- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

PapersPlease: “Continuous screening” means continuous surveillance and control
by grarpamp 26 Dec '17

26 Dec '17

https://papersplease.org/wp/2017/12/15/continuous-screening-means-continuou… Today the Identity Project joins more than 20 other government-accountability and civil liberties organizations in a joint letter opposing S. 2192, the “SECURE Act of 2017”, which was introduced in the Senate earlier this month and immediately placed on the Senate calendar for a floor vote at any time. The name of this bill is Newspeak. It is not about security, but about surveillance and control of immigrants, borders, and international travelers, including U.S. citizens. The coalition letter to members of Congress that we signed today focuses on Sections 6002-6003 (pp. 488-499) of S. 2192, which would authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security, Secretary of State, or Attorney General to exempt their respective Federal departments from the Administrative Procedure Act, the Privacy Act, and the Paperwork Reduction Act with respect to a wide range of border control and surveillance activities. The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) spells out the details of Constititionally-required “due process” as it applies to administrative decision-making by Federal agencies. Decisions adversely affecting individuals’ rights made without complying with the APA would be highly likely to violate Constitutional norms of due process. Exemption from the Privacy Act would allow the creation and maintenance, without notice, of secret Federal government databases about U.S. citizens, and the use of secret, unreliable, uncorrected, and/or irrelevant data as the basis for decisions to deny U.S. citizens their rights. These practices would also be likely to be unconstitutional. Many of the provisons of S. 2192 are copied from S. 1757, an earlier omnibus “border control” bill we criticized when it was introduced in September. Like its predecessor S. 1757, S. 2192 incorporates a patently unconstitutional “Passport Revocation Act” (Section 1632, pp. 446-448), which would purport to authorize revocation or refusal to issue or renew a U.S. passsport, and the prohibition of departure from or return to the U.S., on the guilt-by-association basis of (1) an extrajudicial administrative designation of an organization as a “foreign terrorist organization”, and (2) an extrajudicial administrative determination by the State Department that a U.S. citizen is “affiliated” with such an organization (without the law defining the meaning of “affiliated”). The number of references to the “unreviewable discretion” of officials and agencies has increased from 14 in S. 1757 to 17 in S. 2192. S. 2192 also includes provisions from S. 1757 mandating government monitoring of activities and ideas expressed on social media, and the use of this surveillance data for making visa decisions and for “continuous screening” (continuous surveillance and control) of immigrants, foreign residents (including permanent residents), and foreign-citizen visitors to the U.S. As the letter we sent today concludes, “We oppose these provisions in S.2192 and any other border security bill.” Who We Are THE IDENTITY PROJECT (IDP) The right to travel freely in their own country is a right that has been taken by Americans as their birthright. This right is basic, fundamental, and necessary for the free exercise of many of our other protected rights. Identity-based domestic security programs condition our mobility to freely assemble, associate, speak, and exchange ideas upon the government’s permission to do so. Demands on citizens to ‘show their ID‘ have spread from airports to all major forms of long distance domestic public transport. Some of these ID security programs check people against secret government lists. Some of these programs are simply tests of the traveler’s obedience. Dissent through public protest is in danger of being chilled by the fear of ending up on government lists. We are witnessing the advent of a national ID card, passed by Congress as the Real ID Act. With private data aggregators being used for ‘national security’ purposes; and the ability to use technology to consolidate a wealth of personal information on citizens and have it accessed by both governmental and private agencies, the right to be left alone is under serious threat. IDP shines a spotlight on these serious issues. We are part of the First Amendment Project, a 501(c)(3) public charity. Donations are tax deductible.

3 25

Are cryptocurrencies ready to handle large number of transactions?
by Georgi Guninski 26 Dec '17

26 Dec '17

Are cryptocurrencies ready to handle large number of transactions? Say if the database is 1000TB or more? Doesn't handling large number of transactions contradict decentralization? Several days ago the BTC blockchain was about 150GB. Heard complains that BTC fees are rather large and transactions are currently slow. With growing popularity the database size will increase.

5 6

Re: [Cryptography] Bitcoin theft and the future of cryptocurrencies
by grarpamp 26 Dec '17

26 Dec '17

On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 6:50 PM, Howard Chu <hyc(a)symas.com> wrote: >> https://z.cash/ shows near term updates coming that significantly >> raise performance. Specifically sapling, which incorporates performance, 2nd ceremony, other updates. This list should really be quite interested in reviewing sapling's new choice of curves, eg at minimum somewhat rigorous methodology like... https://safecurves.cr.yp.to/ > Lots of promises, very little delivery thus far. Their github issue tracker > looks like a disaster area. No different than many other coins, with technology and demands of the space advancing every quarter, to which people should be well accustomed to this as standard nature by now. Same for "volatility". > Zerocash does no such thing. > https://btcmanager.com/linkability-zcash-transactions-study-precipitates-de… More media and crap rhetoric from competing coin rivalry. Of course t-tx are not private, by design. Use z-tx to z-tx if privacy is wanted. Of course private z-tx make up only 20%, because t-tx is default, what do you expect, and users are both stupid and haven't been trained by those who might know (this list perhaps) into using privacy properly. The available pool of z coins is similarly limited as a result. The tin says t-tx and z-tx options exist so user can choose transparent or private use cases as needed. Nor do any coins generally implement options for random time delays between tx, which has unfortunately or not been the realm of swaps and their counterparty risk and fees. Whose fault is it that services and users elect not to use z-tx? Maybe they are not interested that privacy often comes with cost, even computational cost, so what side are they truly on? Will they change with sapling, or with future better coins? 'Shiny new maths'... isn't that the realm of this list? Even a read of the abstract shows as flaws in user usage, *not* an exploit of the coin itself. Should a coin baby and encode user usage? To what extent does babying correct the combined user failure? Should they have options for distributing coins to addresses in powers of 10 with sub-penny remainders being sent to charity of choice? Or for a function mandating z output different amounts? Decide that and more and bring the results to market. Here's the actual paper... On the linkability of Zcash transactions Jeffrey Quesnelle University of Michigan-Dearborn https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01210.pdf Are any of these things really not documented or out in common knowledge to the point of being exploits? > And coinjoin was already demonstrably broken over a year ago. Coinjoin, Monero, swaps... all just mixes. Zerocash... cryptographic privacy. Two totally different analysis vectors. Formerly linked... Zerocash... at least sender recipient amount, expect future coins to get more exotic with more functions under privacy. Zerocoin... partial cryptographic privacy. And now some searches on zk-snark vs zk-stark https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJ9K_o-RRSY https://youtu.be/kYmnXxs9kUM https://eccc.weizmann.ac.il/report/2017/134/ And proof / tx sizes have to be low enough to offer viable benefit compared to BTC's on-disk accumulation. Monero is quite a lot larger than anything to date. PQ... https://github.com/zcash/zcash/issues/805 https://github.com/zcash/zcash/issues/2527 Perhaps expect a new coin before long that will be strictly sapling "z" - sn / st with an interesting airdrop little to no founder reward or corporate ties and other nice things. That's the beauty of the new cryptocurrency model, right?... fork away from flaws and inefficiencies, import new tech, exchange and move on. Even exchange fees and user-timing-market realization losses are less than fabled tax optioning right? Search also... Ethereum Metropolis Monero adopting zk-tech https://people.csail.mit.edu/silvio/Selected%20Scientific%20Papers/Proof%20… "The founder’s reward does not only seem somehow greedy. It violates the important principle of cryptocurrencies, that the network pays its peers for work than can be proven on-chain. The Zcash tax is paid for the developers regardless of the amount of work that they do. The blockchain cannot proof the effort of developers and thus should not pay for it." "Fungibility is lost under optional encryption." "Zcash ""plans"" to kill off t-tx." "Kovri to make the offering complete by masking IP addresses" Early days... so much future!

1 0

The Real History of Christmas & How a Real Grinch Stole It!
by Zenaan Harkness 25 Dec '17

25 Dec '17

That subject of course needs to say something like "The real history of Western HUwaite history & how a real grinch stole it", but that would probably be politically incorrect and draw out allegations (completely substantiated) of tribal partisanship and "religious" tomfoolery. BUT, but but but! America, your (giant) menorahs have replaced your Christmas trees, by order of your (((Supreme Court))) - your tribal institutions have been taken over by (((another tribe))). Which leads of course to the question which makes such discussion worthwhile: Is this really the nation you want? The linked version even has cute pictures. Merry Christmas y'all :) Zen ----- Forwarded message from "Dr. Duke" <drdukeupdates(a)hotmail.com> ----- To: zen(a)freedbms.net Date: Mon, 25 Dec 2017 16:01:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: Dr. Duke -The Real History of Christmas & How a Real Grinch Stole It! [1]The True History of Christmas & How a Real Grinch Stole it! Merry Christmas to You! From 1789 to 1989 - the first 200 years of the American Constitution -- it was perfectly legal and very loved by Americans to have Christian and Christmas Cultural Icons on public ground as part of our American traditions and fabric. In addition Christmas has deep and ancient roots in the European people...solstice, Christmas Trees, Yule celebrations -- that are just not acceptable to the new rulers of America! You will read the truth in my "Illustrated True History of Christmas Card." Even the date of our Constitution was signed by its authors with the preface: “In the Year of our Lord.” In 1989 it became illegal to have any Christian-themed Christmas display on any Federal, State, County or City ground. It became illegal to say any Christian prayers in schools, forbidden to even sing Christmas Carols in them or even call the Christmas holidays, “Christmas Holidays!” With unbelievable chutzpah the same Supreme Court decision that outlawed all Christian Symbols decreed that the oldest symbol of the Jewish Religion, the Menorah - even huge, monster Menorahs - could be put up on public ground anywhere in America! Where Christian motifs once stood in front of the White House and city halls, giant Jewish Menorahs became perfectly legal, along with Rabbis lighting it in Jewish rituals! How did this happen? Who is the strange, powerful Grinch, with enormous media, banking and political power -- who Stole Christmas? On this link you can link to my unique illustrated Christmas Card that I mailed out to my friends, patrons and subscribers: [1] http://r20.rs6.net/tn.jsp?f=001PeFjbJ5IFeYq0JHvTYJHV3Fdr2LKkfUDl-Gp3ONk54OU… ----- End forwarded message -----

1 0

[Song] Looking For An Answer - Linkin Park
by Cecilia Tanaka 25 Dec '17

25 Dec '17

No, it isn't a Christmas song, sorry. I was informed only today about one of the members of the CypherPunks list's death and it's still hurting a lot. He was an amazing guy, so sweet and intelligent, so young and full of dreams, and I've lost the chance of hugging him at least once and say hello... and goodbye too... I do still not know if there is a God or not, but I really wanted to believe that my friend is well now, with no pain or sadness, feeling cozy, protected and loved. I don't know about other lives, possible karmas, and reincarnations, Heaven, Purgatory, and Hell, but in any case, always there will be the atoms and the Chemistry to comfort me without judgements or any kind of social hypocrisy... My sadness is not a 'lack of faith' as some religious people say, but simply what I am feeling now. I am missing a dear friend, who will never contact me again... :'( Ceci =========== "Looking For An Answer - Linkin Park" https://youtu.be/labrkIEGxyA [Verse 1] There's an emptiness tonight A hole that wasn't there before And I keep reaching for the light But I can't find it anymore There's an emptiness tonight A heavy hand that pulls me down They say it's gonna be alright But can't begin to tell me how [Pre-Chorus] And I ask myself out loud [Chorus] Have I been lost all along? Was there something I could say or something I should not have done? Was I lost all along? Was I looking for an answer when there never really was one? Was I looking for an answer when there never really was one? [Verse 2] Is there sunshine where you are? The way there was when you were here 'Cause I'm just sitting in the dark In disbelief that this is real In disbelief that this is real [Chorus] Have I been lost all along? Was there something I could say or something I should not have done? Was I lost all along? Was I looking for an answer when there never really was one? Was I looking for an answer when there never really was one? [Pre-Chorus] And I ask myself out loud [Chorus] Have I been lost all along? Was there something I could say or something I should not have done? Was I lost all along? Was I looking for an answer when there never really was one? ------- "Don't let anyone rob you of your imagination, your creativity, or your curiosity. It's your place in the world; it's your life. Go on and do all you can with it, and make it the life you want to live." - Mae Jemison

1 0

Bitcoin... Destroying the planet
by Yule Father 25 Dec '17

25 Dec '17

> g2s g2s at wiseup.net > Fri Dec 22 10:47:19 PST 2017 > nationalism is fascism I think you got it all wrong. [pic related] > To the gaschamber with you. Joyful Yuletide to you and your family, Rayzer.

3 2

Re: [Cryptography] Bitcoin theft and the future of cryptocurrencies
by grarpamp 25 Dec '17

25 Dec '17

On Sun, Dec 24, 2017 at 4:36 AM, James A. Donald <jamesd(a)echeque.com> wrote: > On 12/20/2017 3:27 PM, grarpamp wrote: >> >> Bitcoin is nowhere near private or anonymous. >> Genuine cryptographic privacy needed for that, such as found in >> the Zerocash (Zcash) family of coins, > > > We already are facing big trouble over scaling. Zerocash is too damned > slow. https://z.cash/ shows near term updates coming that significantly raise performance. > I suggest that rather we should employ the coinjoin algorithm. https://reddit.com/r/joinmarket There are surely other mix implementations you could list, including mix coins such as Monero, or simple swap services such as helix / fogcore. > Pretty soon, the state is going to declare some bitcoins to be "blood bitcoins". Already happens, search: chainanalysis > Coinjoin, like zerocash, makes > equality of bitcoins a fact of mathematics, rather than a policy of humans. Which is why all of swap / mix / privacy methods may be useful in certain use cases. However as before in the Zcash thread, in general, a well studied reviewed and used true cryptoprivacy coin may seem to be most and long term resistant to analysis, usage error, liquidity / anonymity set, unlike swaps / mixes. > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus Needless, untrustable, bloating, assertion.

2 2

Morgan Stanley says the true price of bitcoin might be zero
by g2s 25 Dec '17

25 Dec '17

And they should know because they PWN ur btcz gambler. They can put you "In a cardboard box by the river" any time they choose. http://www.businessinsider.com/morgan-stanley-on-bitcoin-value-2017-12

1 0

Qubes
by Ryan Carboni 25 Dec '17

25 Dec '17

I don't recommend Qubes. I attempted to try it within Virtual Box. Didn't work. Not certain on the number of devices that Qubes is certainly known not to work with and not planned to be supported. Never used it for more than ten minutes.

2 1

[SPACE] did anyone get a copy of this? - “(VIDEO) NASA’s Orion Engineer Admits They Can’t Get Past Van Allen Radiation Belts”
by Zenaan Harkness 25 Dec '17

25 Dec '17

This 'tube video is now “ERROR: NlXG0REiVzE: YouTube said: This video does not exist.” Was from March 14 (or earlier) 2015: http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/03/14/video-nasas-orion-engineer-admits-the… Did anyone get a copy they could email (if it's small enough) or reupload? Here's the text of the above article: (VIDEO) NASA’s Orion Engineer Admits They Can’t Get Past Van Allen Radiation Belts March 14, 2015 By 21wire 2 Comments 21st Century Wire says… If this does not get the skeptics going wild on the moon debate, we don’t know what will. In the video presentation below, NASA engineer Kelly Smith explains about many of the risks and pitfalls surrounding the new Orion Deep Space Mission to the planet Mars. Surprisingly, chief among Kelly’s concerns is whether or not his spacecraft can successfully pass through the perilous Van Allen Radiation Belts. Such is the prospective danger in fact, that NASA will have to send a dumbie craft first in order to ‘test out’ what the potential radiation effects will be on future human crews, as well as on the ship’s delicate sensors and equipment. Hold on. Why the guessing game by NASA? Why don’t they just use the same 1969 technology they are said to have used on the first Apollo moon missions? SuperPerformance72 explains, “This video released by NASA about the upcoming Orion space exploration craft, shows a NASA scientist admitting that they still haven’t worked out how to properly shield the spacecraft from the radiation emitted from the Van Allen belts.” This is the ultimate conspiracy, as it brings together two huge issues – the viability of the Apollo Moon Landings, as well as dreams of a human colony on Mars. This latest admission by NASA places both of these in jeopardy. Watch… https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NlXG0REiVzE Thanks, Z

1 1