- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Gorelick testifies before Senate, unveils new executive order
by jim bell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 03:04 AM 7/18/96 -0700, David Sternlight wrote: >Serious studies have shown that the kinds of protections to make the >systems we depend on robust against determined and malicious attackers (say >a terrorist government, or one bent on doing a lot of damage in retaliation >for one of our policies they don't like) "Policies"? There you go again. A "policy," at least in regard to the US government, is not merely opinion, but is action. Action which may (legitimately) anger people. Action which may not genuinely be in the interests of American people, although you'd never get those government thugs to admit it. If somebody overseas doesn't like a US government "policy," maybe the best thing to do is to determine whether it's actually beneficial to the ordinary American citizen, or whether its benefits can be achieved simply by changing government behavior. So what's the best way to avoid "terrorism"? Maybe the fastest, more efficent, and overall best way to avoid it is to get the US government to stop doing things that foment it, rather than trying to protect against it after the fact. , have costs beyond the capability >of individual private sector actors. Your friendly neighborhood ISP, for >instance, probably can't affort the iron belt and steel suspenders needed >to make his system and its connectivity sabotage-proof, and so on. Even >cheap but clever solutions involving encryption in such systems require >standards and common practices across many institutions. None of which require government actions to achieve. If anything, what is required is that governments STOP doing things which discourage such implementations of encryption. Government is the problem, not the solution. >In such a case, where public benefits from government action greatly exceed >public (taxpayer) costs, This is the classic Sternlight misrepresentation. Chances are excellent that this public benefit you speak of is almost totally a benefit to government employees, not ordinary citizens. Government's "solutions" are predictably skewed to maintain government budgets, not actually designed to solve the underlying problem. Jim Bell jimbell(a)pacifier.com

1 0

Re: Telecom regulations - Reuters coverage
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 23:22 7/17/96, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: [...] >>FCC Chairman Hundt Sees Tax On Telecom Industry > >> FAJARDO, Puerto Rico - A small tax will probably be imposed on >> telecommunications companies' revenues to subsidize telephone access >> in rural areas and help wire classrooms for the Internet, Federal >> Communications Commission Chairman Reed Hundt told the nation's >> governors. > >[...] > >> But ensuring that residents in sparsely populated areas have access at >> affordable rates and meeting the administration's goal of wiring every >> classroom in the nation for Internet access will require annual >> subsidies of about $10 billion, Hundt said. Ten billion today will of course mean 100 billion tomorrow. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November. Vote Harry Browne for President.

1 0

re: Opiated file systems
by EVERHART＠Arisia.GCE.Com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hmm... I can set up a cryptodisk on a not necessarily contiguous file on another cryptodisk; the software is free. The second cryptodisk would appear to be just a binary file on the first; would it not be an obscured filesystem? (The drivers have been given away for years public domain for vms, vax or alpha, in source. My old rsx11d driver was published similarly back in 1977 or 78.) In fact, though, the containing file of a cryptodisk does not have to have any specific name or location, and can be hidden away as though it were, say, a sound file or something else among the rest of the system store. Before someone comes demanding your keys, they first have to realize that something might in fact be encrypted. My approach would be to have lots of these obscured cryptodisks for the stuff I wanted private, if I wanted to hide a lot, and have the usual assortment of cleartext stuff of all sorts lying around. The default operation mode forgets the keys automatically once you log off...or even at dismount. If you're stuck with a whole partition being hidden, this is harder to do. When any file of over a few kb can be a separate filestructure when the proper magic is applied, locating the keys can be impossible. glenn

1 0

Re: ABC News on internet telephony
by john (j.) brothers 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In message "ABC News on internet telephony", you write: > > General topic of internet telephony > There's something fundamental going on here beneath the surface. > Surprisingly, a recent item (maybe the one you reported) on this suggests > that the big phone companies are trying to use this phenomenon rather than > stop it. I think it was AT&T Sprint has also come out in favor of the internet phone. > This is the rankest speculation on my part, but could some of the bigger, > smarter phone company cum internet providers have done some serious > analysis and concluded that we're moving away from distance-based rates for > voice calls. I will weigh in with my own stinky speculation: Sprint, MCI and AT&T (and possibly LDDS) own pretty much the entire commercial network physically. Every other long distance company leases lines from the big 3 (or 4,etc) and resells them, except for certain very specific points. And the Internet phone has pretty much given them the chance to drive their competitors out of business if it succeeds. After all, there is a constant demand for internet bandwidth. Every T3 they pull out of long distance services is a T3 they can throw into data services. It gives them a real cost savings compared to installing another high bandwidth backbone. They'll lose money from their customers who switch too, but those three are the ones with the lion's share of business lines, which won't be switching to Inet phone anytime soon. and they gain all the business customers who leave the dying small companies. And yes, fixed rate will be the way to go, especially for small bandwidth applications. Bandwidth is exploding - 1 Terabit optical networks have been created. A single phone line becomes miniscule. Now, if you want a much bigger pipe, they might charge you per hour for that. The thing I find second most interesting about this is how the large companies are fighting regulation, while the small ones are demanding it. That is a big change from yesteryear. And I know that AT&T has benefitted in a major way from gov't regulation in the past, but that doesn't make it right for it to be applied now.

1 0

Re: Responding to Pre-dawn Unannounced Ninja Raids [Noise]
by JonWienk＠ix.netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I personally keep a Desert Eagle .44 Magnum (66 oz empty, 8+1 capacity, semi-auto,) with +P+ 240 grain FMJSP hunting loads. It's not just a gun, it's an adventure. :) Even if it doesn't penetrate body armor, the impact will knock anyone entering entering through your window at 0400 on their duff long enough for a follow-up shot or two to finish the job. This is in addition to a 12-gage pump shotgun and an M-1 carbine. 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

1 0

No Subject
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello! Sorry for the off topic. I want to ask how to install Netscape3.0b5a under NT. I keep getting "Netscape is unable to locate the server: home.netscape.com. The server does not have a DNS entry." Thanks

1 0

Re: Filtering out Queers is OK
by Bert-Jaap Koops 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I'd rather say, filtering out TCM is OK. Bert-Jaap

1 0

PictureTel Licenses Cylink Security Technology For Encrypted Videoconfe (fwd)
by David Lesher 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Message-ID: <BcylinkURQwQ_6lJ(a)clari.net> Clarinet reports: SUNNYVALE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--July 19, 1996--Cylink Corp. (NASDAQ: CYLK) today announced that it has licensed its patented security technology, the Diffie-Hellman, Hellman-Merkle patents covering public key cryptography, to PictureTel Corp. (NASDAQ:PCTL) to be used in its System 4000 group videoconferencing systems. The Cylink license allows access to all implementations of Public Key cryptography, including Diffie-Hellman key exchanges and Digital Signature Standard (DSS), ..... ============== Hmm..... -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz(a)nrk.com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433

2 1

Re: BIG_dif
by Duncan Frissell 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Because of these concerns, Mondex has been modified in > the United States so that banks will be able to track > card use. That will allow them to audit for fraud, if > not recreate every transaction. Data from Mondex cards > will be used for various product marketing. > > "We believe there should be privacy, but there is a big > difference between privacy and anonymity," Dudley Nigg, > executive vice president of Wells Fargo, said. So, how will the identity of the cardholder be tracked when they are transferred physically from one person to another? Presumably bank tracking will only work when the card is submitted to a "public" terminal. "Wallet" transfers won't be tracked immediately. Also, if an API is realeased, interesting possibilities are created. DCF

1 0

Re: Responding to Pre-daw
by harka＠nycmetro.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-=> Quoting In:hallam@ai.mit.edu to Harka <=- In> If you want to own guns then you should accept the fact that you risk In> having your head blown off in the middle of the night by a SWAT team. In> Just as the car has introduced the risk of being killed in a trafic In> accident the gun has introduced new risks. If society dosen't like the In> risks then it can opt to ban the technology. Except that getting killed in a traffic accident IS an accident (mostly :)) while having black clad Fed's storming into your house was _consciously_ decided by them, because THEY have a problem with YOUR guns (?!)... Harka ___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30 [NR]

1 0