.COM First Virtual Corporation (NET-FVC) FVC 199.181.72.0 First Virtual Holdings Inc. (NET-FV-NET) FV-NET 199.171.113.0 First Virtual Holdings, Inc. (FV-DOM) FV.COM First Virtual Holdings, Inc. (THECARD-DOM) THECARD.COM First Virtual Holdings, Inc. (CARD-DOM) CARD.COM % whois fvc.com First Virtual Corporation (FVC-DOM) 3393 Octavius Drive, Suite 102 Santa Clara, CA 95054 Domain Name: FVC.COM Administrative Contact, Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Gallmeister, Bill (BG43) postmaster(a)FVC.COM (408) 738-2220 Record last updated on 22-Apr-94. Domain servers in listed order: NS1.SVC.PORTAL.COM 156.151.6.20 UUCP-GW-1.PA.DEC.COM 16.1.0.18 UUCP-GW-2.PA.DEC.COM 16.1.0.19 % whois fv.com First Virtual Holdings, Inc. (FV-DOM) POB 3627 Rancho Santa Fe, CA 92067-3627 Domain Name: FV.COM Administrative Contact: Stein, Lee (LS48) leestein(a)SCRIPPS.EDU 1 619 759 9300 Technical Contact, Zone Contact: Rose, Marshall T. (MTR) mrose(a)DBC.MTVIEW.CA.US (415) 968-1052 Record last updated on 19-Mar-94. Domain servers in listed order: DBC.MTVIEW.CA.US 192.103.140.1 TRYSTERO.RADIO.COM 192.101.98.3

1 0

Re: cfs & remailers
by markh＠wimsey.bc.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Another potential problem with sendmail->cfs interaction is that > CFS doesn't implement NFS file locking. This isn't much of an issue with > a single host and a single instance of CFS, but could be a problem if the > mailboxes are read and written by other machines or are remotely mounted > by the machine running sendmail. Some versions of sendmail support "dot locking", which effectively does away with this problem. Mark

1 0

Zimmermann debate with NSA on 8/25
by Philip Zimmermann 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Subject: Zimmermann/NSA debate in California There will be a debate between Philip Zimmermann and Clinton Brooks of the National Security Agency, on Thursday, 25 August, at 5:45pm Pacific Time, in Thousand Oaks, California. The debate is organized by the World Affairs Council, and will be held at the Thousand Oaks Inn, at 75 Thousand Oaks Blvd. To get there, take Highway 101 north from LA to the Moorpark exit, turn right onto Moorpark, left at first light, one block down on right side. The debate will be on the issues of crime, terrorism, privacy and civil liberties on the information superhighway, and the role of cryptography in these issues. Philip Zimmermann is the creator of Pretty Good Privacy (PGP), the most widely used software in the world for E-mail encryption. Zimmermann is under criminal investigation for publishing free encryption software, resulting in its widespread use around the world, allegedly in violation of US export restrictions on encryption software. Clinton Brooks is assistant to the director of the NSA, and was instrumental in the creation of the controversial Clipper Chip and the Escrowed Encryption Standard. There will be cocktails and a light buffet at 5:45, and the program will start at 6:30. Admission is $15 if you preregister, or $25 at the door. Preregistration can be done by mailing a check, or by credit card via phone or fax, to: World Affairs Council 1051 Calle Yucca Thousand Oaks, CA 91360 or call 805 498-6312 or fax 805 532-1306 (include credit card number, expiration date, and event) This announcement may be widely distributed.

1 0

Re: Remailer ideas (Was: Re: Latency vs. Reordering)
by wcs＠anchor.ho.att.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> > What I think is a better idea was proposed here last year, and I think > > someone was doing it for a while. It is for someone to volunteer to > > be the keeper of the remailer aliveness information. He runs scripts > > every day to ping the remailers, keeps lists of which remailers are > > currently active, and so on. > > This does seem like a better idea, except for one thing: > Everybody has got to trust the Keeper of the Aliveness Info. > I'm not sure how much of a problem this is, nor am I sure that > the newsgroup method neccesitates any less trust. A major problem with having a single-point aliveness-info source is that watching traffic to that source gives you some idea who's about to send anonymous messages - multiple sources mean there are N sources to wiretap to get the same information, which may be nearly as bad. On the other hand, a broadcast method like a usenet group has the advantage that you can read the newsgroup without being very obvious, except locally. A mailing list is somewhere in between. Similar problems occur with anonymous single remailers in the absence of good reordering; many new remailer users, or users of unreliable remailers precede their real anonymous messages with a ping of some sort, such as a message through the remailer chain pointing back to themselves. If you're using a news reader without NNTP, or with NNTP only for the local non-tapped LAN, you may be ok. Another alternative are mailing lists (NOT human-readable ones like cypherpunks) which reforward the remailer newsgroup information, preferably encrypted. Newsgroups are obviously easy to inject bogus information into, but that's the way it goes; any non-trusted system is, well, non-trusted.... Bill

1 0

Re: Are \"they\" really the enemy? (Systems commentary)
by blancw＠pylon.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Was that really your commentary? For some reason, the new cool feature on the mail system I'm using showed up with your name as the sender of my reply to yourself. But it was really me all along, commenting on the systems thread. Blanc

1 0

The remailers at Hack-Tic
by usura＠vox.hacktic.nl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hello, The "Hack-Tic Network Foundation" has decided to change its name, into a more mainstream "XS4all Networking" [access for all]. This will include a change in domain name. The changes will be made during this weekend, this may cause some slight disturbances in the remailing service. One is advised to do a test messages before an actual remailing request since no garantee for proper functioning during this change can be given. The new domain name will be xs4all.nl, the hacktic.nl domain name will be operational for another 6 months till february 1995. The remailers affected are: usura(a)hacktic.nl -> usura(a)xs4all.nl The adresses for the remailers at my UUCP node: nobody(a)vox.hacktic.nl remail(a)vox.hacktic.nl remailer(a)vox.hacktic.nl anon(a)vox.hacktic.nl and the anon-ID's associated with them will be changed at a later date, more information will be supplied as it becomes available in the following newsgroups/mailinglists: -> alt.privacy.anon-server -> alt.anonymous -> alt.anonymous.messages -> the cypherpunks mailing list -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 for VoX Labz. iQCVAgUBLlM64FnfdBSNVpE9AQGX+wP/QfwaHdNm8HKKeLEqFnH4Kv72efkZx7Ta VS132dLH7wYn8bN+N43nCvh6jSKwSlwT261qXA5DDp9WASCgCdfovzkV4+hnxGkA Hdd3ncJ6TAMyAO4PYPiTNHVREoB3LpLPRRF/iGYfPR7R3+d7acuJApzpMg2pwGW9 nGehxc3tmuE= =sPNJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Exit! Stage Left. Alex de Joode <usura(a)vox.hacktic.nl>

1 0