- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

New PGP key for Lucky Green
by Lucky Green 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Folks, I am about to revoke my old DSS key ID 0xB663B0FD for administrative reasons. My new DSS key is attached. The new DSS key is signed with both my old DSS key and my ancient RSA key. If you signed my keys in the past, please sign the new one. Please discontinue use of my old DSS key. Thanks, - --Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 6.0.2 iQCVAwUBNn24CwSQkem38rwFAQE81AP/SA/AVTvMyWettjxaVOMvSdkSOzZITGPv bkZDp0posq014TrttVOUakHfLkYMe20bqMqkFLGwmzyfC6T33QYEnWXVZ7br/LCX YLg1+5ymS6ceCTgH8nfV+JIOGraxG7k818mF4NinR2xksfG8+p+yxoasSDVMwh0K wrt6/YCsYdQ= =ufA7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

FW: PRIVACY Forum Digest V07 #21(excerpt)
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Snip from the latest Privacy Forum Digest on commercial filtering software for enterprises, encryption and "criminal skills". cheers, C.G. -- A Navigo Farmer > -----Original Message----- > From: privacy(a)vortex.com [SMTP:privacy@vortex.com] > Sent: Sunday, December 20, 1998 4:58 PM > To: PRIVACY-Forum-List(a)vortex.com > Subject: PRIVACY Forum Digest V07 #21 > > PRIVACY Forum Digest Sunday, 20 December 1998 Volume 07 : Issue > 21 > [...] > > Date: Wed, 16 Dec 98 12:25 PST > From: lauren(a)vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein; PRIVACY Forum Moderator) > Subject: Privacy Discussions Classified as a "Criminal Skill" > > Greetings. Is discussing privacy in the PRIVACY Forum a criminal skill? > According to one widely used commercial web filtering tool, the answer was > yes! The controversy over software to block access to particular sites, > based on perceived content, has been continuing to rage. Attempts to > mandate the use of such software in environments such as libraries and > schools have raised a variety of serious concerns. In addition to fairly > straightforward freedom of speech issues, another factor revolves around > how accurate (or inaccurate) these filtering systems really are. > > I've now seen firsthand that errors by a filtering system can indeed be > quite > serious, an event that seems to certainly validate some of these concerns. > But there is something of a silver lining to the story, as we'll see > later. > > I recently was contacted by someone at a large corporation, who was trying > to reach the PRIVACY Forum web site, which is constantly being referenced > by > individuals and commercial, educational, government, and other sites > around > the world. This person was upset since whenever they attempted to reach > the http://www.vortex.com site and domain that hosts the PRIVACY Forum, > their web software blocked them, informing them that the block was in > place > due to the site being categorized as containing "criminal skills." > > As the webmaster for the vortex.com domain, this certainly came as news to > me. The message they received didn't give additional information--they > didn't even know exactly where it came from. It was apparent though, that > the entire organization was probably blocked from reaching the PRIVACY > Forum, since the filtering software in question was affecting a main > firewall system. > > After a number of phone calls and discussions with the system > administrator > for that organization, the details began to emerge. The company was > running > a filtering software package from Secure Computing Corporation of San > Jose, > California. This package received weekly updates of blocked sites in a > wide > variety of categories, one of which was "criminal skills." > > The administrator had no idea what rationale was used for these decisions, > they just pulled in the list each week and applied it. He immediately > placed > vortex.com on a local exception list so that it would no longer be blocked > to > their users. > > I then turned my attention to Secure Computing. After a number of calls, > I > found myself speaking with Ken Montgomery, director of corporate > communications for that firm. He confirmed the information I had already > received. The filtering product in question ("SmartFilter") was > apparently > not being marketed to individuals, rather, it was sold to institutions, > corporations, etc. to enforce filtering policies across entire entities. > The product covers a wide range of information categories that users of > the > software can choose to block. He said that the majority of blocked sites > were in categories involving pornography, where there was (in his opinion) > no question of their not belonging there. > > The "criminal skills" category reportedly was broadly defined to cover > information that might be "of use" to criminals (e.g. how to build bombs). > He had no explanation as to why my domain had been placed in that list, > since by no stretch could any materials that are or have ever been > there fall into such a categorization. He did discover that the > classification of my domain had occurred over a year ago (meaning > other sites could have been receiving similar blocking messages for > that period of time when trying to access the PRIVACY Forum) and > that the parties who had made the original classification were no longer > with their firm--so there was no way to ask them for their rationale. > (All of their classifications are apparently made by people, not > by an automated system.) > > However, it seems likely that the mere mentioning of encryption may have > been enough to trigger the classification. The administrator at the > organization that had originally contacted me about the blocked access, > told > me that the main reason they included the "criminal skills" category in > their site blocking list was to try prevent their users from downloading > "unapproved" encryption software. This was a type of information that he > believed to be included under the Secure Computing "criminal skills" > category (the "logic" being, obviously, that since criminals can use > encryption to further their efforts, encryption is a criminal skill). He > also admitted that he knew that their users could still easily obtain > whatever encryption software they wanted anyway, but he had to enforce the > company policy to include that category in their blocking list. > > As PRIVACY Forum readers may know, no encryption software is or ever has > been distributed from here. The topic of encryption issues does certainly > come up from time to time, as would be expected. For the mere *mention* > of > encryption in a discussion forum to trigger such a negative categorization > would seem to suggest the fallacy of blindly trusting such classification > efforts. > > Mr. Montgomery of Secure Computing initially suggested that it was up to > their customers to decide which categories they wanted to use in their own > blocking lists--he also stated that as a company they were opposed to > mandatory filtering regulations. I suggested that such determinations by > their customers were meaningless if the quality of the entries in those > categories could not be trusted and if errors of this severity could so > easily be made. I felt that this was particularly true of a category with > an obviously derogatory nature such as "criminal skills"--the > ramifications > of being incorrectly placed into such a category, and then to not even > *know* about it for an extended period of time, could be extreme and very > serious. > > To their credit, my argument apparently triggered a serious discussion > within Secure Computing about these issues. I had numerous subsequent > e-mail and some additional phone contacts with Mr. Montgomery and others > in their firm concerning these matters. First off, they apologized > for the miscategorization of vortex.com, and removed it from the > "criminal skills" category (it was apparently never listed in any > other of their categories). > > Secondly, they have agreed with my concerns about the dangers of such > miscategorizations occurring without any mechanism being present for sites > to learn of such problems or having a way to deal with them. So, they > will > shortly be announcing a web-based method for sites to interrogate the > Secure > Computing database to determine which categories (if any) they've been > listed under, and will provide a means for sites to complain if they feel > that they have been misclassified. They've also suggested that their hope > is to provide a rapid turnaround on consideration of such complaints. > > While by no means perfect, this is a step forward. I would prefer a more > active notification system, where sites would be notified directly when > categorizations are made. This would avoid their having to > check to see whether or not they've been listed, and needing to keep > checking back to watch for any changes or new categorizations. If more > filtering software companies adopt the Secure Computing approach, there > would be a lot of checking for sites to do if they wanted to stay on > top of these matters. Secure Computing feels that such notifications are > not practical at this time. However, their move to provide some > accountability to their filtering classifications is certainly preferable > to > the filtering systems which continue to provide no such facilities and > operate in a completely closed environment. > > So, we make a little progress. The PRIVACY Forum and vortex.com are no > longer miscategorized and have been removed from all Secure Computing > block > lists. Secure Computing was polite and responsive in their > communications with me, and will establish the system discussed above in > reaction to my concerns. Web filtering of course remains a highly > controversial topic with many serious negative aspects, but we see that > when > it comes to dealing with the complex issues involved, it would be a > mistake > to assume that all such filters all created equal. > > --Lauren-- > Lauren Weinstein > Moderator, PRIVACY Forum > http://www.vortex.com > [...] >

1 0

SNET: NYC's top cop to outline DNA plan:
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: "Mark A. Smith" <msmith01(a)flash.net> Subject: SNET: NYC's top cop to outline DNA plan: Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1998 18:25:12 -0500 To: Maureen <myfirst(a)tricor.net>, SNET <snetnews(a)world.std.com>, L & J <liberty-and-justice(a)mailbox.by.net>, David Rydel <eagleflt(a)bignet.net> -> SNETNEWS Mailing List This From: Electric Times Union (Albany, NY), December 14, 1998 http://www.timesunion.com NYC's top cop to outline DNA plan: Proposal aims to use sampling as a strategy against repeat offenders http://www.timesunion.com/news/story.asp?storyKey=2960&newsdate=12/14/98 By RICHARD PYLE Associated Press NEW YORK -- Police Commissioner Howard Safir is going public with his proposal for New York City police to take a DNA sampling along with the fingerprints of everyone arrested -- a proposal already drawing fire from civil libertarians. Safir planned a speech at a Bronx high school today to formally outline his plan as a strategy against repeat offenders -- especially burglars, auto thieves and other specialists in property crimes. "I'm asking myself how am I going to continue to reduce crime,'' Safir told The New York Times in an interview. Crime in New York City has dropped by 50 percent in the last five years. The murder rate alone has fallen 20 percent from a year ago and is expected to finish the year at the lowest level since the early 1960s. Under Safir's plan, the police would take a swabbing from inside the suspect's cheek, a standard method of collecting DNA, and put it into a database for future reference. DNA is the unique genetic blueprint of each person, said by legal and forensic experts to be as reliable as fingerprints and far more useful in identifying individuals responsible for certain types of crime. Safir's plan would require action by the state Legislature to expand the circumstances under which DNA samples could be taken from criminal suspects. At present, New York state allows testing of felons convicted of 21 types of violent crime, including murder, rape and manslaughter. All other states have some form of database of DNA taken from felons, and last October, the FBI set up a long-discussed national DNA database beginning with 250,000 names, linked to state-maintained databases. Only Louisiana tests every person arrested for DNA, as Safir suggests for New York City. The genetic profile technology became widely known during the O.J. Simpson trial and has been used increasingly in law enforcement, both to identify criminals and to exonerate individuals falsely accused or convicted. Norman Siegel, director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, has objected to the proposal, contending that arrest is not sufficient grounds for authorities to collect personal genetic information, and would violate the Forth Amendment safeguard against unreasonable search and seizure. Involuntary testing for DNA has been challenged legally by several members of the armed forces and a group of women on California's death row. Copyright 1998, Capital Newspapers Division of The Hearst Corporation, Albany, N.Y. --------------------------------NOTICE:------------------------------ ISPI Clips are news & opinion articles on privacy issues from all points of view; they are clipped from local, national and international newspapers, journals and magazines, etc. Inclusion as an ISPI Clip does not necessarily reflect an endorsement of the content or opinion by ISPI. In compliance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed free without profit or payment for non-profit research and educational purposes only. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- ISPI Clips is a FREE e-mail service from the "Institute for the Study of Privacy Issues" (ISPI). To receive "ISPI Clips" on a regular bases (1 - 6 clips most days) send the following message "Please enter [Your Name] into the ISPI Clips list: [Your e-mail address]" to: ISPIClips(a)ama-gi.com . The Institute for the Study of Privacy Issues (ISPI) is a small contributor-funded organization based in Victoria, British Columbia (Canada). ISPI operates on a not-for-profit basis, accepts no government funding and takes a global perspective. ISPI's mandate is to conduct & promote interdisciplinary research into electronic, personal and financial privacy with a view toward helping ordinary people understand the degree of privacy they have with respect to government, industry and each other. But, none of this can be accomplished without your kind and generous financial support. If you are concerned about the erosion of your privacy in general, won't you please help us continue this important work by becoming an "ISPI Supporter" or by taking out an institute Membership? We gratefully accept all contributions: Less than $60 ISPI Supporter $60 - $99 Primary ISPI Membership (1 year) $100 - $300 Senior ISPI Membership (2 years) More than $300 Executive Council Membership (life) Your ISPI "membership" contribution entitles you to receive "The ISPI Privacy Reporter" (our bi-monthly 12 page hard-copy newsletter in multi-contributor format) for the duration of your membership. For a contribution form with postal instructions please send the following message "ISPI Contribution Form" to ISPI4Privacy(a)ama-gi.com . We maintain a strict privacy policy. Any information you divulge to ISPI is kept in strict confidence. It will not be sold, lent or given away to any third party. -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com -> Posted by: "Mark A. Smith" <msmith01(a)flash.net>

1 0

Publicly Verifiable Anonymous Voting System
by JonWienk＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

[Begin Rant] As I write this, I am listening to the news coverage of the bombing in Centennial Park. The ABC news reports are already linking the suspected Georgia Militia members accused of plotting to use pipe bombs at the Olympic Games. Just like OKC, the militia-gun owner-right-wing extremist smear is gearing up before the blood has a chance to dry. On the other hand, the govt seems to be awfully reluctant to admit the obvious about TWA 800... [End Rant] Here is the how the voting system works. 1. All voting information (public keys, ballots, ballot signatures, etc.) is publicly available via a Web site or other similar means, and can be downloaded in its entirety by anyone who cares to take the trouble to do so. The software (and source code) used to generate ballots should be publicly available as well. 2. When someone registers to vote, they submit a RSA public key to a registered voter key database. The public key database does not contain voter information; only keys. Access to the key entry terminals is controlled, so that only registered voters can submit keys. A receipt is given to the voter with a hash of the key printed on it (PGP fingerprint style), the key entry clerk's name, a receipt serial number, etc., so the voter can verify the correct key was put in the system, and who to shoot if it wasn't. 3. On election day, each voter submits a ballot signed with their private key. The ballot contains the fingerprint of the voter's public key, the voter's choices, (preferably in a standardized ASCII format) and the digital signature. The ballot goes into the vote database regardless of whether it is valid or not. The voter receives a printed receipt confirming that the ballot was entered in the database, with a hash of the entire ballot (headers, signature, and all), receipt serial number, etc. 4. After the election, each voter can verify whether their public key and ballot are in the database, and see whether their vote is deemed valid or not (if the signature on the ballot can be verified by a key in the key database). If there are any discrepancies, the voter has the public key, the ballot, and the receipts to prove that his vote should be counted. 5. Since the key/vote databases are not connected to individuals, no one can connect votes to voters unless cheating occurs during the registration process. If there is fraud or other errors, the key/ballot/receipt combo is all that is necessary to prove the error--no identification of the bearer is required. 6. Keys in the system should expire every few years. Any comments / constructive criticisms welcome. Jonathan Wienke "1935 will go down in history! For the first time a civilized nation has full gun registration! Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead in the future!" --Adolf Hitler "46. The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale, transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. ...Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizens who refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S. government." --The 29 Palms Combat Arms Survey http://www.ksfo560.com/Personalities/Palms.htm 1935 Germany = 1996 U.S.? Key fingerprint = 30 F9 85 7F D2 75 4B C6 BC 79 87 3D 99 21 50 CB

2 2

SNET: [Fwd: [FP] "Anti-government groups" fighting "anti-money laundering" regulation]
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Lynford Theobald <telnet12(a)burgoyne.com> Subject: SNET: [Fwd: [FP] "Anti-government groups" fighting "anti-money laundering" regulation] Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1998 08:10:04 -0700 To: "snetnews(a)world.std.com" <snetnews(a)world.std.com> -> SNETNEWS Mailing List This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------F27EB234AAECCD21A8C78784 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Keep up the good work. Again we can make it happen if we fight together. LT --------------F27EB234AAECCD21A8C78784 Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Received: by bci for telnet12 (with Cubic Circle's cucipop (v1.21 1997/08/10) Fri Dec 11 20:24:26 1998) X-From_: owner-scan(a)efga.org Thu Dec 10 21:46:07 1998 Return-Path: <owner-scan(a)efga.org> Received: from inferno.serversystems.net (inferno.serversystems.net [207.15.209.253]) by burgoyne.com (8.8.7/8.8.6) with ESMTP id VAA23503 for <telnet12(a)burgoyne.com>; Thu, 10 Dec 1998 21:46:07 -0700 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by inferno.serversystems.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) id WAA07977 for scan-list.efga; Thu, 10 Dec 1998 22:34:25 -0500 Received: from alpha.airnet.net (page.airnet.net [207.120.51.2]) by inferno.serversystems.net (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA07974; Thu, 10 Dec 1998 22:34:23 -0500 Received: from scottmcd (207.242.81.215) by alpha.airnet.net (Worldmail 1.3.167); 10 Dec 1998 21:31:48 -0600 From: "ScanThisNews" <mcdonalds(a)airnet.net> To: "ScanThisNews Recipients List" <scan(a)efga.org> Subject: [FP] "Anti-government groups" fighting "anti-money laundering" regulation Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1998 21:33:32 -0600 Message-ID: <000f01be24b7$08034640$d751f2cf@scottmcd> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2173.0 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.2106.4 Importance: Normal Sender: owner-scan(a)efga.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: owner-scan(a)efga.org X-Web-Site: http://www.efga.org/ X-Mail-List-Info: http://efga.org/about/maillist/ X-SCAN: http://www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by burgoyne.com id IAA15087 =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D SCAN THIS NEWS 12/10/98 ---------------------- New anti-money laundering rules spark big protest on bank privacy 5.26 p.m. ET (2226 GMT) December 10, 1998 By Marcy Gordon,=A0Associated Press WASHINGTON (AP) =97 Federal regulators are being deluged with thousands o= f e-mail messages from citizens furious about new anti-money laundering rul= es that they view as an invasion of privacy. As a visible symbol of the federal government with a plaque in every bank branch, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. has become a magnet for consumers' anger over the proposed rules. But regulators at other federal banking agencies also reported Thursday t= hey had received many protesting e-mails, letters and telephone calls =97 som= e of them apparently instigated by anti-government groups. The ire is directed at the proposed regulations, called "Know Your Customer'' rules, that would require banks to verify their customers' identities and know where their money comes from. Banks also would have t= o determine customers' normal pattern of transactions and report any "suspicious'' transactions to law enforcement authorities. The proposal, published Monday in the Federal Register, is designed to combat money laundering techniques used by drug traffickers and other criminals to hide illegal profits. Laundering includes the use of wire transfers and bank drafts as well as "smurfing,'' the practice of breakin= g down transactions into smaller amounts that don't have to be reported und= er banking laws. The torrent of e-mail, first reported in The Wall Street Journal Thursday= , came as the 90-day public comment period opened for the proposal. It reflects growing anxiety among consumers about banks' use of personal financial data =97 a concern that prompted a top federal regulator to war= n the banking industry this spring that it needs to protect customers' privacy. Someone from Texas wrote, "I am appalled at even the suggestion of such a= n intrusion into our personal lives by the federal government.'' In another message, a Florida doctor told the regulators: "Next you'll ... be implanting (an electronic) chip in newborns at birth so they can be scanned as they walk in any banks as an adult.'' FDIC spokesman David Barr said the agency had received a staggering 2,700 e-mails and letters opposing the proposal. At least some of the angry messages appear to have been inspired by anti-government groups claiming the proposed rules are part of a federal conspiracy aimed at limiting people's constitutional rights, according to the Journal and people close to the situation. Regulators and banking industry officials, who worked together on the new rules, have taken pains to reassure consumers that their privacy would be protected under the changes. "Because of privacy concerns, it is the ... expectation that banks would obtain only that information that is necessary to comply with the rule, a= nd would limit the use of this information to that purpose,'' the Office of = the Comptroller of the Currency, which regulates nationally chartered banks, said in a statement. John Byrne, senior counsel of the American Bankers Association, said, "Jo= e Q. Citizen needs to recognize that there's nothing for him or her to worr= y about.'' comments(a)foxnews.com =A9 1998, News America Digital Publishing, Inc. d/b/a Fox News Online. -----Original Message----- From: W.G.E.N. [mailto:idzrus@earthlink.net] Sent: Thursday, December 10, 1998 6:30 PM To: idzrus(a)earthlink.net Subject: NID:"KYC" Feds being deluged with Email protest =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Don't believe anything you read on the Net unless: 1) you can confirm it with another source, and/or 2) it is consistent with what you already know to be true. =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D Reply to: <fingerprint(a)networkusa.org> =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D To subscribe to the free Scan This News newsletter, send a message to <majordomo(a)efga.org> and type "subscribe scan" in the BODY. Or, to be removed type "unsubscribe scan" in the message BODY. For additional instructions see www.efga.org/about/maillist.html ----------------------------------------------------------------------- "Scan This News" is Sponsored by S.C.A.N. Host of the "FIGHT THE FINGERPRINT!" web page: www.networkusa.org/fingerprint.shtml =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D --------------F27EB234AAECCD21A8C78784 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf" Content-Description: Card for Lynford Theobald Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit begin: vcard fn: Lynford Theobald n: ;Lynford Theobald email;internet: telnet12(a)burgoyne.com x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 x-mozilla-html: FALSE version: 2.1 end: vcard --------------F27EB234AAECCD21A8C78784-- -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com -> Posted by: Lynford Theobald <telnet12(a)burgoyne.com>

1 0

major phone company & y2k
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

internet company documents suggest severe problems ------- Forwarded Message Subject: Y2K Alert - 12/17/98 - Internal documents reveal telecomm truth Sent: 12/16/98 11:50 PM Received: 12/17/98 10:37 PM From: alertsend(a)y2knewswire.com To: Eddie Pons, ponski(a)soft-link.com The following is a free Y2K alert + analysis from Y2KNEWSWIRE. COM. You signed up for this. Removal / unsubscribe instructions and e-mail contacts are at the bottom of this e-mail. *Do not* reply by hitting 'reply' in your e-mail program. To reach us, you must use one of the e-mail addresses given below. ____________________________________________________________ SECRET DOCUMENTS REVEAL Y2K TELECOMM TRUTH: A MAJOR LONG-DISTANCE COMPANY KNOWS THEY WON'T MAKE IT (But they won't admit it publicly...) Y2KNEWSWIRE recently received a collection of internal documents from an employee at one of the major long-distance companies. The documents appear to be genuine. However, to avoid copyright infringement, we cannot reprint them here. But we *can* paraphrase the documents without violating copyright law, and that's what we're going to do in this alert. We feel it is our responsibility to inform the public the truth about Y2K problems at large telecommunications companies. We are withholding the name of the company because frankly, the name does not matter. We think *all* the major telecommunications firms are in the same position. The problems described by this one are not unique. Every firm is playing the same spin game, avoiding a public admission of Y2K-guilt while privately, internally, they all know the situation is hopeless. Here's what we found in one particular document: [COMPANY] SUMMARIZES THE PROBLEM In the first part of the document, the company simply summarizes the Y2K problem. [COMPANY] ADMITS ENTIRE SYSTEMS COULD BE SHUT DOWN Mid-way through the documents, the company acknowledges that corrupt data could cause the shutdown of entire systems. They quote a study of network switch components conducted by Bellcore, describing how they were completely locked up after a simulated 2000 rollover. The company then refers to this as the, "Killer aspect" of the system. Then, the documents describe the company's ongoing efforts to solve the problem, pointing out that the deadline, "absolutely cannot slip." [COMPANY] ESTIMATES ITS EXPOSURE The company then says it has between 80 and 100 million lines of code that might be affected by the Millennium Bug. It goes on to call the bug a "virus," which is technically incorrect, but close enough for telecommunications work, apparently. Then the company describes another test of a Bellcore switch that experienced a frightening shutdown due to an expiring license date problem. The switch shut down completely. Another component apparently worked until April of 2000 (in simulation), then it, too, shut down as the daylight savings time change was attempted. [COMPANY] ADMITS THEY CAN'T MAKE IT! Then, the company's internal document claims that fixing the problem is, "too large a task" to finish in time. There simply aren't enough staff hours, according to these documents. The company then goes on to describe a strategy of triage: they'll accept failures in *some* systems in order to focus on the BIG ones. And that's the big challenge, they say: identifying the big systems and getting them remediated in time. THAT'S IT! The document then ends with a warning that all documentation is for internal use only and cannot be distributed outside the company. WHAT DOES IT MEAN? Publicly, this company is telling people they will complete all Y2K remediation on time. We now have proof this is a *con job* designed to deceive customers and investors. And we suspect this is the situation with *most* companies. Internally, when the engineers sit around the lunch table, they all know the situation is basically hopeless. There simply isn't enough time remaining. But publicly, these companies vigorously defend their positions, claiming *everything* will be finished before 2000 and using classic denial phrases like, "We're well on our way..." and, "... the vast majority of our critical systems will be done." This is exactly why 2000 is going to be the biggest shocker we've seen in a generation. It's the moment at which all Y2K lies and deceptions are revealed. The spin melts away to reality. IT'S BEEN A WHILE Americans haven't seen this for a long, long time. Deceptions are the norm these days, and "truth" and "reality" seem to be relative -- especially in politics. The people in power have actually come to believe that words equal reality. If they say it, it must be true. Y2K is the one event that cannot be persuaded. It does not listen to spin and hype. It doesn't have a "mind" to be subjected to mind games. It will simply happen -- precisely on schedule. Remember, bureaucrats are not used to operating under these circumstances. Take the stock market, for instance. Because the stock market is essentially a vehicle of faith, when Clinton says the stock market is good, it *is* good because people believe him. The words have a direct causal effect. Y2KNEWSWIRE thinks politicians have forgotten that Y2K doesn't work that way. If all spinsters on the planet gathered together and gave us their best hype, it would still have zero effect on fixing the Millennium Bug. This is the point they don't understand. Do you wonder why John Koskinen continues telling people the federal government will have absolutely no Year 2000 problems? He's in spin mode, not reality mode. And he seems to believe his spin will somehow solve the problem. That's why 2000 will be a reality-check for at least half the population. Here's a completely objective issue that cannot be swayed by politics or persuasion. It's a pre-programmed event designed into the system. It can't be bargained with or reasoned with. And it most certainly won't listen to spin. SOCIAL SECURITY LIKELY TO MAKE IT This is virtually the *only* Y2K-compliance claim we believe. Social Security is going to make the deadline, no kidding. Why is that? They've spent *a decade* (employing over 700 programmers) to fix the bug. And they'll be done in June of 1999. Aside from the programmers, over 2800 people worked on the problem. This is exactly why the claims from other agencies that started much later -- like the FAA -- are simply lacking all credibility. Do the math here: 700 programmers x 10 years = 1,750,000 person-days of work. That's fourteen million hours of work, and that doesn't even count the 2800 *non-programmers.* So Social Security has spent 14 million hours correcting this problem, according to their own statement. How many hours has the FAA spent? Frankly, we don't know. But to equal 14 million hours in just two years (because they really weren't seriously working on it until early 1998), they would need to employ 3,500 programmers working full time! WHY WASN'T SOCIAL SECURITY FINISHED IN 1991? If these projects could really be completed in two years, why wasn't Social Security done in 1991? Why did it take TEN years to complete the job? If John Koskinen is to be believed, *all* federal projects, no matter how late they started, will be done in plenty of time. And that means two years is quite enough for most agencies. Why did Social Security take ten, then? You already know the answer. Note, however, that without telecommunications or banking, Social Security's compliance doesn't matter. Read the details at: http://www.amcity.com/atlanta/stories/1998/12/14/focus5.html SURVEY REVEALS INSIDER PESSIMISM According to this San Diego Daily Transcript story (link below), the Aberdeen Group conducted a survey at November's COMDEX computer show. Here are some of the more interesting survey results: * Less than half are confident their organization's "mission critical" desktop computer applications will work in 2000 * 20% said their organizations haven't even finished the Y2K assessment stage * 53% said they were "unsure" whether their compliant systems could be effectively shielded from corruption by non-compliant systems Read more details at: http://www.sddt.com/files/library/98/12/07/tca.html U.N. TO DEPLOY Y2K SWAT TEAMS These are basically "crisis intervention teams" that would visit countries with the worst problems and try to solve them. Question: if international transportation is down, how will the SWAT teams get around? Read the details in this CNN report: http://cnn.com/TECH/computing/9812/12/y2k.un/ NEW ZEALAND COMPLIANCE PLANS NEAR COLLAPSE As this "Radio NZ" report reveals, plans to make public sector groups Y2K compliant are on the point of collapse. Read the details at: http://www.year2000.co.nz/y2krnz01.htm READER MAIL "I spoke with my bank (US Bank in Portland) and asked them about buying gold and silver coins. The bank employee looked at me and asked, "Y2K?" and I responded "Yes". She told me that I was about the 150th person this month to inquire about the conversion on assets to gold. She advised me to call the brokerage division of the bank." ________________ "At Grand Union in Smithtown, New York, I had a clerk recently ask me if we were invaded or something because so many people had packed the store for the can goods sale. At Waldbaums's in Ronkonkoma, when they put 20lb bags of rice on sale (about once a month) they FLY out the door. I saw one lady buying three." ________________ "Just a few weeks ago, diesel generators were readily available in the southern AZ area. Now there are none to be found. We are looking for one (obviously we postponed too long) and my husband remembered a large lumber/building supply store in a smaller AZ town that has always had a large supply of all kinds of generators (they service many contractors). He drove up there today and found they had ONE generator, a small 500 watt gas-type, on the shelf." - - Webmaster _____________________________________________ Get ready for Y2K, read the Y2K Sourcebook Get the inside sources for stocking up now http://www.y2ksupply.com/index.asp?pageid=sourcebook _____________________________________________ Tell a friend about the free Y2KNEWSWIRE.COM e-mail alert: http://www.y2knewswire.com/tellafriend.htm _____________________________________________ This e-mail message is subject to the following disclaimer: http://www.y2knewswire.com/Index.asp?pageid=disclaimer All statements made herein, and made since August of 1998, are Year 2000 Statements and are retroactively protected as Year 2000 readiness disclosures under the Good Samaritan Act _____________________________________________ To be removed from this e-mail list, simply go to the following web address: http://www.y2knewswire.com/u.asp?E=ponski@soft-link.com Or: http://www.y2knewswire.com/remove.htm _____________________________________________ Join the "believers-only" free Y2K e-mail newsletter: http://www.y2knewswire.com/believers.htm _____________________________________________ Please ignore this: (for undeliverable pruning only) http://www.y2ksupply.com/p.asp?E=ponski@soft-link.com _____________________________________________ HOW TO REACH US: If you have a hot tip for us (anonymity assured): tips(a)y2knewswire.com If you have a compliment: compliments(a)y2knewswire.com If you want to be added to the subscription list (free!), visit http://www.y2knewswire.com and enter your e-mail address in the sign up box located at the upper-left corner of the page. If you have a complaint: complaints(a)y2knewswire.com For questions about ordering: service(a)y2knewswire.com For any other comments: comments(a)y2knewswire.com - --------------5394A0C9D7D2472270037192 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="vcard.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for Lynford Theobald Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf" begin: vcard fn: Lynford Theobald n: ;Lynford Theobald email;internet: telnet12(a)burgoyne.com x-mozilla-cpt: ;0 x-mozilla-html: FALSE version: 2.1 end: vcard - --------------5394A0C9D7D2472270037192-- - -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com - -> Posted by: Lynford Theobald <telnet12(a)burgoyne.com> ------- End of Forwarded Message

1 0

ShootBack this Thursday (answers to questions)
by Robert Hettinga 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

--- begin forwarded text Resent-Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 15:54:24 -0500 Subject: ShootBack this Thursday (answers to questions) From: mann(a)eecg.toronto.edu To: wear-hard(a)haven.org Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 15:48:07 -0500 (EST) Resent-From: wear-hard(a)haven.org Resent-Sender: wear-hard-request(a)haven.org several people have been asking questions about national shootback day this thursday at noon. for example a lot of people have asked why the day before christmas, for which there is an answer, e.g. just bring a camera with you when you go christmas shopping, and try to capture the spirit of the herds of christmas shopping customers being watched from above... it was felt that a faq would help immensely, so here is the national shootback day faq: http://wearcam.org/nad-faq.htm NATIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY DAY (NAD) FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQ) Q. What is NAD? A. NAD is short for National Accountability Day. To some it is a protest against those who hold us accountable but refuse to or try to avoid being accountable to us. To others, it's a fun celebration of mutual accountability. To some, it's a chance to get revenge by shooting at people who are members of an organization who's been shooting at them. To others, it's a chance to help those who have helped them, by giving them the gift of protection. It's different things to different people, but the one common element is that it involves taking pictures of people who are involved in placing us under video surveillance. Q. How can I give the gift of protection this Christmas season? A. On the entrances to their shops, their signs say ``for YOUR protection you are being videotaped''. Isn't it heartwarming to see that they are offering you so much love and compassion? In return, you must offer them the same protection. By photographing them, you will show them that you love them and care for them. Put them in your family album, and cherish their smiles for centuries. Q. Who was the inventor or originator of NAD? A. NAD is not the vision of a single individual, but, rather, it is the work of an international coalition that includes artists, scientists, engineers, and scholars. Q. When is NAD? A. December 24, 1998 Q. Why December 24th? Won't the stores be kind of crowded with last minute Christmas shoppers then? A. That's exactly the point of selecting December 24th. The meaning of Christmas has become one of consumerism. Like herds of animals we are shepherded into the shops only to be distrusted by the shopkeepers who watch over us from on high, with their omniscient surveillance network. When the sheep are greatest in number, the shopkeepers will have a more difficult time of keeping order. Moreover, it gets boring waiting in the long lineups. Why not pass away the time standing in line, by doing a little shooting. So take a camera along during your Christmas shopping and do a little camera shooting. Why was Christmas Eve chosen ? The shops will be rather busy. A. that's exactly why. 12:00 noon dec.24th will be the busiest day, and the best expression of corporate culture, and the best time to shoot. It's a human element.. crowds of people herded like cattle, overseen by the surveillance. Also the lineups will be long, so it was felt that folks could entertain themselves while waiting in line by shooting. When you get bored waiting in line, liven it up with some camerafire. Shoot when you're bored. Shoot when you're frustrated. Shoot when you're being shot!!! Q. Is NAD the same as ShootBack Day? A. Yes, NAD is also known to many as National ShootBack Day or National ShootingBack Day. (ShootBack is one word! There is no space between Shoot and Back.) Q. Isn't 12:00 noon going to happen at different times since the different parts of the nation are in different time zones? Furthermore, National Accountability Day is International. If that itself isn't an oxymoron, then at least it adds to the confusion since different coutries around the world are in much different time zones. A. That's exactly the point of doing it at noon. As high noon sweeps past various time zones, the shot heard around the world will be that of clicking cameras. This shot will travel around the world, and the shot heard around the world will be the shot seen around the world, later on when the contest submissions come in. The shot seen around the world will be seen in the nationless realm of cyberspace, hence the term ``National'' is partly in jest, for it is certainly not limited to any nation in particular. Q. How do I enter the contest? A. Send your pictures to International Photo Contest, 284 Bloor Street West, Suite 701, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5S 3B8 All submissions become property of NAD and will not be returned. Winning entries along with a large number of the submissions will be posted to the online gallery. Q. What format should the pictures be in? A. Any developed format (print, film positive, film negative, etc.), or any file format that can be read using GNU software under Gnu Public License on a computer running the Linux operating system. Alternatively, submissions may be placed on an FTP or HTTP server and the address or URL may be submitted. Any submissions that require commercial software or commercial operating systems to read will be discarded without review. Acceptable media include slides, silver halide prints, or other standard forms of photographic prints up to 8.5 by 11 inches, computer printouts, film negatives, plates (glass plate negatives up to 8 by 10 inches), film negative strips, film positive strips, diffractive prints, 3.5 inch floppy disks, ISO 9660 CD ROMs, IDE devices, or SCSI devices. Photographic media must have been developed (e.g. no undeveloped films or forms that require chemical treatment or processing by NAD staff will be accepted). If submissions are made by URL, the image format must be universally readable from any WWW browser. Q. I have heard that NAD is a protest? Is this true? Will there be a march? A. If you prefer to think of NAD as a protest, it can certainly be explained that way. Rather than protesting by carrying signs, or by marching, citizens will protest by going on shooting sprees. Armed with their own photographic or videographic cameras and recording devices, ordinary citizens will dish out some accountability by taking pictures of people who are representatives of organizations who are taking pictures of them. Q. If NAD isn't a protest, than what is it? A. Another equally valid interpretation is that NAD is an agreement with the status quo rather than a protest against it. In this interpretation cameras are good, so let's have more of them. Pictures are good, so let's all take pictures. If a department store is such a dangerous place that cameras are needed, then so be it. What's good for the goose is good for the gangster. Everyone shoots everyone and we're all happy. ``Only criminals are afraid of cameras'', so let's give representatives of the Surveillance Superhighway a chance to define themselves by seeing if they're afraid of cameras. When we ask why we are under video surveillance, we are told by the Bigs that ``only criminals are afraid of cameras'', or we are asked ``why are you so paranoid''. Now is the time to allow the Bigs to define themselves. Q. How can I participate? A. All you need to do is bring a camera --- any camera --- to a place where video surveillance is used. Q. How will I know who I should shoot? A. Taking pictures of the surveillance cameras will cause models to appear very quickly for you to photograph. When you point your camera at their cameras, the officials watching their television monitors will very quickly dispatch the models for you to shoot. This is a universal phenomenon that happens in nearly any large organization where video surveillance is used. Models often carry two--way radios and wear navy blue uniforms with special badges. Most will be eager to pose close to your camera, especially the hand models. They will reach out and place their hands over your camera lens so you can get a closup hand shot. Q. What is the rationale behind NAD? A. We are all accountable for our actions. The Bigs keep us under surveillance, whether we're just walking down the street, shopping, or sometimes even when we're changing clothes in their fitting rooms (Phil Patton, Jan. '95, WiReD). That's why Thursday, December 24th is National Accountability Day. This is the day to arm yourself with a camera, or other photographic or videographic instrumentation, and enter various department stores, and other establishments that match the classic definition of totalitarian (e.g. establishments that wish to know everything about everyone yet reveal nothing about themselves). Q. What are some examples of totalitarian establishments? A. Examples of totalitarian establishments are those in which we are placed under extensive video surveillance, yet we are prohibited from taking pictures ourselves. The goal of National Accountability Day is to challenge this one-sided aspect of Totalitarian Surveillance. Q. What subject matter, other than pictures of the surveillance cameras and representatives of the SS should I shoot? A. Participants will also photograph or make videos of any illegal activity they happen to encounter in these totalitarian establishments. Evidence of illegal activity includes fire exits chained shut, and other forms of entrapment, forcible confinement doors, and the like, which are potential fire hazards. Q. Should I shoot alone, or be part of a firing squad. A. Going salvo is better than going solo. It is preferable that groups of citizens participate in unison, to prevent, or at least document illegal theft or vandalism of photographic equipment by the Bigs. Q. Is there a deeper philisophical underpinning to NAD, or is it just a bunch of angry people going postal? A. The camera is like Hamlet's Mirror, allowing the Bigs to define themselves within a Reflectionist context. Reflectionism holds up a mirror to society, and constructs this mirror in a symmetrical way, so that it is defined on the same terms as that which it calls into question. Q. Is there any slogan or aphorism I might use to publicize NAD? A. Shoot Authority First Question Authority Later. (Shoot first, ask questions later) Q. Is NAD a photo conntest? A. There is a photo contest associated with NAD. For entry instructions, see http://wearcam.org/nad-entry.htm -- Subcription/unsubscription/info requests: send e-mail with subject of "subscribe", "unsubscribe", or "info" to wear-hard-request(a)haven.org Wear-Hard Mailing List Archive (searchable): http://wearables.ml.org --- end forwarded text ----------------- Robert A. Hettinga <mailto: rah(a)philodox.com> Philodox Financial Technology Evangelism <http://www.philodox.com/> 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA "... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'

1 0

Anthrax [DoD]
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > X-within-URL: http://www.defenselink.mil/other_info/agent.html > Go to Home Page - U.S. Department of Defense U.S. DEPARTMENT OF > DEFENSE > Home Site Map Search major sections are next NEWS MULTIMEDIA > PUBLICATIONS QUESTIONS? > > Information Paper > Anthrax as a Biological Warfare Agent > * Anthrax is the preferred biological warfare agent because: > > * It is highly lethal. > > * 100 million lethal doses per gram of anthrax material (100,000 > times deadlier than the deadliest chemical warfare agent). > * Silent, invisible killer. > * Inhalational anthrax is virtually always fatal. > > * There are low barriers to production. > > * Low cost of producing the anthrax material. > * Not high-technology. Knowledge is widely available. > * Easy to produce in large quantities. > > * It is easy to weaponize. > > * It is extremely stable. It can be stored almost indefinitely as a > dry powder. > * It can be loaded, in a freeze-dried condition, in munitions or > disseminated as an aerosol with crude sprayers. > > * Currently, we have a limited detection capability. > * What is Anthrax? > > * Anthrax is a naturally occurring disease of plant eating animals > (goats, sheep, cattle, wine, etc.) caused by the bacterium > Bacillus anthracis. > * It is an illness which has been recognized since antiquity. > Anthrax was common in essentially all areas where livestock are > raised. Intensive livestock immunization programs have greatly > reduced the occurrence of the disease among both animals and > humans in much of the world, an most outbreaks occur in areas > where immunization programs have not been implemented or have > become compromised (primarily Africa and Asia; however, outbreaks > occurred during the mid- I 990's in Haiti and the former Soviet > Union). > * Anthrax spores can remain viable for several decades under > suitable environmental conditions; thus, absence of cases does not > equate to absence of risk. > > * Humans can contract anthrax in three ways: > > * Through cuts or breaks in the skin resulting from contact with an > infected animal (cutaneous anthrax), resulting in local and > possibly systemic (bloodstream) infection. > > * From breathing anthrax spores (termed "woolsorters" disease) > resulting in an infection of the lungs (inhalational anthrax). > > * From eating infected meat, resulting in gastrointestinal infection > (gastrointestinal anthrax). Gastrointestinal anthrax is generally > not considered a threat to U.S. forces. > * What are the symptoms? > > * Symptoms of anthrax begin after a 1 to 6 day incubation period > following exposure. > > * For contact or cutaneous anthrax, itching will occur at the site > of exposure followed by the formation of a lesion. Untreated > contact anthrax has a fatality rate of 5-20 percent, but with > effective antibiotic treatment, few deaths occur. > * Initial symptoms for inhalational anthrax are generally > non-specific: low grade fever, a dry hacking cough, and weakness. > The person may briefly improve after 2 to 4 days; however within > 24 hours after this brief improvement, respiratory distress occurs > with shock and death following shortly thereafter. > > * Almost all cases of inhalational anthrax, in which treatment was > begun after patients have exhibited symptoms, have resulted in > death, regardless of post-exposure treatment. > * What is the medical countermeasure? > > * Prior to exposure, prevention through vaccination, using the > FDA-licensed vaccine. > * Otherwise, antibiotics such as penicillin, ciprofloxacin, and > doxycycline are the drugs of choice for treatment of anthrax. > * Treatment with antibiotics must begin prior to the onset of > symptoms and must include vaccination prior to discontinuing their > use. > * The use of antibiotics keep the patient alive until their body can > build an immunity to anthrax via vaccination. After symptoms > appear however, inhalational anthrax is almost always fatal, > regardless of treatment. > > > _________________________________________________________________ > > > > Updated: 10 Jun 1998 > Contact Us > Security and Privacy Notice > ____________________________________________________________________ What raises the standard of living may well diminish the quality of life. The Club of Rome The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage(a)ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

No Subject
by HyperReal-Anon 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> This has not been lost on those who battle right-wing terror. Early > next year, the FBI will launch a nationwide assessment of the threat > of domestic terrorism on and around Jan. 1, 2000. "I worry that every > day something could happen somewhere," Robert Blitzer, head of the > FBIs domestic terrorism unit, told the Los Angeles Times recently (see > interview also in this issue). > > "The odds are that something will happen." > The odds are that *something* will happen, if only because they finally decide to go and burn Tim May out. #!/usr/local/bin/perl -0777-- -export-a-crypto-system-sig -RC4-3-lines-PERL @k=unpack('C*',pack('H*',shift));for(@t=@s=0..255){$y=($k[$_%@k]+$s[$x=$_ ]+$y)%256;&S}$x=$y=0;for(unpack('C*',<>)){$x++;$y=($s[$x%=256]+$y)%256; &S;print pack(C,$_^=$s[($s[$x]+$s[$y])%256])}sub S{@s[$x,$y]=@s[$y,$x]}

1 0

(fwd) Re: Anonymous posters & Misinformation = Net pollution
by nzook＠math.utexas.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Path: math.utexas.edu!news.dell.com!tadpole.com!uunet!news.sprintlink.net!sun.cais.com!cais2.cais.com!jdfalk From: jdfalk(a)cais2.cais.com (J.D. Falk) Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc,news.admin.policy Subject: Re: Anonymous posters & Misinformation = Net pollution Followup-To: talk.politics.misc,news.admin.policy Date: 8 Aug 1994 20:27:54 GMT Organization: Capital Area Internet Service Lines: 2 Message-ID: <3264ga$adk(a)sun.cais.com> References: <32253p$220(a)news.u.washington.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: 199.0.216.200 X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2] Xref: math.utexas.edu talk.politics.misc:239596 news.admin.policy:19191 What you propose would involve rewriting news and mail software at every site. This will not happen.

1 0