- cypherpunks-legacy - lists.cpunks.org

Re: Remailers and ecash (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: Remailers and ecash (fwd) > Date: Wed, 1 Oct 97 23:56:19 -0400 > From: "Brian B. Riley" <brianbr(a)together.net> > >And why does this by any security when it's the header info and > >contents that Mallet looks at, not the frequency. The only thing > >such approaches do is impliment security by obscurity, and that > >ain't security. > > What header info?, its all messages to the remailer with nondescript > info .. from that point the latency and mix takes over. The meaningful > message looks no different from the 'cover' traffic. Mallet will be following the cover traffic, since it is cover there will be no correllation uncovered between input and output traffic because the output traffic header info will either be a small class of destinations used over and over or else it will be chosen randomly using something like a spider on webpages or a usenet newsgroup crawler. Just send the bogus packets to random addresses, talk about spam with a bite... <hint: the LEA's would then instigate an investigation of the randomly selected target, depleting their resources, this might buy you 2-3 days if you got two halves of a clue to rub together> <speculation: anything short of several thousand entries in the bogus destinations will be trivial to track> <obvious: once a bogus address is used and known by the LEA's it will be worthless to send any further packets there> <obvious: all this traffic analysis will be done by computers with very nice databases so it might take one or two agents to review the full traffic set for just about any time frame under review> <speculation: given a determined and well equiped Mallet it should take no more than a week to 10 days to resolve the analysis if the destination party is a small set, say <= dozen, using todays remailers and traffic levels. Previously it was mentioned that one remailer handled about 4300 pieces a day, something Oracle or Sybase wouldn't have a problem with> <speculation: currently remailers are not seriously bothered by the BIG Big Brother's because it is not worth validating the paranoids out there that they are being watched> For the sender to chain from remailer to remailer to destination the destination has to be in the header info somewhere. Now in the most secure system each packet header will only contain the address of the next hop. When the next site gets it the packet contents are de-crypted (otherwise reading the chaining info is trivial) and the contents are uncovered to reveal another packet with the next hop header and another encrypted block. And on and on we go. <Question: Are there any remailer sets that impliment the encrypted nested packet system?> <speculation: an encrypted chain could be made stronger if the next hop header depended on which key was used to decode it. In other words, remailer A's key will produce one next hop address while remailer B's key will send it elsewhere. This is a subset of the different plaintext - same cyphertext problem - a hard problem as I understand it. Find two distinct texts that encrypt with different keys to the same cyphertext> Now if I were tasked with traffic analysis of this sort I would look at each incoming header and each outgoing header. I would look for some sort of correlation (ie some percentage of the time when I see this source address I see this destination address within some period) over time between the steps in the chain. Realisticaly it would take at least a dozen or so transmissions using the same remailer chain before a clear pattern would emerge. In general there are two types of classes in traffic analysis. The first is monitoring of a specific entity involved in the transfer, usualy source or destination. The second is passive traffic monitoring where I simply go from remailer to remailer and find statistical correlation between the various packets in the hope that somewhere somewhen I would come across something of use. <observation: without latency being added simply shuffling the messages will not significantly hamper the analysis. To be most effective the latencies should be randomly chosen. This implies that for best security the content of the traffic should not be greatly time sensitive. It furher implies that such traffic should be over a significant range, at least an order of magnitude say> <suggestion: I learned of the basics of traffic analysis from following the study of dinosaur teeth and trying to determine which type they were. Different dinosaurs leave distinctive but different types of scratches on their teeth. By applying statistics to the measurements it becomes possible to assign them to specific types> The first type is the most commen currently but with the various requests by the FBI and other LEA's it is becoming clear they want to get into the second class of traffic analysis in a big way. Guess they are finding it harder and harder to get the big-wigs like the drug cartels because they use a higher degree of technology than the LEA's do, they're simply out-classed. With the second class they could catch a email (for example) from some end user buying a couple of quarters of pot and then chase that chain in reverse. Without the passive second class monitoring they would have never gotten that lead in the first place. Now consider the LEA's think nothing of monitoring a suspect for years if required. I know of one case where the DEA spent 2 years tracking a 'kingpin' for 45 tons of herb. They even brought in specialist from the NSA and military to do covert monitoring for the over-seas participants, including traffic analysis of their communications. <observation: Blackhawks have a pretty nifty electronics system, watching downtown Bagdad via a sat link while flying along playing with Internet email and using your FLIR to not hit the cables between the poles> If they ain't LEA's then a whole new set of options become available. Also consider, if they aren't LEA's then they are probably doing a class one traffic analysis which is only a matter of time to resolve. Considering the current number of anonymous remailers it would not surprise me if the CIA/NSA/Massad/MI5/etc. are not currently monitoring them all. It is a given that countries like Iraq, Singapore, China, etc. are currently doing about all they can to monitor the remailers because they are known to be used by 'terrorist' organizations. It seems to me that many people have an inherent (and unrecognized) assumption that Mallet will have access only to a single remailer and won't bother actualy tracing the traffic. A bad assumption. It is also worth remembering, the government as a whole is quite slow but there are some quite capable individuals. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Re: Forwarded mail...
by Brian B. Riley 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 10/1/97 9:03 PM, Jim Choate (ravage(a)ssz.com) passed this wisdom: >Why is the situation more stable if both parties are armed? If I >were confronted by a armed burglar and we were facing off I would >pull the trigger as soon as I got a lock. If their gun wasn't in a >ready position Iwould warn them and if they so much as flinched I'd >drop them. If they wereunarmed I might beat them senseless with the >gun but I would not shoot themunless they made a motion to rush me, >then I would go for a non-lethal shotunless the distance was less >than a dozen feet (rushing distance) or so >in ... nothing personal, but why is it people keep deluding themselves with the idea that they can shoot to wound. You cannot know what a shot will do ... if you shoot someone the odds are pretty high that you will kill him or seriously injure. You cannot count on 'non-lethally' wounding anyone. Leg shots have a very high incidence of hitting bone and deflecting up into the torso and really raising havoc. A shot to the thigh could easily hit the femoral artery and a total bleedout .... if you are going to shoot assume your are going to kill, if the guys lives, then you get to sleep a little easier that night and later. I hear so much talk about killing like its something really easy to do ... it isn't ... unfortunately it gets easier each time, and the sleeping gets tougher ... the only consolation to the bad dreams is that it means you haven't lost your humanity, yet! -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP for Personal Privacy 5.0 Charset: noconv iQA/AwUBNDMc3sdZgC62U/gIEQKPVACgnbr0UQGw0Lx8j7tJhOii6bVWB/MAnjM6 euuGEBAmFLhxWsULQLNTOFSs =LFzV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Brian B. Riley --> http://www.macconnect.com/~brianbr For PGP Keys <mailto:brianbr@together.net?subject=Get%20PGP%20Key> "...Those of you who turned your swords into plowshares will soon find yourselves under the yokes of those of us who kept our swords..." -- author unknown

2 1

Internet Censorware Summit, Clinton to speak, Dec 1-3
by Declan McCullagh 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

At 09:20 -0800 10/30/97, James S. Tyre wrote: >Showing my ignorance, what's the "real" censorware summit? Check out http://www.kidsonline.org/ -- it's a hoot. Praises the CDA as a "well-intentioned effort to protect children." Grew out of the White House's kickoff Censorware Summit in July; Clinton is expected to speak at this one. Scheduled for Dec 1-3 here in DC. Chaired by former Clinton campaign official and former FTC "protect the children" Commissioner Christine Varney. (This is not to criticize Varney; I rather like her personally, but politically, well...) The Censorware Summit is organized largely by industy groups -- America Online initially took the lead role -- and sympathetic advocacy groups. Donna Rice-Hughes (yes that Donna Rice) is heavily involved, as operations co-chair or something (I forget her real title). Sydney Rubin (syd(a)kidsonline.org) a public relations rep for CyberPatrol, is handling media registration. The Center for Democracy and Technology is hosting the kidsonline.org web site. Following is a quote from the web site. Note it talks about how we need stricter enforcement of obscenity laws -- one of the worst ideas I've heard in a while. Remember Robert Thomas -- why should S.F. or NYC be subject to the "community standards" of Tennessee? *sigh* >The summit will seek to advance the following objectives in accordance with >Presidential and Congressional statements on Internet use by children: > > Technological Solutions: Encouraging market-based development and > deployment of an effective, easy-to-use "digital toolbox" of user > empowerment tools which can assist parents and others responsible for > children, in shielding those children from material they deem >inappropriate > and shaping children's communication and information options online; to > enable access to positive content and communications based on >individual > values; and to enable service and content providers, and others, to >create > family-friendly environments. > > Enforcement of Current Law: Fostering greater cooperation among > law enforcement, industry, and the public, to support vigorous > enforcement of existing laws against using the Internet to traffic >in obscene > material and child pornography, stalk children, and commit other >crimes. Fortunately there's a coalition forming to oppose this. That is, emphasizing the free speech implications of rating and filtering proposals. I understand details will be made public soon. As I said: >>Look for the usual suspects to stand up and wave around censorware >>programs, blissfully ignoring the fact that the Supreme Court ruled >>recently that the Net should be as free as print or a public square. Last I >>checked, print publishers would never endorse any "self-labelling" system >>to stave off Federal censorship. They'd have the balls to stand up and >>fight. So should the Net. -Declan

1 1

Re: Forwarded mail... (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Subject: Re: Forwarded mail... > Date: Thu, 2 Oct 97 00:09:24 -0400 > From: "Brian B. Riley" <brianbr(a)together.net> > ... nothing personal, but why is it people keep deluding themselves > with the idea that they can shoot to wound. You cannot know what a > shot will do Remember: A gun is like a finger, just point it at what you want to hit. I have met hundreds of great shots in my life, there are many people for whom this sort of behaviour would not be delusional. My grandfather (who you'll hear more about in a minute) used to delight us as small kids by lighting matches stuck in wood fence posts with a .22 pistol from about 50 yds. My cousin from Louisiana likes to shoot squirrels (if you can call it that) by passing the bullet just in front of their nose, causes lung hemorraghes and they just fall off the limb. Me, I always miss or blow their teeny little head off, it's apparently a game of 1/4 inches. I work with an ex-gomer (ie USMC) pilot who is quite phenomenal with his .357 Desert Eagle, his groupings are just about an inch at 25 yds. I have 20/10 eyesight (in one eye now, the L. is blind) and I've been shooting guns since I was 6 years old. By the time I was 12 I was killing Nutria in Louisiana's swamps every summer for bounty with a single shot of .22 from 100+ yds. I once got a nice heart shot on a deer at 400 yds. over iron sites with a .308. I hit what I aim at with a pistol or rifle assuming I have fired it a few times (which if I own the gun is a given). The first thing I do is range a weapon when I buy it. It's also why I practice shooting in groups of 3. Better chance of hitting, and hitting something important. Being shot at doesn't bother me, been there done that several times now, so I don't think that will be much of a factor. I agree a snap shot is inaccurate but if I have time to get the gun and get to my bedroom door nobody is going to get a chance for a snap shot. Hell, if I had a reasonable idea where they were I'd shoot their wormy ass through the wall. I seriously doubt anyone can get to my bedroom without me being warned (my burglar alarm isn't electronic). <hint: if your walls are white and you're faced with a burglar cover yourself with a white sheet (assuming the lights are off and only ambient is available) and stay below waist level moving no more than about 1 ft. at a time and shooting upward. Keep both elbows tucked in and hold the gun in a 2-hand grip, use you ears not your eyes> >... if you shoot someone the odds are pretty high that > you will kill him or seriously injure. If you break into my house at 1AM this is a given. I'll either shoot you or beat you to death with a skillet. If you don't want to die don't break into my house. It's the Golden Rule. There is absolute NOTHING that justifies breaking into my house at any time let alone in the middle of the night. It's called 'cause and effect' unfortunately most folks now a-days just don't seem to have caught the clue. There is a saying that my grandfather tought me (he was a medic in WWI because he was a contientous (sp?) objecter): If you pull a gun on somebody shoot, and shoot to kill. If you can't bring yourself to kill then don't use a gun. > You cannot count on > 'non-lethally' wounding anyone. Who the hell wants to non-lethaly wound a burglar, I'm betting on them flinching when I start yelling at them... > Leg shots have a very high incidence > of hitting bone and deflecting up into the torso and really raising > havoc. A shot to the thigh could easily hit the femoral artery and a > total bleedout Absolutely great reasons to shoot the asshole there. Look, when a person breaks into your house, robs you, rapes you, or whatever they are basicly saying "I am going it on my own, I apply no rules or recognition of civilization. Your life means nothing to me because I am willing to trade it for a few measly bucks". It is silly to try to deal with such people reasonably, if they were reasonable they wouldn't be there in the first place (they'd be home protecting their own possessions). They are a clear and present danger with long-term intent. Save your life and their next victim or your tax dollars to put them in jail and train them to be better criminals, do everyone a favor kill them now. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http:// www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0

Stop Dreaming & Start Making Money!
by 72384400＠13117.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Are you interested in making an extra $10,000, $50,000, or $100,000 a month? YES! $100,000 a month. If you believe that someday you'll get that big break, get ready because THIS IS IT! Just imagine, no more living from paycheck to paycheck. Become FINANCIALLY INDEPENDENT. Buy your dream home. Purchase that sports car in cash. Never again worry about living in debt. "I currently make $1,350 to $1,800 a day doing this part-time. One week after I started, the checks showed up in my mailbox. I can't believe it!" - Lynette from Glendale, CA. I'm sure you've seen couples on TV, sitting on a couch, holding each other's hand & claiming to make this sort of MONEY. If all these people were lying, don't you think you would have heard about it from the Attorney General or Hard Copy? STOP thinking that no one can possibly make this kind of money. WE ARE!! "I was probably the most skeptical person out there, until I saw how much my brother-in-law was making. Then I HAD to try it. The first day, I got checks that totaled $5,693. Yesterday I made $4,374." - Michael from Everette, WA $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Are you ready to change your life forever? $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ MAKE HUGE PROFITS IN THE INFORMATION AGE Selling information is one of the FASTEST and EASIEST ways to get into the mail order business. Ordinary people just like you and me are doing this and smiling all the way to the bank. It is only in this amazing business can you start out with practically NO CAPITAL and with literally NO LIMIT to your profits. I bet you know someone who would PAY YOU $5-$15 to know: HOW TO GET $1,000,000 WORTH OF LIFE INSURANCE WITH NO CASH! HOW TO STOP PAYING PROPERTY TAXES ON YOUR HOME WIPE OUT DEBTS WITHOUT BANKRUPTCY INSIDER SECRETS TO PERSONAL TAX SHELTERS HOW TO REDUCE YOUR GROCERY BILLS BY 50% TOP 10 WAYS TO MAKE MONEY ON THE INTERNET All you have to do is buy our CD-ROM which contain over 650+ how to money making reports, reprint on diskettes or paper & SELL, SELL, SELL. CD-ROM comes with Unlimited Reprint & Resell license. You can sell the reports individually or in sets through classified ads, personal contacts, flyers, or on the Net. Sell them HOWEVER you want and for as MUCH as you want. YOU KEEP ALL THE PROFIT. HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU $$$$$ Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and you send out only 2,000 email ads a day. (You obviously already have an internet connection so e-mail advertising is FREE.) Your email would read: SPECIAL REPORT "Live in a $100,000 Home without ANY Money" Send $10 & self- addressed stamped envelope to: YOUR NAME YOUR ADDRESS YOUR CITY AND STATE Let's also say that the mailing only receives a tiny response rate of not 5% , not 1% but 0.5%. That comes out to 10 orders a day X $10.00 per order. That's $100 in additional income a day for 5 minutes of work. Imagine, that comes out to an additional $36,500 a year. Can you use an extra $36,500 a year for 5 minutes of work? BUT what would happen if you sent out 100,000 emails? At the smaller response rate of 0.35% , YOU WILL EARN $105,000.00 OF SPENDABLE CASH IN JUST ONE MONTH! Note: Some programs out there send email at 250,000 - 330,000 emails an HOUR with a 28.8 modem. Note: Currently there are over 90 million email accounts users & predicted to be 500 million by the year 2000 When you order from us, you get: *Our BEST-SELLING 650+ money making reports on CD-ROM. *Step-by-step proven instructions on how you can start a huge business selling information & become financially successful. *The best methods for bulk e-mailing and obtaining e-mail lists. Other money making programs sound great, they say place tiny classified ads. They forget to tell you that, you have to WRITE A BOOK. With our CD-ROM, you can begin selling, TODAY! E-Z ORDER FORM : Please print out this form and fill in the blanks legibly to send along with payment. I WOULD LIKE TO ORDER THE FOLLOWING: QTY TITLE _______ CD-ROM (650+ Reports with Full Reprint Rights) Advertised before for $99.00 NOW *ONLY $59.00* Name ____________________________________________________ Street Address ____________________________________________ City, State, Zip_____________________________________________ Phone Number_____________________________________________ Email Address_____________________________________________ Payment method ____ credit card ____ check ____ money order Account Number _____________________________________ Expiration Date ________________ Name on Card _______________________________________ Signature ___________________________________________ ORDER AMOUNT __________________________ + $4.00 shipping/handling = _______________ TOTAL Send payment along with this completed form to: Micro Info Publishing 2107 W. Commonwealth Ave. #264 Alhambra, CA 91803 Comes with a 30 DAY MONEY BACK GUARANTEE

1 0

Your Listing on Yahoo
by search10＠earthlink.net 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Hi: This email is in reference to YOUR LISTING ON YAHOO! If you are interested in placing your web site in the TOP TEN on the major search engines, please read on. (If not, please disregard this email and accept our apology for any intrusion.) reply with remove in the subject. For those of you who are interested, please read on! (Ed. note: Yahoo asked that we mention that our group and Yahoo are not affiliated --they probably wouldn't let us publish this if we were affiliated). ____________________________________________________________ SEARCH ENGINE SECRETS HOW YOU CAN GET YOUR SITE CONSISTENTLY IN THE TOP 10 ON MAJOR SEARCH ENGINES (and watch your hit count skyrocket) http://www.leedspublishing.com/SES5/ As you probably noticed with the listing of your site on the search engines, it is becoming more and more difficult to be found among the MILLIONS of listings. If you"re like the rest of us you have found it extremely frustrating. You spend lots of time and money developing your site and then you're listed number 30, or 80, or even 200th. You're NEVER FOUND. *************************** GOOD NEWS The good news is we have found a SOLUTION. After months of fighting the search engine battle we got LUCKY. A programmer recently became associated with our firm who had done some CONSULTING WORK for six months with one of the major search engines. With his help we developed a REPORT on the major search engines and how they really work. ***************************** REPORT His report is excellent. We have been using the material in the report for over five months. IT WORKS! With it, our sites are in the top TEN listings on all major search engines and we have experienced a virtual stampede of people to the web sites. HITS ARE UP, SALES ARE UP, and most importantly, everyone is HAPPY. > > *************************** YOUR COPY > > Now, YOU CAN HAVE A COPY of his report. In it you will find: > > > > How to vault in the TOP TEN on any search engine using any keyword. Strategies that put you ahead of 95% of the other sites online. How to STAY in that TOP TEN. How to improve your chances of being found in about 10 MINUTES. > > How the search engines calculate CONFIDENCE ratings (and what that means to you). > > Killer META TAGS that totally blow away your competitors. > > Which search engines are the very BEST FOR YOU. > > How to get your site REGISTERED for FREE at over 200 locations, in one easy step (it takes 10 minutes). > > How to BLOCK out part of your site from the search engines (and why you should do it). > > The effect of REPEATING KEY WORDS. (good or bad?) What happens when you repeat them too many times? > > LATEST FORMS for developing the best meta tags. Meta Tag strategies that can broaden your audience and build high volume web traffic for you. We tell you exactly what to do and show you SPECIFIC EXAMPLES. And it's SIMPLE and EASY to understand. So you can put the principles to immediate use. > > The benefits of site UPDATING. How often? What NOT to do! Avoid making those errors which can cost you. > > > and even > > How to legally "steal" your competitor's web traffic and send it to your site. Type in your competitor's name and YOUR NAME will appear FIRST! > > > *************************** > > WHAT DOES IT COST? > > The material is only $19.95, and is unconditionally guaranteed to work for you. Just follow the instructions and you will find your site in the top ten too. Ordering is SAFE and EASY. For more information, or to RECEIVE this 18 page report by email just go to our INSTANT-DELIVERY SECURE order form at: http://www.leedspublishing.com/SES5/ (Order on line and you will receive your report in JUST 60 SECONDS.) Now that your site is up shouldn't you take this MOST IMPORTANT LAST STEP so people can find it. ****************************** UNCONDITIONAL GUARANTEE Remember, we UNCONDITIONALLY GUARANTEE IT WORKS. You can't lose. ******************************** SPECIAL FREE BONUS Order within 48 hours, we and will include, AS A FREE BONUS, information on over 500 SEARCH ENGINES and directories where you can list your site for free. (Some are very specialized and targeted). SPECIAL NOTE: If you are busy and don't have time to go to our web site INSTANT-DELIVERY SECURE ORDER FORM, you can order by FAX. (The unconditional guarantee still applies!) Just fill in the FAX FORM AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. Then FAX it to us at: > > 1-305-289-1884 > If you order by FAX your copy of the report will be sent to you by email within 24 hrs. Or, if you prefer, you can send your order with a CHECK by snail mail to the address below. (Be sure to include your email address for delivery.) Whichever method you choose to order, YOU'LL BE GLAD YOU DID! Best of luck with your web site! Leeds Publishing 5800 Overseas Hwy., St. 35-154 Marathon Key, Fl. 33050 Fax 305-289-1884 http://www.leedspublishing.com/SES5/ ________________________________________________________________________ >________________________________________________________________________ > FAX ORDER FORM > (Please print clearly) > >FAX TO: Leeds Publishing > >FAX NUMBER: 1-305-289-1884 Hi: Here is my order for Search Engine Secrets at $19.95 only. I understand it is unconditionally guaranteed. Include my FREE BONUS of 500 search engines. Send by email ASAP. Date:__________________ > NAME:_______________________________________________ > E-MAIL ADDRESS:______________________________________________________________ (PLEASE be accurate. One small error and we can't send your order). > >CARD TYPE:_________________ > >CARD NUMBER:_________________________________________________ > >EXPIRATION DATE:______________ > >NAME ON CARD:________________________________________________ > > >Thanks for ordering. Your copy of the report will be sent to you by email ASAP. > >____________________________________________________________ >____________________________________________________________ > > >Copyright 1997 Leeds and Rousseau Publishing. All rights reserved. Form 102 GD-Yahoo >

1 0

Re: Request for illegal electronic surveillance examples and cases
by John Young 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Declan wrote: >So I'm putting together a special report featuring examples of illegal >wiretapping by governments -- to show why we shouldn't trust them with >mandatory domestic key escrow. Also illegal electronic surveillance, >generally speaking. Especially more recent ones. Maybe non-U.S. examples >too. There are a number of US cases in the just published "Secrets: The CIA's War at Home," by Angus Mackenzie. What is worth exploring to supplement the perhaps too facile gov-bash is the burgeoning private industry of illegal electronic surveillance, staffed with mostly ex-gov folks (and those not deft enough to get a global Cold War sinecure) who are not always as scrupulous as the government. These operations are growing worldwide as governments down-size, up-size and sneaky-rig their NatSec and LE programs, often most slyly by privatizing them behind false fronts. Indeed, the bigger story may be the ways illegal electronic snooping is being hidden behind "legal" operations by both government and industry, often working in concert to camouflage the bastardly deeds by pointing fingers at each other to justify higher budgets and higher fees and more restrictions on free expression. Get Stewart Baker looped and talkative. Then John Deutch, William Perry, and on and on. The media and DC public interest groups are not outside this long-running covert loop of mutual back-scratchers. Read "Secrets." Trace for example where the heads and legal counsels of military, spy and law enforcement agencies go in private industry, and the affiliations they form in commerce and non-profit orgs, beginning with SAIC, say, and the Council on Foreign Relations, the lobby-law firms and schools, but do not stop with the obvious, easy to find. Get Stewart Baker looped and talkative. Then John Deutch, William Perry, ex-legislators, and on and on. Be prepared to have your not-so-secure comm systems hacked by the New Terrorists as dirty secrets are threatened. Read "Secrets:" some of the characters in the crypto debate are mentioned in earlier disguises and, in a few case, where they show now.

1 0

counter-intuitive -- spam is good for you. anonymous assholes are your friend
by Zooko Journeyman 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

I just got through reading another hilarious post from Anonymous, and I realized that instead of filtering anonymous posts _out_ of my reading list like I used to, I've gradually started filtering them _in_. I was thinking about why, and it illustrates a counter- intuitive hypothesis that's been germinating in my head for a few days/months/years. I'll call it "Zooko's Law of Evolutionary, Counter-Intuitive, Painful Serendipity": In an evolving ecosystem, things which appear to do harm often result in benefit. For example, if you consider having lots of healthy, happy bunnies to be a benefit, you might consider an influx of voracious wolves to be bad news. But in many cases the selective pressure exerted by the wolf population will result in stronger bunny genes, healthier bunnies, more bunny babies and cetera. In the case that the wolves leave again, or some other aspect of the environment changes (winter comes, etc.) then the population of passive grass-nibbling bunnies will turn out to be disappointingly fragile compared to the population of well-exercised wolf-fleeing bunnies. Now you might complain that I am not playing fair by tossing in these hypothetical environment changes late in the game. If we are evaluating _just_ the influx of wolves, and not some possible developments such as the wolves passing on, winter coming and so forth, then "obviously" the bunnies were better off without wolves. But perhaps that's just the point. In an evolving ecosystem, you _can't_ measure success without considering the likelihood of continual change. You might also object that I am sneaking in some unfounded Platonic concept of "bunny goodness" which only holds in certain contexts. I.e. maybe the environment will change in a way that penalizes bunnies with sinewy muscles and fast hearts and rewards big fat stupid bunnies who only think of the next nibble. Okay. Maybe I am. But my intuition tells me that this isn't some human-prejudice Platonic Ideal slipping in, but that in fact competition _does_ usually make the competitors better suited for all sorts of likely environmental changes. Now why do the cpunks care? Because I think the invasion of flaming, spamming Vulisses and "Graham-John Buellers" was good for the cpunks list. It drives away people with too little intelligence, stomache-strength, technical know-how or egostic attitude manage their own list input without depending on group dynamics to manage it for them. Okay, so like all "natural" selections, it takes out a few of the good guys too. I still miss Perry Metzger's involvement, but if we had to lose Perry in order to lose a few dozen clueless loudmouths, then so be it. Anyway, I consider it a Bad Thing that anonymous remailers are so difficult to learn and use. I would approve if point-n- click remailers and remailer clients were widely distributed. But in another application of Zooko's Law of Evolutionary Serendipity, the fact that remailers are hard to use means that the people who use them are smarter than average. So maybe _that's_ why I've found it rewarding to select _for_ anonymous posts instead of against in recent times. And why I toy with the notion of fomenting the kind of infowar "war games" that Phill Hallam-Baker hates. Damn, I wish Daniel Dennett were reading this list. Regards, Zooko Journeyman P.S. Just to tie up one loose end-- you might notice that I counted the flame-invasion as a goodness because it drove off "clueless loudmouths". But what's the difference between a "Graham-John Buellers" and a normal crypto-groupie? Is this a double-standard? Not at all. The clueless loudmouths that I am glad to be rid of are an insidious sort, like William H. Geiger III, Paul Bradley, and rest-his-soul Jim Bell who are on-topic and sane enough to attract attention from the real thinkers, but who are prolific and mediocre enough to pull down the over-all quality of discourse. Apologies to the named people for hurting your feelings. It's nothing personal, but I have to call 'em like I see 'em. Cut down the volume of your output to just the very best of your articles, and maybe I'll stop filtering you out.

2 1

Upgrade to first class - nearly every time you fly...
by 53199432＠hotmail.com 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

To respond to this message, DO NOT HIT REPLY! (nothing will happen) Rather, use the link at the end of the message. *********************************************************** <HTML><PRE>UPGRADES to first class (domestic and international), the latest 'Two-for Ones', analysis of the many frequent flyer perks, double and triple miles, comparisons of premium class amenities and unpublicized bank card perks - sound interesting? Read on!!! You deserve the best first and business class comfort the airlines have to offer and these days domestic and international airlines are offering the most easily attainable upgrades in air travel history, many of them either without charge or even a membership in their frequent flier programs! Every issue of The Front Row Advisor bimonthly newsletter compiles and packs no-nonsense, insider air travel tips, disclosing the little-known first class promotions for all passengers and lots more; all presented in a well-organized, concise yet thorough, easily readable format. Our current issue is up to 20 pages with over 70 articles dedicated to FIRST CLASS AIR TRAVEL ONLY, NO ADVERTISING!!! The Front Row Advisor is the only thorough industry resource of low cost and no cost upgrades blended with timely, unbiased reporting from worldwide sources covering all the airlines, not just a few. Like to read more? We'd like to send you a FREE "Sneak Preview" issue! *************** CLICK HERE TO REQUEST A FREE "SNEAK PREVIEW" *************** </PRE></HTML> end END

1 0

Re: Orthogonality and Disaster Recovery (fwd)
by Jim Choate 17 Dec '03

17 Dec '03

Forwarded message: > Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 18:03:16 -0800 > From: David Sternlight <david(a)sternlight.com> > Subject: Re: Orthogonality and Disaster Recovery > > Do all E-Mail vendors need to be cryptologist?? > > If the client's e-mail is to be secure, yes. But let's be accurate here. I absolute agree we need to be accurate. To that end, it is not the applications that need security but rather the network and session layers. > > Do all cryptologist need > > to be application vendors?? Obviously not. > > Now that IS nonsensical because cryptology is a wide and deep art only a small > part of which has to do with mail applications themselves. In contrast, mail > applications to be secure must use encryption. There's some very muddy > thinking going on in your post. He said 'application vendors', not just mail. Pay attention to the details of the argument and quit trying to change the subject without specificaly noteing the change, otherwise known as a strawman. His muddy thinking doesn't stand alone. > > PGP is a tool much like a > > database is. The majority of vendors who develop apps that require a > > database do not go out and write their own, rather they use a database > > engine that is suited to their needs. > > Except for the occasional password protection, databases don't need encryption > to the extent e-mail does. I work everyday with the NSA, CIA, Dod, Army, SAIC, all the phone companies, many of the major banks, Intel, Human Genome Project, etc. Every one of these folks would disagree with you. In fact it was one of the motivating factors behind Tivoli comming out with their new Security Management application because vendors required us to move away from our custom databases and toward industry standards (Oracle, Sybase, Informix, DB2, DBMX, etc.) *AND* at the same time requiring a better security mechanism than the existing one we use (DES & Kerberos based). The reality of the market does not support your thesis. > You miss the point here. And you miss the many worked examples. RSA is selling > lots and lots of toolkits for lots and lots of money for in-line integration > into applications, not for pre- and post-processing. The former is the way to > go; the latter a kludge until something better comes along. Are they involved with the new Cryptographic Standard projects of the government and Tivoli - IBM? I don't think so, at least I still haven't seen them involved in any of the work I have had access to so far; much to my own personal disappointment. ____________________________________________________________________ | | | The financial policy of the welfare state requires that there | | be no way for the owners of wealth to protect themselves. | | | | -Alan Greenspan- | | | | _____ The Armadillo Group | | ,::////;::-. Austin, Tx. USA | | /:'///// ``::>/|/ http://www.ssz.com/ | | .', |||| `/( e\ | | -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- Jim Choate | | ravage(a)ssz.com | | 512-451-7087 | |____________________________________________________________________|

1 0