- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: anon.penet.fi troubles
by sidney＠taurus.apple.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Brian D Williams <talon57(a)well.sf.ca.us> wrote (in e-mail to this list, not to Julf, by the way): >There has been a rash of discussion about unusual messages from >your server on cypherpunks recently, I received this one today; [...] >X-Envelope-To: an111447 Checking the subscriber list, I see that an111447(a)anon.penet.fi is subscribed to cypherpunks. It is near the end of the list returned by Majordomo. Does that mean it was recently added? This has happened before. If someone uses anonymized mail to subscribe to this list, then all mail which anybody sends here is going to be sent to the anonymized address. Anyone who has an id on anon.penet.fi who has not set up a password and has sent mail to a mailing list such as this one that has an anonymous subscriber has revealed their identity to that subscriber if they included their sig in their message. Anyone who did not have an id who sends a message to this list will end up being assigned one. I thought that somebody did something the last time this happened to fix the problem, at least regarding the cypherpunks list. Or was that just before one of the mailing list crashes, so the problem went away by itself until this person recently subscribed? Does it seem to much of a coincidence that an111447 subscribed at the same time that the alt.test tunafish spam appeared? -- sidney <sidney(a)apple.com>

1 0

Re: NYET to censors, REPOST
by gtoal＠an-teallach.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

: From: nzook(a)fireant.ma.utexas.edu : Specifically, this is a plan to create two sorts of accounts to the net-- : adult and minor. Adult accounts may only be obtained by persons of age : The legal framework that I see important in aiding such a system is as : State Level: : acceptable verification methods specified, with authority to add methods : delegated to a regulatory agency. Emphasis to be on ease and speed of : 2) Make it illegal to misrepresent age and name data to a BBS. Require : BBS operators to maintain a record of age and name of account holders for : 3) Declare aiding in tampering with NYET system to be "Contributing to the : Delequency of a Minor". : Federal Level: : Pass paralell laws for BBSs operating with local numbers from two or : more states, or for BBSs operating with 800 numbers. 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. G

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

From: Paul Robichaux The same way companies have been made to commit not to kill dolphins, or test products on animals, or give to Planned Parenthood: organized public pressure, combined with threatened or actual negative publicity. .......................................... You could also, like the Luddites, pressure the inventors of computers not to make any more of these new-fangled, fearsome things. Because you just *know* what they'll be used for, once they develop some database "features" and make it possible to send messages anonymously. Blanc (And, for clarity, I'm reminded that I ought to put a disclaimer in my signature about my address: I don't any express any "official" opinions from Microsoft; I just like to argue on cypherpunks.)

2 1

Anonymous message failed (wrong password)
by daemon＠anon.penet.fi 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

The message you sent to the anonymous server could not be processed, as your password (in the X-Anon-Password: header) didn't match the one stored in the server. Either you have made a mistake, or somebody has used your account and changed the password. If the latter is the case, please contact admin(a)anon.penet.fi. Contents of failed message: ------------------------- X-Envelope-To: an111447 Received: from relay2.UU.NET by anon.penet.fi (5.67/1.35) id AA20854; Thu, 28 Jul 94 22:44:56 +0300 Received: from toad.com by relay2.UU.NET with SMTP id QQxanv11527; Thu, 28 Jul 1994 15:47:30 -0400 Received: by toad.com id AA20384; Thu, 28 Jul 94 12:00:25 PDT Received: from well.sf.ca.us by toad.com id AA20148; Thu, 28 Jul 94 11:59:05 PDT Received: (from talon57@localhost) by well.sf.ca.us (8.6.9/8.6.9) id LAA16258 for cypherpunks(a)toad.com; Thu, 28 Jul 1994 11:53:34 -0700 Date: Thu, 28 Jul 1994 11:53:34 -0700 From: Brian D Williams <talon57(a)well.sf.ca.us> Message-Id: <199407281853.LAA16258(a)well.sf.ca.us> To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Subject: "Just say NYET to NYET" Sender: owner-cypherpunks(a)toad.com Precedence: bulk The message in question was sent by me to cypherpunks(a)toad.com from my account at talon57(a)well.sf.ca.us and nowhere else. It looks as if someone is redirecting mail improperly. Brian Williams Extropian Cypherpatriot "Cryptocosmology: Sufficently advanced communication is indistinguishable from noise." --Steve Witham "Have you ever had your phones tapped by the government? YOU WILL and the company that'll bring it to you.... AT&T" --James Speth

1 0

NYET and international data services
by hughes＠ah.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Even in the NYET proposal were implemented, it wouldn't accomplish it's own objectives. The existence of international data services, not under the purview of the cabal of governments administering a hypothetical mandatory rating system, would provide an end run around any attempt at censorship. The only alternative would be to shut down international data links. Whatever material someone might find objectionable will still exist, because the proposal doesn't call for its suppression, merely its labelling. That objectionable material will go outside the bounds of the system, and right back in. In order to be effective, the system would have to prevent telnetting to arbitrary international sites. Do you really suppose China would participate in a Western-values (of any sort) madatory rating system? Please. And I, for one, would be happy to run data services out of China, and the Chinese would be happy for the foreign exchange. I have, in fact, considered putting up just such a service in Tiajuana, right across the border from San Diego. I might even be able to use radio or laser links to cross the border, and not even deal with international telecom arrangements. Someone wants a non-US web page? I could sell them one. They don't tell me their name, and I can't tell anyone else. If someone is offended, they get to sue in Mexican court. Internationalization solves most problems of local restriction, de facto. You won't be able to do mandatory ratings of any kind because every jurisdiction, even the USA, is a local jurisdiction. Eric

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

From: Timothy C. May "If Microsoft has never met with NIST/NSA or Denning or TIS on this matter, and was only pursuing SKE research on its own initiative, without any incentives or threats from the government, then I will withdraw my speculations and cheer Microsoft on." ................................................... And then you can say: Blanc was right all along; I really had nothing to worry about. Signed: Tim C May "We need to see a public debate on software key escrow, regardless of Microsoft's involvement one way or another. And we shouldn't wait until the press conference is held to announce the program!" ....................................................... I would like to see more explanations on key escrow, myself. To me, the issue is control: who gets it, who excercises it, who will try to prevent an individual from their right to exert it. How does the mere existence of a system of key escrow necessitate that no one will ever again have the means to secure their privacy? I do understand the difference in the situation of an individual in a corporate environment using a given software environment, vs the individual at home with their own pc trying to access the internet & send email. But you all write code: you have ideas on how to deal with this, right? Do you think that having created a means to an end, that it will be impossible to retain ownership and control of it? In the present political atmosphere, there are many ownership issues being threated. The government's position is to take away the means to an end, thereby preventing the whole problem of having to think about who has the right to use it or not. Do you think that preventing companies from implementing their own key escrow schemes, this will eliminate the problem of having to fight with the government over the keys? Blanc

2 1

Re: Just say NYET to kneejerking
by jdd＠aiki.demon.co.uk 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In message <199407291601.JAA28808(a)sleepy.retix.com> joshua geller writes: > > The Internet is a wild and exciting place. You want your children to > > get to know it. But you would also like a way to build little fences > > between them and some things that they are just too young to deal with. > > How do you do it? > > I don't guess I rightly care how you raise your kids as long as you > don't to interfere with what I want to do in the process. if you don't > have sufficient authority over your children to prevent them from doing > that which you do not want them to do, sorry, this is not my problem. My little fences are on my land. If you cross over my little fences, so are you. I think that what I was trying to politely suggest is that the proper place for the proposed access restrictions is not out there on every system on the Internet, but instead on your own system. Politeness rarely does any harm. -- Jim Dixon

1 0

Re: AA BBS sysops found guilty
by Pierre Uszynski 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I said: > I remember that the charges were actually more subtle (though just as > silly) and numerous. To discuss it further we need to know the detail > of which charges brought a guilty verdict, and which were thrown out. Well, talk about subtle: (From the netnews threads) "The Thomases were convicted on 11 criminal counts, each carrying maximum sentences of five years in prison and $250,000 in fines. Thomas was acquitted on a charge of accepting child pornography mailed to him by an undercover postal inspector." The thread is currently in comp.org.eff.talk,misc.legal,alt.sex, alt.bbs,alt.slack In none of the thread did I see a mention that the difference between "shipping material" and "Making material available for net access" was even considered to matter. The judge also seems to have disallowed the jury from interpreting "community standards" to include what we call "electronic communities" (not that I would expect a bunch of random jurors to even consider this distinction). Interesting quotes from the thread: : "If the jury feels the law is unjust, we recognize the undisputed : power of the jury to acquit, even if its verdict is contrary to the : law as given by a judge, and contrary to the evidence ... and the : courts must abide by that decision." : - US v Moylan, 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, 1969, 417 F.2d at 1006 and : In the list of grievances in the July 4, 1776, declaration of : independence, one was "transporting us beyond seas to be tried for : pretended offences." Pierre. pierre(a)shell.portal.com

1 0

New remailer up at: usura@hacktic.nl
by usura＠vox.hacktic.nl 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hi C'punx, There is another remailer operational in The Netherlands. It operates from my usura(a)hacktic.nl account, and it is an 'on-line' remailer as oposed to my UUCP remailers at vox.hacktic.nl . For more information send some email To: usura(a)hacktic.nl Subject: remailer-help Or finger usura(a)hacktic.nl for the remailers PGPkey. UsE Wisely .. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6 for VoX Labz. iQCVAgUBLjpxS1nfdBSNVpE9AQHdwgP/YEMVzaPmgSK5/neizS+XxAtG8//Hbpmw G3b0WJ3JLCSmlbsP4eyS70vOn7V0kdLEoht5yJL4VnMF0J6L8elxLfU8wDxMofKj z7tRCdfVZru2Xcao5FbIEm8L+nFrDF3CPv+Wo3YrHeJEh4kghw0fCsPdlSqilWDz uCF0JDGMhnk= =3UmU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- EnJoY .. -- Exit! Stage Left. Alex de Joode <usura(a)vox.hacktic.nl>

1 0

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

17 Dec '03

From: Aron Freed What is the difference if a big company subjects its employees to a key-escrow system or if the government does it with the people. If you think about it, the government could coerce the company into reading through information being passed back and forth.... ................................................. With a private company, you can negotiate with the owners, or leave. With the government, you have no choice. If the governors decide to coerce a company into complicity with surveillance over internal correspondence, it can do this anyway by other means - that is, it can get access over any material it deems necessary for "legitimate law enforcement needs", even hard-copy files. The desire for absolute control isn't limited to governments, and it doesn't originate in the institution, but in the psychology of the beholder. Blanc

2 1