- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Prologue 4
by Linda Reed--PCC West Campus CSC 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Prologue 4/0 SPACE ALIENS HIDE MY DRUGS ©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©©© A Nuclear Bullet, With *Everyone's* Name On It: [Your Name Here] Excerpt from an interview with Marilyn Manson on NPR: MM: A lot of the lies spread by Fundamentalist Christians about our tour were believed by people because they read them on the InterNet. The InterNet is the CB Radio of the 90's. People perceive it as a legitimate news source, which it's not. Eventually there will need to be some sort of laws or something... Top Ten Ways To Convince The Sheeple The Revolution Is NOW: 10,9,8,.7,6,5,4,3,2... 1. Put Marilyn Manson's name on the first bullet. "Give me nuclear freedom, or give me death." ~ Patrick Hussein The TRUTH About Area 51: It's a resort©spa for the reptilian Nazis who are shaping our present and our future, preparing to rule all of mankind when they emerge from the underground bunkers beneath Los Alamos, Livermore, Colorado Springs, Muleshoe, Texas, etc., at the end of the Milleniuum. Why can't you buy a straight 2"x4" anymore? The reptilian Nazis are keeping all of the good stuff for themselves. The reason for the tight security at Area 51 is not because of secret spy©planes and the like. The reptilian Nazi's don't want us to know that they are all driving '56 Chevy's. (Their original plan was to have earthlings all driving Edsels, but they tried to implement the plan before their mind©control experiments had proven successful.) Who It Is OK To Put A Fucking Bullet Through Their Head: Officially Recognized Bad Guys©©For the Sheeple, this is Saddam Hussein, Timothy McVeigh, Dennis Rodman, paramilitarists, grandmothers who plug other people's parking meters, Branch Davidians (but it's a shame about the children), and The Subject Of A Ten©Second Sound©Byte To Be Named Later. For Republicans, this is welfare cheats, the homeless, tax cheats making less than $100,000 per year, liberals, Ralph Nadar, CypherPunks, Alt2600 avocados, the 4 Horsemen, and anyone who looks like me. For the Democrats, this is the non©avant©guarde wealthy,Üj liberals consume, Rush Limbaugh, Republican presidents, rednecks, people who drink water straight out of the tap, and anyone who looks like me. For Kris Kristofferson, this is "People doing something dirty, decent folks can frown on..." "Sunshine is the best disinfectant." ~ Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis, 1928 "Bullet holes let the sun shine in." ~ Supreme Asshole TruthMonger, 1998 When Existence Is Outlawed, Only Outlaws Will Exist: The revolution is now. The only question that those who have the balls to participate in the inevitable chaos which will be needed to balance the Tao against the current onslaught of digitally structured reality that is being forced upon humanity by the new technology being promoted by the pawns of the reptilian Nazis whose headquarters is deep within the confines of the AdamAntarctic is: "Whose brain do I put my first bullet through?" For many, the answer will be, "TruthMonger!" Nobody likes to hear the truth, and the truth is: We all deserve to die. Not only that, but the extinction of humanity, according to our current values, epitomizes the crowning glory of our evolutionary path. What places us *above* the other primates and the other forms of life on our planet? What is it that makes us special, that deems us worthy of ruling over all other life forms on the planet Earth? It is our ability to control; our ability to master our environment and the objects and life©forms contained within its bounds. Ultimately, it is our ability to *kill* whatever stands in the way of the fulfillment of our desires and our goals. For all of our soul©searching, spiritual posturing, deep down inside we all know that we live in a predatorial universe. Republicans cry out for bigger guns to defend our way of life from everyone who fails to salute the flag. Democrats cry out for the press and political leaders to invent enemies to justify the liberals crying out for bigger guns to protect us from the 'bad guys.' And it's all bullshit... The reason we need to launch wars and destroy our environment is to keep the price of our refrigerators and our color TV's reasonable©©to keep the price of aÜj dollar high enough that we can feel good about ourselves for saving a starving child for less than ten cents a day, while ignoring the fact that an obese Sally Fields could save more starving children in a week than we possibly could in a lifetime, just by donating one of her lunches to the charity she is promoting. Think About This, You Stupid Fucking Bastards: Why do we need to allow our basic human rights and freedoms to be compromised?: In order for our hallowed leaders and our protectors in the law enforcement community to adequately protect us from the 'bad guys.' Why do we need to be protected from the 'bad guys'?: Because if they win out over the 'good guys', they will take away our basic human rights and freedoms. The Reason TruthMonger Will Die Broke And Alone: Because he invested all of his money in ClueServers, believing that the Sheeple might one day find them to be of value. "TV Is Real! (Just go back to sleep, dear.)"

1 0

SNET: U.S. Patent Programmable subcutaneous visible implant
by Vladimir Z. Nuri 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: jeremy.compton(a)stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jeremy Compton) Subject: SNET: U.S. Patent Programmable subcutaneous visible implant Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 01:35:49 +1200 To: snetnews(a)world.std.com -> SNETNEWS Mailing List United States Patent 5,638,832 Singer, et. al. Jun. 17, 1997 Programmable subcutaneous visible implant Abstract A subcutaneous implant for displaying various re-programmable information or decorative patterns beneath the surface of the skin of a person or an animal. A biologically inert subcutaneous implant is constructed of a flexible material so as to conform to the skin's surface. The subcutaneous implant includes a battery for providing power to the implant. The subcutaneous implant also includes a receiver for receiving programming information from a user, and a display for displaying the programming information through the skin. Inventors: Singer; Andrew J. (Palo Alto, CA); White; Sean (San Francisco, CA). Assignee: Interval Research Corporation (Palo Alto, CA). Appl. No.: 477,096 Filed: Jun. 7, 1995 Intl. Cl. : A61B 19/00 Current U.S. Cl.: 128/899 Field of Search: 128/897-899, 654 References Cited | [Referenced By] U.S. Patent Documents 4,233,964 Nov., 1980 Jefferts et al. 128/899 5,041,826 Aug., 1991 Milheiser 5,074,318 Dec., 1991 Campbell et al. 5,205,286 Apr., 1993 Soukup et al. 128/899 5,322,034 Jun., 1994 Willham et al. 5,324,940 Jun., 1994 Ekstrom 5,482,008 Jan., 1996 Stafford et al. 128/899 Primary Examiner: Cohen; Lee S. Assistant Examiner: Lacyk; John P. Attorney, Agent or Firm: Brooks & Kushman 19 Claims, 4 Drawing Figures -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to majordomo(a)world.std.com -> Posted by: jeremy.compton(a)stonebow.otago.ac.nz (Jeremy Compton)

1 0

Remailer Security
by jrochkin＠cs.oberlin.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 11:06 PM 03/04/96, lmccarth(a)cs.umass.edu wrote: >Bottom line: if you can crack (say) the 8-character Unix passphrase for a >remailer account, you have full access to the remailer's secrets and all the >opportunities that presents. Good remailer account passphrases are >important. Um, there's no reason why your remailer's account needs to be logged into interactively, is there? Seems like remailer ops should disable login to remailer accounts, putting '*' into the password field in /etc/passwd, or however unix lets you disable login (I know it does). Obviously, the general security risk of someone gaining unauthorized access to the remailer executable or data files is still there, and important to keep in mind. But this would seem to be a fairly logical security measure.

1 0

I don't think I'm on the mailing list anymore. What's going on?
by Corey Minter 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi, I'm not getting any more mail from this list. Does anyone know what could have happened? Maybe it's a CDA crackdown :) If anyone knows could you email me directly?

1 0

Re: rhetorical trickery
by Mutant Rob 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Vladimir Z. Nuri wrote: [..] > there is an infamous case of a child pornographer or pedophile in > California that is sometimes cited by law enforcement representatives > as a good example of the evils of encryption: supposedly he encrypted > his diary and it couldn't be unlocked by them. this was mentioned in > the article. > > but I have a question: how did they know it was his diary? If I remember some earlier discussion about that case from a few years ago, the file was called "diary.pgp". What they don't mention is that they were still able to convict him. They were just under the belief that they could figure out who all the victims were they didn't know about from his alleged diary... so they could "help" the other victims or maybe get him ore jail time? Odd thing is he used PGP 1.0, which used Bass-O-Matic. > I've noticed that people tend to often make conceptual leaps like > this that are wholly unjustified. it is easy to get their opposition Yes. This is quite common in political/social discussions and argumentation. A big problem is that people are no longer taught rhetoric and argumentation in schools. Another problem is that it is a clear example the opponents of strong crypto can point to, with lots of emotional strings attached. The best you can do is to note that the case in question was still sucessfully prosecuted, and also to give counter-examples as to why PGP has helped people (cite the usual freedom fighters in Burma, Amnesty International examples, or cite the theft of records from the UN's investigation in Bosnia, noting that it wasn't encrypted....) - --Rob - --- [This message has been signed by an auto-signing service. A valid signature means only that it has been received at the address corresponding to the signature and forwarded.] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 Comment: Gratis auto-signing service iQBFAwUBMUDtbSoZzwIn1bdtAQGyLwGAu0nRv276K9cAmJslrl6HwW6m0YHWYKw/ mpZvHynKhfdNLRj6ghaHHH8V2DMDYrLO =SpjH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Re: News on RSA vs. Cylink Injunctions and Patents
by Bill Stewart 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:06 AM 3/8/96 PST, "baldwin" <baldwin(a)RSA.COM (Robert W. Baldwin)> wrote: > The following press release from RSA may be of interest to the >folks on this list. Thanks! It is of interest, but from one or two rounds of previous experience, I'd not want to draw any conclusions from either RSA's or Cylink's press releases about the content or meaning of a given court decision. They seem to inhabit different and not-quite parallel universes. >Cylink contends that RSA's software infringes its Stanford patents and that >licensing required an additional grant from Cylink, despite >the fact that RSA already has a license. After hearing oral arguments on >Feb. 29, Judge Williams denied Cylink's motion from the bench and later >issued a written order explaining that "several factors weigh against >finding that (Cylink) has shown a likelihood of success on >the merits." This sounds a lot like Cylink asked for a temporary restraining order blocking sales of BSAFE until the resolution of a lawsuit, and the judge rejected that request. If the quotations mean the same in context as they do in a press release (:-), they're moderately negative, though not a total rejection of the main case. It is pleasant to have RSA on the side of breaking the D-H patent and limiting the scope of H-M. Maybe this will help free the algorithms even before Roger Schlafly's suit does. #-- # Thanks; Bill # Bill Stewart, stewarts(a)ix.netcom.com, +1-415-442-2215 pager 408-787-1281 # "At year's end, however, new government limits on Internet access threatened # to halt the growth of Internet use. [...] Government control of news media # generally continues to depend on self-censorship to regulate political and # social content, but the authorities also consistently penalize those who # exceed the permissable." - US government statement on China...

1 0

Re: U.S. State Dept criticizes Chinese net-censorship
by jf_avon＠citenet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >Excerpts from internet.cypherpunks: 8-Mar-96 Re: U.S. State Dept >critici.. by JFA T. QC, Canada@citene >> There is no such thing as "self-censorship". Either you stick to >> your values, and then it is *not* censorship, or then you do not, >> and then, it is neither. > >Self-censorship does happen, and it's a growing problem in the arts >community. (I'm not a commercial artist, so this is my understanding >from other panelists and speakers at a conference I spoke at last month.) > >Making art more palatable or less "extreme" to curry favor with >corporate patrons, or to get that NEA grant, or to get that faculty >position is self-censorship, and it does happen. No, it does not. Making art more palatable is simply the process of free trade between two uncoerced entities. If the artist does not offer what the corporate purchaser wants he will not sell. He thus adapt his style out to his customer. Nobody is threatening to use force to have the artist conform to the client. Nobody is forcing the client to buy what he does not like. The artist does not have to compromise, he simply have to refuse the contract. Anybody using the term "censorship" to describe that is in the following situation : he *wants* the advantages of the contract (money) without respecting the customer, therefore. He deplores the fact that somebody (the customer) can act to his best judgment. The fact that the artist calls that censorship shows that he have the same thought process as the true censorers, i.e. the conviction that the end justify the means, and more specifically, the feeling that *his* ends justify *any* means. The artist may not act on his feelings but nevertheless, they are, in essence, of this nature. And unfortunately, too many artists think that way. JFA Accepting a grant is accepting stolen money. The collectivists and their free-lunchers be DAMNED! Restore an objective monetary standard such as gold! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2i iQEVAwUBMUDVbsiycyXFit0NAQHG0gf+P1rmX5xQiRo5sHpvYBlvvclVdGxJaJ6c E+n35ln3/FFMGiguk5TEr6tOG+vj6UNBW2VibggQ9HkMkQ+6yTeJRrWQVje+YxxY pygYrY6wfDB8F9aemkVIiypZqvo+UrG+IZwKSsuqZuFmyxu5VsnAzFB/NQS6z/fq WPnm23t51kj2d6e+1PDVJRmv1Gpjaj34xt9YIif7S7fXdMI8vRbopRkoFfbXcFsE +I+fzeIPINXde44duW/tUmVbPZcrwxNgL0xo7AZ3fwzYGqOw2cR3zNFH9iPWs6O5 iV+fNIx2f1sKl1MbkydEHtPVctLT3cqX0Bvi5f0k6XKdzmCMGSOr9g== =qWzV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Public Key at http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon Jean-Francois Avon <jf_avon(a)citenet.net> 2048 bits key ID:C58ADD0D 1996/03/01 fingerprint=52 96 45 E8 20 5A 8A 5E F8 7C C8 6F AE FE F8 91

2 1

test
by Bryan Koschmann 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

just a test to see if my filter works..sorry3 for any inconvenience Gate|<eepeR (!-=Gate|<eepeR ruLeZ=-!)

1 0

Re: Artist self censorship (Was Chinese net-censorship) Noise
by jf_avon＠citenet.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- nobody(a)REPLAY.COM (Anonymous) said: >before taking >a picture he usually asks himself about how this picture is percived, something >the he never thought twice before the FBI raid. > >Mr. Avon should think twice before commenting on self censorship does not >exist, for that could be the difference from having the door kicked in by the >black ninja turtles with the FBI or toning down your work. OK. *THAT* might be interpreted, wrongly, as self-censorship. But words have a *precise* meaning, which unfortunately, I sometimes miss in the english language. The opinion I wrote was in the *context* of the interaction of an artist with a purchaser. In that context, what govern the events is consensuality: everybody acts *uncoerced* to his best advantage. In the case you cite, the *context* is very different. But still, I would not call it "self-censorship". I do not have, on the top of my head, any precise term for it, but maybe FUD, fear of physical violence, survival tactics while harrassed by a thuggish assaulter, etc., would apply... I did not think twice, I thought about it several hundred times... Your comment is *very* interesting. It point out how peoples can so easily blank out contextual information. Forgive my bias but I personnally makes a big distinction between the volitional initiation of physical violence (or menace of) and other situations where it is absent. Regards! JFA -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2i iQEVAwUBMUF6K8iycyXFit0NAQFoBgf/Tt0zFCaRNJFBwZcxsV/v5ABnjjnAtqoT EDF0OA7+UogWT1MXL8RP58tQ2vTwUWJ1PdK/gdnwlkjpwxC0i4gRx1HpnCLOjRlL UgkUKu5qiyIWKd6upCYCMd1NCbqaffHjWr3pWxVFE/zPaCQ7mlrZZV4QBeV/bKbU djt70BQTa7WFvQwZWkVO7QcxOawjzItyZErusdEIvPz03MqbcqSaQu0NgtEy/Zwu 82CSF10uTL96TzjXm1icASiquDk8Tj+go8WqC1FZ8uK3kFHDDkEuLqzXdtG6sJKK hV4PPfehyjXXXB2CADmXMnXZVLkWU0x5Ig7l/bdOETrPhfl07Di9tQ== =1OeX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Public Key at http://w3.citenet.net/users/jf_avon Jean-Francois Avon <jf_avon(a)citenet.net> 2048 bits key ID:C58ADD0D 1996/03/01 fingerprint=52 96 45 E8 20 5A 8A 5E F8 7C C8 6F AE FE F8 91

1 0

Re: art-stego
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

This is a very good idea. I wish I'd thought of it. Just bear in mind that this form of steganography is getting further away from conventional hiding, and into "pure plausible deniability." In fact, one need not even make a serious attempt to hide the encrypted bits: just call the encrypted file "art" and be done with it! (I'm not saying stego is worthless, just that there's a slippery slope one can get on, with one extreme being this fiction that "this is not an encrypted file, this is _art_!") At 7:18 PM 3/4/96, Jim Miller wrote: >The recent discussion "Chaff in the Channel" got me thinking about an >alternative to hiding random bit streams in picture files. The goal of >steganography, as I see it, is to provide plausible deniability. The Yes, all those critics who point out that steganography (not to mention stenography) is an example of the rightly-maligned "security through obscurity" are missing this point, that steganography arises in situations where the mere act of communicating is itself actionable. (Get caught in Berlin during the war with invisible ink or microdots and get hanged the next morning, whether or not the SS can read the traffic.) >problem with hiding bit streams is that you can never be sure if the >opponent has developed an analysis technique to prove a particular file >contains a suspicious bit pattern. Yes, this is why I suggested (some years back, originally) that noise be deliberately added to even images not intended for communication, as "chaff" to confuse traffic analysts. Your approach is a better one, as the "art stego" market, while small, could be self-sustaining. >The alternative to hiding bit streams is to not hide them. Use them to >generate pretty pictures. For example, modify a fractal image generator >to accept a bit stream as input. Use the bit settings to influence the >values used to iterate the fractal function. You don't have to use >fractals, any function that produces pretty pictures would probably work >as long as there was a way to extract the bit stream from the final >picture. Brute force would probably work fast enough for humans. > >One possibility is a screen saver that produces an "infinite" variety of >pretty pictures by generating a pseudo-random bit stream and using it to >help generate the next background picture. Occasionally, the picture >might be so cool you will want to send it your friends or post it on the >Net or just keep it around to look at. > >The goal is to create an innocent reason for passing around unique images >that contain random bit streams so we don't have to worry if somebody >finds the bit stream. If you live in a country that doesn't outlaw >abstract art you have plausible deniability. Now it's just up to someone to implement this. I don't expect this to be a huge market--remember what's happened to all those Mandelbrot images that were once the rage--but there's a chance it will get established as one of those "cool" apps that are tres trendy for a while. I still would expect that when the Hamas leaders in Gaza are picked up for questioning and "ArtStego" is found on their systems, along with various "abstract artworks" on their disk drives, that Mossad will not be fooled. --Tim May Boycott "Big Brother Inside" software! We got computers, we're tapping phone lines, we know that that ain't allowed. ---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---------:---- Timothy C. May | Crypto Anarchy: encryption, digital money, tcmay(a)got.net 408-728-0152 | anonymous networks, digital pseudonyms, zero W.A.S.T.E.: Corralitos, CA | knowledge, reputations, information markets, Higher Power: 2^756839 - 1 | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0