- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Open Fabs
by grarpamp 16 Nov '15

16 Nov '15

Open Fabs might choose to [modify and] incorporate various familiar auditing methods, including those which are rejected by closed fabs due to their openness... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statement_on_Auditing_Standards_No._70:_Servi… https://www.iana.org/dnssec/ceremonies/22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate_authority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_9000 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computer_System_Evaluation_Criteria

2 2

pervasive opportunistic encryption of voice and text communication
by Zenaan Harkness 16 Nov '15

16 Nov '15

I think RedPhone / Open Whisper Systems is a start to what we might achieve as a "base" level of privacy for "most people" in modern digital communications: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_Whisper_Systems https://whispersystems.org/ "Open Whisper Systems is a nonprofit software group[3] that develops collaborative open source projects with a mission to "make private communication simple"." So, for those so inspired, these might be the guys to work with. (Figured a new thread on actual projects / potential new ideas (rather than just complaints) is in order.)

5 4

Pride and Legacy Thinking is a Tired Old Bitch
by grarpamp 16 Nov '15

16 Nov '15

On Sat, Nov 14, 2015 at 5:17 AM, oshwm <oshwm(a)openmailbox.org> wrote: > Ok, how about this then... > > Your idea on your blog is pretty cool but I think there is an even > simpler way to handle this. > > When you sign up for a new mail account, the mail provider... ... is still the weakest link. Anyone can design a scheme where users can turn the net black with encrypted email bodies. However these days, and really since day one, it has been known that email bodies are only half the problem in the full threat model. The other half is metadata. And now with them pushing code to you, it's become even worse. So please stop talking about what you're going to bolt on to fix traditional centralised email services. They cannot be fixed, ever. And start talking about what you're going to build to replace them. Or testing and contributing to development of proposed replacements. Pride of owning yet another commercial central service is a tired old bitch. Pride of dropping a true anonymous encrypted p2p protocol that scales and reaches adoption... now that's priceless. Regarding some of the elements in the latter, Bram's Bittorrent made it, Satoshi's Bitcoin is doing quite well, as are things like I2P, many to list. You could be next with more...

2 2

FOIPA adventures
by grarpamp 16 Nov '15

16 Nov '15

Don't know what you're looking for, but every query is one step closer. The mark of a true cpunk. Thanks.

1 0

Will the orgy of tolerance continue?
by Zenaan Harkness 15 Nov '15

15 Nov '15

And so tyranny rolls on... http://fortruss.blogspot.ru/2015/11/france-is-paying-all-its-debts-at-once.… http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/11/13/hell-comes-to-paris/ http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/260785/destroy-isis-caliphate-daniel-greenf… http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/260781/migrants-rape-girl-swedish-school-… I say we "western"ites are indoctrinated to tolerate, to turn the other cheek, and that this nature of the majority in our "Christian umbrella" western societies has been thoroughly abused. We are programmed to tolerate those who do not tolerate us, and tell us they do not tolerate us, tell us they will kill us, then as happens, they execute on their plans for execution, jihad, terrorism. We are so fragile we cry bully for "safe spaces" such as entire universities, where our particular ('minority') viewpoints are the only ones that are allowed to be spoken or published by other students in posters. We are so lacking in conscience and incompetent to determine what is right and what is wrong that we must be completely disarmed and the use of deadly force only to ever be accessible to government-appointed officers who "keep the peace" and "protect the innocent," as if police can ever protect an innocent schoolgirl from rape before the fact, or innocent theater goers from murder at gunpoint - hostages are not needed by Islam. So bring on the silver lining of the hope of a raise in awareness to the point of action by Joe and Jane sixpack as their hearts are ripped apart by death and extreme abuse of their near and dear ones, if not themselves - perhaps one day humans will rise and start living their inalienable rights to protect and feed their own family, come threats, intimidation or even jail. Should thousands rise in such a ways, the political landscape will certainly change. One can only hope, Zenaan

1 1

Google's TensorFlow AI Engine... More Power Tools [For Power?]
by grarpamp 15 Nov '15

15 Nov '15

http://www.tensorflow.org/ http://www.wired.com/2015/11/google-open-sources-its-artificial-intelligenc… Google had unveiled its personal photos app earlier in the day, and O’Reilly marveled that if he typed something like “gravestone” into the search box, the app could find a photo of his uncle’s grave, taken so long ago. More power tools, who is wielding them, why, and who benefits? Does the nobody down the street benefit besides gravestones? How?

7 11

RT assets to be seized due to preaching First Amendment rights
by Zenaan Harkness 15 Nov '15

15 Nov '15

WARNING: Do -not- watch RT (Russia Today), they do not tow the US party line! Well asset seizure is not quite ready to happen but that's what Senator John McCain’s Institute for International Leadership is calling for :) http://russia-insider.com/en/russia-and-putin-are-winning-public-relations-… Of course lecturing America on how it should be upholding First Amendment rights is a pretty ironic way to "win the propaganda war" in America, which this article doesn't hold back in pointing out. Now if only cypherpunks could be so vilified by the MSM for promoting our inalienable right to private encrypted communications...

2 1

When the Party Van is at your doorstep
by grarpamp 15 Nov '15

15 Nov '15

https://archive.org/details/OHM2013-Partyvan http://cryto.net/~joepie91/

1 0

Re: [Cryptography] Bear Bonds - a new crytpocurrency
by grarpamp 15 Nov '15

15 Nov '15

>> And details on "directory servers", "witnesses", "trusted party >> transaction servers". I was looking for details on who or what process selects / runs / chooses these nodes, and how. That and words like 'trusted' are critical in these communities and do we not yet see these established in the quoted things above? What makes them unable to censor transactions? Or to censor other nodes, or unspent outputs? Who has authority for issuing control messages? What are their key practices and defense to various threats? >> An admittedly very brief reading, site verbage, including trademark, >> patent and copyright claims leaves question as to commitment to >> fully decentralized p2p model and opensource. If true, you might find >> quite limited interest here and more interest by banks, govts, and >> commercial. If untrue and misread, please address. This question was not yet answered. These and the license may not be 'notable features' for certain of these communities, and should certainly be detailed in any full and legitimate comparison to Bitcoin... https://www.bearbonds.org/legal/software-license-agreement/ What is the open development model? What aligns you (or not) with the various non-technical philosophies of Bitcoin (to which you already strive to technically compare)? > We currently do not support any network other than Tor. Before introducing a > new network, we would have to carefully consider whether it could potentially > compromise privacy and security. Do you have a paper covering your analysis of Tor in that regard? It would certainly be welcomed and of interest to at least the Tor community.

1 0

State sponsored, unaccountable blackmail - backround to Mohammed 'Jihadi John' Emwazi
by Zenaan Harkness 15 Nov '15

15 Nov '15

https://www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/ben-hayes/why-britain-won%E2%80%99… Why Britain won’t talk about crucial elements of Jihadi John’s story Ben Hayes 28 February 2015 The role of our security services in the actions of 'Jihadi John' needs grown up discussion – we must not forget the lessons of Northern Ireland. In “Suspect Community: People’s Experience of the Prevention of Terrorism Acts in Britain”, Professor Paddy Hillyard produced what remains the world’s most detailed ethnographic study of the impact of repressive laws and state policies on what we now call “radicalisation”. That was 1993. Hillyard, a former chair of the National Council of Civil Liberties (now Liberty), had interviewed more than 100 people of Irish catholic descent and provided unequivocal evidence that their everyday treatment at the hands of the British state had boosted support for Irish republicanism, acted as a recruiting sergeant for the IRA and fuelled “the Troubles”. Of course it wasn’t the only “radicalising” factor: Bloody Sunday, a shoot-to-kill policy and state collusion with Loyalist paramilitaries also played their part. As of course did the violence, propaganda and popularity of organisations like the IRA. We could learn a lot from people like Paddy Hillyard and the incremental moves toward truth and reconciliation in the north of Ireland. Instead, this valuable insight is being steadily exorcised from public debate – as are the similar experiences of Muslim communities at the hands of the British state. Yesterday the identity of “Jihadi John”, the ISIS executioner-in-chief, was revealed to belong to British citizen Mohammed Emwazi. The human rights group CAGE – the only organisation in Britain who offers legal support to Muslims who have been interrogated or harassed by the security services (support which is readily available to most others questioned by the UK authorities) – produced a 3,000 word dossier detailing his treatment between 2009 and 2013. This included, inter alia, the surveillance of his movements, the interception of his telecommunications, the orchestration of his arrest in Tanzania and transfer to the Netherlands where he was interrogated by MI5, attempts to coerce him into becoming an MI5 informer, harassment of his family and fiancé, and the prevention of his resettlement in Kuwait – all in the absence of any formal allegation, charge or prospect of official recourse. Since this occurred well before Mohammed Emwazi’s departure from the UK and appearance in Syria as “Jihadi John”, one might have thought our media duty bound to ask whether this and other encounters played any part in his decision to go there. Indeed the most revealing exchange, which should surely have been on the lips of any journalist worth their salt, is the following, spoken by MI5 agent “Nick”: “Listen Mohammed: You’ve got the whole world in front of you; you’re 21 years old; you just finished Uni – why don’t you work for us?” When Mohammed declines, he is told: “You’re going to have a lot of trouble... You’re going to be known... you’re going to be followed... life will be harder for you.” Let us be clear that whatever else may have transpired since this exchange, here is a credible allegation of state-sanctioned blackmail of one of our citizens upon pain of having his life ruined by unaccountable security forces. When things like this happen to Muslims in Arab dictatorships, we talk about “secret police” and “fearsome security apparatuses”. When they happen here, we put our fingers in our ears and demand that Muslims “get over themselves” and condemn acts of terrorism. And so it was that Kay Burley of Sky News duly began her interview with a CAGE spokesman by asking “What level of harassment by the security services here in the United Kingdom justifies beheadings?” – a plainly preposterous straw man argument that literally no-one was making. Liberal pin-up Jon Snow also glossed over the evidence produced by CAGE, before getting down to the most important business of the day: demanding that their spokespeople condemn terrorism, and seeking to belittle them when they question why this demand is only ever made of Muslims, or worse still, refuse to participate in the ridiculous spectacle. It was already a nailed-on certainty that the government and the media would turn the “extremist” spotlight onto CAGE and its supporters in a witch hunt that would make McCarthy blush. But having anointed Peter Oborne the Supreme Ruler of Media Integrity for taking on the Telegraph, perhaps they should ask him what he thinks about CAGE’s treatment at the hands of the establishment. Or reflect on CAGE’s founder and director’s own experience at the hands of MI5, or his three-and-a-half years of illegal detention in Guantanamo Bay and Belmarsh prisons. Nope: they’re just “apologists for terrorism”, guilty until proven innocent. Human rights and social justice groups should be supporting CAGE in its endeavours to uncover the extra-judicial prosecution of the “war on terror” in this country. They won’t because they’re scared of the “public perception”. Much easier to support free expression from behind the comfort of a “Je Suis Charlie” banner. The country should be having a serious conversation about the way “intelligence-led policing” has undermined our national security and human rights by linking the treatment of Mohammed Emwazi to the discredited use of informants and double agents in Northern Ireland, to the links between MI5 and extremist groups, and to an undercover culture that has perverted the pursuit of social and legal justice in this country. It won’t, because we’ll turn a blind eye to anything at the drop of the T-word. Something fundamental has to change if we’re to have the grown-up conversations that can inform these policies, and that can temper the appeal of extremism and violence in all quarters.

1 0