- cypherpunks - lists.cpunks.org

Re: [p2p-hackers] The next gen P2P secure email solution
by grarpamp 10 Jan '14

10 Jan '14

On Mon, Dec 30, 2013 at 12:34 AM, ianG <iang(a)iang.org> wrote: > On 28/12/13 09:24 AM, grarpamp wrote: >> >> On Wed, Dec 25, 2013 at 7:21 PM, Matthew Kaufman <matthew(a)matthew.at> >> wrote: >>> >>> So there's already a system that until very recently did peer-to-peer >>> delivery of messages over encrypted channels between hosts that >>> participated >>> in a peer-to-peer overlay. It was Skype. >> >> >> Afaik, skype used a central lookup to get to unknown peers, not a DHT. >> So they perhaps knew who wanted to talk to who. Of course now skype >> is untrusted by anyone with a clue. > > > So sad. I have a clue and don't trust Skype. But I can't for the life of > me migrate my friends off of it. It's as addictive as crack. It's just > better than the alternatives. > > As a serious business problem, if one wants to share documents on a frequent > basis, which system would one choose for security? Skype, google docs aka > drive, or something else? > > I need something that ordinary people can use. So no complicated "download > this on 100 machines and ..." > > Also, should be free and can make a nice cup of coffee. There is slick, and then there is utility. I'm seeing some good utility in a few of the listings on https://www.prism-break.org/ . When it comes getting utility done, it's not to hard to introduce (even firmly) people into using utilities. Slick helps, but it's not required, and will come in time. Everyone throws up BS about adoption and thus nothing ever gets built, or even researched, screw that, I say build it and see. I also question a few of those listings. >>> battery life... and when they're on 3G/4G, the bandwidth isn't as good >>> and >>> it can be very expensive, and it burns the battery up even faster. >> >> >> Sure, there's a class of users that want this, a big class. They can >> have and use their modified legacy centralized email as they wish. >> There's another big class that want's something more than that. >> >> We're also going to see faster hardware, lighter code, and maybe >> even wearable battery packs... because as you say, these users >> want it all and are willing to go to almost any means to get it. > > > I'm going to make a call here. I reckon that future phone bandwidth and > batterywidth will be sufficient to close the gap, to the point that this > problem goes away. > > So, moving away from p2p notions that are popular with the > one-laptop-per-everyone western world would be the wrong strategy. > > Although it seems that the phone market is 'different' it is catching up > fast in the things that matter. Right now, the only thing where they are > arguably short is VoIP. Hell, they're happy watching utube on phones... > > But that's no problem because in today's world, what dominates is chat & > apps. Lack of good VoIP over phones is just a short term issue. > > (It's a prediction, not a claim!) I agree with this hardware path, especially for the subject of p2p secure messaging. I think voip is currently not a user priority on devices with a cell stack because that stack is already activated and paid for. With good apps and wider access to free wifi in particular, encrypted voip should take off. Or we will see more use of cell based IP plans. Another twist is going out of voiceband to get the key material of your peer, then with the more open phones out there, grab the cell mic/vocoder/modem on them and stuff your encrypted voice over that if voip doesn't work at that moment. But that's way off topic to p2p secure messaging... at least until that hardware path allows for p2p secure <everything>. >>> These users want to be able to send and receive messages when their >>> device >>> is on, but the recipient's device isn't. Because most of the time, the >>> recipient's device, even if they put it in their pocket 10 seconds ago, >>> is >>> already asleep, trying to preserve as much battery as possible. >>> >>> That pretty much eliminates all designs that do direct transfer from >>> sender >>> to receiver, irrespective of the traffic analysis risks of doing so. >>> >>> Additionally, it also means that nearly all the participant nodes are >>> also >>> unable to participate in a peer-to-peer overlay network, because they >>> can't >>> afford the network uptime (and consequent battery drain) necessary. >> >> >> We're exploring ideas. What is to say we are able to develop into it some >> kind of automaton taho-lafs delivery storage nodes. Storing messages in >> transit under some expiry policy is not a huge space concern. So who >> knows. >> >> Maybe everyone with their uber important phones will end >> up VPN to their home/colo servers where the horsepower is. >> >> Predicting mobile is hard. Throw more apps out there and your >> $30-50/mo unlimited data plans go away. Now is everyone going >> to pay $150+/mo for that? Where is free open wifi going to end up >> spanning? And so many other things. > > > In the market I'm in, people are very used to switching off Apps when they > see the bandwidth being sucked. Just an observation... I think it's a > problem that solves itself, a warning to developers that they have to think > outside their tech box. Right... I think not everything has to run in RAM... we have a few GiB to store the network state in, as a sliding tradeoff for reconnection speed when switching them back on. CPU is another available slider. So is network rate/transfer limits. >> What I think is clear is that there will for the far to indefinite >> forseeable >> future be some form of real workstation/laptop in the home and office. >> Phones just can't replace that. Maybe we're seeing something in how >> you see larger tablet/netbooks/laptops with headsets being carried about >> now as if it is natural. And lots of those people will want a highly >> secure system to communicate over with their peers in this new >> world of disgustingly gratuitous surveillance and databasing. >> I would not underestimate the demand for that sort of a comms system. > > > > I see this as rather a rich western world observation. It probably works > for Apple. It doesn't so much work in the non-rich world, where things are > much more widely driven by Android, etc. I gather Africa does a lot of things with simple text messaging on simple non-I/Android/MS/Unix phones. What is their path for phone tech advancement, and when? Is it reasonable to expect to truly need to develop for more than the 'West' as a userbase? Keep in mind the West now probably includes China and many other places, so we're looking at more than 1B nodes anyways. We probably mean 'Western class' of phones. And by the time a p2p secure messaging platform the subject of this thread is deployed in a handful of years, that class will be much more widespread. So perhaps natural convergence of this software and hardware will occur. Yes there are West/first vs. second/third disparities, if everyone waited we wouldn't have what 'western' tools we have today. There are folks in the west that need them too, even to work on solving those disparities, so it is not much of an argument to expect to limit develop only for western class HW. See what you can build for intel/amd CPU's. See what you can fit in ARM, snapdragon, android, etc. >>> ps. And then there's the other unsolved problem: If you do actually build >>> a >>> popular service that lets people securely exchange messages, the >>> government >>> comes with an order to reveal the content of the messages, and threats to >>> lock up the principals if those demands aren't met. I wish I could tell >>> you >>> more stories about this, but of course I'm subject to the same sorts of >>> non-disclosure that everyone else who's ever gotten one of those is. >> >> >> That's why you should be doing the development of these new >> protocols entirely within existing secure networks such as Tor >> and I2P. And why you should bootstrap via peers instead of >> clearnet authorities like Tor that can be shutdown... it's a little >> less secure, but you can have in network authorities wrapped >> in web of trust and then rejoin listening only to them later. And >> if clearnet get''s that bad, it becomes a freedom of speech issue >> which is well, SHTF time. > > > > Easy to say :) And then you meet your users, and they don't want that, they > want something different. ie: I2P has it's main repo in .i2p and some anon developers. I don't see bootstrapping into the net via peers as 'unwanted', they are your trusted real world friends for the most part. What your app does after that with the network db it learns from that doesn't necessarily need to involve your friend anymore. What don't they want? A little less initial security for a day while the app crunches and sorts things out? Possibly selecting a trust chain other than that introduced to them by their friend? Reading the public consensus on that? It sounds like the BS adoption issue people like to claim in order to not build anything. Granny learned to surf the net, so Johnny can learn to encrypt. And both of them know how to read the manual. Seriously.

2 1

Re: [p2p-hackers] The next gen P2P secure email solution
by grarpamp 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

On Fri, Dec 27, 2013 at 4:28 AM, Bill Broadley <bill(a)broadley.org> wrote: > On 12/24/2013 01:20 AM, grarpamp wrote: >> grarpamp... >> Bittorrent is already in the 100m node range. > > Numbers I've seen show 8-10M for users in the DHT at any one time. If > it's actually 100M all the better. I think if you load Vuze with the mlDHT plugin you'll often see 150m users online. >> That's not enough. This >> needs to replace every possible messaging user on the planet over >> the duration of their actiive lifetime. That's at least a couple billion nodes. >> Don't forget, you can always use disk to cache things. > > Considering the DHT already scales to 2^23 peers, what causes you to > think the next 2^7th is going to cause problems? Especially when router > table and traffic increases with the log(peers)? > > Current bittorrent clients often have 20 bins in use, tracking about 160 > peers per 15 minutes. That would only change toe 27 bins (216 hosts) > for 1 billion peers. Seems workable to me. Did you have some specific > concerns? If a DHT can scale to say 10B nodes while performing lookup on an unknown key in say a minute or less [1], that sounds like a great start. Are there such designs in effect? The concern is that we don't appear to have any decentralized p2p messaging network today that is anywhere near that large. When you ask the current big ones (BT, Tor, I2P, cjdns, etc) they don't seem to have a scale solution, be they filesharing, transport, messaging, etc. [1] Perhaps reasonable latency for delivery of mail across an anonymous transport (aka: circuit setup time, uncached) may be a few minutes or so.

1 0

FAKE INDIANS!!(substitute fake indian war cry)
by Anonymous Remailer (austria) 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

"am also cherokee for instance"... uh huh and in an earlier mail you said: "when my people hunted buffalo in the plains" what fucking plains exist in north carolina, south carolina, georgia or alabama or florida is what I would like to fucking know... Cherokees were part of the five civilized tribes originally from those states till the "trail of tears" to the oklahoma terrotiry where the remaining surviving Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole were placed on reservation(Indian territory). (my melungugeon/choctaw father came from same). . ALL of these tribes are southeast indian tribes for the unknowledgeable.no plains near the southeastern states. NONE of these tribes inhabited the plains with buffalo. such is a complete fiction spun out of whole cloth by what is now revealed to be a LIAR... gettin JUST like usenet I would say.. fucking fakes... if your ancestors were in fact enrolled members of one of the 5 civilized tribes... why doesnt your family name appear on either the dawes(all 5 tribes) or the baker 1924 or the baker revised roll lists at http://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/final-rolls.htm Hint for fakes.. MY family name is there on card 2201..on the dawes treaty list... where the fuck is "machet" found?(it is NOT found I checked). Did you think EVERY one you meet would simply take your claim of indian ancestry without investigation? you are living in a dreamworld white girl... get off the drugs stop fantasizing and get thee to a therapist to find out why you cant seem to tell the truth. Consider this an interventon by reality and the truth... bitch ass white fucking cunt

1 0

FAKE INDIANS!!(substitute fake indian war cry)
by Anonymous Remailer (austria) 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

"am also cherokee for instancei"... uh huh and in an earlier mail you said: "when my people hunted buffalo in the plains" what fucking plains exist in north carolina, south carolina, georgia or alabama or florida is what I would like to fucking know... Cherokees were part of the five civilized tribes originally from those states till the "trail of tears" to the oklahoma terrotiry where the remaining surviving Cherokee, Chickasaw, Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole were placed on reservation(Indian territory). (my melungugeon/choctaw father came from same). . ALL of these tribes are southeast indian tribes for the unknowledgeable.no plains near the southeastern states. NONE of these tribes inhabited the plains with buffalo. such is a complete fiction spun out of whole cloth by what is now revealed to be a LIAR... gettin JUST like usenet I would say.. fucking fakes... if your ancestors were in fact enrolled members of one of the 5 civilized tribes... why doesnt your family name appear on either the dawes(all 5 tribes) or the baker 1924 or the baker revised roll lists at http://www.accessgenealogy.com/native/final-rolls.htm Hint for fakes.. MY family name is there on card 220X..on the dawes treaty list... where the fuck is "machet" found?(it is NOT found I checked). Did you think EVERY one you meet would simply take your claim of indian ancestry without investigation? you are living in a dreamworld white girl... get off the drugs stop fantasizing and get thee to a therapist to find out why you cant seem to tell the truth. Consider this an interventon by reality and the truth... bitch ass white fucking cunt

1 0

the idiot cari machet
by Anonymous Remailer (austria) 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

On being nice/polite to fucking driveling idiots one word dont.. and those who make claims of being indigenous, pure blood etc "native american? JUST more FUCKING RACE NAZI(s)! what we are suppose to model for fucking professional "victims" like Cari Machett?? Native Amerindian?? GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK.. what? are we supposed to feel sorry for you mother FUCKING IDIOT.. this list goes WAY BEYOND your fucking worry about who your unknown daddy was and the socialist fucking drivel you spout.. What fucking rock did you crawl out from under with your victim protests?? Debate a obvious socialist? like arguing with Xtians about how the calculate the number of "Angels dancing on the head of a pin" And libertarians are even worse!! Dont even get me started on that bitch Rand and her follower greenspan :) ok I have insulted pure bloods, invoked godwins law made deliberate mispellings and abused various soft in the head types. Now may I have a drink of water!! fucking idiots!!

4 3

Fw: Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to screw you
by Jim Bell 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

I was subjected on a number of occasions to what should have been illegal GPS-tracker use. This kind of tracker use was finally declared a "search" within the meaning of the 4th Amendment to the US Constitution in a January 2012 US Supreme Court case, US v. Jones. The 9th Circuit Court case which the government would presumably try to use to justify that tracking was called U.S. v. McIver (9th Cir. 1999), where such a GPS tracking device was put on a vehicle seen at a location where a marijuana-grow was in operation. http://www.patc.com/enewsletter/legal-answers/4-oct08.shtml (Note: This reference to the McIver case was written in 2008, 4 years prior to US v. Jones.) A Third Circuit case from 2013 that addresses this matter (and comes to the correct conclusion) is US v. Katzin (3rd Cir. 2013). www.eff.org/files/2013/10/22/katzin_opinion.pdf The use of the McIver case to justify the placement of the tracking device on my car(s) in 1998 and 2000 should not have worked, because unlike the McIver situation, I was actually not suspected of any crime, neither in 1998 nor 2000: I was, in effect, being stalked by Federal agents who were engaging in criminal activity against me. (Assault by Federal informant Ryan Thomas Lund, on November 25, 1997, and promulgation of a forged, fake, fraudulent "appeals" case 99-30210 from about June 20, 1999 through April 2000, and well beyond.) One quirk was my allegation (which due to corruption of the Tanner court as well as corrupt lawyer Robert Leen) that the Feds had actually placed a GPS tracking device on my car, shortly after my release on April 13, 2000. Eventually, in late October, 2000, they petitioned a Federal court for a warrant to place a DIFFERENT GPS tracking device, WITHOUT alerting that court that the previous device was present. This omission of that relevant information constituted fraud on that court, because the Feds presumably argued that they 'needed' the information to find out where I was going: Since they already had one such device on my car, they obviously already knew what I was doing. And, if they would have argued that placing such a device on my car was 'legal', then why would they have had to obtain a warrant in late October 2000? Why not simply use the information they had obtained from April 2000-October 2000? The answer, in hindsight, is simple: The Feds had no justification at all to place a tracking device on my car during and after April 2000: For them to use that information about October 2000, they would have had to explain why the tracking device had been placed as early as April 2000. That they could not do, unless they admitted that they had no articulateable reason to track me during that time. Note: On about November 21, 2000 I told my (corrupt, appointed) lawyer Robert Leen about my suspicion that they had been tracking me from April-October 2000; I had a right to have all such information available to me at my "trial". But, Leen wasn't really acting as my 'first line of defense': Leen was acting as the GOVERNMENT'S 'first line of offense'. Because Leen wouldn't act to obtain that (secret) trackig device information in 'discovery' (legal term of art, requiring government to turn over information before trial) I sent a letter about December 8, 2000 to Judge Tanner, telling him that I 'fired' Leen for his deliberate negligence. Tanner did not allow me to fire Leen, and I was denied the ability to present this (and essentially any other) evidence at the "trial". While you may have heard snippets about how my trial was 'fixed', the reality was far worse than that. Any questions? Jim Bell http://www.infowars.com/feds-may-require-vehicle-location-tracking-in-new-c… Feds Consider Vehicle Location Tracking in New Cars * Proposal may lead to more accidents, mileage taxes and tickets for “recorded traffic violations” Kit Daniels Infowars.com January 1, 2014 In a few weeks, federal officials may require new vehicles to have trackable GPS “safety” devices which could be hacked to cause automobile accidents and may even usher in mileage taxes. With the V2V device, the GPS location for all new cars could be recorded. Credit: Minesweeper via Wiki The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is spending the next couple of weeks mulling over its decision to install vehicle-to-vehicle communications – known as V2V for short – into new vehicles which would allow them to “talk” to each other through GPS data under the guise of “accident prevention,” according to ABC News. However, one official involved with the government study of the devices admitted that hackers could abuse the system to create mass havoc on the road. “Who has access and how do you secure the data?” David Wise of the Government Accountability Office asked. He even said that the V2V would rely on GPS data that can be used to easily track a vehicle – and thus the occupants inside. “Privacy is a real challenge,” Wise said. This is refreshing honesty from a government official. The fact that the V2V system could be hacked to cause high-speed pile-ups exposes the political lie that these devices were designed to prevent accidents. In fact, bureaucrats want the V2V installed in vehicles in order to track Americans like animals in another sick extension of the domestic spy grid pioneered by the NSA. With vehicle tracking, big government politicians could also accomplish their goal of taxing drivers by every mile driven. Lawmakers could even use this sort of technology to pass laws that allow local governments to mail drivers tickets for “recorded traffic violations” as they already do with red light cameras. And to really stick it into drivers even further, the costs for the GPS technology will be tacked onto the price of new cars – forcing Americans to pay for their own enslavement. Take a look at the following articles to see for yourself the hidden agenda behind the V2V technology:=======================end of quote============================

4 9

Re: Swartz, Weev & radical libertarian lexicon (Re: Jacob Appelbaum in Germany - Aaron Swartz)
by Juan Garofalo 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

>> That is the charges against Aaron Swartz. >> http://docs.jstor.org/summary.html > > > That's a link to jstor. Irrelevant. Well thanks James. Of course you didn't read your own source. "Meanwhile, on October 14, we asked MIT if they could identify the person responsible because we wanted to understand the downloader's motivation, to ensure the articles already downloaded would not be distributed," >ensure the articles already downloaded would not be distributed, >ensure the articles already downloaded would not be distributed, >ensure the articles already downloaded would not be distributed, See? That's called 'intelectual property'.

8 10

Earlier Detweiler ravings!!
by gwen hastings 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

>From ld231782 Wed Dec 29 21:33:12 1993 Return-Path: ld231782 Received: from dolores.lance.colostate.edu (dolores.lance.colostate.edu [129.82.112.18]) by longs.lance.colostate.edu (8.6.4/8.6.4) with SMTP id VAA27831; Wed, 29 Dec 1993 21:32:40 -0700 Message-Id: <199312300432.VAA27831(a)longs.lance.colostate.edu> to: cypherpunks(a)toad.com, cypherwonks(a)lists.eunet.fi, colorado_cypherpunks(a)vis.colostate.edu subject: Paranoia Strikes Deep... cc: ld231782 Date: Wed, 29 Dec 93 21:32:28 -0700 From: "L. Detweiler" <ld231782> X-Mts: smtp Hello, I have been hearing some rumors about the cypherpunks being `penetrated' by some spies and areas of the Internet (mailing lists, newsgroups, private mail, journal articles, etc.) being targeted with `tentacle' infiltrations. I thought this was kind of fascinating to contemplate how they would behave. It seems to me that loyalty is very hard to judge by mere email messages alone, and that these hypothetical spies might take that to their advantage. Here are some of the things that either cypherpunk loyalists (cyberanarchists) or cy{b,ph}erwonk spies might say to gain credibility and further `intelligence' from insiders: - L.Detweiler is insane, has sent death threats, is behind S.Boxx, is involved in cyberspatial guerrila warfare, is the mastermind of a spy plot, etc. He is the only person in the world who cares about pseudospoofing. (All the complete ad hominem fantasy stuff). - `T.C. May and E.Hughes and J.Gilmore are all outstanding and upstanding net citizens, have never pseudospoofed or done anything wrong, and are the target of an anonymous smear campaign by terrorists.' - `I have been to cypherpunk meetings and parties, and I have met all the people who have been accused of being tentacles, and they are all real. In fact, I saw their drivers licenses.' `Someone accused of being a tentacle actually lives with me.' - There are no conspiracies whatsoever going on inside the cypherpunks, including drug use by `leaders' or pseudospoofing or other illegitimate activities. - Lies are liberating. `We have a right to lie to the media and other people through tentacles.' One can make a game out of infecting respectable media outlets like Wired and NYT with elaborate deceptions. - Pseudospoofing is liberating. `You are only as good as the number of identities you can project on the internet; this is a feature, not a bug.' The Enders Game book (Orson Scott Card?) is an example of the liberating effect of pseudospoofing on freeing people from their arbitrary prejudices about human identity and accountability. - There's no big deal about black marketeering or tax evasion. Everyone does it. It's a survival tactic in a brutal world of corrupt governments and massive corporations out to oppress the little guy. We are entering a New World Order where anarchy will rule and all governments will crumble. - Blacknet is a harmless and visionary cyberspatial experiment done by T.C.May. - `Please take these annoying discussions about secret conspiracies elsewhere.' Of course, if any of these statements are by the spies, they are just trying to build up your trust so that they can betray you later when they have the proper opportunity. Or, sometimes, there is the dictum that `intelligence is more valuable than liquidation' and they may continue to deceive you just for the valuable intelligence indefinately. * * * Then there may be some `tentacles' out there that are being driven by the counterrevolutionaries bent on destroying the Cyberanarchist movement and interested in getting some of their own propaganda out there. These would be indistinguishable from cy{b,ph}erwonk loyalists. - L.Detweiler is brilliant, has made stellar net contributions, has never sent death threats, no evidence exists that he is behind S.Boxx, he has spoken out against cyberspatial guerrila warfare, is the mastermind of a new mailing list but talk of a spy plot is preposterous, etc. He is one of many in the world who cares very seriously about pseudospoofing as all his writing in e.g. RISKS and CUD attests. - `Very little is know about T.C. May and E.Hughes and J.Gilmore as far as their personalities, and in fact J.Gilmore has admitted publicly to drug use, and all vehemently resist making unequivocal public or private statements on pseudospoofing, although they do seem to be the target of an anonymous smear campaign by the anonymous person S.Boxx, but with some disturbing elements of truth.' - `I have never been to cypherpunk meetings and parties, and I am suspicious of the behavior of many of the `people' L.Detweiler has accused of being tentacles, because of the lack of verifiable information and a sort of `cardboard cutout' flavor to their personalities. There seems to be some desperate damage control going on.' - There seem to be some actual conspiracies going on inside the cypherpunks, including drug use by `leaders' or pseudospoofing or other illegitimate activities. - Lies are lies. `No one has a right to lie to the media or other people through tentacles.' Anyone who makes a game out of infecting respectable media outlets like Wired and NYT with elaborate deceptions is malicious, depraved, and perverted. - Pseudospoofing is perverted. Statements like `You are only as good as the number of identities you can project on the internet; this is a feature, not a bug.' are depraved and deluded. The Enders Game book (Orson Scott Card?) is an example of the very dangerous effect of pseudospoofing on manipulating people in their assumptions and presumptions about human identity and accountability, and for mind control and brainwashing. - Black marketeering and tax evasion are evil. Though many promote it, it is toxic to social harmony. Those that promote it are all hypocrites who claim that they have found new societies that are free of it, but have found only societies of poisonous distrust and paranoia. The whole purpose of governments and corporations is to serve people, and if they fail to do so they need to be adjusted but not destroyed. - `Please don't censor these fascinating discussions about secret conspiracies and cyberanarchists.' * * * It's quite a pity that in Cyberspace, to borrow a phrase that is rapidly becoming a cliche, no one knows if you are a spy. Perhaps we can work together to build systems that minimize this kind of rampant paranoia. It's really a shame that someone with a grudge against any mailing list or its leaders could so disrupt its smooth flowing operation with no repercussions. I have some ideas for preventing this, and in fact I encourage anyone else who does to join the Cy{ph,b}erwonks list and discuss these issues associated with Electronic Democracy. ``The first casualty in war is the truth.'' There is a saying in war, `shoot them all and let God sort them out.' Perhaps in these turbulent times, this message represents a `list all the rumors and let the People sort them out.' I hope the truth prevails in Cyberspace as it does in the real world. Our own controversies, such as those above, will serve as an interesting experiment. -- Tentacle #99 ecc public key curve p160 ;9C~b~)3)cp0d!?C1JIVI=tI( Governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.’

11 15

Re: [cryptography] To Protect and Infect Slides
by John Young 09 Jan '14

09 Jan '14

Jake's, Assange's and others' emphasis at 30c3 was to pursue technological offenses rather than futile expectation of political, financial and legal controls of spying which inevitably confirm what spies do, for it is in their interest to support spyin and secrecy to maintain hegemonic, heirarchial institutions under "the rule of law." Reminder, at the origin of cypherpunks there was a crackdown on encryption as a munitions. That skirmish was thought to have been won. Now Snowden has revealed that victory was a delusion, the real one-sided battle was fought surreptiously in secret, not only by contaminating crypto but by development of bypasses, implants, backdoors, booby traps, ruses, scams, bribes, dual-hatted contracts with crypto-hackers. Can an openly avowed combat on the technologies of political control (1) work or will it be demonized, fought by secret underhanded means? Public debate deployed as a ruse in the 1990s as now. (1) An Appraisal of the Technologies of Political Control http://cryptome.org/stoa-atpc.htm This combat is about far more than crypto and coders must be supplemented with all the discplines of science and technology which are now serving industry and the "lawful" hegemons. 30c3 advocated a direct attack on these means, not wait for the public debate to be rigged in favor of the hegemon with PR, propaganda, lobbying, bribery, contracts, scare stories, terrifying incidents, the customary dirty fighting and tricks of spies and "defense" industry. Is that technological attack on the political, financial, legal hegemon likely to succeed? Or will the crackdown on armed (technological) dissent become as violent as it has in the past? There is a likelihood encryption will be restricted, by fiat, by planting weaknesses, by covert attacks, by technological bypasses, by rigged failures to create doubt of effectiveness. That was the way CryptoAG operation was run. Now the RSA ploy is operative. Is the effect of Snowden to be a series of ploys and ruses. Worse, hop on board the paranoia train, is Snowden a disinfo op for leaking gobs of ruses? Musings: A singular feature of hegemons is that they are dominated by "self-regulating organizations" which set the terms and conditions of the ruling entity, assure enforcement of the rules, and perpetuate themselves under "self-regulation." These are successors of royalty which instead of divine right, backed by military power, they invoke the "Constitution," a law which distinctively empowers "lawful" behavior according to the rules of the hegemon. No wonder the US promotes constitutional government around the planet, backed by military power, most often by denigrating other forms of government. A striking parallel is the rise of the clerics in Europe as an alternative to religious hegemons. From clerics came lawyerly self-regulating hegemons. A new religion hidden within supremacist judges' black robes. Enough of lawful self-regulation in secrecy, unpunishable by lawful means. Justice is out of control, prison populations stuffed, bloated law enforcement and spies raiding the public till, private spies, cops and mercenaries worse than the official, or indistinguishable. Back to the military which backs the hegemons. Technology controls its effectiveness, thus the need for the hegemons to control manufacture, distribution, ownership and application of military means. Concentration of wealth through government regulation, economic and tax policy, and military supremacy reifies special privileges and exculpations for the enforcers of law. Law->taxation->enforcement->informants->spying-> assassination->military action.

6 8

Re: [cryptography] To Protect and Infect Slides (corrections)
by brian carroll 08 Jan '14

08 Jan '14

sorry: brain damage. correction for brain-blip misinfo... so an illusion may exist or > persist of 'no control' or 'wildness' while thoroughly accounted for at > another level or layer, where the specs are closed by the originators > and root of one level may NOT access root of another, or those combined > (correction: root of one level may not access root of another) Hayek, Keynes, Hegel, Marx and others had 'some truth' > yet it is not absolute truth within language as language, > as it is mediated. these are signs, patterns, instead that > are referenced, not truth itself. it is trap, just like when i > refer to an author and seek to present their views yet this > is a limit or skew is inherent and perhaps even inaccurate, > not only my views though their views also, potentially also > in error, not absolute in correctness, yet believed to be as > if biblical conveyance that is to be knelt down before and > served as if higher, even, as if guiding light, when that same > light may not be as bright as direct observation shared by > and between people of the same phenomena modeled in > parameters more accurate or beyond those of the past mucked this up badly- was not to imply my writing biblical, instead that 'ideas' become theology, referenced text then have faith-based aspect institutionalized, structuralized as shared belief systems. sinning against ideology if going against consensus in its inaccuracy, all of it corruptible as ideas in their errored state and within language and social relations, as it becomes or is ungrounded, etc, then having this be the basis for exchange, development i think this same thing holds true for patents, of unshared > identity which then splits and DIVIDES the shared condition > into a 'shared group relation' as an ideological impossibility: > > (patent1a) <--> (patent1b) <--|--> (patent2) > ...correction: splits and divides the shared condition. (please ignore that it does not make grammatical sense) note: gotta say it, because it is relevant- i have social skills of a 10 year old, never developed or kept pace with others due to learning/behavioral deficit; not good with groups or social relations unless about ideas or internet comms; (aspergers) and, writing skills are horrendous, subpar by far, some of it involving deteriorated brain function. lysdexia also ubiquitous issue, i blame phonics.

1 0