- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

FBI, DoJ deny invesitgation of CompuServe
by rodger＠interramp.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- on 5-8, Joseph Reagle posted: > COLUMBUS, Ohio, May 8 (UPI) -- The FBI, acting on a complaint from a >Christian morals watchdog group, Wednesday sought to determine whether >CompuServe Inc. has violated a new law against indecency. > FBI agents said they were attempting to determine whether >CompuServe's Entertainment Drive, which contains some adult material, >violates the Communications Decency Act. The law prohibits offering >pornography to on-line users, especially minors. > Reuters, however, just moved a story saying the FBI and Dept. of Justice denied there was *any* investigation ongoing. The agencies were responding to the original stroy which ran in the Columbus Dispatch, Such denials are *extremely* rare; agenices almost always refuse to confirm or deny investigations. Those of you with access to AOL can check the story out in technology news. Will Rodger -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQEVAwUBMZEUDEcByjT5n+LZAQFt0gf+MnIkM51VD9wlVwNG6KFTZGeYsJMFVViZ 5uRA6na7R9jNSL9u4zxJjYJxPkEDUO64z87ZV2tODXTOJdFfencOycCsy+oDR0da 1fObsFCqZN1Rh2ZNspgG4TpTLZVUn/naiZoA4jyFlRyXV8qa19Zwro5S0a9JfHj9 xofxhBwCb/Sdw4kKDRgqfnehrKVlIRaQw3kR9TetF+Olm2czF2iIoeQTlwUR7y10 SY+vqxApyACLTkwfPP/Y/H/uwMFTQbcMPCbI7yoK/AnPRywC0pV//b6JkSaMvcm3 ZhdyiUkpY6gRr0MAB4fwe2ho/zRLXj7bEQ2pSQJcRSpm2Tl+Zq4U9w== =ffRy -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Re: Remailer in a box
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Questions. How much memory does the Mixmaster remailer take up? What accesses/permissions/etcetera on a machine do I need to have in order to have it running on an account? Has anyone set up one such that it will only remail from & to a set of addresses (e.g., other remailers)? I, for instance, wouldn't be willing to deal with the hassles involved with running a remailer that was either what the end user would see (thus getting potentially deluged with help questions) or the end mailer (thus getting potentially in problems if someone abuses the remailer)... but I (and others) might if it was set up just for chaining. (Yes, I know I'd need a UNIX account... I'm looking into that.) Speaking of UNIX, does anyone have any existing programs to automatically mail out at random intervals a looping or /dev/null directed message through the remailers, in order to increase security against traffic analysis? Thanks, -Allen

1 0

100S OF FREE PICS'N'LINKS EVERY DAY!
by STUFFED FRI NOV 13 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

+ 30 SUPERB, HI-RES, HOT PHOTOS + 5 SUPER SEXY STORIES + ISLAND EROTICA + BIGGINS + WET WET WEB + INDIAN PORN + PURE PIX + WHITE CHOCOLATE + XXX FEMALES + HARDCORE SEX WITH ZOOM + CUMSHOT QUEENS + XXX 4 FREE + BONUS PIC 1 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/31225.htm + BONUS PIC 2 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/15219.htm + BONUS PIC 3 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/6401.htm + BONUS PIC 4 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/9541.htm + BONUS PIC 5 -> http://www.stuffed.net/home/9140.htm + MUCH, MUCH MORE! ----> http://stuffed.net/home/ <---- This email is never sent unsolicited. Stuffed is the supplement for the Eureka newsletter you subscribed to. Full instructions on unsubscribing are in every issue of Eureka! ----> http://stuffed.net/home/ <----

1 0

re: Dempster-Shafer...(re: Transitive
by watson＠tds.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

tcmay's approach is elegant, and it's refreshing to find a practical use for AI approaches. I think it needs one more step, though. If we learn to quantify our trust in a key, we still need to know what the threshold should be for a given application. Maybe I can get by with a 0.05 Bel for posting to cypherpunks, but maybe I want a 0.95 for a monetary transaction. Seems to need a comprehensive risk management approach,

1 0

Re: Remailer in a box
by loki＠infonex.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 6:55 PM 5/8/96, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > Questions. How much memory does the Mixmaster remailer take up? My remailer (with source code and spooled messages) is 1.4M. >What >accesses/permissions/etcetera on a machine do I need to have in order to have >it running on an account? It will run out of any account. A procmail script could be used to direct the mail to Mixmaster (or the front end scripts). If you use the account for other things, you can have the procmail script only forward the Mixmaster messages. >Has anyone set up one such that it will only remail >from & to a set of addresses (e.g., other remailers)? I, for instance, wouldn't >be willing to deal with the hassles involved with running a remailer that was >either what the end user would see (thus getting potentially deluged with help >questions) or the end mailer (thus getting potentially in problems if someone >abuses the remailer)... but I (and others) might if it was set up just for >chaining. (Yes, I know I'd need a UNIX account... I'm looking into that.) This could be done with a trivial modification to the source and destination blocking lists (just change the sense of the checking). Cyberpass (www.cyberpass.net) offers UNIX accounts without dialin access for $7 per month. These are available anonymously, and can be paid for with ecash. > Speaking of UNIX, does anyone have any existing programs to >automatically mail out at random intervals a looping or /dev/null directed >message through the remailers, in order to increase security against traffic >analysis? > Thanks, > -Allen Yes, but I only give it to remailer operators. The "bramble" might get flooded otherwise. Operators see the repercussions of their actions. -Lance ---------------------------------------------------------- Lance Cottrell loki(a)obscura.com PGP 2.6 key available by finger or server. Mixmaster, the next generation remailer, is now available! http://www.obscura.com/~loki/Welcome.html or FTP to obscura.com "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra. Suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night the ice weasels come." --Nietzsche ----------------------------------------------------------

1 0

FW: Science Project Fair
by Husa, Carl (MSX) 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>---------- >From: Beverly. Ferguson[SMTP:103014.3727@CompuServe.COM] >Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 1996 9:38 PM >To: KOMBUCHA DIGEST; PARACELSUS DIGEST >Subject: Science Project Fair > > >Originally Posted To: > >>Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 09:58:55 -0400 >>Sender: Methods of Teaching Mathematics <TEACHMAT(a)UICVM.UIC.EDU> >>From: Peggy R Shearin <pshearin(a)WARREN.CES.NCSU.EDU> >>Subject: Science Fair Project > >>>Hi, our names are Stevie and Amanda. We are in the 5th grade at >>>the Phillipston Memorial school, Phillipston, Massachusetts, USA. >>>We are doing a science project on the Internet. We want to see >>>how many responses we can get back in two weeks. (We are only >>>sending out 2 letters). > >>>Please respond and then send this letter to anyone you >>>communicate with on the Internet. > >>>Respond to smc(a)tiac.net. >>>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > >>>1. Where do you live (state and country)? > > >>>2. From whom did you get this letter? > > >>>Thank you, >>>Stevie and Amanda > >------------------------------ > >

1 0

Looking for someone to speak on JAVA security issues (fwd)
by TQDB 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

---------- Forwarded message ---------- Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 03:25:29 -0700 From: The Dark Tangent <dtangent(a)defcon.org> To: dc-stuff(a)fc.net Subject: Looking for someone to speak on JAVA security issues If you or someone you know has seen a Java security expert who would speak at DEF CON, please have them contact me! -- Hey! All my mail is sniffed! Don't forget to PGP important stuff. PGP Key (2.3a & 2.6) on key servers or mail me. Voice (AT&T) 0-700-TANGENT DEF CON mailing list, mail: majordomo(a)fc.net with "subscribe dc-announce" in the body. DEF CON FTP: ftp.fc.net /pub/defcon http://www.defcon.org

1 0

re: Dempster-Shafer...(re: Transitive
by tcmay＠got.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:18 AM 5/9/96, watson(a)tds.com wrote: >tcmay's approach is elegant, and it's refreshing to find a practical use >for AI approaches. I think it needs one more step, though. If we learn >to quantify our trust in a key, we still need to know what the threshold >should be for a given application. Maybe I can get by with a 0.05 Bel >for posting to cypherpunks, but maybe I want a 0.95 for a monetary >transaction. Seems to need a comprehensive risk management approach, [was the rest accidentally cut off?] Anyway, I agree that a more comprehensive system is needed. But even attaching belief estimates to keys, for example, goes a long way in letting others than do some transitive calculations. --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, Licensed Ontologist | black markets, collapse of governments. "National borders aren't even speed bumps on the information superhighway."

1 0

Re: Mandatory Voluntary Self-Ratings
by David K. Merriman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- At 11:17 AM 05/9/96 -0400, Joseph M. Reagle Jr. <reagle(a)MIT.EDU> wrote: >> I've figured out where my differences between myself and others >lay. The _only_ system and service that I am aware of that is distributing >PICS labels is RSAC. (http://www.rsac.org) They are what one could call an >objective and non-arbitrary content rating system rather than an >"appropriateness" system. "Appropriateness" systems will be valuable 3rd >party systems when the vigilantes and fundamentalists wish to create label >bureaus. For self labeling, if many people (main stream people) are going to >use that system within their browser, it will have to have mind share. If >it's going to have mind share, I think it would be advantegeous to it to be >a descriptive label rather than "appropriate." Hence, much of the concerns >I'm hearing aren't so worrisome to me. SurfWatch is offering self-rating via a web page at their site. It spits back the appropriate 'meta' tags to embed in an html document. Dave Merriman -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.2 iQCVAwUBMZFQ+MVrTvyYOzAZAQFM+gP/edsvNSSkeiyZVBuJyWYCK82J7O1zG5O8 jI5cGj22R/qSPAhhpZj6pLFxvoKnuUc7P+8QzAao1ccxihZpy5ZW3fzM/+pyn6dW B126/l4R+SRCrDiPV+5HeXyBTXAiWYMjRAuv2nZtHVIiLjQrjziwrug4H/4U26GP NEbKT8Uqwno= =UAbu -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- ------------------------------------------------------------- "Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys." P. J. O'Rourke (b. 1947), U.S. journalist. <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> http://www.shellback.com/personal/merriman/index.htm

1 0

RE: self-ratings vs. market ratings
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>From: Vladimir Z. Nuri > >you are free to assume any connotation you like. but in my view >they are pretty much interchangeable. they are both "meta >information"-- information about other things or information. ............................................................... The fact that I, like others, am "free to assume" any connotation means that there easily can exist confusion surrounding the definitions of these terms, and that this can then create controversy in discussions over what anyone means when they make references to them. Those who intend to apply these concepts must determine what they think they are doing (rating content, or establishing someone's reputation?) and must communicate it to others clearly so as to be definitely understood, else risk further compounding of confusion. The word & the concept of "reputation" has been in use for much longer than "rating". In the most recent applications of the term "rating", the idea has evolved to include such things as electronic web page content. It refers to a deliberate, conscious intent to establish a measure, an estimate, or evaluation, of something that an individual or group presents (information) or provides (service). The rating is intentionally applied and is intended to be used for communicating to those who are seeking this specific kind of information, where a reputation evolves "on its own", so to speak, as a coincidence of being generally known. "Reputation" is more a passive reference to the past, where "rating" is actively in regard of a present condition (with future expectations). [These are just comments I have on this subject; I myself don't pay much attention to ratings, as my own measures of things & people tend to be quite different from most, and therefore not very useful for my purposes. So that's all I have to say about it, "Vlad".] .. Blanc >

1 0