- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

RE: Libel/slander & crypto relevancy
by jbugden＠smtplink.alis.ca 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Jim Choate <ravage(a)EINSTEIN.ssz.com> wrote: I have received several private emails inquiring into what possible crypto relevance the recent exchange over libel/slander and the law. It is clear that even in democratic countries like Canada (not know as a freedom of speech protectorate) slander/libel is covered under criminal codes. While it is true that currently these statutes are not heavily used, if at all, this will change as businesses and special interest groups move even further onto electronic networks. Consider the zealous use of the law by the CoS. Ask Julf if the ramifications are not 'real world'. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com Not one to ever let a mention of Canada go unchallenged - even when it is a simple fact or a compliment - I thought I should jump into the discussion. Like the CoS, many companies have threatened libel actions as a means to silence people. The McLibel Two in Britian quickly come to mind. However, also like the Cos, many companies are finding that the net effect of these libel suites are not in their favour even when they win. Some brilliant examples of subversive use of trademarks can be found at the site: http://www.adbusters.org Specific examples: http://www.adbusters.org/Corporate/Greasestick.html http://www.adbusters.org/Gallery/spoofabs.html http://www.adbusters.org/Corporate/Kalvin.html A little clever marketing could go a long way to promoting privacy issues in the public consciousness. Perhaps an NSA Friends and Family calling plan? James

1 0

We pay You if we can't get you a VISA/MC!
by 23908678＠17105.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hello! If you have bad credit, no credit, even bankruptcy, you can still obtain one or more VISA or MasterCards with NO SECURITY DEPOSIT or SAVINGS ACCOUNT REQUIRED! And NO CREDIT CHECK. Our Credit Matching service has helped hundreds of people become bankcard holders, and we can help you too! In fact, we if we can't get you approved!! This is that second chance you've been waiting for! Don't miss out! <A HREF="http://www.cybermaxx.com/visanow">CLICK HERE TO APPLY FOR YOUR UNSECURED CREDIT CARD!</A> You've nothing to lose! Our web page also provides you with a FREE LIST of companies offering merchant cards and banks that offer secured cards. (No monthly fees, no deposits, NOT MLM, and NO inquiries to your credit file). We thank you for your business! (This is a one time mailing. You won't hear from us again unless you request so) <<<>>><<<>>><<<>>><<<>>><<<>>><<<>>><<<>>><<<>>><<<>>><<<><< Tired of unsolicited email? Click here! <><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><9><4><9><0>

1 0

Re: mouse droppings
by James A. Donald 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:49 PM 1/24/96 -0500, j. ercole wrote: >One issue, "mouse droppings" --- "a trail of every site they visit and for >how long [on the www], was highlighted as an example of existing privacy >regulations falling short of consumer expectations. Apparently, the >amorphous public is shocked, *SHOCKED* I tell you , to discover that their >service providers are selling the personal preference information to the >highest bidder. More info in article. > >Would some rocket scientist speak to this terrifying mouse droppings issue? Jeff Wienstein and others have provided, or are working on, various technological solutions to this problem: Meanwhile the FTC wants to solve this privacy problem by checking out every persons computer to make sure you are not keeping any privacy violating information in your files. --------------------------------------------------------------------- | We have the right to defend ourselves | http://www.jim.com/jamesd/ and our property, because of the kind | of animals that we are. True law | James A. Donald derives from this right, not from the | arbitrary power of the state. | jamesd(a)echeque.com

1 0

Re: Streams, Voice, and Sensitive Dependence
by Jim Gillogly 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

"Lee Davis"<lee.davis(a)thomasmore.edu> skribis: > In any case, there has been a lot of recent work in dynamic systems (Chaos), > especially in the fast computations of Julia Sets. Has anyone seen a paper on > exploiting the sensitive dependance in these systems for pseudorandom number > generation? A number of attempts have been made to apply chaos to cryptosystems. The two that I've broken suffered from the same fault: although it's difficult to find the precise starting point (key) due to sensitive dependence, chaotic systems are by definition non-random, and have preferred orbits. If the cryptanalyst finds an orbit that's close to the one used by the actual key, the stream is mostly the same; this is good enough to hone the attack for the next pass. I'm not saying chaos has no applications in cryptography; only that the applications are not obvious. -- Jim Gillogly Trewesday, 14 Foreyule S.R. 1998, 19:37 12.19.5.13.7, 6 Manik 20 Ceh, Sixth Lord of Night

1 0

joy of export, h/ware
by Anonymous 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 10:06 AM 12/3/98 -0800, Michael Motyka wrote: >> Their architecture has real $$ value because it cracks 99% of >> "encrypted" traffic. >> >What type of attack was used in the famous test? Known plaintext? It >gets a bit tougher in the real world doesn't it? Not really. >> Offering the real stuff for sale in US requires some investment. >> >Really? Interesting question. Open a delaware corporation and sell munition-quality gate arrays in the back pages of Popular Electronics or EE Times... keep us posted... >I expect it would be easier to convince a manufacturer to participate >with a working prototype than it would with only an idea. Duh :-) >> Hardware is overkill for the single voice line. PGPfone works fine >> there. ^^^^^^^^ >> >No it is not. 500k gates may be too much but I maintain that you simply >cannot trust the Wintel HW, Windows or anything you cannot analyze in >detail and freeze. Besides, people like little palm-sized gadgets. * 10,000 gates cost less than a paper clip. 500K is high for a block cipher. * If we don't find something to do with them, at the rate we're producing them, the earth will be covered with silicon and its compounds soon. :-) * Its not like we'd ever put floating point routines, or blitting routines, out of business by integrating those functions in Si, is it? Naah, we'd never accelerate encryption with hardware, the CPU is bored and has nothing better to do, and its soooo expensive to print chips.. (That being said, I'll point out to myself how many asics have been replaced by dsps...but not without some inefficiency) * PGPfone on a very fast cpu plus fast link is still less pleasant than a noisy cordless (no pun intended). * We'd never take encryption hardware through the same path as modems, would we? First used between companies, then used for remote access, eventually you can't buy a bloody machine without one. Getting cheaper, faster, closer to the motherboard, taken for granted by applications. Ever seen a 300 baud, 40 lb modem, cost probably $3000 in 1970 dollars? The final level of deployment is when garage-door-openers, car remotes, and childrens' toys (e.g., radio controlled cars) use encryption chips... or chips with encryption, anyway. >Now an embedded system for secure e-mail that used a PC as a gateway >might be kind of cool. You drop encrypted attachments onto a driver that >sends them to the unit where you read them. Anything you enter and >encrypt at the unit is presented as a file at the host to be attached >and sent. USB would be plenty quick for that sort of stuff. Yes, the PC can be used as an untrusted router if the encryption is done outside it. The outside encrypting unit should also perform NAT, otherwise the PC (doing the tunnelling) can broadcast traffic ('trap and trace' in the pots world) info. The lower power used in PDAs really helps keep the boys in the White Van Across the Street busy. Email is so low-bandwidth that software suffices. Secure video conferencing on your Dick Tracy (tm) telewatch needs h/w support. --- Is 5% of YOUR communications encrypted or anonymous in '98 ?? ---

1 0

TESTING... Seems like I don't get all my mail...
by Jan Dobrucki 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

TEST TEST TEST TEST JDO

1 0

Re: Third World Man
by Robert A. Rosenberg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 22:25 8/21/95, Timothy C. May wrote: >When a certain character in a television show referred to "Third World >mutants," he was also referring to "your basic brown types." (His words, >not mine. Ten credits to anyone who can identify the t.v. show and the >character.) Archie Bunker? All in the Family (I think is the show title).

1 0

Re: Best Computer School?
by Rick Osborne 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 12:32 PM 1/28/97 -0500, Derek Atkins wrote: >This is really exagerating. You do not need a 4.0, 1600, etc. to be >admitted to MIT. Sure, you need good grades, but a 3.6 average and >1350-1400 SAT scores is perfectly adequate to be admitted to MIT. I disagree and can speak from experience. I was denied admission to MIT even thought I had a 3.82 GPA, 1440 SAT (one try), and had taken 9 AP tests with two 5's, four 4's, two 3's, and one 2. As for being well-rounded, I was on several academic teams, sang in Chorus, acted and stage managed in Drama, and played Tennis. The only thing I didn't have that the next MIT applicant had was money. I made the mistake of letting them know that I was dirt poor and would need full aid/grants/etc, and to quote "The Great Escape" it was "Zzzt! To the Russian front!" >For what it's worth, I wanted to go to MIT my sophomore year in high >school, too Lucky you. It had been a dream of mine since I was an annoying overachiever of 6. Sux to be white trash, I guess. MIT may be a great school, but they tend to be snooty assholes for the most part. (DISCLAIMER: Not all MIT grads/attendees are necessarily "snooty assholes", I'm just saying that I've yet to meet one that wasn't.) _________ o s b o r n e @ g a t e w a y . g r u m m a n . c o m _________ "He who knows, does not speak. He who speaks, does not know."

1 0

CNN: Court ok's College control of Internet access
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Note: Heavily edited. Forwarded message: > COURT SAYS COLLEGES CAN RESTRICT INTERNET ACCESS > > > January 28, 1997 > Web posted at: 1:35 p.m. EST > > NORMAN, Oklahoma (CNN) -- A U.S. District Court in Oklahoma has > ruled universities have the right to limit access to explicit > material on the Internet. > > A federal judge ruled University of Oklahoma president David Boren, > a former U.S. senator, has every right to determine what sites > students and faculty can view while on the campus Internet system. > > Boren was sued by University professor, Bill Loving, who claimed his > First Amendment rights were being infringed upon. > > The court ruled against Loving, also an attorney, saying his > constitutional rights were not violated and that he is not entitled > to injunctive relief. > > "I am certainly pleased by the judge's decision," Boren said. "The > university did its best to strike a careful balance in order to > protect legitimate academic and intellectual freedom while at the > same time assuring that the university not act as a distributor of > obscene material, which is not protected by the First Amendment." > rule

1 0

Physical meet, Sat. Feb. 15 - not 18.
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi all, I apparently didn't pay much attention to what month I was looking at when I made the initial meeting. Turns out the 18th is a Tuesday obviously a day that few of us can make. As a result I looked at the 'real' Feb. calendar and the meeting date is as follows: Saturday, Feb. 15, 1997 6pm. HEB Central Market Restaurant Look for the red 2nd. ed. Applied Cryptography book For more info email 'austin-cpunks(a)ssz.com' Also invited to this meet are members of the mailing lists: Experimental Science Instrumentation Advanced Computer Experimentation Sorry for the confusion. Jim Choate CyberTects ravage(a)ssz.com

1 0