- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

[OT] I Have a Dream - Martin Luther King, Jr.
by /canna/bin 18 Jan '17

18 Jan '17

> Tue, Jan 17 2017 14:57:12 > James A. Donald <jamesd at echeque.com>: > "Marijuana" You would think that a scientist would be a bit more terminologically accurate. https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Marijuana_(word) "The term, originally spelled variously as "marihuana", or "mariguana", originated in Juan's language [1]" [1]: https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Spanish

1 0

Manning Commuted By Obama, Free In May
by He-Man 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

grarpamp grarpamp at gmail.com Tue Jan 17 15:33:43 2017: > Manning Commuted By Obama, Free In May Now can have bocan Saturated fat will hepl him recover

1 0

Wealth Disparity via Oxfam
by grarpamp 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_DAVOS_INEQUALITY https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/5o7xrx/stark_inequality_oxfam_says_8… DAVOS, Switzerland (AP) -- The gap between the super-rich and the poorest half of the global population is starker than previously thought, with just eight men, from Bill Gates to Michael Bloomberg, owning as much wealth as 3.6 billion people, according to an analysis by Oxfam released Monday. Presenting its findings on the dawn of the annual gathering of the global political and business elites in the Swiss ski resort of Davos, anti-poverty organization Oxfam says the gap between the very rich and poor is far greater than just a year ago. It's urging leaders to do more than pay lip-service to the problem. If not, it warns, public anger against this kind of inequality will continue to grow and lead to more seismic political changes "It is obscene for so much wealth to be held in the hands of so few when 1 in 10 people survive on less than $2 a day,"

3 2

Intel ME cleaner code
by John Newman 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

https://github.com/corna/me_cleaner/ ME cleaner A cleaner for Intel ME images. This tools removes any unnecessary partition from an Intel ME firmware, reducing its size and its ability to interact with the system. It should work both with Coreboot and with the factory BIOS. Currently this tool: Scans the FPT (partition table) and checks that everything is correct Removes any partition entry (except for FTPR) from FPT Removes any partition except for the fundamental one (FTPR) Removes the EFFS presence flag Corrects the FPT checksum Removes any LZMA-compressed module (pre-Skylake only) Removes most of the Huffman-compressed modules (pre-Skylake only) John

1 0

Torproject disease infects WhatsApp - User experience trumps(sic) security
by Razer 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

> At issue is the way WhatsApp behaves when an end user's encryption key > changes. By default, the app will use the new key to encrypt messages > without ever informing the sender of the change.... > > Critics of Friday's Guardian post, and most encryption practitioners, > argue such behavior is common in encryption apps and often a necessary > requirement. Among other things, it lets existing WhatsApp users who > buy a new phone continue an ongoing conversation thread. Ars Technica agrees: "Reported “backdoor” in WhatsApp is in fact a feature" http://arstechnica.com/security/2017/01/whatsapp-and-friends-take-umbrage-a…

2 1

NNCP -- store-and-forward E2EE F2F network building utilities
by stargrave＠stargrave.org 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

Node to Node copy http://www.nncpgo.org/ is a collection of utilities simplifying secure store-and-forward files and mail exchanging. This utilities are intended to help build up small size (dozens of nodes) ad-hoc friend-to-friend (F2F) statically routed darknet networks for fire-and-forget secure reliable files, file requests and Internet mail transmission. All packets are integrity checked, end-to-end encrypted, explicitly authenticated by known participants public keys. Onion encryption is applied to relayed packets. Each node acts both as a client and server, can use push and poll behaviour model. Main difference from existing UUCP and FTN solutions, except encryption and authentication, is out-of-box offline sneakernet/floppynet, dead drops and air-gapped computers support. But online TCP daemon with full-duplex resumable data transmission exists and is built on top of Noise protocol http://noiseprotocol.org/. Where can it be useful? Occasional connection between mail servers, slow/unreliable/expensive communication links, high-volume data transfer, extreme terrestrial environments with no link, building of private, isolated MitM-resistant networks, highly secure isolated air-gap computers, network censorship bypassing, and even Reconnaissance, spying and intelligence.

6 10

Attention Google re Captchas
by grarpamp 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

You people are here on this list, reading it, we know this. You are one of the biggest corporations in the world. You are ridiculous in your wanton use of captchas against tor users. Your bandwidth and processing capabilities are on par with that disgusting Facebook, and with the largest of all entities. All supported by advertising and datamining and anti-anon/freedom things. You demand simple phone numbers and captchas instead of making creative heuristics. The bandwidth and assault thrown at you via tor is relatively trivial in respect and highly sustainable in proportion to clearnet (prove otherwise, including disclosure of your resources and metrics). Yet you are choosing to profiteer off tor users brain cycles without compensation, shame on you, by forcing them to complete and process on average three or more sets of vision captchas comprising many images for your gain, while clearnet needs to process zero in a relative number of cases. Yet everyone must still supply mineable phone numbers. You deny even "google search" and "translate" to tor users, the key to worldwide understanding of peoples in communication with each other, the most vital to peace. That is bullshit. We want peace, not war, and yet you seem to support artificial divides. You say "errors occurred in your request, cannot process your request further". For simple searches via tor, even after triplicate successful captchas. What the fuck is that!!! Why do you hate peoples? In short, and on behalf of tor users worldwide, *fuck you* google!!! You can do better. And pray you be forgiven.

2 4

Re: [tor-relays] Proposing an Exit Node
by grarpamp 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

I agree with you here. This is a mission, a partnership amongst all perticipants, even negotiated and discovered as such, to good ends and via good means, amongst similar, or amenable participants, with backbone, and with high principles. Yes toppost, shootme. On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Roger Dingledine <arma(a)mit.edu> wrote: > On Mon, Jan 16, 2017 at 11:49:46PM -0700, Mirimir wrote: >> Or you need adequate anonymity, and be willing to lose sunk cost. > > I think trying to run exit relays with anonymity, and with plans to > discard them as needed, is a poor plan long-term. In the struggle for > what the Internet can become, we need to be public and clear about who > we are and why privacy is important for everybody. > > (Yes, that looks like a contradiction, but I claim it isn't: privacy > is about giving people choices, and to win this conflict we need some > people who will make the choice to step up and be public and build > relationships.) > > This "slash and burn agriculture" approach to running Tor relays, where > you set up an exit relay, and if anybody gets angry you move on to > another ISP, is really appealing since it's simple, but it assumes the > Internet is infinite. If in fact we're destroying land without regard > to sustainability, and we run out of land... > > The Internet is smaller and more centralized than we think, and we need > the people who run it to see us as a worthwhile positive and contributing > community. > > For previous versions of this thread, see > https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-relays/2013-November/003240.html > https://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/2015-May/037991.html > > Thanks! > --Roger > > _______________________________________________ > tor-relays mailing list > tor-relays(a)lists.torproject.org > https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-relays

1 0

Re: [tor-relays] Proposing an Exit Node
by grarpamp 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

On Tue, Jan 17, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Kenneth Freeman <kencf0618(a)riseup.net> wrote: > On 01/16/2017 11:49 AM, Olaf Grimm wrote: >> Now I have my servers outside and at home a middle node only. > This is best practice. And even under a proposed corporate aegis (LLC, > you really need to be loaded for bear to run an exit node. This is not so much a thing, as you really need to have the right message for that which is worth supporting. That freedom to make and support speech and debate ideas is paramount. And one should be educated and cognizant to dispel any such preposterous things that may be spoken. Without that you are doomed to the arbitrary and authoritarian concourse of history.

1 0

Re: [Cryptography] Cryptocurrency Exchange without a trusted third party
by grarpamp 17 Jan '17

17 Jan '17

On Sun, Jan 15, 2017 at 5:46 PM, Bill Frantz <frantz(a)pwpconsult.com> wrote: > has occurred in real life. One story: > > A company > This company Failing to name entities does not support independant research and verification of story. Are there facts, or are people so in fear of libel / suit pursuant to their wanton conjecture? Fear of tracing authorship of such (when posted non anon, lol)? Or that anonymization of entity really provides any more focus on concept expressed? Get real on all such things. Lest you develop habit of self squelching crypto weaknesses.

1 0