- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: FW: No SKE in Daytona and other goodies
by Blanc Weber 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

From: Paul Robichaux ...... the road to key escrow is paved with good intentions. IMHO the developers who might actually be working on implementations of this scheme either a) don't know that it _could easily_ "become part of a nationally-mandated open avenue to spying," b) know but don't think such developments are likely, or c) know and don't care. Clearly education is a powerful antidote to cases a) and b) ...................................................................... ................................... You're right: How would you make clear the connection between key escrow (per se), the large context of liberty to pursue software strategies to solve customer problems, the and the individuals who find themselves in the middle? What would you say is the critical, key focal point between the existence of a system of operation, and the way it is intended to be used? And how would you get the educational message out to those involved? Blanc [Job-related Disclaimer: Microsoft won't let me make "official" statements, but they will allow for Superior Arguments.]

2 1

Graham Toal and His 'Fucking Religion'
by Anonymous User 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

gtoal(a)an-teallach.com (Graham Toal) wrote: > Keep your fucking religion out of my face, Zook. If you want > censored-kiddynet, create your own one privately out of funds > donated by Good Christians, but take your state control and stuff > it where ypu stuff your crucifix. Ironic what you say, Graham. Given the fact that the subject matter is PORNOGRAPHY, often involving explicit depiction of sexual intercourse, which is somewhat of a "religion to some", maybe that's exactly what Nathan was asking -- for pornographers to keep their "fucking religion" off the net... Just as adults can avoid reading what the consider "offensive" material, so can you, too, avoid lashing out in a blind fury at posts like this that YOU disagree with. If one didn't know better, it'd seem that YOU are almost advocating censorship of ideas that you deem offensive. <g>

1 0

penet.fi attack
by L. Todd Masco 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

roy(a)sendai.cybrspc.mn.org (Roy M. Silvernail): > In list.cypherpunks, Alan Westrope: > > > Me too, but I suspect the asshole just sent a 'who cypherpunks' request > > to majordomo(a)toad.com. > > Maybe not. My personal address was used, but my list subscription > address wasn't. (cypherpunks gets gated to a local newsgroup here, so I > can read it with news tools) Ditto. El creepo was definitely using the real list for the attack (and oddly, I got two total: one last night and one this evening). -- L. Todd Masco | Bibliobytes books on computer, on any UNIX host with e-mail cactus(a)bb.com | "Information wants to be free, but authors want to be paid."

1 0

Re: Larry Detweiler and his 'Fucking Hypocrisy'
by gtoal＠an-teallach.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

: From: Anonymous User <nobody(a)c2.org> : Ironic what you say, Graham. Given the fact that the subject : matter is PORNOGRAPHY, often involving explicit depiction of : sexual intercourse, which is somewhat of a "religion to some", : maybe that's exactly what Nathan was asking -- for pornographers : to keep their "fucking religion" off the net... Classic, a lesson in hypocrisy from Detweiler! Larry, the day I call for government regulation to stop decent atheist kids from being allowed to access evil underground Christian fsp sites is the day you can start bleating hypocrisy. Another deliberate flame-bait from Detweiler. Excuse me if I don't waste my time refuting anything else he said. G

1 0

Re: "Just say 'No' to key escrow."
by gtoal＠an-teallach.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

: From: solman(a)mit.edu : This is a relatively inane conspiracy theory. Gates hardly requires any : assistance since the feds were already committed to setting up licenses : in bands that are good for these types of networks. Both the FCC and Hughes : have sped up their efforts towards these systems in recent days. That's just the terrestrial side. What about actually getting the birds up? : And the satellite system is not Bill Gates. He is an investor, and a fairly : small one. Gates and McCaw (sp?) gave that venture much more by attaching : their names to it than they did by giving a few of their millions. I seem : to recall Gates' share being 7 megabucks. All the more reason to look at the investors more closely and see what other quid pro quo's have been arranged. : will be too late and that B) software based escrows are a good thing because : they take the wind out of hardware based encryption efforts and they are : difficult to make mandatory. This sort of talk is dangerous. If cypherpunks don't have a united front against SKE, I can't see the less radical front organisations like EFF and CPSR (well, maybe just EFF) going balls to the wall against it either. Compromises should be resisted in order to force USG to show their true colors when they finally demand to outlaw all non-escrowed crypto. Otherwise it'll sneak up on us in the night like the Christian Coalition's goal of taking over the Republican party. G

1 0

penet.fi attack
by Jeff Gostin 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"L. Todd Masco" <cactus(a)bb.com> writes: > Ditto. El creepo was definitely using the real list for the attack (and > oddly, I got two total: one last night and one this evening). Might it be that El Creepo is a _subscriber_ here? If he were, he could get a list of addresses that people actually _post_ from. That covers cases like Roy's. Methinks the C'Punks have a Bug in our midsts. Since C'Punks Write Code, C'Punks also Debug Code, and this Bug needs to be Squashed. :-) --Jeff -- ====== ====== +----------------jgostin(a)eternal.pha.pa.us----------------+ == == | The new, improved, environmentally safe, bigger, better,| == == -= | faster, hypo-allergenic, AND politically correct .sig. | ==== ====== | Now with a new fresh lemon scent! | PGP Key Available +---------------------------------------------------------+

1 0

Re: NYET to censors, REPOST
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Graham wrote about the NYET proposal: >I see a lot of call here for legislation and government control. > >Keep your fucking religion out of my face, Zook. If you want >censored-kiddynet, create your own one privately out of funds >donated by Good Christians, but take your state control and >stuff it where ypu stuff your crucifix. > Amen, amem. The christian right is attempting to keep their children in ignorance to minimize the effort it takes to brainwash them. I shall not rest posting on the Net until those children ask their parents: "Daddy, do you know how to perform a genuine French duck fuck?" "Gasp!" "Well, we do. Would you like to know?" -- Lucky Green <shamrock(a)netcom.com> PGP public key by finger

2 1

Re: "Just say 'No' to key escrow."
by rah＠shipwright.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 2:08 PM 7/30/94 +0100, Graham Toal wrote: >: From: solman(a)mit.edu > >: This is a relatively inane conspiracy theory. Gates hardly requires any >: assistance since the feds were already committed to setting up licenses >: in bands that are good for these types of networks. Both the FCC and Hughes >: have sped up their efforts towards these systems in recent days. > >That's just the terrestrial side. What about actually getting the birds up? > Oddly enough, they're discussing the use of a modified version of Orbital Sciences' Pegasus launcher. It currently uses a B-52 to carry the rocket to ~40K ft., and then lets it go on up to LEO. However, there's no reason they can't use a 747 as the "first stage". 747's are newer and cheaper and easier to maintain, and the result would be private enterprise from the ground up. At the risk of sounding like pollyanna, we may again be seeing fascists behind every Bush(?) here... Yet, conducting a public awareness campaign, in the shrillest possible terms, against SKE (or more properly, government mandated SKE) is a very good idea. It's easy to separate the two on a conceptual basis, and we should. Conspiracy theories about collusion between governments and big business, no matter how monopolistic those businesses, usually don't wash. Economic institutions really can't keep secrets for very long these days, especially secrets with significant economic impact. While I believe that they probably try, it's a little like pissing in the wind (if you're looking for the proper middle-class white northern european unconciousness-raised male metaphor ;-). However, I have to admit people do stupid things for uneconomic reasons. Windows is living proof of that. Microsoft offering a "security" package with SKE in it to their most lucrative market (Large, Hieropatriarchical, Semi-ossified, Ex-industrial Corporations), is very plausible without any collusion with the uncle necessary. Us howling like banshees about it makes real sense in that light. LHSECs really hate it when people howl at them like like banshees. Exhortatory prose (and action) about manning the barracades against SKE makes sense. Conspiracy theories will probably make potential allies laugh. Cheers, Robert 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

3 2

Re: Encryption in Fiction (DKM's _The Long Run_)
by mclow＠san_marcos.csusm.edu 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

How about a quote from Vernor Vinge's "True Names" (a must read for any cypherpunk, happily now back in print): "Like most folks, honest citizens or warlocks, he had no trust for the government standard encryption routines, but preferred the schemes that had leaked out of academia -- over the NSA's petulant objections -- over the last fifteen years". This from a book that was published in 1981. Marshall Clow Aladdin Systems mclow(a)san_marcos.csusm.edu

2 1

Re: Just say NYET to kneejerking
by Perry E. Metzger 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Ed Carp [Sysadmin] says: > > There is no excuse for being impolite. You can express your views > > without vitriol -- you may indeed be able to get along with people > > with views you do not share, and find that you are better off for it. > > Is this the pot calling the kettle black? No.

1 0