- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: GIF_nip
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

> Watch your Cc: headers, s'vous plait? AAK! Eudora's "reply-to-all" strikes again! Grovelling in your general direction, Bob Hettinga ----------------- Robert Hettinga (rah(a)shipwright.com) "There is no difference between someone Shipwright Development Corporation who eats too little and sees Heaven and 44 Farquhar Street someone who drinks too much and sees Boston, MA 02331 USA snakes." -- Bertrand Russell (617) 323-7923

1 0

Re: True Names
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Timothy C. May I see copies in used bookstores often. It's in the collection "True Names and Something-or-other" and was in print until recenly. I also have the Bluejay edition, with an afterward by Marvin Minsky. .............................................................. I bought one at Half-Price Books. I don't know what edition it is, it's a dingy little paperback with a signature in it of some stranger that I wouldn't know. I keep it with my "previously owned" collection. Blanc

3 2

Re: True Names
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Jim Gillogly > Blanc Weber <blancw(a)microsoft.com> writes: > I see copies in used bookstores often. It's in the collection "True > Names and Something-or-other" and was in print until recenly. I also ............................................................. No, No, Jim, that wasn't me saying that - that statement was made by a cpunkgod. Mine was beneath it. Blanc

1 0

DES for HP48
by SINCLAIR DOUGLAS N 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

There used to be some code on soda to do DES on an HP48 palmtop/calculator. I looked this afternoon, on ftp.csua.berkeley.edu, and I couldn't find it. Anyone know where it got to?

2 1

Re: public vs. private replies
by L. McCarthy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Tim May writes: > [...] has asked that we reply in e-mail to him, to avoid > "cluttering the list more than I already have...," but the logic of > this is faulty. The few lines of a response such as this one, or even > of several such responses, are as nothing compared to dozens or more > people sifting their own archives so they can each independently send > [...] what they find. Hence my public reply. I'd like to amplify this point, which is missed all too often on Usenet and mailing lists. Replies to requests for fairly widely-known factual information should be directed to the forum (i.e. the mailing list, newsgroup, or what have you). This practice not only prevents duplication of effort by the repliers, as Tim mentioned, but also prevents duplication of effort by others interested in the same answer. I try to make a point of replying to the whole list when someone asks for a list of remailers, mail-news gateways, etc. for precisely this reason. As I see it the basic principle rests on a simple comparison of the number of replies desired with the likely number of replies. If you anticipate getting many more replies than you want, you should ask for replies to the entire forum in which you place the query. Otherwise, seek private email. This is certainly not a perfect heuristic, but it's an excellent starting point IMHO. For example, a few months back I wanted to give away an old AM/FM/ shortwave radio, so I posted to a local newsgroup. I asked for initial public replies, so that I wouldn't be flooded with mail before I had the chance to announce that a recipient had been selected (first-come first-served). After the initial expression of interest, further correspondence continued in private. [...] > In my opinion, having personal access > to past posts is several orders of magnitude more important than > having MIDI-MIME JPEG-II TeX players [...] It takes more disk space from one's personal quota, though (for those who suffer under such restrictions). :[ Let's not head down this road again.... "You've gotta keep `em separated !" -Offspring -L. Futplex McCarthy; PGP key by finger or server "The objective is for us to get those conversations whether they're by an alligator clip or ones and zeroes. Wherever they are, whatever they are, I need them." -FBI Dir. Freeh - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBLwz5Mmf7YYibNzjpAQEooAQAlj93pc1CuSMTdApaRTg06ONgPkeyqUfY KhdcqzDmEnuWBDdwgO+YtHOHFsOGlPhoFhOijajJzTh97G1TBYn5plBECaZXs1RJ Au9g1uqEAKtFLFYB/jKDaDA/Xzf13irCKb846IAhttKICwQJ8HfLfgPWLHMa1/f1 ldkXYq7DfY8= =7KNc - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [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 iQBFAwUBLwz6PCoZzwIn1bdtAQGpbwGAqY6tLm7TAN2TluCpD1WOTsR6kMgI2R27 CMExwcLopwSapiPNO0u/IHnzHUq5ij2C =TyKQ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: All I did was properly crosspost!
by L. McCarthy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- [I'm cc:ing this to C. A. Braddock's new address and her ex-sysadmin, in addition to the cypherpunks list. --L. Futplex McCarthy] Carol Anne Braddock writes: > I first saw the Dubois Letter in alt.security.pgp the 28th. > PRZ posted it here the next day. > > I "crossposted" it to my favorite 10 newsgroups. Just 10. Posting letters asking for $$$ is of course a risky venture on Usenet. We see the PRZ Appeal as a Worthy Cause (tm), but that's just what all the MAKE.MONEY.FAST posters think of their garbage too. If you go sticking out your hand, you'd better be doing it in the right place. My frank reaction as a veteran Usenetter is that 10 newsgroups sounds like rather a lot, especially when that presumably excludes the groups like a.s.pgp to which the letter was originally posted. To which 10 newsgroups did you repost the letter ? [...] > Is there somebody who can please help me get my 2 megs of mail? I believe it's questionable whether your old system is under any legal obligation to provide access to your accumulated mail there. As I recall, Netcom ended up deleting most of the deluge of mail Canter & Siegel received after their infamous spam. However, in this instance it does seem that it would be polite (and good P.R.) to give you access to the mail your account has received. Apologize and ask your former admin nicely, and you might well get it. He could move it to an anon-ftp directory, perhaps encrypted with some public key of yours :) [...] > But to take my account away for crossposting to 10 groups is not right. Well, it depends greatly upon what you posted and where. If I posted the PRZ Appeal to *my* ten favorite newsgroups (including alt.config, alt.religion. kibology, and alt.sexual.abuse.recovery), I'd certainly expect to face trouble and perhaps lose posting privileges. [...] > Login name: carolann In real life: CarolAnne Braddock > Directory: /usr2/carolann Shell: /etc/scripts/tcsh-susp > Last login Thu Jan 5 21:38 on ttyq5 from annex3-1.wintern > New mail received Thu Jan 5 21:16:23 1995; > unread since Mon Jan 2 13:18:25 1995 > Plan: > This account has been disabled permanently. > > Mike Horwath - Admin - Winternet - drechsau(a)winternet.com -L. Futplex McCarthy - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBLw0Fu2f7YYibNzjpAQGwoAP/RrXUl3vguSSJSvGDNKsXIMek61Ay5Cvy xFO/NWcyZpzXkqwF3w19DOtke1EQ1NuPP7Z9luN6zF/QkqNwS6Z0mAMc8hcI0kLg F3ESx06UABPJMQoVY63BtaDYuj6Dualjs903koAliIUhpITZ+qsf7jaj3qT1FtMa d3SzHqOWGYM= =876P - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [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 iQBFAwUBLw0G3CoZzwIn1bdtAQHTCQGAgs4itNl5sAZMFjgMIx4Gef52o49+4q3k m36gnACMfYDMThQyhcOS8udSMFw3YM4Q =uty3 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

We still don't have the mailbox.
by Carol Anne Braddock 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Thanks Doc. Wrote Phil Dubois, Zimmy's Lawyer. It's something I'll show you a copy of when I get back to playing "catch-up". Love Always, Carol Anne On Fri, 6 Jan 1995, Thaddeus Ozone wrote: > Carol, > I DL'd the whole thang. If it was world-readable, I've got it locked up on > my hard drive. I'll have to wait until I can get my hands on some 800k > disks, it takes up 1776k on my hard drive, but should fit on 2 - 800k's > once it gets transferred. I took the liberty of taking EVERYTHING that was > readable, including what was in the main directory. Talk to you over the > weekend. > Your pal, -doc- > > >I tried again, even from my pages. > >I do believe it's the local server that's gotta do the job. > >Anyway, I'm bookmarking all the links. > >And downloading all the pages. > >Will go ftp here in a minute. > > > >Love Always, > > > >Carol Anne > >more in about an hour. > > >

1 0

Chain letter bounced (fwd)
by L. McCarthy 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- A small advisory: since na166182(a)anon.penet.fi is subscribed to the c'punks list, and anon.penet.fi attempts to filter out instances of Make Money Fast, any mention of "MAKE.MONEY.FAST" on the list will likely generate an autoreply like the one below. It appears that a copy of the MAKE.MONEY.FAST FAQ (there, I've said it again :) included in the autoreply will even trigger this mechanism, which is awfully ironic at best. At worst, this self-referential property seems liable to allow some nasty email feedback loops. Offhand it appears that a message with an address @anon.penet.fi (preferably forged) in the From: line, and "MAKE.MONEY.FAST" as the message body, would launch an automatic recursive bounce process as anon.penet.fi attempts to send itself a message it considers illegal. Presumably this would crash when the disk quota on some mail spool somewhere is exceeded. If the message was forged to come From: cypherpunks(a)toad.com or another list to which an anon.penet.fi user is subscribed, I imagine the list would have the dubious privilege of witnessing all the recursive bounce messages along the way. I'm not volunteering to try to write a better MMF-recognizer for a.p.f, though.... Forwarded message: > From daemon(a)anon.penet.fi Fri Jan 6 04:22:39 1995 > To: lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu > Subject: Chain letter bounced > > You, lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu, have sent a message that seems to contain yet another > copy of the infamous Make Money Fast chain letter. > > If you want to make a complaint, please send just the headers of the > message to admin(a)anon.penet.fi - albeit as the messages have been blocked > (as you can see), the message probably *didn't* go through anon.penet.fi > but was faked (using NNTP faking or something similar). > [...] > To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com > From: "L. McCarthy" <lmccarth(a)ducie.cs.umass.edu> [...] > Posting letters asking for $$$ is of course a risky venture on Usenet. We > see the PRZ Appeal as a Worthy Cause (tm), but that's just what all the > MAKE.MONEY.FAST posters think of their garbage too. If you go sticking out [...] -L. Futplex McCarthy - -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.1 iQCVAwUBLw0WJGf7YYibNzjpAQEfxAQAiA70W8v7saU4TU+0yJL4XC44uhV50Q34 rX5T1A1ADbPgKeIEX/nImyRP2h6T+V2GdYBWPMJjlVYV1Nyqpxb2kHToocQCbtjd ILyNYew0zHfpZAPeYYM4Y35ru1LoQeg9+COo9RElkS3daMB2gtUjmY2EtfPF6h4V tDei1OHtdl0= =vxjA - -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- - --- [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 iQBFAwUBLw0XKioZzwIn1bdtAQE2egF/Z5Tjg/dzt8cc/lkFXA/LMd17nNNGYv8N 7E7qlnWAhdz82+cILCVHmfVpHNIfdTUH =xtDg -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

Remailer anonymity
by Dr. D.C. Williams 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Much has been said lately about maintaining anonymity for remailer users while providing some "pay to play" mechanism for the operator. Absent strong collusion between operators, doesn't remailer chaining ensure anonymity? Plenty of movie "bad guys" escape by getting on the subway because no one knows where they'll get off or change lines. It seems to me that knowing a person entered the system is far less information than knowing where they exited. As long as remailers have guaranteed access to other remailers, anonymity should be maintained. Re: collusion; I'd sooner believe the Macro$oft/RCC fable. In a gadda da vida, Billy. =D.C. Williams <dcwill(a)ee.unr.edu> - --- [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 iQBFAwUBLw12MioZzwIn1bdtAQH+XQF/RGe9sufCmL8KB2ARuyJNChmF+ZA4DRlf cCnAwpyUhRRtWdpDRx7wZxopjvPHUYDC =kVwM -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: your mail
by Carol Anne Braddock 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Is that better...giggle... Hope you make and hand out some hard copies! Love Always, Carol Anne ps if it was you instead of Zimmy the result would have been the same, I think. I'll rant why I'm actually on the list soon

1 0