- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: WaPo on Crypto-Genie Terrorism
by Deranged Mutant 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

On 27 Jul 96 at 19:21, John Young wrote: > The Washington Post, July 27, 1996, p. A22. > Speaking in Code on the Internet ... [Editorial] Some bothersome things about this editorial... [..] > security of their data. They also see it as a market in > which the United States maintains a comfortable lead, one > that is threatened if domestic encryption makers can't sell > their products elsewhere. The makers argue that foreign > encryption software will rush in to fill the gap, doing > nothing about the uncrackability problem -- indeed, making > it worse. The administration in turn is pursuing a wider IMO, the US does not have a comfortable lead. It's already falling behind considering some of the stronger crypto programs available (at least as freeware) are made outside the US. Many of the stronger algorithms were invented outside of the US (IDEA for instance). [..] > with wiretapping. Mr. Freeh, testifying at Thursday's hearing in > favor of an optional key escrow plan, noted that the point is not > to prevent all copies of uncrackable code from going abroad -- that's > clearly impossible -- but to prevent such high-level code > from becoming the international standard, with architecture > and transmission channels all unreadable to world > authorities. To software companies and Internet users who So why should criminals bother with using standards if they are readable by authorities? > have been clamoring for the right to encrypt as securely as > possible, Mr. Freeh and others argue, "the genie is not yet > out of the bottle" on "robust," meaning uncrackable, > encryption. Are they going to magically erase all copies of strong software that is already currently available? (Side note: the Pacifica news report on Friday notes that while Freeh gave his testimony, over 100 copies of PGP were downloaded from MIT's site.) [..] > Encryption, if widely used, could conceivably ease some > privacy problems concerning who gets to see personal and > financial data on individuals -- though such data usually > are vulnerable to being dug out of storage rather than > intercepted in transmission. But neither is it clear that And evidence cannot be encrypted. You cannot encrypt an airplane full of cocaine or an unusually expensive car baught by money from drugs, espionage, etc. Nor can you encrypt bomb-making materials, nor conversations in a room (from your mouth to a telephone receiver). Nor will encryption do anything about informants inside the communications loop. etc. etc.... > the encryption enthusiasts' desire for free development > should take precedence over the tracking of terrorism. At It's not clear that terrorism can be tracked, even if it's unencrypted. The OK and WTC bombings were apparently not encrypted, and there's some allegations that the authorities had advanced warnings of the latter. > the very least, Congress should be exceedingly cautious > about getting out ahead of administration concerns on > controls that, once lifted, are hardly reversible. The controls haven't done much to prevent free software from being exported. They only control commercial sales of software (and hardware). Particularly absent in the WaPo-ed is that many do not trust the authorities (in the US and elsewhere)--particularly the FBI, which has a long history of extra-legal surveillance. Rob --- No-frills sig. Befriend my mail filter by sending a message with the subject "send help" Key-ID: 5D3F2E99 1996/04/22 wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com (root@magneto) AB1F4831 1993/05/10 Deranged Mutant <wlkngowl(a)unix.asb.com> Send a message with the subject "send pgp-key" for a copy of my key.

3 2

Re: Lynx...
by Remo Pini 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- To: cypherpunks(a)toad.com Date: Sun Jul 28 12:28:37 1996 well, you could turn off all those things in netscape anyway... - --------< fate favors the prepared mind >-------- Remo Pini rp(a)rpini.com PGP: http://www.rpini.com/remopini/rpcrypto.html - ------< words are what reality is made of >------ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQEVAwUBMftA1RFhy5sz+bTpAQG6SwgAlvNbuuCfTSuQZQ/+JNuAMuaWb03arq9f JWDH7VsoX23KNMkUSZlXiRxq3vDIR8clVfXx+j6Gwpy+vGZhC7YhTIcIutZEYh2z tpjjC1ySw92gxs7Rxm8h0IGnZIT6N8Tak070/Qc8hgWIEvHqQZHkv5UjydoSTCW7 rRcVM/mvF4x1MQrgX6NK+DRf7+1uOQFLQkbBv63sIRZeRKj/5v8u126lDShT+LOO 73S6LH7wZ6AiLEB09O2ay4v3IFJbdcLgmQGItrHn8j7v5pUf/E3MMb5TI61jj7a7 vqlin7elVIX1HXLMuvhWAfkhhISuj5YDhsChoNWDWgP1R0XnjtxfRA== =lUu/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Security debate after Olympics bombing
by E. ALLEN SMITH 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Well, at least some people have the right idea. -Allen >Experts point out differences in Atlanta, TWA incidents > _(c) Copyright Nando.net_ > The Associated Press > WASHINGTON -- With nerves already on edge after the suspicious downing > of TWA Flight 800, the bombing at the Olympic Games in Atlanta on > Saturday renewed concerns about U.S. safeguards against terrorism. > But analyses by security experts drew important distinctions between > the incidents, and politicians cautioned against measures that would > limit liberties. > Investigators have not officially determined what caused the Flight > 800 tragedy, but if the jetliner was brought down by terrorists it was > a relatively sophisticated operation. > By comparison, the device in Atlanta was easy to make and detonated in > an easily accessible place. "I don't believe that a pipe bomb would > have taken down that TWA plane," said a Treasury agent, who requested anonymity. > Another federal investigator noted differences between the Atlanta > attack and Middle Eastern terrorists who often use high-powered truck > bombs. And domestic militia groups tend to focus on government > buildings, not crowds. > James Alan Fox, the dean of Northeastern University's criminal justice > school and a student of criminal behavior, said there are basically > two motivations for bombers: revenge and attention. > "The desire to make a statement can be that of a well-organized > terrorist group that uses the victims as pawns to advance their cause, > or it could be someone who is just interested in feeling important," > he said. > Given the recent rise of violent anti-government groups, Fox > speculated that a militia sympathizer might use such an event to grab > the spotlight. > "Through an amateurish bombing like this, he can feel like he's part > of the movement," Fox said. "He can elevate his sense of importance." [...] > And building one is almost as simple. "If you don't know how to do it, > there are any number of books available ... that will teach you > explicitly, step-by-step, how to manufacture the device," Vitch said. [...] > House Speaker Newt Gingrich stressed that security was already high at > the Olympics, and cautioned against adopting a "police state" > mentality. > "If a terrorist is nutty enough, there's always an opportunity for > tragedy," he said, appearing after Nunn on CNN. "A free people can't > back down."

1 0

Re: Internet blamed for pipe bombs
by shamrock＠netcom.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 5:36 7/28/96, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: >> Across the country, latest figures from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, >> Tobacco and Firearms show a 20 percent jump in pipe bomb incidents >> between 1990 and 1994. > >[...] > >> "We've been incredibly busy," said sheriff's bomb technician Judd >> Holiday. "As crime in other categories is dropping, this is going up." The friendly Anarchist's Bookstore in San Francisco sells several books on building bombs. No Internet connection required. I would like offer another possible explanation for the increase in pipe bombings. The People are getting frustrated and a pipe bomb can be very useful device releasing one's frustration. [No, I do not approve of pipe bombing civilians]. -- Lucky Green <mailto:shamrock@netcom.com> PGP encrypted mail preferred. Defeat the Demopublican Unity Party. Vote no on Clinton/Dole in November. Vote Harry Browne for President.

2 1

War of Words
by jya＠pipeline.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Financial Times, July 27/28, 1996, p. XVIII. War of words over the facts By Peter Aspden It must be tough to return from a spell of duty as a war correspondent to a gentle, civilised, country such as Britain. One minute you are witnessing the most unspeakable atrocities committed in the name of politics, religion or just for the hell of it; the next, you are listening to heated debate over the future of the rugby Five Nations Championship. It does nothing for your sense of perspective. Martin Bell, who covered the Bosnian war with such distinction for the BBC, left the stench of the Srebrenica mass executions to breathe the irrelevant odours of Euro-scepticism and National Lottery-mania over the media airwaves. It shocked him to the core, as he revealed in a recent speech: "I ask myself: is this my country? Is it even my planet?" Bell's exasperation has led him to question the model of balanced, dispassionate, objective journalism which has been the bedrock of BBC -- and indeed most serious newspaper and broadcasting -- journalism. He now calls it "bystander journalism". "What I believe in now is what I prefer to call the journalism of attachment, a journalism that cares as well as knows." Predictably, this has set alarm bells ringing. Traditionalists fussed over their hallowed dictum -- facts are sacred, comment is free -- with scarcely a pause for reflection. It is precisely when issues take on a tragic, awful dimension, they argued, that one needs to stick to the facts of the matter. There is no room for sentiment on the front lines. But Bell's point is well made. The trouble with facts, or at least those which are given privilege by traditional journalism, is that they are hard, cold, numbing. If, while reporting on Srebrenica, one talks about diplomatic initiatives, talks about talks, United Nations troop movements, one soon loses one's audience. It is a lesson which even academics, those ultimate upholders of cool objectivity, have come to appreciate. I remember the American philosopher Richard Rorty beginning a lecture on human rights to Oxford University students with a harrowing account of a Bosnian Moslem having his penis bitten off. The atmosphere became electric, no mean feat for the Sheldonian Theatre. We probably would not hear of such incidents in a normal news account from Bosnia; we certainly would not see anything related to it, on grounds of poor taste. But the sexual sadism which is a component of virtually every ethnic cleansing campaign there has ever been is a fact, too. Not a cold, hard fact, but one which has the power to move people. Therein lies its strength. It is not as if the media show any consistency here. On certain occasions, they are only too willing to allow news reports to emote. When we see an interview with a distressed relative whose family has been wiped out or gone missing, we are meant to feel for them. And the police exploit that feeling: they hope that public compassion will turn to solid leads. The facts here are heart-wrenching. But, more importantly, they are facts with which we can identify. It requires little imagination to see ourselves in the wretched situation we watch on the small screen. We know what it is like to lose a loved one, or we feel we know. What we find difficult is to move from micro to macro. What happened at Srebrenica, like what happened at Auschwitz and Belsen, is almost unimaginable. And faced with the unimaginable, we go cold. This applies to news reports as well as the self-defence mechanisms of our fragile emotions. One cannot countenance sitting down after dinner in front of the television to hear of such brutalities, let alone see them. But that is no excuse. The trouble with cold facts is that they harden, while all the time we should be being tenderised. And then we fall to that terrible disease of fattened western sensibilities, "compassion fatigue". We should listen to Martin Bell. He knows a thing or two about human behaviour which most of us choose to exclude from our worldview. We should have heard more from him on the horrors of Bosnia, and less on the grotesquely inadequate responses of our gentle, civilised countries as they sought to respond to the unthinkable. [End]

1 0

Schelling Points leads to interesting family investment opportunities
by Ian Grigg 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi Tim, you said: > The _costs_ of extending beyond the Schelling point boundaries > is deemed to be too high, and the boundary persists. This reminds me of the transactional theory of business units. Working from memory, the optimal size of a business unit is positively related to the cost of the transactions conducted between units, other things being held constant. Thus, in a place where it is "expensive to do business" the dominant form of company will be large. Conversely in a cheap business environment, small companies will predominate. This notion spurs one to examine the transactional costs and to decide (or not) to lower them... The interesting part for your family context is that falling transaction costs have purportedly produced a shift away from large companies to smaller units. Those falling costs are in the sphere of digital communications, other technology, and regulation. If such were to apply to the context of families, upbringing children and education in general, one might predict that the size of the family should shrink. In a sense we might have already seen this. The extended family is really just a memory for most westerners, but is still the norm in poor countries. And I guess we have seen a strong increase in the number of single-parent families in most western countries. One would then be lead to ask, if you are proposing that Internet technologies in general and crypto in particular are influences on the Schelling points related to the family rights set, can this result in smaller family units? That is, the cost of providing (net) education falls, and the ease of crypto communication allows children to grow up as individuals in the big wide Inter-world rather than the shoolyard. If I were permitted to ramble without judicious limit, I would talk about the economic unit becoming a single person, and that person becoming responsible for their own success, regardless of their age. In this view of the future, a child is an economic unit, and is responsible for his own education, and thus must learn for the future. Obviously there is a bootstrapping problem here previously known as birth, and this could be addressed by well-meaning investors purchasing educational rights to a mother's future child (in effect, buying an unborn baby). The child then becomes the ward of the investor, who attempts to raise the child to produce the maximal return. Of course, in order to eliminate the distorting effects of love and child-like whims (I don't want to log into teacher today), there would have to be a free market for raising rights, based on caveat emptor examination of progress. Thus would be exist an informational approach to encourage the child's attention to books, and of course, towards a successful career as an investor in the youth of tomorrow. This would also allow specialisation of investment, those that concentrate on the early years, those on the teens and those that reap the final rewards of first productive working years. The arisal of these strata would lay to rest for ever that old saw of the economists by showing that there is no market failure in education, and thus no need for regulation. And in answer to those anticipated questions from concerned parents, no, I don't have any children, and yes, in the new world, senior citizens can contract to investors to provide granny services, so that they won't be unemployed. But perhaps I should really have placed a judicious limit on my ramblings :-) -- iang iang(a)systemics.com

1 0

[NOISE] Rich Graves is accused of forgery and other net-abuse
by dlv＠bwalk.dm.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hmm, I though Rich Graves was a Nazi, but now the Nazis reject him too. :-) Message-ID: <012317Z28071996(a)anon.penet.fi> Path: ...!newsfeed.internetmci.com!swrinde!howland.reston.ans.net!EU.net!news.eunet.fi!anon.penet.fi Newsgroups: alt.fan.ernst-zundel,alt.revisionism,news.groups,alt.internet.media-coverage,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,c2.chat,alt.cyberpunk,soc.culture.jewish From: an572010(a)anon.penet.fi (Vyshinsky) X-Anonymously-To: alt.fan.ernst-zundel,alt.revisionism,news.groups,alt.internet.media-coverage,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,c2.chat,alt.cyberpunk,soc.culture.jewish Organization: Anonymous forwarding service Reply-To: an572010(a)anon.penet.fi Date: Sun, 28 Jul 1996 01:21:24 UTC Subject: Re: Spammed by a Nazi obssessive References: <schwartz-2507960756390001(a)cmh-p091.infinet.com> <joelr.3533.000B045C(a)winternet.com> <4t8nk8$3ic(a)Networking.Stanford.EDU> Lines: 80 [multi-mailed to llurch(a)stanford.edu, postmaster(a)stanford.edu, and postmaster(a)c2.net] llurch(a)stanford.edu writes: > joelr(a)winternet.com (Joel Rosenberg) writes: > >In article <schwartz-2507960756390001(a)cmh-p091.infinet.com> schwartz(a)infinet.com writes: > > > >>Maybe someone should mention to Ingrid that this little crap works both > >>ways. She may have been spammed, so are we. > >> > >>Sara > > > >I got the same spew, and sent back a message, with a copy to the root, that > >I want no further email from these folks. No big deal. > > > Right. It's not. > > It doesn't work both ways. Neither way is acceptable. Fortunately, with > the exceptions of Skippy, Giwer, and Marduk, whom nobody loves, nobody > seems to be into continuing net abuse after they've been notified that > it's wrong. You, postmaster(a)c2.org, postmaster(a)stanford.edu and news.admin.net-abuse.misc were notified about forged cancels by you against others. Did you stop since? Your practice of posting to a lot of newsgroups with a followup-to line for an "enemy" newsgroup, is the classic practice of trolling. Most of the newsreaders wont see the rebuttals, and presume that your post was unchallenged, so inspiring a rebuttal with the same arguments that have already been made. You've not stopped regardless of the number of complaints. Your practice of forging your e-mail address away from your true e-mail address is also net abuse. This is an obvious taking advantage of sameer(a)c2.net, a net hero, the admin of your ISP, that you are maliciously taking advantage of to avoid complaints of your actual e-mail address, llurch(a)stanford.edu, whom you work for. Whoever "Skippy" is, she has not forged cancels since March 1996, and has never done the other abuses you deal out in prolific quantity. Are you going to stop these three net abuses because of yet another complaint? You haven't before. --****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--****ATTENTION****--***ATTENTION*** Your e-mail reply to this message WILL be *automatically* ANONYMIZED. Please, report inappropriate use to abuse(a)anon.penet.fi For information (incl. non-anon reply) write to help(a)anon.penet.fi If you have any problems, address them to admin(a)anon.penet.fi

1 0

Re: ALL OF YOU ARE CRIMINAL HACKERS, I AM GOING TO CALL FBI
by anonymous-remailer＠shell.portal.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

>I AM NOT GOING TO TOLERATE EXISTENCE OF A MEDIUM FOR CRIMINAL HACKERS >AND MUNITIONS SMUGGLERS. I WILL COMPLAIN TO THE FBI IMMEDIATELY SO THAT THEY >CAN TRACK YOU DOWN AND CLOSE THIS LIST. Tips for reporting this 'clandestine' list to the FBI (and it's contributors) 1) Be sure to speak slowly and use small words when contacting the FBI. 2) If you can, be sure to work the words 'Pipe Bomb', 'Olympics', and/or 'TWA' into your sentences. 3) Remember to unsubscribe from the list before reporting it. 4) Try not to be belligerant when the talking with the FBI - RE: tracking down cpunks; they're laughing at you, already. 5) Try not to use the word 'inbred' in your report..they seem particullarly sensitive to this...for some reason. 6) When meeting FBI in person, do not wear shiny objects or bright colors - it distracts them. 7) When calling the FBI hotline, don't ask to speak to someone about munition smuggling AND computers crimez - this will put the operator into coma. 8) Be sure to ask for special agent 'Fox Mulder' and 'Dana Sculley' - they're 'the best' 9) 10)... _______ Warren Crossfield Programmer/MacOS "Buy a Pentium - so you can restart Windoze faster!"

6 5

Re: Internet blamed for pipe bombs
by Alan Olsen 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 08:30 AM 7/28/96 -0700, Lucky Green wrote: >At 5:36 7/28/96, E. ALLEN SMITH wrote: > >>> Across the country, latest figures from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, >>> Tobacco and Firearms show a 20 percent jump in pipe bomb incidents >>> between 1990 and 1994. >> >>[...] >> >>> "We've been incredibly busy," said sheriff's bomb technician Judd >>> Holiday. "As crime in other categories is dropping, this is going up." > >The friendly Anarchist's Bookstore in San Francisco sells several books on >building bombs. No Internet connection required. I would like offer another >possible explanation for the increase in pipe bombings. The People are >getting frustrated and a pipe bomb can be very useful device releasing >one's frustration. The local PBS station had a program on bomb detection and manufacture. It included a section with someone from the BATF explaining how Pipebombs work and included slow motion video. (It might have been an episode of NOVA. I came in in the middle.) It even included information about how nails and screws would be included for extra schrapnel. (Maybe this is part of a plot to remove funding from PBS once and for all...) The media and government types who are blaming the Internet for pipebombs do not get out enough. I have seen good working descriptions in books since I was a small child. (Of course, I actually read books as a child. And not just the pablum they expect kids to read nowadays.) Of course, since when have government and media pronouncements have had anything to do with the real world and/or truth... --- Alan Olsen -- alano(a)teleport.com -- Contract Web Design & Instruction `finger -l alano(a)teleport.com` for PGP 2.6.2 key http://www.teleport.com/~alano/ "We had to destroy the Internet in order to save it." - Sen. Exon "Microsoft -- Nothing but NT promises."

1 0

cypherpunks vs hackers
by pjn＠nworks.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

In> How can we differentiate cypherpunks to hackers? What are their In> attitudes, psychological thinking, main objective? It is interesting to note that while both groups have opposite objectives (Hackers want all information free, where cypherpunks want everbody to be able to have privacy), and yet in there own ways, they are both right. I think what we need to define is the diffrence between hackers and crackers. A hacker breaks into a computer like a cracker (but the similarities end there). The hacker just want to look and learn, possably "map out" the system just to see how everything works with everything else. Crackers break into computers for the sake of destroying or stealing information or the system itself. Both cypherpunks and hackers think that the government is wrong in many things that they do. P.J. pjn(a)nworks.com ... It would seem that evil retreats when forcibly confronted. - Excalbian ___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.20 [NR]

2 1